May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2517 put aside partisan tricks and the pri- into the workplace. Let us work with bill (H.R. 4737) to reauthorize and im- vatization plan, and I call on my col- that much maligned body on the other prove the program of block grants to leagues to join me in opposing privat- side to get real reform that continues States for temporary assistance for ization and work to protect Social Se- the bipartisan success of 1996. needy families, improve access to qual- curity and the promise to America’s f ity child care, and for other purposes, seniors. and ask for its immediate consider- FROM WELFARE TO WORK f ation in the House. (Ms. HART asked and was given per- The Clerk read the title of the bill. PRIVATIZATION OF SOCIAL mission to address the House for 1 The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- SECURITY minute and to revise and extend her re- ant to House Resolution 422, the bill is (Mr. CROWLEY asked and was given marks.) considered read for amendment. permission to address the House for 1 Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, we have the The text of H.R. 4737 is as follows: minute and to revise and extend his re- opportunity now to reauthorize one of H.R. 4737 marks.) the most successful pieces of legisla- Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep- Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, if you tion this House has ever passed, the resentatives of the United States of America in loved what happened to the people who welfare reform legislation. I think it is Congress assembled, invested their retirement savings in important to focus on one point that SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. Enron stock, look out. House Repub- has come to be a part of this reauthor- This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Personal Re- licans have something even better as a ization, improvement in this bill. It is sponsibility, Work, and Family Promotion sequel, the privatization of Social Se- one that will be so very helpful to fam- Act of 2002’’. curity. They can retitle it all they ilies across the United States who are SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS. want as personal retirement accounts struggling to move from welfare to The table of contents of this Act is as fol- lows: or personal choice or individual invest- work, welfare to independence, welfare Sec. 1. Short title. ing options, but it all means the same to hope for the future. And one of those situations that we have identified that Sec. 2. Table of contents. thing, privatization, taking your hard Sec. 3. References. earned money from Social Security we are improving greatly in this bill is Sec. 4. Findings. the opportunity for moms to go to and giving it to the same people who TITLE I—TANF brought us Enron and Global Crossing. work, and that is because we are add- ing significant amounts of resources Sec. 101. Purposes. No more guaranteed retirement income Sec. 102. Family assistance grants. for seniors, but guaranteed instability. for them to get good safe child care for Sec. 103. Promotion of family formation and Should Ken Lay and Ivan Boesky and their children. healthy marriage. There have been so many children Michael Milliken be deciding your per- Sec. 104. Supplemental grant for population elevated from poverty because of the increases in certain States. sonal retirement future? Democrats welfare reform. We are only going to Sec. 105. Bonus to reward employment say no. Republicans say yes. Oppose improve those figures by doing what we achievement. the Republican efforts to privatize so- are doing here today. And one of the Sec. 106. Contingency fund. cial security. It is your money and do Sec. 107. Use of funds. best parts, one that I am very proud to not let them forget it. Sec. 108. Repeal of Federal loan for State have been part of, is where we will now When Social Security was started in welfare programs. give more moms the opportunity to 1935, 40 percent of Americans were Sec. 109. Universal engagement and family move into the independence of work self-sufficiency plan require- dying in a state of poverty. We have because we are going to help them with ments. not come very far. Today a full 33 per- safe and competent child care. Sec. 110. Work participation requirements. cent of Americans rely on Social Secu- Sec. 111. Maintenance of effort. rity for their only source of income in f Sec. 112. Performance improvement. retirement years. SUCCESS FOR AMERICA’S Sec. 113. Data collection and reporting. CHILDREN Sec. 114. Direct funding and administration f by Indian tribes. BIPARTISAN WELFARE REFORM (Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico asked Sec. 115. Research, evaluations, and national and was given permission to address studies. (Mr. ROEMER asked and was given the House for 1 minute and to revise Sec. 116. Studies by the Census Bureau and permission to address the House for 1 and extend her remarks.) the General Accounting Office. minute and to revise and extend his re- Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Sec. 117. Definition of assistance. Sec. 118. Technical corrections. marks.) Speaker, we are going to go tackle the Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, I am Sec. 119. Fatherhood program. welfare reform debate here, and there Sec. 120. State option to make TANF pro- proud to have voted for a successful bi- is one very important element and that grams mandatory partners with partisan welfare reform in 1996. That focuses on children. The real success of one-stop employment training bill has worked to get people off of wel- welfare reform has been to move people centers. fare roles into work, and many of them from helplessness to hope and move Sec. 121. Sense of the Congress. out of poverty. children out of poverty. There are 3 TITLE II—CHILD CARE Now we have a Republican bill that is million fewer children today in poverty Sec. 201. Short title. coming to the floor later today that because their moms have gotten a job Sec. 202. Goals. Sec. 203. Authorization of appropriations. threatens that very success because it to be able to support their family. We omits three important things. One, in- Sec. 204. Application and plan. are going to build on that today by Sec. 205. Activities to improve the quality of stead of emphasizing work it empha- adding $2 billion more into child care child care. sizes simply knocking people off the and giving States the flexibility to Sec. 206. Report by Secretary. welfare roles. We want to give a credit move that money from folks who are Sec. 207. Definitions. to States to get people into jobs, not on welfare to folks who are the low in- Sec. 208. Entitlement funding. just off welfare. come working poor to support their re- TITLE III—TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS Secondly, we need to emphasize child turn to work. Sec. 301. Exclusion from gross income for in- care. I support more work for welfare This is a great day for America, a terest on overpayments of in- families. If they are going to work great celebration of all that we have come tax by individuals. Sec. 302. Deposits made to suspend running more, their children are going to need achieved for America’s children and we more child care. We have 12,757 chil- of interest on potential under- will build on that success. payments. dren on the waiting list today in Indi- f Sec. 303. Partial payment of tax liability in ana for child care. installment agreements. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, Thirdly, we emphasized mothers, sin- TITLE IV—CHILD SUPPORT gle mothers and welfare reform in 1996. WORK, AND FAMILY PROMOTION ACT OF 2002 Sec. 401. Federal matching funds for limited We largely left out fathers. We should pass through of child support be able to offer an amendment to make Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, pursuant payments to families receiving fathers, noncustodial parents get back to House Resolution 422 I call up the TANF.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0655 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.008 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2518 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 Sec. 402. State option to pass through all amendment or repeal shall be considered to women ages 15–19. The rate for African child support payments to fam- be made to a section or other provision of American teens—until recently the highest— ilies that formerly received the Social Security Act. experienced the largest decline, down 31 per- TANF. SEC. 4. FINDINGS. cent from 1991 to 2000, to reach the lowest child support payments to fam- The Congress makes the following findings: rate ever reported for this group. Most births (1) The Temporary Assistance for Needy ilies that formerly received to teens are nonmarital; in 2000, about 73 per- Families (TANF) Program established by the TANF. cent of the births to teens aged 15–19 oc- Sec. 403. Mandatory review and adjustment Personal Responsibility and Work Oppor- curred outside of marriage. of child support orders for fami- tunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Public (B) Nonmarital childbearing continued to lies receiving TANF. Law 104–193) has succeeded in moving fami- Sec. 404. Mandatory fee for successful child lies from welfare to work and reducing child increase slightly in 2000, however not at the support collection for family poverty. sharp rates of increase seen in recent dec- that has never received TANF. (A) There has been a dramatic increase in ades. The birth rate among unmarried Sec. 405. Report on undistributed child sup- the employment of current and former wel- women in 2000 was 3.5 percent lower than its port payments. fare recipients. The percentage of working peak reached in 1994, while the proportion of Sec. 406. Use of new hire information to as- recipients reached an all-time high in fiscal births occurring outside of marriage has re- sist in administration of unem- years 1999 and 2000. In fiscal year 1999, 33 per- mained at approximately 33 percent since ployment compensation pro- cent of adult recipients were working, com- 1998. grams. pared to less than 7 percent in fiscal year (C) The negative consequences of out-of- Sec. 407. Decrease in amount of child sup- 1992, and 11 percent in fiscal year 1996. All wedlock birth on the mother, the child, the port arrearage triggering pass- States met the overall participation rate family, and society are well documented. port denial. standard in fiscal year 2000, as did the Dis- These include increased likelihood of welfare Sec. 408. Use of tax refund intercept pro- trict of Columbia and Puerto Rico. dependency, increased risks of low birth gram to collect past-due child (B) Earnings for welfare recipients remain- weight, poor cognitive development, child support on behalf of children ing on the rolls have also increased signifi- abuse and neglect, and teen parenthood, and who are not minors. cantly, as have earnings for female-headed decreased likelihood of having an intact Sec. 409. Garnishment of compensation paid households. The increases have been particu- to veterans for service-con- larly large for the bottom 2 income quintiles, marriage during adulthood. nected disabilities in order to that is, those women who are most likely to (D) An estimated 23,900,000 children do not enforce child support obliga- be former or present welfare recipients. live with their biological father. 16,000,000 tions. (C) Welfare dependency has plummeted. As children live with their mother only. These Sec. 410. Improving Federal debt collection of September 2001, 2,103,000 families and facts are attributable largely to declining practices. 5,333,000 individuals were receiving assist- marriage rates, increasing divorce rates, and Sec. 411. Maintenance of technical assist- ance. Accordingly, the number of families in increasing rates of nonmarital births during ance funding. the welfare caseload and the number of indi- the latter part of the 20th century. Sec. 412. Maintenance of Federal Parent Lo- viduals receiving cash assistance declined 52 (E) There has been a dramatic rise in co- cator Service funding. percent and 56 percent, respectively, since habitation as marriages have declined. Only TITLE V—CHILD WELFARE the enactment of TANF. These declines have 40 percent of children of cohabiting couples Sec. 501. Extension of authority to approve persisted even as unemployment rates have will see their parents marry. Those who do demonstration projects. increased: unemployment rates nationwide marry experience a 50 percent higher divorce Sec. 502. Elimination of limitation on num- rose 25 percent, from 3.9 percent in Sep- rate. Children in single-parent households ber of waivers. tember 2000 to 4.9 percent in September 2001, and cohabiting households are at much high- Sec. 503. Elimination of limitation on num- while welfare caseloads continued to drop by er risk of child abuse than children in intact ber of States that may be 7 percent. married and stepparent families. granted waivers to conduct (D) The child poverty rate continued to de- (F) Children who live apart from their bio- demonstration projects on same cline between 1996 and 2000, falling 21 percent logical fathers, on average, are more likely topic. from 20.5 to 16.2 percent. The 2000 child pov- to be poor, experience educational, health, Sec. 504. Elimination of limitation on num- erty rate is the lowest since 1979. Child pov- emotional, and psychological problems, be ber of waivers that may be erty rates for African-American and His- victims of child abuse, engage in criminal granted to a single State for panic children have also fallen dramatically demonstration projects. during the past 6 years. African-American behavior, and become involved with the juve- Sec. 505. Streamlined process for consider- child poverty is at the lowest rate on record nile justice system than their peers who live ation of amendments to and ex- and Hispanic child poverty has had the larg- with their married, biological mother and fa- tensions of demonstration est 4-year decrease on record. ther. A child living in a single-parent family projects requiring waivers. (E) Despite these gains, States have had is nearly 5 times as likely to be poor as a Sec. 506. Availability of reports. mixed success in fully engaging welfare re- child living in a married-couple family. In Sec. 507. Technical correction. cipients in work activities. While all States married-couple families, the child poverty TITLE VI—SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY have met the overall work participation rate is 8.1 percent, in households headed by a INCOME rates required by law, in 2000, in an average single mother, the poverty rate is 39.7 per- Sec. 601. Review of State agency blindness month, only about 1⁄3 of all families with an cent. and disability determinations. adult participated in work activities that (G) Since the enactment of the Personal TITLE VII—STATE AND LOCAL were countable toward the State’s participa- Responsibility and Work Opportunity Rec- FLEXIBILITY tion rate. Eight jurisdictions failed to meet onciliation Act of 1996, child support collec- Sec. 701. Program coordination demonstra- the more rigorous 2-parent work require- tions within the child support enforcement tion projects. ments, and about 20 States are not subject to system have grown every year, increasing Sec. 702. State food assistance block grant the 2-parent requirements, most because from $12,000,000,000 in fiscal year 1996 to near- demonstration project. they moved their 2-parent cases to separate ly $19,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2001. The num- TITLE VIII—ABSTINENCE EDUCATION State programs where they are not subject ber of paternities established or acknowl- Sec. 801. Extension of abstinence education to a penalty for failing the 2-parent rates. edged in fiscal year 2002 reached an historic funding under maternal and (2) As a Nation, we have made substantial high of over 1,500,000—which includes a near- child health program. progress in reducing teen pregnancies and ly 100 percent increase through in-hospital TITLE IX—TRANSITIONAL MEDICAL births, slowing increases in nonmarital acknowledgement programs to 688,510 in 2000 ASSISTANCE childbearing, and improving child support from 349,356 in 1996. Child support collections collections and paternity establishment. Sec. 901. One-year reauthorization of transi- were made in over 7,000,000 cases in fiscal (A) The teen birth rate has fallen continu- year 2000, significantly more than the almost tional medical assistance. ously since 1991, down a dramatic 22 percent Sec. 902. Adjustment to payments for med- 4,000,000 cases having a collection in 1996. by 2000. During the period of 1991–2000, teen- icaid administrative costs to age birth rates fell in all States and the Dis- (3) The Personal Responsibility and Work prevent duplicative payments trict of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Vir- Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 gave and to fund a 1-year extension gin Islands. Declines also have spanned age, States great flexibility in the use of Federal of transitional medical assist- racial, and ethnic groups. There has been funds to develop innovative programs to help ance. success in lowering the birth rate for both families leave welfare and begin employment TITLE X—EFFECTIVE DATE younger and older teens. The birth rate for and to encourage the formation of 2-parent Sec. 1001. Effective date. those 15–17 years of age is down 29 percent families. SEC. 3. REFERENCES. since 1991, and the rate for those 18 and 19 is (A) Total Federal and State TANF expendi- Except as otherwise expressly provided, down 16 percent. Between 1991 and 2000, teen tures in fiscal year 2000 were $24,000,000,000, wherever in this Act an amendment or repeal birth rates declined for all women ages 15– up from $22,600,000,000 for the previous year. is expressed in terms of an amendment to, or 19—white, African American, American In- This increased spending is attributable to repeal of, a section or other provision, the dian, Asian or Pacific Islander, and Hispanic significant new investments in supportive

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:47 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.002 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2519

services in the TANF program, such as child (c) MATCHING GRANTS FOR THE TERRI- (2) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘fiscal year care and activities to support work. TORIES.—Section 1108(b)(2) (42 U.S.C. 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘each of fiscal years 2002 (B) Since the welfare reform effort began 1308(b)(2)) is amended by striking ‘‘1997 through 2006’’; there has been a dramatic increase in work through 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘2003 through (3) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘2002’’ and in- participation (including employment, com- 2007’’. serting ‘‘2006’’; and munity service, and work experience) among SEC. 103. PROMOTION OF FAMILY FORMATION (4) in clause (iii), by striking ‘‘fiscal year welfare recipients, as well as an unprece- AND HEALTHY MARRIAGE. 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘each of fiscal years 2002 dented reduction in the caseload because re- (a) STATE PLANS.—Section 402(a)(1)(A) (42 through 2006’’. cipients have left welfare for work. U.S.C. 602(a)(1)(A)) is amended by adding at SEC. 105. BONUS TO REWARD EMPLOYMENT (C) States are making policy choices and the end the following: ACHIEVEMENT. investment decisions best suited to the needs ‘‘(vii) Encourage equitable treatment of (a) REALLOCATION OF FUNDING.—Section of their citizens. married, 2-parent families under the pro- 403(a)(4) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(4)) is amended— (i) To expand aid to working families, all gram referred to in clause (i).’’. (1) in the paragraph heading, by striking ‘‘HIGH PERFORMANCE STATES’’ and inserting States disregard a portion of a family’s (b) HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROMOTION GRANTS; ‘‘EMPLOYMENT ACHIEVEMENT’’; earned income when determining benefit lev- REPEAL OF BONUS FOR REDUCTION OF ILLEGIT- (2) in subparagraph (D)(ii)— els. IMACY RATIO.—Section 403(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. (A) in subclause (I), by striking ‘‘equals (ii) Most States increased the limits on 603(a)(2)) is amended to read as follows: $200,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘(other than 2003) countable assets above the former Aid to ‘‘(2) HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROMOTION equals $200,000,000, and for bonus year 2003 Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) GRANTS.— equals $100,000,000’’; and program. Every State has increased the vehi- ‘‘(A) AUTHORITY.—The Secretary shall (B) in subclause (II), by striking cle asset level above the prior AFDC limit award competitive grants to States, terri- ‘‘$1,000,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$900,000,000’’; for a family’s primary automobile. tories, and tribal organizations for not more and (iii) States are experimenting with pro- than 50 percent of the cost of developing and (3) in subparagraph (F), by striking grams to promote marriage and father in- implementing innovative programs to pro- volvement. Over half the States have elimi- ‘‘$1,000,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$900,000,000’’. mote and support healthy, married, 2-parent (b) BONUS TO REWARD EMPLOYMENT nated restrictions on 2-parent families. Many families. ACHIEVEMENT.— States use TANF, child support, or State ‘‘(B) HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROMOTION ACTIVI- (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 403(a)(4) (42 U.S.C. funds to support community-based activities TIES.—Funds provided under subparagraph 603(a)(4)) is amended by striking subpara- to help fathers become more involved in (A) shall be used to support any of the fol- graphs (A) through (F) and inserting the fol- their children’s lives or strengthen relation- lowing programs or activities: lowing: ships between mothers and fathers. ‘‘(i) Public advertising campaigns on the ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall (4) Therefore, it is the sense of the Con- value of marriage and the skills needed to in- make a grant pursuant to this paragraph to gress that increasing success in moving fam- crease marital stability and health. each State for each bonus year for which the ilies from welfare to work, as well as in pro- ‘‘(ii) Education in high schools on the State is an employment achievement State. moting healthy marriage and other means of value of marriage, relationship skills, and ‘‘(B) AMOUNT OF GRANT.— improving child well-being, are very impor- budgeting. ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Subject to clause (ii) of tant Government interests and the policy ‘‘(iii) Marriage education, marriage skills, this subparagraph, the Secretary shall deter- contained in part A of title IV of the Social and relationship skills programs, that may mine the amount of the grant payable under Security Act (as amended by this Act) is in- include parenting skills, financial manage- this paragraph to an employment achieve- tended to serve these ends. ment, conflict resolution, and job and career ment State for a bonus year, which shall be TITLE I—TANF advancement, for non-married pregnant based on the performance of the State as de- SEC. 101. PURPOSES. women and non-married expectant fathers. termined under subparagraph (D)(i) for the Section 401(a) (42 U.S.C. 601(a)) is ‘‘(iv) Pre-marital education and marriage fiscal year that immediately precedes the amended— skills training for engaged couples and for bonus year. (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), couples interested in marriage. ‘‘(ii) LIMITATION.—The amount payable to a by striking ‘‘increase’’ and inserting ‘‘im- ‘‘(v) Marriage enhancement and marriage State under this paragraph for a bonus year prove child well-being by increasing’’; skills training programs for married couples. shall not exceed 5 percent of the State fam- (2) in paragraph (1), by inserting ‘‘and serv- ‘‘(vi) Divorce reduction programs that ily assistance grant. ices’’ after ‘‘assistance’’; teach relationship skills. ‘‘(C) FORMULA FOR MEASURING STATE PER- (3) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘parents ‘‘(vii) Marriage mentoring programs which FORMANCE.— on government benefits’’ and inserting ‘‘fam- use married couples as role models and men- ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Subject to clause (ii), not ilies on government benefits and reduce pov- tors in at-risk communities. later than October 1, 2003, the Secretary, in erty’’; and ‘‘(viii) Programs to reduce the disincen- consultation with the States, shall develop a (4) in paragraph (4), by striking ‘‘two-par- tives to marriage in means-tested aid pro- formula for measuring State performance in ent families’’ and inserting ‘‘healthy, 2-par- grams, if offered in conjunction with any ac- operating the State program funded under ent married families, and encourage respon- tivity described in this subparagraph. this part so as to achieve the goals of em- sible fatherhood’’. ‘‘(C) APPROPRIATION.—Out of any money in ployment entry, job retention, and increased SEC. 102. FAMILY ASSISTANCE GRANTS. the Treasury of the United States not other- earnings from employment for families re- (a) EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY.—Section wise appropriated, there are appropriated for ceiving assistance under the program, as 403(a)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(1)(A)) is each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007 measured on an absolute basis and on the amended— $100,000,000 for grants under this paragraph.’’. basis of improvement in State performance. (1) by striking ‘‘1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, (c) COUNTING OF SPENDING ON NON-ELIGIBLE ‘‘(ii) SPECIAL RULE FOR BONUS YEAR 2004.— 2001, and 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘2003 through FAMILIES TO PREVENT AND REDUCE INCIDENCE For the purposes of awarding a bonus under 2007’’; and OF OUT-OF-WEDLOCK BIRTHS, ENCOURAGE FOR- this paragraph for bonus year 2004, the Sec- (2) by inserting ‘‘payable to the State for MATION AND MAINTENANCE OF HEALTHY, 2- retary may measure the performance of a the fiscal year’’ before the period. PARENT MARRIED FAMILIES, OR ENCOURAGE State in fiscal year 2003 using the job entry (b) STATE FAMILY ASSISTANCE GRANT.— RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD.—Section rate, job retention rate, and earnings gain Section 403(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(1)) is 409(a)(7)(B)(i) (42 U.S.C. 609(a)(7)(B)(i)) is rate components of the formula developed amended by striking subparagraphs (B) amended by adding at the end the following: under section 403(a)(4)(C) as in effect imme- through (E) and inserting the following: ‘‘(V) COUNTING OF SPENDING ON NON-ELIGI- diately before the effective date of this para- ‘‘(B) STATE FAMILY ASSISTANCE GRANT.— BLE FAMILIES TO PREVENT AND REDUCE INCI- graph. The State family assistance grant payable to DENCE OF OUT-OF-WEDLOCK BIRTHS, ENCOURAGE ‘‘(D) DETERMINATION OF STATE PERFORM- a State for a fiscal year shall be the amount FORMATION AND MAINTENANCE OF HEALTHY, 2- ANCE.—For each bonus year, the Secretary that bears the same ratio to the amount PARENT MARRIED FAMILIES, OR ENCOURAGE RE- shall— specified in subparagraph (C) of this para- SPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD.—The term ‘qualified ‘‘(i) use the formula developed under sub- graph as the amount required to be paid to State expenditures’ includes the total ex- paragraph (C) to determine the performance the State under this paragraph for fiscal penditures by the State during the fiscal of each eligible State for the fiscal year that year 2002 (determined without regard to any year under all State programs for a purpose precedes the bonus year; and reduction pursuant to section 412(a)(1)) bears described in paragraph (3) or (4) of section ‘‘(ii) prescribe performance standards in to the total amount required to be paid 401(a).’’. such a manner so as to ensure that— under this paragraph for fiscal year 2002. SEC. 104. SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT FOR POPU- ‘‘(I) the average annual total amount of ‘‘(C) APPROPRIATION.—Out of any money in LATION INCREASES IN CERTAIN grants to be made under this paragraph for the Treasury of the United States not other- STATES. each bonus year equals $100,000,000; and wise appropriated, there are appropriated for Section 403(a)(3)(H) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(3)(H)) ‘‘(II) the total amount of grants to be made each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007 is amended— under this paragraph for all bonus years $16,566,542,000 for grants under this para- (1) in the subparagraph heading, by strik- equals $500,000,000. graph.’’. ing ‘‘OF GRANTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002’’; ‘‘(E) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph:

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:47 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.002 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2520 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002

‘‘(i) BONUS YEAR.—The term ‘bonus year’ (1) STATE PLAN PROVISION.—Section State deems appropriate with the individual, means each of fiscal years 2004 through 2008. 402(a)(1)(B) (42 U.S.C. 602(a)(1)(B)) is amended a self-sufficiency plan that specifies appro- ‘‘(ii) EMPLOYMENT ACHIEVEMENT STATE.— by striking clause (i) and redesignating priate activities described in the State plan The term ‘employment achievement State’ clauses (ii) through (iv) as clauses (i) submitted pursuant to section 402, including means, with respect to a bonus year, an eli- through (iii), respectively. direct work activities as appropriate de- gible State whose performance determined (2) USE OF FUNDS.—Section 404 (42 U.S.C. signed to assist the family in achieving their pursuant to subparagraph (D)(i) for the fiscal 604) is amended by striking subsection (c). maximum degree of self-sufficiency, and that year preceding the bonus year equals or ex- (c) INCREASE IN AMOUNT TRANSFERABLE TO provides for the ongoing participation of the ceeds the performance standards prescribed CHILD CARE.—Section 404(d)(1) (42 U.S.C. individual in the activities; under subparagraph (D)(ii) for such preceding 604(d)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘30’’ and in- ‘‘(C) require, at a minimum, each such in- fiscal year. serting ‘‘50’’. dividual to participate in activities in ac- ‘‘(F) APPROPRIATION.—Out of any money in (d) INCREASE IN AMOUNT TRANSFERABLE TO cordance with the self-sufficiency plan; the Treasury of the United States not other- TITLE XX PROGRAMS.—Section 404(d)(2)(B) (42 ‘‘(D) monitor the participation of each wise appropriated, there are appropriated for U.S.C. 604(d)(2)(B)) is amended to read as fol- such individual in the activities specified in fiscal years 2004 through 2008 $500,000,000 for lows: the self sufficiency plan, and regularly re- ‘‘(B) APPLICABLE PERCENT.—For purposes of grants under this paragraph. view the progress of the family toward self- subparagraph (A), the applicable percent is ‘‘(G) GRANTS FOR TRIBAL ORGANIZATIONS.— sufficiency; 10 percent for fiscal year 2003 and each suc- This paragraph shall apply with respect to ‘‘(E) upon such a review, revise the self-suf- ceeding fiscal year.’’. tribal organizations in the same manner in ficiency plan and activities as the State (e) CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY OF STATES which this paragraph applies with respect to deems appropriate. TO USE TANF FUNDS CARRIED OVER FROM States. In determining the criteria under ‘‘(2) TIMING.—The State shall comply with PRIOR YEARS TO PROVIDE TANF BENEFITS paragraph (1) with respect to a family— which to make grants to tribal organizations AND SERVICES.—Section 404(e) (42 U.S.C. under this paragraph, the Secretary shall ‘‘(A) in the case of a family that, as of Oc- 604(e)) is amended to read as follows: tober 1, 2002, is not receiving assistance from consult with tribal organizations.’’. ‘‘(e) AUTHORITY TO CARRYOVER OR RESERVE the State program funded under this part, (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment CERTAIN AMOUNTS FOR BENEFITS OR SERVICES not later than 60 days after the family first made by paragraph (1) shall take effect on OR FOR FUTURE CONTINGENCIES.— receives assistance on the basis of the most October 1, 2003. ‘‘(1) CARRYOVER.—A State or tribe may use recent application for the assistance; or SEC. 106. CONTINGENCY FUND. a grant made to the State or tribe under this ‘‘(B) in the case of a family that, as of such (a) DEPOSITS INTO FUND.—Section 403(b)(2) part for any fiscal year to provide, without date, is receiving the assistance, not later (42 U.S.C. 603(b)(2)) is amended— fiscal year limitation, any benefit or service than 12 months after the date of enactment (1) by striking ‘‘1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, that may be provided under the State or of this subsection. and 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘2003 through 2007’’; tribal program funded under this part. ‘‘(3) STATE DISCRETION.—A State shall have ‘‘(2) CONTINGENCY RESERVE.—A State or and sole discretion, consistent with section 407, tribe may designate any portion of a grant (2) by striking all that follows to define and design activities for families made to the State or tribe under this part as ‘‘$2,000,000,000’’ and inserting a period. for purposes of this subsection, to develop a contingency reserve for future needs, and (b) GRANTS.—Section 403(b)(3)(C)(ii) (42 methods for monitoring and reviewing may use any amount so designated to pro- U.S.C. 603(b)(3)(C)(ii)) is amended by striking progress pursuant to this subsection, and to vide, without fiscal year limitation, any ben- ‘‘fiscal years 1997 through 2002’’ and inserting make modifications to the plan as the State efit or service that may be provided under ‘‘fiscal years 2003 through 2007’’. deems appropriate to assist the individual in the State or tribal program funded under (c) DEFINITION OF NEEDY STATE.—Clauses increasing their degree of self-sufficiency. (i) and (ii) of section 403(b)(5)(B) (42 U.S.C. this part. If a State or tribe so designates a portion of such a grant, the State shall, on ‘‘(4) RULE OF INTERPRETATION.—Nothing in 603(b)(5)(B)) are amended by inserting after this part shall preclude a State from requir- ‘‘1996’’ the following: ‘‘, and the Food Stamp an annual basis, include in its report under section 411(a) the amount so designated.’’. ing participation in work and any other ac- Act of 1977 as in effect during the cor- tivities the State deems appropriate for responding 3-month period in the fiscal year SEC. 108. REPEAL OF FEDERAL LOAN FOR STATE WELFARE PROGRAMS. helping families achieve self-sufficiency and preceding such most recently concluded 3- improving child well-being.’’. month period,’’. (a) REPEAL.—Section 406 (42 U.S.C. 606) is (2) PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO ESTABLISH (d) ANNUAL RECONCILIATION: FEDERAL repealed. FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY PLAN.—Section MATCHING OF STATE EXPENDITURES ABOVE (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 409(a)(3) (42 U.S.C. 609(a)(3)) is amended— ‘‘MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT’’ LEVEL.—Section (1) Section 409(a) (42 U.S.C. 609(a)) is (A) in the paragraph heading, by inserting 403(b)(6) (42 U.S.C. 603(b)(6)) is amended— amended by striking paragraph (6). ‘‘OR ESTABLISH FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY (1) in subparagraph (A)(ii)— (2) Section 412 (42 U.S.C. 612) is amended by PLAN’’ after ‘‘RATES’’; and (A) by adding ‘‘and’’ at the end of sub- striking subsection (f) and redesignating sub- (B) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ‘‘or clause (I); sections (g) through (i) as subsections (f) 408(b)’’ after ‘‘407(a)’’. (B) by striking ‘‘; and’’ at the end of sub- through (h), respectively. SEC. 110. WORK PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS. clause (II) and inserting a period; and (3) Section 1108(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. 1308(a)(2)) is (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 407 (42 U.S.C. 607) (C) by striking subclause (III); amended by striking ‘‘406,’’. is amended by striking all that precedes sub- (2) in subparagraph (B)(i)(II), by striking SEC. 109. UNIVERSAL ENGAGEMENT AND FAMILY section (b)(3) and inserting the following: all that follows ‘‘section 409(a)(7)(B)(iii))’’ SELF-SUFFICIENCY PLAN REQUIRE- MENTS. ‘‘SEC. 407. WORK PARTICIPATION REQUIRE- and inserting a period; (a) MODIFICATION OF STATE PLAN REQUIRE- MENTS. (3) by amending subparagraph (B)(ii)(I) to MENTS.—Section 402(a)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. ‘‘(a) PARTICIPATION RATE REQUIREMENTS.— read as follows: 602(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking clauses A State to which a grant is made under sec- ‘‘(I) the qualified State expenditures (as (ii) and (iii) and inserting the following: tion 403 for a fiscal year shall achieve a min- defined in section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)) for the fis- ‘‘(ii) Require a parent or caretaker receiv- imum participation rate equal to not less cal year; plus’’; and ing assistance under the program to engage than— (4) by striking subparagraph (C). in work or alternative self-sufficiency activi- ‘‘(1) 50 percent for fiscal year 2003; (e) CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN CHILD CARE ties (as defined by the State), consistent ‘‘(2) 55 percent for fiscal year 2004; EXPENDITURES IN DETERMINING STATE COM- with section 407(e)(2). ‘‘(3) 60 percent for fiscal year 2005; PLIANCE WITH CONTINGENCY FUND MAINTE- ‘‘(iii) Require families receiving assistance ‘‘(4) 65 percent for fiscal year 2006; and NANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENT.—Section under the program to engage in activities in ‘‘(5) 70 percent for fiscal year 2007 and each 409(a)(10) (42 U.S.C. 609(a)(10)) is amended— accordance with family self-sufficiency plans succeeding fiscal year. (1) by striking ‘‘(other than the expendi- developed pursuant to section 408(b).’’. ‘‘(b) CALCULATION OF PARTICIPATION tures described in subclause (I)(bb) of that (b) ESTABLISHMENT OF FAMILY SELF-SUFFI- RATES.— paragraph)) under the State program funded CIENCY PLANS.— ‘‘(1) AVERAGE MONTHLY RATE.—For pur- under this part’’ and inserting a close paren- (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 408(b) (42 U.S.C. poses of subsection (a), the participation rate thesis; and 608(b)) is amended to read as follows: of a State for a fiscal year is the average of (2) by striking ‘‘excluding any amount ex- ‘‘(b) FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY PLANS.— the participation rates of the State for each pended by the State for child care under sub- ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A State to which a grant month in the fiscal year. section (g) or (i) of section 402 (as in effect is made under section 403 shall— ‘‘(2) MONTHLY PARTICIPATION RATES; INCOR- during fiscal year 1994) for fiscal year 1994,’’. ‘‘(A) assess, in the manner deemed appro- PORATION OF 40-HOUR WORK WEEK STANDARD.— SEC. 107. USE OF FUNDS. priate by the State, of the skills, prior work ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of para- (a) GENERAL RULES.—Section 404(a)(2) (42 experience, and employability of each work- graph (1), the participation rate of a State U.S.C. 604(a)(2)) is amended by striking ‘‘in eligible individual (as defined in section for a month is— any manner that’’ and inserting ‘‘for any 407(b)(2)(C)) receiving assistance under the ‘‘(i) the total number of countable hours purposes or activities for which’’. State program funded under this part; (as defined in subsection (c)) with respect to (b) TREATMENT OF INTERSTATE IMMI- ‘‘(B) establish for each family that includes the counted families for the State for the GRANTS.— such an individual, in consultation as the month; divided by

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:47 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.002 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2521

‘‘(ii) 160 multiplied by the number of families that received assistance during fis- ‘‘(B) SCHOOL ATTENDANCE BY TEEN HEAD OF counted families for the State for the month. cal year 2001 under the State program funded HOUSEHOLD.—The work-eligible members of a ‘‘(B) COUNTED FAMILIES DEFINED.— under this part. family shall be considered to be engaged in a ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—In subparagraph (A), the ‘‘(ii) STATE CASELOAD FOR FISCAL YEAR direct work activity for an average of 40 term ‘counted family’ means, with respect to 1995.—The term ‘State caseload for fiscal year hours per week in a month if the family in- a State and a month, a family that includes 1995’ means the average monthly number of cludes an individual who is married, or is a a work-eligible individual and that receives families that received aid under the State single head of household, who has not at- assistance in the month under the State pro- plan approved under part A (as in effect on tained 20 years of age, and the individual— gram funded under this part, subject to September 30, 1995) during fiscal year 1995.’’. ‘‘(i) maintains satisfactory attendance at clause (ii). (d) COUNTABLE HOURS.—Section 407 of such secondary school or the equivalent in the ‘‘(ii) STATE OPTION TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN Act (42 U.S.C. 607) is amended by striking month; or FAMILIES.—At the option of a State, the term subsections (c) and (d) and inserting the fol- ‘‘(ii) participates in education directly re- ‘counted family’ shall not include— lowing: lated to employment for an average of at ‘‘(I) a family in the first month for which ‘‘(c) COUNTABLE HOURS.— least 20 hours per week in the month. the family receives assistance from a State ‘‘(1) DEFINITION.—In subsection (b)(2), the ‘‘(d) DIRECT WORK ACTIVITY.—In this sec- program funded under this part on the basis term ‘countable hours’ means, with respect tion, the term ‘direct work activity’ means— of the most recent application for such as- to a family for a month, the total number of ‘‘(1) unsubsidized employment; sistance; or hours in the month in which any member of ‘‘(2) subsidized private sector employment; ‘‘(II) on a case-by-case basis, a family in the family who is a work-eligible individual ‘‘(3) subsidized public sector employment; which the youngest child has not attained 12 is engaged in a direct work activity or other ‘‘(4) on-the-job training; months of age. activities specified by the State (excluding ‘‘(5) supervised work experience; or ‘‘(iii) STATE OPTION TO INCLUDE INDIVIDUALS an activity that does not address a purpose ‘‘(6) supervised community service.’’. RECEIVING ASSISTANCE UNDER A TRIBAL FAM- specified in section 401(a)), subject to the (e) PENALTIES AGAINST INDIVIDUALS.—Sec- ILY ASSISTANCE PLAN OR TRIBAL WORK PRO- other provisions of this subsection. tion 407(e)(1) (42 U.S.C. 607(e)(1)) is amended GRAM.—At the option of a State, the term IMITATIONS.—Subject to such regula- to read as follows: ‘counted family’ may include families in the ‘‘(2) L tions as the Secretary may prescribe: ‘‘(1) REDUCTION OR TERMINATION OF ASSIST- State that are receiving assistance under a ANCE.— tribal family assistance plan approved under ‘‘(A) MINIMUM WEEKLY AVERAGE OF 24 HOURS OF DIRECT WORK ACTIVITIES REQUIRED.—If the ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in section 412 or under a tribal work program to paragraph (2), if an individual in a family re- which funds are provided under this part. work-eligible individuals in a family are en- gaged in a direct work activity for an aver- ceiving assistance under a State program ‘‘(C) WORK-ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUAL DEFINED.— funded under this part fails to engage in ac- In this section, the term ‘work-eligible indi- age total of fewer than 24 hours per week in a month, then the number of countable tivities required in accordance with this sec- vidual’ means an individual— tion, or other activities required by the ‘‘(i) who is married or a single head of hours with respect to the family for the month shall be zero. State under the program, and the family household; and does not otherwise engage in activities in ac- ‘‘(ii) whose needs are (or, but for sanctions ‘‘(B) MAXIMUM WEEKLY AVERAGE OF 16 HOURS OF OTHER ACTIVITIES.—An average of cordance with the self-sufficiency plan estab- under this part that have been in effect for lished for the family pursuant to section more than 3 months (whether or not con- not more than 16 hours per week of activities specified by the State (subject to the exclu- 408(b), the State shall— secutive) in the preceding 12 months or ‘‘(i) if the failure is partial or persists for under part D, would be) included in deter- sion described in paragraph (1)) may be con- sidered countable hours in a month with re- not more than 1 month— mining the amount of cash assistance to be ‘‘(I) reduce the amount of assistance other- provided to the family under the State pro- spect to a family. ‘‘(3) SPECIAL RULES.—For purposes of para- wise payable to the family pro rata (or more, gram funded under this part.’’. at the option of the State) with respect to (b) RECALIBRATION OF CASELOAD REDUCTION graph (1): any period during a month in which the fail- CREDIT.—Section 407(b)(3)(A)(ii) (42 U.S.C. ‘‘(A) PARTICIPATION IN QUALIFIED ACTIVI- 607(b)(3)(A)(ii)) is amended to read as follows: TIES.— ure occurs; or ‘‘(ii) the average monthly number of fami- ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—If, with the approval of ‘‘(II) terminate all assistance to the fam- lies that received assistance under the State the State, the work-eligible individuals in a ily, subject to such good cause exceptions as program funded under this part during— family are engaged in 1 or more qualified ac- the State may establish; or ‘‘(I) if the fiscal year is fiscal year 2003, fis- tivities for an average total of at least 24 ‘‘(ii) if the failure is total and persists for cal year 1996; hours per week in a month, then all such en- at least 2 consecutive months, terminate all ‘‘(II) if the fiscal year is fiscal year 2004, gagement in the month shall be considered cash payments to the family including quali- fiscal year 1998; engagement in a direct work activity, sub- fied State expenditures (as defined in section ‘‘(III) if the fiscal year is fiscal year 2005, ject to clause (iii). 409(a)(7)(B)(i)) for at least 1 month and there- fiscal year 2001; or ‘‘(ii) QUALIFIED ACTIVITY DEFINED.—The after until the State determines that the in- ‘‘(IV) if the fiscal year is fiscal year 2006 or term ‘qualified activity’ means an activity dividual has resumed full participation in any succeeding fiscal year, the then 4th pre- specified by the State (subject to the exclu- the activities, subject to such good cause ex- ceding fiscal year.’’. sion described in paragraph (1)) that meets ceptions as the State may establish. (c) SUPERACHIEVER CREDIT.—Section 407(b) such standards and criteria as the State may ‘‘(B) SPECIAL RULE.—In the event of a con- (42 U.S.C. 607(b)) is amended by striking specify, including— flict between a requirement of clause (i)(II) paragraphs (4) and (5) and inserting the fol- ‘‘(I) substance abuse counseling or treat- or (ii) of subparagraph (A) and a requirement lowing: ment; of a State constitution, or of a State statute ‘‘(4) SUPERACHIEVER CREDIT.— ‘‘(II) rehabilitation treatment and services; that, before 1966, obligated local government ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The participation rate, ‘‘(III) work-related education or training to provide assistance to needy parents and determined under paragraphs (1) and (2) of directed at enabling the family member to children, the State constitutional or statu- this subsection, of a superachiever State for work; tory requirement shall control.’’. a fiscal year shall be increased by the lesser ‘‘(IV) job search or job readiness assist- (f) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— of— ance; and (1) Section 407(f) (42 U.S.C. 607(f)) is amend- ‘‘(i) the amount (if any) of the super- ‘‘(V) any other activity that addresses a ed in each of paragraphs (1) and (2) by strik- achiever credit applicable to the State; or purpose specified in section 401(a). ing ‘‘work activity described in subsection ‘‘(ii) the number of percentage points (if ‘‘(iii) LIMITATION.— (d)’’ and inserting ‘‘direct work activity’’. any) by which the minimum participation ‘‘(I) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in (2) The heading of section 409(a)(14) (42 rate required by subsection (a) for the fiscal subclause (II), clause (i) shall not apply to a U.S.C. 609(a)(14)) is amended by inserting ‘‘OR year exceeds 50 percent. family for more than 3 months in any period REFUSING TO ENGAGE IN ACTIVITIES UNDER A ‘‘(B) SUPERACHIEVER STATE.—For purposes of 24 consecutive months. FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY PLAN’’ after of subparagraph (A), a State is a super- ‘‘(II) SPECIAL RULE APPLICABLE TO EDU- ‘‘WORK’’. achiever State if the State caseload for fiscal CATION AND TRAINING.—A State may, on a SEC. 111. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT. year 2001 has declined by at least 60 percent case-by-case basis, apply clause (i) to a (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 409(a)(7) (42 from the State caseload for fiscal year 1995. work-eligible individual so that participa- U.S.C. 609(a)(7)) is amended— ‘‘(C) AMOUNT OF CREDIT.—The super- tion by the individual in education or train- (1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ‘‘fiscal achiever credit applicable to a State is the ing, if needed to permit the individual to year 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, or 2003’’ and number of percentage points (if any) by complete a certificate program or other inserting ‘‘fiscal year 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, which the decline referred to in subpara- work-related education or training directed 2007 or 2008’’; and graph (B) exceeds 60 percent. at enabling the individual to fill a known job (2) in subparagraph (B)(ii)— ‘‘(D) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph: need in a local area, may be considered (A) by inserting ‘‘preceding’’ before ‘‘fiscal ‘‘(i) STATE CASELOAD FOR FISCAL YEAR countable hours with respect to the family of year’’; and 2001.—The term ‘State caseload for fiscal year the individual for not more than 4 months in (B) by striking ‘‘for fiscal years 1997 2001’ means the average monthly number of any period of 24 consecutive months. through 2002,’’.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:47 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.002 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2522 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002

(b) STATE SPENDING ON PROMOTING ‘‘(iv) The document shall describe strate- (1) in clause (i)— HEALTHY MARRIAGE.— gies to improve program management and (A) by striking ‘‘a sample’’ and inserting (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 404 (42 U.S.C. 604) performance.’’; and ‘‘samples’’; and is amended by adding at the end the fol- (2) in paragraph (4), by inserting ‘‘and trib- (B) by inserting before the period ‘‘, except lowing: al’’ after ‘‘that local’’. that the Secretary may designate core data ‘‘(l) MARRIAGE PROMOTION.—A State, terri- (b) CONSULTATION WITH STATE REGARDING elements that must be reported on all fami- tory, or tribal organization to which a grant PLAN AND DESIGN OF TRIBAL PROGRAMS.— lies’’; and is made under section 403(a)(2) may use a Section 412(b)(1) (42 U.S.C. 612(b)(1)) is (2) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘funded under grant made to the State, territory, or tribal amended— this part’’ and inserting ‘‘described in sub- organization under any other provision of (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara- paragraph (A)’’. section 403 for marriage promotion activi- graph (E); (c) REPORT ON FAMILIES THAT BECOME IN- ties, and the amount of any such grant so (2) by striking the period at the end of sub- ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE ASSISTANCE.—Section used shall be considered State funds for pur- paragraph (F) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 411(a) (42 U.S.C. 611(a)) is amended— poses of section 403(a)(2).’’. (3) by adding at the end the following: (1) by striking paragraph (5); (2) FEDERAL TANF FUNDS USED FOR MAR- ‘‘(G) provides an assurance that the State (2) by redesignating paragraph (6) as para- RIAGE PROMOTION DISREGARDED FOR PURPOSES in which the tribe is located has been con- graph (5); and OF MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENT.— sulted regarding the plan and its design.’’. (3) by inserting after paragraph (5) (as so Section 409(a)(7)(B)(i) (42 U.S.C. (c) PERFORMANCE MEASURES.—Section 413 redesignated) the following: 609(a)(7)(B)(i)), as amended by section 103(c) (42 U.S.C. 613) is amended by adding at the ‘‘(6) REPORT ON FAMILIES THAT BECOME IN- of this Act, is amended by adding at the end end the following: ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE ASSISTANCE.—The report the following: ‘‘(k) PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT.—The required by paragraph (1) for a fiscal quarter ‘‘(VI) EXCLUSION OF FEDERAL TANF FUNDS Secretary, in consultation with the States, shall include for each month in the quarter USED FOR MARRIAGE PROMOTION ACTIVITIES.— shall develop uniform performance measures the number of families and total number of Such term does not include the amount of designed to assess the degree of effective- individuals that, during the month, became any grant made to the State under section ness, and the degree of improvement, of ineligible to receive assistance under the 403 that is expended for a marriage pro- State programs funded under this part in ac- State program funded under this part (bro- motion activity.’’. complishing the purposes of this part.’’. ken down by the number of families that be- SEC. 112. PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT. (d) ANNUAL RANKING OF STATES.—Section come so ineligible due to earnings, changes (a) STATE PLANS.—Section 402(a) (42 U.S.C. 413(d)(1) (42 U.S.C. 613(d)(1)) is amended by in family composition that result in in- 602(a)) is amended— striking ‘‘long-term private sector jobs’’ and creased earnings, sanctions, time limits, or (1) in paragraph (1)— inserting ‘‘private sector jobs, the success of other specified reasons).’’. the recipients in retaining employment, the (A) in subparagraph (A)— (d) REGULATIONS.—Section 411(a)(7) (42 (i) by redesignating clause (vi) and clause ability of the recipients to increase their U.S.C. 611(a)(7)) is amended— (vii) (as added by section 103(a) of this Act) wages’’. (1) by inserting ‘‘and to collect the nec- as clauses (vii) and (viii), respectively; and SEC. 113. DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING. essary data’’ before ‘‘with respect to which (ii) by striking clause (v) and inserting the (a) CONTENTS OF REPORT.— Section reports’’; following: 411(a)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 611(a)(1)(A)) is (2) by striking ‘‘subsection’’ and inserting ‘‘(v) The document shall— amended— ‘‘section’’; and ‘‘(I) describe how the State will pursue (1) in clause (vii), by inserting ‘‘and minor (3) by striking ‘‘in defining the data ele- ending dependence of needy families on gov- parent’’ after ‘‘of each adult’’; ments’’ and all that follows and inserting ‘‘, ernment benefits and reducing poverty by (2) in clause (viii), by striking ‘‘and edu- the National Governors’ Association, the promoting job preparation and work; cational level’’; American Public Human Services Associa- ‘‘(II) describe how the State will encourage (3) in clause (ix), by striking ‘‘, and if the tion, the National Conference of State Legis- the formation and maintenance of healthy 2- latter 2, the amount received’’; latures, and others in defining the data ele- parent married families, encourage respon- (4) in clause (x)— ments.’’. sible fatherhood, and prevent and reduce the (A) by striking ‘‘each type of’’; and (e) ADDITIONAL REPORTS BY STATES.—Sec- incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies; (B) by inserting before the period ‘‘and, if tion 411 (42 U.S.C. 611) is amended— ‘‘(III) include specific, numerical, and applicable, the reason for receipt of the as- (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as sub- measurable performance objectives for ac- sistance for a total of more than 60 months’’; section (e); and complishing subclauses (I) and (II), and with (5) in clause (xi), by striking the subclauses (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the fol- respect to subclause (I), include objectives and inserting the following: lowing: consistent with the criteria used by the Sec- ‘‘(I) Subsidized private sector employment. retary in establishing performance targets ‘‘(II) Unsubsidized employment. ‘‘(b) ANNUAL REPORTS ON PROGRAM CHARAC- under section 403(a)(4)(B) if available; and ‘‘(III) Public sector employment, super- TERISTICS.—Not later than 90 days after the ‘‘(IV) describe the methodology that the vised work experience, or supervised commu- end of fiscal year 2004 and each succeeding State will use to measure State performance nity service. fiscal year, each eligible State shall submit in relation to each such objective. ‘‘(IV) On-the-job training. to the Secretary a report on the characteris- ‘‘(vi) Describe any strategies and programs ‘‘(V) Job search and placement. tics of the State program funded under this the State may be undertaking to address— ‘‘(VI) Training. part and other State programs funded with ‘‘(I) employment retention and advance- ‘‘(VII) Education. qualified State expenditures (as defined in ment for recipients of assistance under the ‘‘(VIII) Other activities directed at the pur- section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)). The report shall in- program, including placement into high-de- poses of this part, as specified in the State clude, with respect to each such program, mand jobs, and whether the jobs are identi- plan submitted pursuant to section 402.’’; the program name, a description of program fied using labor market information; (6) in clause (xii), by inserting ‘‘and activities, the program purpose, the program ‘‘(II) efforts to reduce teen pregnancy; progress toward universal engagement’’ after eligibility criteria, the sources of program ‘‘(III) services for struggling and non- ‘‘participation rates’’; funding, the number of program bene- compliant families, and for clients with spe- (7) in clause (xiii), by striking ‘‘type and’’ ficiaries, sanction policies, and any program cial problems; and before ‘‘amount of assistance’’; work requirements. ‘‘(IV) program integration, including the (8) in clause (xvi), by striking subclause ‘‘(c) MONTHLY REPORTS ON CASELOAD.—Not extent to which employment and training (II) and redesignating subclauses (III) later than 3 months after the end of a cal- services under the program are provided through (V) as subclauses (II) through (IV), endar month that begins 1 year or more after through the One-Stop delivery system cre- respectively; and the enactment of this subsection, each eligi- ated under the Workforce Investment Act of (9) by adding at the end the following: ble State shall submit to the Secretary re- 1998, and the extent to which former recipi- ‘‘(xviii) The date the family first received port on the number of families and total ents of such assistance have access to addi- assistance from the State program on the number of individuals receiving assistance in tional core, intensive, or training services basis of the most recent application for such the calendar month under the State program funded through such Act.’’; and assistance. funded under this part. (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking clause ‘‘(xix) Whether a self-sufficiency plan is es- ‘‘(d) ANNUAL REPORT ON PERFORMANCE IM- (iii) (as so redesignated by section 107(b)(1) of tablished for the family in accordance with PROVEMENT.—Beginning with fiscal year 2004, this Act) and inserting the following: section 408(b). not later than January 1 of each fiscal year, ‘‘(iii) The document shall describe strate- ‘‘(xx) With respect to any child in the fam- each eligible State shall submit to the Sec- gies and programs the State is undertaking ily, the marital status of the parents at the retary a report on achievement and improve- to engage religious organizations in the pro- birth of the child, and if the parents were not ment during the preceding fiscal year under vision of services funded under this part and then married, whether the paternity of the the numerical performance goals and meas- efforts related to section 104 of the Personal child has been established.’’. ures under the State program funded under Responsibility and Work Opportunity (b) USE OF SAMPLES.—Section 411(a)(1)(B) this part with respect to each of the matters Reconcilation Act of 1996. (42 U.S.C. 611(a)(1)(B)) is amended— described in section 402(a)(1)(A)(v).’’.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:47 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.002 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2523

(f) ANNUAL REPORTS TO CONGRESS BY THE ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Of the amounts made (2) APPROPRIATION.—Section 414(b) (42 SECRETARY.—Section 411(e), as so redesig- available under paragraph (1) for a fiscal U.S.C. 614(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘1996,’’ nated by subsection (e) of this section, is year, $2,000,000 shall be awarded on a com- and all that follows through ‘‘2002’’ and in- amended— petitive basis to fund demonstration projects serting ‘‘2003 through 2007’’. (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), designed to test the effectiveness of tribal (b) GAO STUDY.— by striking ‘‘and each fiscal year thereafter’’ governments or tribal consortia in coordi- (1) IN GENERAL.—The Comptroller General and inserting ‘‘and by July 1 of each fiscal nating the provision to tribal families at of the United States shall conduct a study to year thereafter’’; risk of child abuse or neglect of child welfare determine the combined effect of the phase- (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘families services and services under tribal programs out rates for Federal programs and policies applying for assistance,’’ and by striking the funded under this part. which provide support to low-income fami- last comma; and ‘‘(B) USE OF FUNDS.—A grant made to such lies and individuals as they move from wel- (3) in paragraph (3), by inserting ‘‘and a project shall be used— fare to work, at all earning levels up to other programs funded with qualified State ‘‘(i) to improve case management for fami- $35,000 per year, for at least 5 States includ- expenditures (as defined in section lies eligible for assistance from such a tribal ing Wisconsin and California, and any poten- 409(a)(7)(B)(i))’’ before the semicolon. program; tial disincentives the combined phase-out (g) INCREASED ANALYSIS OF STATE SINGLE ‘‘(ii) for supportive services and assistance rates create for families to achieve independ- AUDIT REPORTS.—Section 411 (42 U.S.C. 611) to tribal children in out-of-home placements ence or to marry. is amended by adding at the end the fol- and the tribal families caring for such chil- (2) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after lowing: dren, including families who adopt such chil- the date of the enactment of this subsection, ‘‘(f) INCREASED ANALYSIS OF STATE SINGLE dren; and the Comptroller General shall submit a re- AUDIT REPORTS.— ‘‘(iii) for prevention services and assist- port to Congress containing the results of ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Within 3 months after a ance to tribal families at risk of child abuse the study conducted under this section and, State submits to the Secretary a report pur- and neglect. as appropriate, any recommendations con- suant to section 7502(a)(1)(A) of title 31, ‘‘(C) REPORTS.—The Secretary may require sistent with the results. United States Code, the Secretary shall ana- a recipient of funds awarded under this para- SEC. 117. DEFINITION OF ASSISTANCE. lyze the report for the purpose of identifying graph to provide the Secretary with such in- (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 419 (42 U.S.C. 619) the extent and nature of problems related to formation as the Secretary deems relevant is amended by adding at the end the fol- the oversight by the State of nongovern- to enable the Secretary to facilitate and lowing: mental entities with respect to contracts en- oversee the administration of any project for ‘‘(6) ASSISTANCE.— tered into by such entities with the State which funds are provided under this para- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘assistance’ program funded under this part, and deter- graph.’’. means payment, by cash, voucher, or other mining what additional actions may be ap- (b) FUNDING OF STUDIES AND DEMONSTRA- means, to or for an individual or family for propriate to help prevent and correct the TIONS.—Section 413(h)(1) (42 U.S.C. 613(h)(1)) the purpose of meeting a subsistence need of problems. is amended in the matter preceding subpara- the individual or family (including food, ‘‘(2) INCLUSION OF PROGRAM OVERSIGHT SEC- graph (A) by striking ‘‘1997 through 2002’’ and clothing, shelter, and related items, but not TION IN ANNUAL REPORT TO THE CONGRESS.— inserting ‘‘2003 through 2007’’. including costs of transportation or child The Secretary shall include in each report (c) REPORT ON ENFORCEMENT OF CERTAIN care). under subsection (a) a section on oversight of AFFIDAVITS OF SUPPORT AND SPONSOR DEEM- ‘‘(B) EXCEPTION.—The term ‘assistance’ State programs funded under this part, in- ING.—Not later than March 31, 2004, the Sec- does not include a payment described in sub- cluding findings on the extent and nature of retary of Health and Human Services, in con- paragraph (A) to or for an individual or fam- the problems referred to in paragraph (1), ac- sultation with the Attorney General, shall ily on a short-term, nonrecurring basis (as tions taken to resolve the problems, and to submit to the Congress a report on the en- defined by the State in accordance with reg- the extent the Secretary deems appropriate forcement of affidavits of support and spon- ulations prescribed by the Secretary).’’. make recommendations on changes needed sor deeming as required by section 421, 422, (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— to resolve the problems.’’. and 432 of the Personal Responsibility and (1) Section 404(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 604(a)(1)) is Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of amended by striking ‘‘assistance’’ and in- SEC. 114. DIRECT FUNDING AND ADMINISTRA- 1996. TION BY INDIAN TRIBES. serting ‘‘aid’’. (d) REPORT ON COORDINATION.—Not later (2) Section 404(f) (42 U.S.C. 604(f)) is amend- (a) TRIBAL FAMILY ASSISTANCE GRANT.— than 6 months after the date of the enact- Section 412(a)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 612(a)(1)(A)) is ed by striking ‘‘assistance’’ and inserting ment of this Act, the Secretary of Health ‘‘benefits or services’’. amended by striking ‘‘1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, and Human Services and the Secretary of 2001, and 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘2003 through (3) Section 408(a)(5)(B)(i) (42 U.S.C. Labor shall jointly submit a report to the 608(a)(5)(B)(i)) is amended in the heading by 2007’’. Congress describing common or conflicting (b) GRANTS FOR INDIAN TRIBES THAT RE- striking ‘‘ASSISTANCE’’ and inserting ‘‘AID’’. data elements, definitions, performance (4) Section 413(d)(2) (42 U.S.C. 613(d)(2)) is CEIVED JOBS FUNDS.—Section 412(a)(2)(A) (42 measures, and reporting requirements in the U.S.C. 612(a)(2)(A)) is amended by striking amended by striking ‘‘assistance’’ and in- Workforce Investment Act of 1998 and part A serting ‘‘aid’’. ‘‘1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002’’ and in- of title IV of the Social Security Act, and, to serting ‘‘2003 through 2007’’. SEC. 118. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS. the degree each Secretary deems appro- (a) Section 409(c)(2) (42 U.S.C. 609(c)(2)) is SEC. 115. RESEARCH, EVALUATIONS, AND NA- priate, at the discretion of either Secretary, TIONAL STUDIES. amended by inserting a comma after ‘‘appro- any other program administered by the re- priate’’. (a) SECRETARY’S FUND FOR RESEARCH, DEM- spective Secretary, to allow greater coordi- (b) Section 411(a)(1)(A)(ii)(III) (42 U.S.C. ONSTRATIONS, AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.— nation between the welfare and workforce 611(a)(1)(A)(ii)(III)) is amended by striking Section 413 (42 U.S.C. 613), as amended by development systems. the last close parenthesis. section 112(c) of this Act, is further amended SEC. 116. STUDIES BY THE CENSUS BUREAU AND (c) Section 413(j)(2)(A) (42 U.S.C. by adding at the end the following: THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE. 613(j)(2)(A)) is amended by striking ‘‘section’’ ‘‘(l) FUNDING FOR RESEARCH, DEMONSTRA- (a) CENSUS BUREAU STUDY.— and inserting ‘‘sections’’. TIONS, AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 414(a) (42 U.S.C. (d)(1) Section 413 (42 U.S.C. 613) is amended ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Out of any money in the 614(a)) is amended to read as follows: by striking subsection (g) and redesignating Treasury of the United States not otherwise ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Bureau of the Cen- subsections (h) through (j) and subsections appropriated, there are appropriated sus shall implement a new longitudinal sur- (k) and (l) (as added by sections 112(c) and $102,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 vey of program dynamics, developed in con- 115(a) of this Act, respectively) as sub- through 2007, which shall be available to the sultation with the Secretary and made avail- sections (g) through (k), respectively. Secretary for the purpose of conducting and able to interested parties, to allow for the (2) Each of the following provisions is supporting research and demonstration assessment of the outcomes of continued amended by striking ‘‘413(j)’’ and inserting projects by public or private entities, and welfare reform on the economic and child ‘‘413(i)’’: providing technical assistance to States, In- well-being of low-income families with chil- (A) Section 403(a)(5)(A)(ii)(III) (42 U.S.C. dian tribal organizations, and such other en- dren, including those who received assist- 603(a)(5)(A)(ii)(III)). tities as the Secretary may specify that are ance or services from a State program fund- (B) Section 403(a)(5)(F) (42 U.S.C. receiving a grant under this part, which ed under this part, and, to the extent pos- 603(a)(5)(F)). shall be expended primarily on activities de- sible, shall provide State representative (C) Section 403(a)(5)(G)(ii) (42 U.S.C. scribed in section 403(a)(2)(B), and which samples. The content of the survey should 603(a)(5)(G)(ii)). shall be in addition to any other funds made include such information as may be nec- (D) Section 412(a)(3)(B)(iv) (42 U.S.C. available under this part. essary to examine the issues of out-of-wed- 612(a)(3)(B)(iv)). ‘‘(2) SET ASIDE FOR DEMONSTRATION lock childbearing, marriage, welfare depend- SEC. 119. FATHERHOOD PROGRAM. PROJECTS FOR COORDINATION OF PROVISION OF ency and compliance with work require- (a) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be CHILD WELFARE AND TANF SERVICES TO TRIBAL ments, the beginning and ending of spells of cited as the ‘‘Promotion and Support of Re- FAMILIES AT RISK OF CHILD ABUSE OR NE- assistance, work, earnings and employment sponsible Fatherhood and Healthy Marriage GLECT.— stability, and the well-being of children.’’. Act of 2002’’.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:47 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.003 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2524 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002

(b) FATHERHOOD PROGRAM.— system established under title I of the Work- capacity to carry out the project, including (1) IN GENERAL.—Title I of the Personal Re- force Investment Act of 1998, encouragement the entity’s ability to provide the non-Fed- sponsibility and Work Opportunity Rec- and support of timely payment of current eral share of project resources. onciliation Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–193) is child support and regular payment toward ‘‘ ‘(3) ADDRESSING CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT amended by adding at the end the following: past due child support obligations in appro- AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.—A description of ‘‘SEC. 117. FATHERHOOD PROGRAM. priate cases, and other methods. how the entity will assess for the presence ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Title IV (42 U.S.C. 601– ‘‘ ‘(C) Improving fathers’ ability to effec- of, and intervene to resolve, domestic vio- 679b) is amended by inserting after part B tively manage family business affairs by lence and child abuse and neglect, including the following: means such as education, counseling, and how the entity will coordinate with State ‘‘ ‘PART C—FATHERHOOD PROGRAM mentoring in matters including household and local child protective service and domes- ‘‘ ‘SEC. 441. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. management, budgeting, banking, and han- tic violence programs. ‘‘ ‘(a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds that dling of financial transactions, time manage- ‘‘ ‘(4) ADDRESSING CONCERNS RELATING TO there is substantial evidence strongly indi- ment, and home maintenance. SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND SEXUAL ACTIVITY.—A cating the urgent need to promote and sup- ‘‘ ‘(D) Encouraging and supporting healthy commitment to make available to each indi- port involved, committed, and responsible marriages and married fatherhood through vidual participating in the project education fatherhood, and to encourage and support such activities as premarital education, in- about alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs, and healthy marriages between parents raising cluding the use of premarital inventories, about the health risks associated with abus- children, including data demonstrating the marriage preparation programs, skills-based ing such substances, and information about following: marriage education programs, marital ther- diseases and conditions transmitted through ‘‘ ‘(1) In approximately 90 percent of cases apy, couples counseling, divorce education substance abuse and sexual contact, includ- where a parent is absent, that parent is the and reduction programs, divorce mediation ing HIV/AIDS, and to coordinate with pro- father. and counseling, relationship skills enhance- viders of services addressing such problems, ‘‘ ‘(2) By some estimates, 60 percent of chil- ment programs, including those designed to as appropriate. dren born in the 1990’s will spend a signifi- reduce child abuse and domestic violence, ‘‘ ‘(5) COORDINATION WITH SPECIFIED PRO- cant portion of their childhood in a home and dissemination of information about the GRAMS.—An undertaking to coordinate, as without a father. benefits of marriage for both parents and appropriate, with State and local entities re- ‘‘ ‘(3) Nearly 75 percent of children in sin- children. sponsible for the programs under parts A, B, gle-parent homes will experience poverty be- ‘‘ ‘(2) Through the projects and activities and D of this title, including programs under fore they are 11 years old, compared with described in paragraph (1), to improve out- title I of the Workforce Investment Act of only 20 percent of children in 2-parent fami- comes for children with respect to measures 1998 (including the One-Stop delivery sys- lies. such as increased family income and eco- tem), and such other programs as the Sec- ‘‘ ‘(4) Low income is positively correlated nomic security, improved school perform- retary may require. with children’s difficulties with education, ance, better health, improved emotional and ‘‘ ‘(6) RECORDS, REPORTS, AND AUDITS.—An social adjustment, and delinquency, and sin- behavioral stability and social adjustment, agreement to maintain such records, make gle-parent households constitute a dispropor- and reduced risk of delinquency, crime, sub- such reports, and cooperate with such re- tionate share of low-income households. stance abuse, child abuse and neglect, teen views or audits as the Secretary may find ‘‘ ‘(5) Where families (whether intact or sexual activity, and teen suicide. necessary for purposes of oversight of project with a parent absent) are living in poverty, ‘‘ ‘(3) To evaluate the effectiveness of var- activities and expenditures. a significant factor is the father’s lack of job ious approaches and to disseminate findings ‘‘ ‘(7) SELF-INITIATED EVALUATION.—If the skills. concerning outcomes and other information entity elects to contract for independent ‘‘ ‘(6) Children raised in 2-parent married in order to encourage and facilitate the rep- evaluation of the project (part or all of the families, on average, fare better as a group lication of effective approaches to accom- cost of which may be paid for using grant in key areas, including better school per- plishing these objectives. funds), a commitment to submit to the Sec- formance, reduced rates of substance abuse, ‘‘ ‘SEC. 442. DEFINITIONS. retary a copy of the evaluation report within crime, and delinquency, fewer health, emo- ‘‘ ‘In this part, the terms ‘‘Indian tribe’’ 30 days after completion of the report and tional, and behavioral problems, lower rates and ‘‘tribal organization’’ have the meanings not more than 1 year after completion of the of teenage sexual activity, less risk of abuse given them in subsections (e) and (l), respec- project. or neglect, and lower risk of teen suicide. tively, of section 4 of the Indian Self-Deter- ‘‘ ‘(8) COOPERATION WITH SECRETARY’S OVER- ‘‘ ‘(7) Committed and responsible fathering mination and Education Assistance Act. SIGHT AND EVALUATION.—An agreement to co- during infancy and early childhood contrib- ‘‘ ‘SEC. 443. COMPETITIVE GRANTS FOR SERVICE operate with the Secretary’s evaluation of utes to the development of emotional secu- PROJECTS. projects assisted under this section, by rity, curiosity, and math and verbal skills. ‘‘ ‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may means including random assignment of cli- ‘‘ ‘(8) An estimated 24,000,000 children (33.5 make grants for fiscal years 2003 through ents to service recipient and control groups, percent) live apart from their biological fa- 2007 to public and nonprofit community enti- if determined by the Secretary to be appro- ther. ties, including religious organizations, and priate, and affording the Secretary access to ‘‘ ‘(9) A recent national survey indicates to Indian tribes and tribal organizations, for the project and to project-related records that of all children under age 18 not living demonstration service projects and activities and documents, staff, and clients. with their biological father, 29 percent had designed to test the effectiveness of various ‘‘ ‘(c) ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR LIMITED not seen their father even once in the last 12 approaches to accomplish the objectives PURPOSE GRANTS.—In order to be eligible for months. specified in section 441(b)(1). a grant under this section in an amount ‘‘ ‘(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this part ‘‘ ‘(b) ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR FULL SERV- under $25,000 per fiscal year, an entity shall are: ICE GRANTS.—In order to be eligible for a submit an application to the Secretary con- ‘‘ ‘(1) To provide for projects and activities grant under this section, except as specified taining the following: by public entities and by nonprofit commu- in subsection (c), an entity shall submit an ‘‘ ‘(1) PROJECT DESCRIPTION.—A description nity entities, including religious organiza- application to the Secretary containing the of the project and how it will be carried out, tions, designed to test promising approaches following: including the number and characteristics of to accomplishing the following objectives: ‘‘ ‘(1) PROJECT DESCRIPTION.—A statement clients to be served, the proposed duration of ‘‘ ‘(A) Promoting responsible, caring, and including— the project, and how it will address at least effective parenting through counseling, men- ‘‘ ‘(A) a description of the project and how 1 of the 4 objectives specified in section toring, and parenting education, dissemina- it will be carried out, including the geo- 441(b)(1). tion of educational materials and informa- graphical area to be covered and the number ‘‘ ‘(2) QUALIFICATIONS.—Such information tion on parenting skills, encouragement of and characteristics of clients to be served, as the Secretary may require as to the ca- positive father involvement, including the and how it will address each of the 4 objec- pacity of the entity to carry out the project, positive involvement of nonresident fathers, tives specified in section 441(b)(1); and including any previous experience with simi- and other methods. ‘‘ ‘(B) a description of the methods to be lar activities. ‘‘ ‘(B) Enhancing the abilities and commit- used by the entity or its contractor to assess ‘‘ ‘(3) COORDINATION WITH RELATED PRO- ment of unemployed or low-income fathers the extent to which the project was success- GRAMS.—As required by the Secretary in ap- to provide material support for their fami- ful in accomplishing its specific objectives propriate cases, an undertaking to coordi- lies and to avoid or leave welfare programs and the general objectives specified in sec- nate and cooperate with State and local enti- by assisting them to take full advantage of tion 441(b)(1). ties responsible for specific programs relat- education, job training, and job search pro- ‘‘ ‘(2) EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS.—A ing to the objectives of the project including, grams, to improve work habits and work demonstration of ability to carry out the as appropriate, jobs programs and programs skills, to secure career advancement by ac- project, by means such as demonstration of serving children and families. tivities such as outreach and information experience in successfully carrying out ‘‘ ‘(4) RECORDS, REPORTS, AND AUDITS.—An dissemination, coordination, as appropriate, projects of similar design and scope, and agreement to maintain such records, make with employment services and job training such other information as the Secretary may such reports, and cooperate with such re- programs, including the One-Stop delivery find necessary to demonstrate the entity’s views or audits as the Secretary may find

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:44 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.003 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2525

necessary for purposes of oversight of project ‘‘ ‘(A) ELIGIBLE ENTITY.—A demonstration such reports, and cooperate with such re- activities and expenditures. that the entity meets the requirements of views or audits (in addition to those required ‘‘ ‘(5) COOPERATION WITH SECRETARY’S OVER- subsection (b). under the preceding provisions of paragraph SIGHT AND EVALUATION.—An agreement to co- ‘‘ ‘(B) OTHER.—Such other information as (2)) as the Secretary may find necessary for operate with the Secretary’s evaluation of the Secretary may find necessary to dem- purposes of oversight of project activities projects assisted under this section, by onstrate the entity’s capacity to carry out and expenditures. means including affording the Secretary ac- the project, including the entity’s ability to ‘‘ ‘(d) FEDERAL SHARE.— cess to the project and to project-related provide the non-Federal share of project re- ‘‘ ‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Grants for a project records and documents, staff, and clients. sources. under this section for a fiscal year shall be ‘‘ ‘(d) CONSIDERATIONS IN AWARDING ‘‘ ‘(2) PROJECT DESCRIPTION.—A description available for up to 80 percent of the cost of GRANTS.— of and commitments concerning the project such project in such fiscal year. ‘‘ ‘(1) DIVERSITY OF PROJECTS.—In awarding design, including the following: ‘‘ ‘(2) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Fed- grants under this section, the Secretary ‘‘ ‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A detailed description eral share may be in cash or in kind. In de- shall seek to achieve a balance among enti- of the proposed project design and how it termining the amount of the non-Federal ties of differing sizes, entities in differing ge- will be carried out, which shall— share, the Secretary may attribute fair mar- ographic areas, entities in urban and in rural ‘‘ ‘(i) provide for the project to be con- ket value to goods, services, and facilities areas, and entities employing differing meth- ducted in at least 3 major metropolitan contributed from non-Federal sources. ods of achieving the purposes of this section, areas; ‘‘ ‘SEC. 445. EVALUATION. including working with the State agency re- ‘‘ ‘(ii) state how it will address each of the ‘‘ ‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, directly sponsible for the administration of part D to 4 objectives specified in section 441(b)(1); or by contract or cooperative agreement, help fathers satisfy child support arrearage ‘‘ ‘(iii) demonstrate that there is a suffi- shall evaluate the effectiveness of service obligations. cient number of potential clients to allow for projects funded under sections 443 and 444 ‘‘ ‘(2) PREFERENCE FOR PROJECTS SERVING the random selection of individuals to par- from the standpoint of the purposes specified LOW-INCOME FATHERS.—In awarding grants ticipate in the project and for comparisons in section 441(b)(1). under this section, the Secretary may give with appropriate control groups composed of ‘‘ ‘(b) EVALUATION METHODOLOGY.—Evalua- preference to applications for projects in individuals who have not participated in tions under this section shall— which a majority of the clients to be served such projects; and ‘‘ ‘(1) include, to the maximum extent fea- are low-income fathers. ‘‘ ‘(iv) demonstrate that the project is de- sible, random assignment of clients to serv- signed to direct a majority of project re- ‘‘ ‘(e) FEDERAL SHARE.— ice delivery and control groups and other ap- sources to activities serving low-income fa- ‘‘ ‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Grants for a project propriate comparisons of groups of individ- under this section for a fiscal year shall be thers (but the project need not make services uals receiving and not receiving services; available on a means-tested basis). available for a share of the cost of such ‘‘ ‘(2) describe and measure the effective- ‘‘ ‘(B) OVERSIGHT, EVALUATION, AND ADJUST- project in such fiscal year equal to— ness of the projects in achieving their spe- MENT COMPONENT.—An agreement that the ‘‘ ‘(A) up to 80 percent (or up to 90 percent, cific project goals; and entity— if the entity demonstrates to the Secretary’s ‘‘ ‘(3) describe and assess, as appropriate, ‘‘ ‘(i) in consultation with the evaluator se- satisfaction circumstances limiting the enti- the impact of such projects on marriage, par- lected pursuant to section 445, and as re- ty’s ability to secure non-Federal resources) enting, domestic violence, child abuse and quired by the Secretary, will modify the in the case of a project under subsection (b); neglect, money management, employment project design, initially and (if necessary) and and earnings, payment of child support, and subsequently throughout the duration of the ‘‘ ‘(B) up to 100 percent, in the case of a project, in order to facilitate ongoing and child well-being, health, and education. ‘‘ ‘(c) EVALUATION REPORTS.—The Secretary project under subsection (c). final oversight and evaluation of project op- shall publish the following reports on the re- ‘‘ ‘(2) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The non-Fed- eration and outcomes (by means including, sults of the evaluation: eral share may be in cash or in kind. In de- to the maximum extent feasible, random as- termining the amount of the non-Federal signment of clients to service recipient and ‘‘ ‘(1) An implementation evaluation report share, the Secretary may attribute fair mar- control groups), and to provide for mid- covering the first 24 months of the activities ket value to goods, services, and facilities course adjustments in project design indi- under this part to be completed by 36 months contributed from non-Federal sources. cated by interim evaluations; after initiation of such activities. ‘‘ ‘SEC. 444. MULTICITY, MULTISTATE DEM- ‘‘ ‘(ii) will submit to the Secretary revised ‘‘ ‘(2) A final report on the evaluation to be ONSTRATION PROJECTS. descriptions of the project design as modified completed by September 30, 2010. ‘‘ ‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may in accordance with clause (i); and ‘‘ ‘SEC. 446. PROJECTS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFI- make grants under this section for fiscal ‘‘ ‘(iii) will cooperate fully with the Sec- CANCE. years 2003 through 2007 to eligible entities retary’s ongoing oversight and ongoing and ‘‘ ‘The Secretary is authorized, by grant, (as specified in subsection (b)) for 2 final evaluation of the project, by means in- contract, or cooperative agreement, to carry multicity, multistate projects dem- cluding affording the Secretary access to the out projects and activities of national sig- onstrating approaches to achieving the ob- project and to project-related records and nificance relating to fatherhood promotion, jectives specified in section 441(b)(1). One of documents, staff, and clients. including— the projects shall test the use of married ‘‘ ‘(3) ADDRESSING CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT ‘‘ ‘(1) COLLECTION AND DISSEMINATION OF IN- couples to deliver program services. AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.—A description of FORMATION.—Assisting States, communities, ‘‘ ‘(b) ELIGIBLE ENTITIES.—An entity eligi- how the entity will assess for the presence and private entities, including religious or- ble for a grant under this section must be a of, and intervene to resolve, domestic vio- ganizations, in efforts to promote and sup- national nonprofit fatherhood promotion or- lence and child abuse and neglect, including port marriage and responsible fatherhood by ganization that meets the following require- how the entity will coordinate with State collecting, evaluating, developing, and mak- ments: and local child protective service and domes- ing available (through the Internet and by ‘‘ ‘(1) EXPERIENCE WITH FATHERHOOD PRO- tic violence programs. other means) to all interested parties infor- GRAMS.—The organization must have sub- ‘‘ ‘(4) ADDRESSING CONCERNS RELATING TO mation regarding approaches to accom- stantial experience in designing and success- SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND SEXUAL ACTIVITY.—A plishing the objectives specified in section fully conducting programs that meet the commitment to make available to each indi- 441(b)(1). purposes described in section 441. vidual participating in the project education ‘‘ ‘(2) MEDIA CAMPAIGN.—Developing, pro- ‘‘ ‘(2) EXPERIENCE WITH MULTICITY, about alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs, and moting, and distributing to interested MULTISTATE PROGRAMS AND GOVERNMENT CO- about the health risks associated with abus- States, local governments, public agencies, ORDINATION.—The organization must have ex- ing such substances, and information about and private nonprofit organizations, includ- perience in simultaneously conducting such diseases and conditions transmitted through ing charitable and religious organizations, a programs in more than 1 major metropolitan substance abuse and sexual contact, includ- media campaign that promotes and encour- area in more than 1 State and in coordi- ing HIV/AIDS, and to coordinate with pro- ages involved, committed, and responsible nating such programs, where appropriate, viders of services addressing such problems, fatherhood and married fatherhood. with State and local government agencies as appropriate. ‘‘ ‘(3) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—Providing and private, nonprofit agencies (including ‘‘ ‘(5) COORDINATION WITH SPECIFIED PRO- technical assistance, including consultation community-based and religious organiza- GRAMS.—An undertaking to coordinate, as and training, to public and private entities, tions), including State or local agencies re- appropriate, with State and local entities re- including community organizations and sponsible for child support enforcement and sponsible for the programs funded under faith-based organizations, in the implemen- workforce development. parts A, B, and D of this title, programs tation of local fatherhood promotion pro- ‘‘ ‘(c) APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS.—In under title I of the Workforce Investment grams. order to be eligible for a grant under this Act of 1998 (including the One-Stop delivery ‘‘ ‘(4) RESEARCH.—Conducting research re- section, an entity must submit to the Sec- system), and such other programs as the Sec- lated to the purposes of this part. retary an application that includes the fol- retary may require. ‘‘ ‘SEC. 447. NONDISCRIMINATION. lowing: ‘‘ ‘(6) RECORDS, REPORTS, AND AUDITS.—An ‘‘ ‘The projects and activities assisted ‘‘ ‘(1) QUALIFICATIONS.— agreement to maintain such records, make under this part shall be available on the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.003 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2526 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 same basis to all fathers and expectant fa- SEC. 203. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. ‘‘(II) a description of quantifiable, objec- thers able to benefit from such projects and Section 658B of the Child Care and Devel- tive measures for evaluating the quality of activities, including married and unmarried opment Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. child care services separately with respect to fathers and custodial and noncustodial fa- 9858) is amended— the activities listed in each of such para- thers, with particular attention to low-in- (1) by striking ‘‘is’’ and inserting ‘‘are’’, graphs that the State will use to evaluate its come fathers, and to mothers and expectant and progress in improving the quality of such mothers on the same basis as to fathers. (2) by striking ‘‘$1,000,000,000 for each of the child care services; ‘‘ ‘SEC. 448. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIA- fiscal years 1996 through 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘(III) a list of State-developed child care TIONS; RESERVATION FOR CERTAIN ‘‘$2,300,000,000 for fiscal year 2003, service quality targets for such fiscal year PURPOSE. $2,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, $2,700,000,000 quantified on the basis of such measures; and ‘‘ ‘(a) AUTHORIZATION.—There are author- for fiscal year 2005, $2,900,000,000 for fiscal ‘‘(IV) for each fiscal year after fiscal year ized to be appropriated $20,000,000 for each of year 2006, and $3,100,000,000 for fiscal year 2003, a report on the progress made to fiscal years 2003 through 2007 to carry out 2007’’. achieve such targets during the then pre- the provisions of this part. SEC. 204. APPLICATION AND PLAN. ceding fiscal year. ‘‘ ‘(b) RESERVATION.—Of the amount appro- Section 658E(c)(2) of the Child Care and De- ‘‘(iii) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in priated under this section for each fiscal velopment Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. this subparagraph shall be construed to re- year, not more than 15 percent shall be avail- 9858C(c)(2)) is amended— quire that the State apply measures for eval- able for the costs of the multicity, multi- (1) by amending subparagraph (D) to read uating quality to specific types of child care county, multistate demonstration projects as follows: providers. under section 444, evaluations under section ‘‘(D) CONSUMER AND CHILD CARE PROVIDER ‘‘(L) ACCESS TO CARE FOR CERTAIN POPU- 445, and projects of national significance EDUCATION INFORMATION.—Certify that the LATIONS.—Demonstrate how the State is ad- under section 446.’. State will collect and disseminate, through dressing the child care needs of parents eligi- ‘‘(b) INAPPLICABILITY OF EFFECTIVE DATE resource and referral services and other ble for child care services for which financial PROVISIONS.—Section 116 shall not apply to means as determined by the State, to par- assistance is provided under this subchapter the amendment made by subsection (a) of ents of eligible children, child care providers, who have children with special needs, work this section.’’. and the general public, information nontraditional hours, or require child care (2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—Section 2 of regarding— services for infants or toddlers.’’. such Act is amended in the table of contents ‘‘(i) the promotion of informed child care SEC. 205. ACTIVITIES TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY by inserting after the item relating to sec- choices, including information about the OF CHILD CARE. tion 116 the following new item: quality and availability of child care serv- Section 658G of the Child Care and Devel- ‘‘Sec. 117. Fatherhood program.’’. ices; opment Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. SEC. 120. STATE OPTION TO MAKE TANF PRO- ‘‘(ii) research and best practices on chil- 9858e) is amended to read as follows: GRAMS MANDATORY PARTNERS dren’s development, including early cog- ‘‘SEC. 658G. ACTIVITIES TO IMPROVE THE QUAL- WITH ONE-STOP EMPLOYMENT nitive development; ITY OF CHILD CARE SERVICES. TRAINING CENTERS. ‘‘A State that receives funds to carry out Section 408 of the Social Security Act (42 ‘‘(iii) the availability of assistance to ob- tain child care services; and this subchapter for a fiscal year, shall use U.S.C. 608) is amended by adding at the end not less than 6 percent of the amount of such the following: ‘‘(iv) other programs for which families that receive child care services for which fi- funds for activities provided through re- ‘‘(h) STATE OPTION TO MAKE TANF PRO- nancial assistance is provided under this sub- source and referral services or other means, GRAMS MANDATORY PARTNERS WITH ONE-STOP chapter may be eligible, including the food that are designed to improve the quality of EMPLOYMENT TRAINING CENTERS.—For pur- child care services for which financial assist- poses of section 121(b) of the Workforce In- stamp program, the WIC program under sec- tion 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, the ance is made available under this sub- vestment Act of 1998, a State program funded chapter. Such activities include— under part A of title IV of the Social Secu- child and adult care food program under sec- tion 17 of the Richard B. Russell National ‘‘(1) programs that provide training, edu- rity Act shall be considered a program re- cation, and other professional development ferred to in paragraph (1)(B) of such section, School Lunch Act, and the medicaid and CHIP programs under titles XIX and XXI of activities to enhance the skills of the child unless, after the date of the enactment of care workforce, including training opportu- this subsection, the Governor of the State the Social Security Act.’’, and (2) by inserting after subparagraph (H) the nities for caregivers in informal care set- notifies the Secretaries of Health and Human tings; Services and Labor in writing of the decision following: ‘‘(I) COORDINATION WITH OTHER EARLY CHILD ‘‘(2) activities within child care settings to of the Governor not to make the State pro- enhance early learning for young children, to gram a mandatory partner.’’. CARE SERVICES AND EARLY CHILDHOOD EDU- CATION PROGRAMS.—Demonstrate how the promote early literacy, and to foster school SEC. 121. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS. State is coordinating child care services pro- readiness; It is the sense of the Congress that a State vided under this subchapter with Head Start, ‘‘(3) initiatives to increase the retention welfare-to-work program should include a Early Reading First, Even Start, Ready-To- and compensation of child care providers, in- mentoring program. Learn Television, State pre-kindergarten cluding tiered reimbursement rates for pro- TITLE II—CHILD CARE programs, and other early childhood edu- viders that meet quality standards as defined SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE. cation programs to expand accessibility to by the State; or This title may be cited as the ‘‘Caring for and continuity of care and early education ‘‘(4) other activities deemed by the State Children Act of 2002’’. without displacing services provided by the to improve the quality of child care services SEC. 202. GOALS. current early care and education delivery provided in such State.’’. (a) GOALS.—Section 658A(b) of the Child system. SEC. 206. REPORT BY SECRETARY. Care and Development Block Grant Act of ‘‘(J) PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.—Dem- Section 658L of the Child Care and Devel- 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9801 note) is amended— onstrate how the State encourages partner- opment Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. (1) in paragraph (3) by striking ‘‘encour- ships with private and other public entities 9858j) is amended to read as follows: age’’ and inserting ‘‘assist’’, to leverage existing service delivery systems ‘‘SEC. 658L. REPORT BY SECRETARY. (2) by amending paragraph (4) to read as of early childhood education and increase ‘‘(a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than Oc- follows: the supply and quality of child care services. tober 1, 2004, and biennially thereafter, the ‘‘(4) to assist State to provide child care to ‘‘(K) CHILD CARE SERVICE QUALITY.— Secretary shall prepare and submit to the low-income parents;’’, ‘‘(i) CERTIFICATION.—For each fiscal year Committee on Education and the Workforce (3) by redesignating paragraph (5) as para- after fiscal year 2003, certify that during the of the House of Representatives and the graph (7), and then preceding fiscal year the State was in Committee on Health, Education, Labor and (4) by inserting after paragraph (4) the fol- compliance with section 658G and describe Pensions of the Senate a report that con- lowing: how funds were used to comply with such tains the following: ‘‘(5) to encourage States to improve the section during such preceding fiscal year. ‘‘(1) A summary and analysis of the data quality of child care available to families; ‘‘(ii) STRATEGY.—For each fiscal year after and information provided to the Secretary in ‘‘(6) to promote school readiness by encour- fiscal year 2003, contain an outline of the the State reports submitted under section aging the exposure of young children in child strategy the State will implement during 658K. care to nurturing environments and develop- such fiscal year for which the State plan is ‘‘(2) Aggregated statistics on the supply of, mentally-appropriate activities, including submitted, to address the quality of child demand for, and quality of child care, early activities to foster early cognitive and lit- care services in child care settings that pro- education, and non-school-hours programs. eracy development; and’’. vide services for which assistance is made ‘‘(3) An assessment, and where appropriate, (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section available under this subchapter, and include recommendations for the Congress con- 658E(c)(3)(B) of the Child Care and Develop- in such strategy— cerning efforts that should be undertaken to ment Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. ‘‘(I) a statement specifying how the State improve the access of the public to quality 9858c(c)(3)(B)) is amended by striking will address the activities described in para- and affordable child care in the United ‘‘through (5)’’ and inserting ‘‘through (7)’’. graphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 658G; States.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:32 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.003 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2527

‘‘(b) COLLECTION OF INFORMATION.—The pay tax, for purposes of section 6601 (relating (1) Section 6159(a) of the Internal Revenue Secretary may utilize the national child care to interest on underpayments), the tax shall Code of 1986 (relating to authorization of data system available through resource and be treated as paid when the deposit is made. agreements) is amended— referral organizations at the local, State, ‘‘(c) RETURN OF DEPOSIT.—Except in a case (A) by striking ‘‘satisfy liability for pay- and national level to collect the information where the Secretary determines that collec- ment of’’ and inserting ‘‘make payment on’’, required by subsection (a)(2). tion of tax is in jeopardy, the Secretary shall and SEC. 207. DEFINITIONS. return to the taxpayer any amount of the de- (B) by inserting ‘‘full or partial’’ after ‘‘fa- Section 658P(4)(B) of the Child Care and posit (to the extent not used for a payment cilitate’’. Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 of tax) which the taxpayer requests in writ- (2) Section 6159(c) of such Code (relating to U.S.C. 9858N(4)(B)) is amended by striking ing. Secretary required to enter into installment ‘‘85 percent of the State median income’’ and ‘‘(d) PAYMENT OF INTEREST.— agreements in certain cases) is amended in inserting ‘‘income levels as established by ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of section the matter preceding paragraph (1) by insert- the State, prioritized by need,’’. 6611 (relating to interest on overpayments), a ing ‘‘full’’ before ‘‘payment’’. (b) REQUIREMENT TO REVIEW PARTIAL PAY- SEC. 208. ENTITLEMENT FUNDING. deposit which is returned to a taxpayer shall MENT AGREEMENTS EVERY TWO YEARS.—Sec- Section 418(a)(3) (42 U.S.C. 618(a)(3)) is be treated as a payment of tax for any period tion 6159 of such Code is amended by redesig- amended— to the extent (and only to the extent) attrib- nating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara- utable to a disputable tax for such period. Under regulations prescribed by the Sec- (e) and (f), respectively, and inserting after graph (E); subsection (c) the following new subsection: (2) by striking the period at the end of sub- retary, rules similar to the rules of section 6611(b)(2) shall apply. ‘‘(d) SECRETARY REQUIRED TO REVIEW IN- paragraph (F) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and STALLMENT AGREEMENTS FOR PARTIAL COL- ‘‘(2) DISPUTABLE TAX.— (3) by adding at the end the following: LECTION EVERY TWO YEARS.—In the case of ‘‘(G) $2,917,000,000 for each of fiscal years ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of this sec- tion, the term ‘disputable tax’ means the an agreement entered into by the Secretary 2003 through 2007.’’. under subsection (a) for partial collection of amount of tax specified at the time of the de- TITLE III—TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS a tax liability, the Secretary shall review posit as the taxpayer’s reasonable estimate the agreement at least once every 2 years.’’. SEC. 301. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME FOR of the maximum amount of any tax attrib- (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments INTEREST ON OVERPAYMENTS OF utable to disputable items. INCOME TAX BY INDIVIDUALS. made by this section shall apply to agree- ‘‘(B) SAFE HARBOR BASED ON 30-DAY LET- (a) IN GENERAL.—Part III of subchapter B ments entered into on or after the date of TER.—In the case of a taxpayer who has been of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of the enactment of this Act. issued a 30-day letter, the maximum amount 1986 (relating to items specifically excluded TITLE IV—CHILD SUPPORT of tax under subparagraph (A) shall not be from gross income) is amended by inserting less than the amount of the proposed defi- SEC. 401. FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS FOR LIM- after section 139 the following new section: ciency specified in such letter. ITED PASS THROUGH OF CHILD SUP- ‘‘SEC. 139A. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME PORT PAYMENTS TO FAMILIES RE- ‘‘(3) OTHER DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of FOR INTEREST ON OVERPAYMENTS CEIVING TANF. OF INCOME TAX BY INDIVIDUALS. paragraph (2)— (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 457(a) (42 U.S.C. ‘‘(A) DISPUTABLE ITEM.—The term ‘disput- ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an indi- 657(a)) is amended— vidual, gross income shall not include inter- able item’ means any item of income, gain, (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by inserting ‘‘sub- est paid under section 6611 on any overpay- loss, deduction, or credit if the taxpayer— ject to paragraph (7)’’ before the semicolon; ment of tax imposed by this subtitle. ‘‘(i) has a reasonable basis for its treat- and ‘‘(b) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) shall not ment of such item, and (2) by adding at the end the following: apply in the case of a failure to claim items ‘‘(ii) reasonably believes that the Sec- ‘‘(7) FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS FOR LIMITED resulting in the overpayment on the original retary also has a reasonable basis for dis- PASS THROUGH OF CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS return if the Secretary determines that the allowing the taxpayer’s treatment of such TO FAMILIES RECEIVING TANF.—Notwith- principal purpose of such failure is to take item. standing paragraph (1), a State shall not be advantage of subsection (a). ‘‘(B) 30-DAY LETTER.—The term ‘30-day let- required to pay to the Federal Government ‘‘(c) SPECIAL RULE FOR DETERMINING MODI- ter’ means the first letter of proposed defi- the Federal share of an amount collected FIED ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME.—For purposes ciency which allows the taxpayer an oppor- during a month on behalf of a family that is of this title, interest not included in gross tunity for administrative review in the In- a recipient of assistance under the State pro- income under subsection (a) shall not be ternal Revenue Service Office of Appeals. gram funded under part A, to the extent treated as interest which is exempt from tax ‘‘(4) RATE OF INTEREST.—The rate of inter- that— for purposes of sections 32(i)(2)(B) and 6012(d) est allowable under this subsection shall be ‘‘(A) the State distributes the amount to or any computation in which interest ex- the Federal short-term rate determined the family; empt from tax under this title is added to ad- under section 6621(b), compounded daily. ‘‘(B) the total of the amounts so distrib- justed gross income.’’. ‘‘(e) USE OF DEPOSITS.— uted to the family during the month— (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of ‘‘(1) PAYMENT OF TAX.—Except as otherwise ‘‘(i) exceeds the amount (if any) that, as of sections for part III of subchapter B of chap- provided by the taxpayer, deposits shall be December 31, 2001, was required under State ter 1 of such Code is amended by inserting treated as used for the payment of tax in the law to be distributed to a family under para- after the item relating to section 139 the fol- order deposited. graph (1)(B); and lowing new item: ‘‘(2) RETURNS OF DEPOSITS.—Deposits shall ‘‘(ii) does not exceed the greater of— be treated as returned to the taxpayer on a ‘‘(I) $100; or ‘‘Sec. 139A. Exclusion from gross income for last-in, first-out basis.’’. ‘‘(II) $50 plus the amount described in interest on overpayments of in- (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of clause (i); and come tax by individuals.’’. sections for subchapter A of chapter 67 of ‘‘(C) the amount is disregarded in deter- (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments such Code is amended by adding at the end mining the amount and type of assistance made by this section shall apply to interest the following new item: provided to the family under the State pro- received after December 31, 2006. ‘‘Sec. 6603. Deposits made to suspend running gram funded under part A.’’. SEC. 302. DEPOSITS MADE TO SUSPEND RUNNING (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments of interest on potential under- OF INTEREST ON POTENTIAL UN- made by subsection (a) shall apply to payments, etc.’’. DERPAYMENTS. amounts distributed on or after October 1, (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter A of chapter (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 2004. (1) IN GENERAL.—The amendments made by 67 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (re- SEC. 402. STATE OPTION TO PASS THROUGH ALL lating to interest on underpayments) is this section shall apply to deposits made CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS TO FAM- amended by adding at the end the following after the date of the enactment of this Act. ILIES THAT FORMERLY RECEIVED new section: (2) COORDINATION WITH DEPOSITS MADE TANF. ‘‘SEC. 6603. DEPOSITS MADE TO SUSPEND RUN- UNDER REVENUE PROCEDURE 84–58.—In the case (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 457(a) (42 U.S.C. NING OF INTEREST ON POTENTIAL of an amount held by the Secretary of the 657(a)), as amended by section 401(a) of this UNDERPAYMENTS, ETC. Treasury or his delegate on the date of the Act, is amended— ‘‘(a) AUTHORITY TO MAKE DEPOSITS OTHER enactment of this Act as a deposit in the na- (1) in paragraph (2)(B), in the matter pre- THAN AS PAYMENT OF TAX.—A taxpayer may ture of a cash bond deposit pursuant to Rev- ceding clause (i), by inserting ‘‘, except as make a cash deposit with the Secretary enue Procedure 84–58, the date that the tax- provided in paragraph (8),’’ after ‘‘shall’’; and which may be used by the Secretary to pay payer identifies such amount as a deposit (2) by adding at the end the following: any tax imposed under subtitle A or B or made pursuant to section 6603 of the Internal ‘‘(8) STATE OPTION TO PASS THROUGH ALL chapter 41, 42, 43, or 44 which has not been Revenue Code (as added by this Act) shall be CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS TO FAMILIES THAT assessed at the time of the deposit. Such a treated as the date such amount is deposited FORMERLY RECEIVED TANF.—In lieu of apply- deposit shall be made in such manner as the for purposes of such section 6603. ing paragraph (2) to any family described in Secretary shall prescribe. SEC. 303. PARTIAL PAYMENT OF TAX LIABILITY paragraph (2), a State may distribute to the ‘‘(b) NO INTEREST IMPOSED.—To the extent IN INSTALLMENT AGREEMENTS. family any amount collected during a month that such deposit is used by the Secretary to (a) IN GENERAL.— on behalf of the family.’’.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.003 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2528 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If a State agency re- SEC. 410. IMPROVING FEDERAL DEBT COLLEC- made by subsection (a) shall apply to sponsible for the administration of an unem- TION PRACTICES. amounts distributed on or after October 1, ployment compensation program under Fed- Section 3716(h)(3) of title 31, United States 2004. eral or State law transmits to the Secretary Code, is amended to read as follows: SEC. 403. MANDATORY REVIEW AND ADJUST- the name and social security account num- ‘‘(3) In applying this subsection with re- MENT OF CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS ber of an individual, the Secretary shall, if spect to any debt owed to a State, other than FOR FAMILIES RECEIVING TANF. the information in the National Directory of past due support being enforced by the State, (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 466(a)(10)(A)(i) (42 New Hires indicates that the individual may subsection (c)(3)(A) shall not apply. Sub- U.S.C. 666(a)(10)(A)(i)) is amended— be employed, disclose to the State agency section (c)(3)(A) shall apply with respect to (1) by striking ‘‘parent, or,’’ and inserting the name, address, and employer identifica- past due support being enforced by the State ‘‘parent or’’; and tion number of any putative employer of the notwithstanding any other provision of law, (2) by striking ‘‘upon the request of the individual, subject to this paragraph. including sections 207 and 1631(d)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 407 and State agency under the State plan or of ei- ‘‘(B) CONDITION ON DISCLOSURE.—The Sec- ther parent,’’. retary shall make a disclosure under sub- 1383(d)(1)), section 413(b) of Public law 91–173 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment paragraph (A) only to the extent that the (30 U.S.C. 923(b)), and section 14 of the Act of made by subsection (a) shall take effect on Secretary determines that the disclosure August 29, 1935 (45 U.S.C. 231m).’’. October 1, 2004. would not interfere with the effective oper- SEC. 411. MAINTENANCE OF TECHNICAL ASSIST- SEC. 404. MANDATORY FEE FOR SUCCESSFUL ation of the program under this part. ANCE FUNDING. CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTION FOR Section 452(j) (42 U.S.C. 652(j)) is amended ‘‘(C) USE OF INFORMATION.—A State agency FAMILY THAT HAS NEVER RECEIVED by inserting ‘‘or the amount appropriated may use information provided under this TANF. under this paragraph for fiscal year 2002, paragraph only for purposes of administering (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 454(6)(B) (42 whichever is greater,’’ before ‘‘which shall be a program referred to in subparagraph (A).’’. U.S.C. 654(6)(B)) is amended— available’’. (1) by inserting ‘‘(i)’’ after ‘‘(B)’’; (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by subsection (a) shall take effect on SEC. 412. MAINTENANCE OF FEDERAL PARENT (2) by redesignating clauses (i) and (ii) as LOCATOR SERVICE FUNDING. subclauses (I) and (II), respectively; October 1, 2003. Section 453(o) (42 U.S.C. 653(o)) is (3) by adding ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon; SEC. 407. DECREASE IN AMOUNT OF CHILD SUP- amended— and PORT ARREARAGE TRIGGERING (1) in the 1st sentence, by inserting ‘‘or the (4) by adding after and below the end the PASSPORT DENIAL. amount appropriated under this paragraph following new clause: (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 452(k)(1) (42 for fiscal year 2002, whichever is greater,’’ ‘‘(ii) in the case of an individual who has U.S.C. 652(k)(1)) is amended by striking before ‘‘which shall be available’’; and never received assistance under a State pro- ‘‘$5,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$2,500’’. (2) in the 2nd sentence, by striking ‘‘for gram funded under part A and for whom the (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section each of fiscal years 1997 through 2001’’. State has collected at least $500 of support, 454(31) (42 U.S.C. 654(31)) is amended by strik- TITLE V—CHILD WELFARE the State shall impose an annual fee of $25 ing ‘‘$5,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$2,500’’. for each case in which services are furnished, SEC. 501. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO AP- (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments PROVE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS. which shall be retained by the State from made by this section shall take effect on Oc- Section 1130(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. 1320a–9(a)(2)) is support collected on behalf of the individual tober 1, 2003. amended by striking ‘‘2002’’ and inserting (but not from the 1st $500 so collected), paid SEC. 408. USE OF TAX REFUND INTERCEPT PRO- ‘‘2007’’. by the individual applying for the services, GRAM TO COLLECT PAST-DUE CHILD recovered from the absent parent, or paid by SEC. 502. ELIMINATION OF LIMITATION ON NUM- SUPPORT ON BEHALF OF CHILDREN BER OF WAIVERS. the State out of its own funds (the payment WHO ARE NOT MINORS. Section 1130(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. 1320a–9(a)(2)) is of which from State funds shall not be con- (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 464 (42 U.S.C. 664) amended by striking ‘‘not more than 10’’. sidered as an administrative cost of the is amended— SEC. 503. ELIMINATION OF LIMITATION ON NUM- State for the operation of the plan, and shall (1) in subsection (a)(2)(A), by striking ‘‘(as BER OF STATES THAT MAY BE be considered income to the program);’’. that term is defined for purposes of this GRANTED WAIVERS TO CONDUCT (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section paragraph under subsection (c))’’; and DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS ON 457(a)(3) (42 U.S.C. 657(a)(3)) is amended to (2) in subsection (c)— SAME TOPIC. read as follows: (A) in paragraph (1)— Section 1130 (42 U.S.C. 1320a–9) is amended ‘‘(3) FAMILIES THAT NEVER RECEIVED ASSIST- (i) by striking ‘‘(1) Except as provided in by adding at the end the following: ANCE.—In the case of any other family, the paragraph (2), as used in’’ and inserting ‘‘In’’; ‘‘(h) NO LIMIT ON NUMBER OF STATES THAT State shall distribute to the family the por- and MAY BE GRANTED WAIVERS TO CONDUCT SAME tion of the amount so collected that remains (ii) by inserting ‘‘(whether or not a OR SIMILAR DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.—The after withholding any fee pursuant to sec- minor)’’ after ‘‘a child’’ each place it ap- Secretary shall not refuse to grant a waiver tion 454(6)(B)(ii).’’. pears; and to a State under this section on the grounds (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments (B) by striking paragraphs (2) and (3). that a purpose of the waiver or of the dem- made by this section shall take effect on Oc- (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments onstration project for which the waiver is tober 1, 2003. made by subsection (a) shall take effect on necessary would be the same as or similar to SEC. 405. REPORT ON UNDISTRIBUTED CHILD October 1, 2004. a purpose of another waiver or project that SUPPORT PAYMENTS. is or may be conducted under this section.’’. SEC. 409. GARNISHMENT OF COMPENSATION Not later than 6 months after the date of SEC. 504. ELIMINATION OF LIMITATION ON NUM- the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of PAID TO VETERANS FOR SERVICE- CONNECTED DISABILITIES IN BER OF WAIVERS THAT MAY BE Health and Human Services shall submit to ORDER TO ENFORCE CHILD SUP- GRANTED TO A SINGLE STATE FOR the Committee on Ways and Means of the PORT OBLIGATIONS. DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS. House of Representatives and the Committee Section 1130 (42 U.S.C. 1320a–9) is further (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 459(h) (42 U.S.C. amended by adding at the end the following: on Finance of the Senate a report on the pro- 659(h)) is amended— cedures that the States use generally to lo- ‘‘(i) NO LIMIT ON NUMBER OF WAIVERS (1) in paragraph (1)(A)(ii)(V), by striking cate custodial parents for whom child sup- GRANTED TO, OR DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS all that follows ‘‘Armed Forces’’ and insert- port has been collected but not yet distrib- THAT MAY BE CONDUCTED BY, A SINGLE ing a semicolon; and uted. The report shall include an estimate of STATE.—The Secretary shall not impose any (2) by adding at the end the following: the total amount of such undistributed child limit on the number of waivers that may be ‘‘(3) LIMITATIONS WITH RESPECT TO COM- support and the average length of time it granted to a State, or the number of dem- PENSATION PAID TO VETERANS FOR SERVICE- takes for such child support to be distrib- onstration projects that a State may be au- CONNECTED DISABILITIES.—Notwithstanding uted. To the extent the Secretary deems ap- thorized to conduct, under this section.’’. any other provision of this section: propriate, the Secretary shall include in the SEC. 505. STREAMLINED PROCESS FOR CONSID- ‘‘(A) Compensation described in paragraph report recommendations as to whether addi- ERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO AND tional procedures should be established at (1)(A)(ii)(V) shall not be subject to with- EXTENSIONS OF DEMONSTRATION the State or Federal level to expedite the holding pursuant to this section— PROJECTS REQUIRING WAIVERS. payment of undistributed child support. ‘‘(i) for payment of alimony; or Section 1130 (42 U.S.C. 1320a–9) is further ‘‘(ii) for payment of child support if the in- SEC. 406. USE OF NEW HIRE INFORMATION TO AS- amended by adding at the end the following: SIST IN ADMINISTRATION OF UNEM- dividual is fewer than 60 days in arrears in ‘‘(j) STREAMLINED PROCESS FOR CONSIDER- PLOYMENT COMPENSATION PRO- payment of the support. ATION OF AMENDMENTS AND EXTENSIONS.—The GRAMS. ‘‘(B) Not more than 50 percent of any pay- Secretary shall develop a streamlined proc- (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 453(j) (42 U.S.C. ment of compensation described in para- ess for consideration of amendments and ex- 653(j)) is amended by adding at the end the graph (1)(A)(ii)(V) may be withheld pursuant tensions proposed by States to demonstra- following: to this section.’’. tion projects conducted under this section.’’. ‘‘(7) INFORMATION COMPARISONS AND DISCLO- (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments SEC. 506. AVAILABILITY OF REPORTS. SURE TO ASSIST IN ADMINISTRATION OF UNEM- made by subsection (a) shall take effect on Section 1130 (42 U.S.C. 1320a–9) is further PLOYMENT COMPENSATION PROGRAMS.— October 1, 2004. amended by adding at the end the following:

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.004 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2529

‘‘(k) AVAILABILITY OF REPORTS.—The Sec- (G) activities funded under the Child Care 5A(e)(2) of the United States Housing Act of retary shall make available to any State or and Development Block Grant Act of 1990; 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437c–1(e)(2), is required to be other interested party any report provided to (H) activities funded under the United included in the public housing agency plan of the Secretary under subsection (f)(2), and States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et any public housing agency affected by the any evaluation or report made by the Sec- seq.), except that such term shall not project. retary with respect to a demonstration include— (8) OTHER INFORMATION AND ASSURANCES.— project conducted under this section, with a (i) any program for rental assistance under Such other information and assurances as focus on information that may promote best section 8 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f); and the administering Secretary may require. practices and program improvements.’’. (ii) the program under section 7 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1437e) for designating public (d) APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS.— SEC. 507. TECHNICAL CORRECTION. (1) IN GENERAL.—The administering Sec- Section 1130(b)(1) (42 U.S.C. 1320a–9(b)(1)) is housing for occupancy by certain popu- lations; retary with respect to a qualified program amended by striking ‘‘422(b)(9)’’ and insert- that is identified in an application submitted ing ‘‘422(b)(10)’’. (I) activities funded under title I, II, III, or IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assist- pursuant to subsection (c) may approve the TITLE VI—SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY ance Act (42 U.S.C. 11301 et seq.); or application and, except as provided in para- INCOME (J) the food stamp program as defined in graph (2), waive any requirement applicable SEC. 601. REVIEW OF STATE AGENCY BLINDNESS section 3(h) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 to the program, to the extent consistent AND DISABILITY DETERMINATIONS. U.S.C. 2012(h)). with this section and necessary and appro- Section 1633 (42 U.S.C. 1383b) is amended by (c) APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS.—The head priate for the conduct of the demonstration adding at the end the following: of a State entity or of a sub-State entity ad- project proposed in the application, if the ad- ‘‘(e)(1) The Commissioner of Social Secu- ministering 2 or more qualified programs ministering Secretary determines that the rity shall review determinations, made by proposed to be included in a demonstration project— State agencies pursuant to subsection (a) in project under this section shall (or, if the (A) has a reasonable likelihood of achiev- connection with applications for benefits project is proposed to include qualified pro- ing the objectives of the programs to be in- under this title on the basis of blindness or grams administered by 2 or more such enti- cluded in the project; disability, that individuals who have at- ties, the heads of the administering entities (B) may reasonably be expected to meet tained 18 years of age are blind or disabled as (each of whom shall be considered an appli- the applicable cost neutrality requirements of a specified onset date. The Commissioner cant for purposes of this section) shall joint- of paragraph (4), as determined by the Direc- of Social Security shall review such a deter- ly) submit to the administering Secretary of tor of the Office of Management and Budget; mination before any action is taken to im- each such program an application that con- and plement the determination. tains the following: (C) includes the coordination of 2 or more ‘‘(2)(A) In carrying out paragraph (1), the (1) PROGRAMS INCLUDED.—A statement qualified programs. identifying each qualified program to be in- Commissioner of Social Security shall (2) PROVISIONS EXCLUDED FROM WAIVER AU- cluded in the project, and describing how the review— THORITY.—A waiver shall not be granted purposes of each such program will be ‘‘(i) at least 20 percent of all determina- under paragraph (1)— achieved by the project. tions referred to in paragraph (1) that are (A) with respect to any provision of law re- (2) POPULATION SERVED.—A statement iden- made in fiscal year 2003; lating to— tifying the population to be served by the ‘‘(ii) at least 40 percent of all such deter- (i) civil rights or prohibition of discrimina- project and specifying the eligibility criteria minations that are made in fiscal year 2004; to be used. tion; and (ii) purposes or goals of any program; (3) DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION.—A de- ‘‘(iii) at least 50 percent of all such deter- tailed description of the project, including— (iii) maintenance of effort requirements; minations that are made in fiscal year 2005 (A) a description of how the project is ex- (iv) health or safety; or thereafter. pected to improve or enhance achievement of (v) labor standards under the Fair Labor ‘‘(B) In carrying out subparagraph (A), the the purposes of the programs to be included Standards Act of 1938; or Commissioner of Social Security shall, to in the project, from the standpoint of qual- (vi) environmental protection; the extent feasible, select for review the de- ity, of cost-effectiveness, or of both; and (B) with respect to section 241(a) of the terminations which the Commissioner of So- (B) a description of the performance objec- Adult Education and Family Literacy Act; cial Security identifies as being the most tives for the project, including any proposed (C) in the case of a program under the likely to be incorrect.’’. modifications to the performance measures United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. TITLE VII—STATE AND LOCAL and reporting requirements used in the pro- 1437 et seq.), with respect to any requirement FLEXIBILITY grams. under section 5A of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1437c– SEC. 701. PROGRAM COORDINATION DEM- (4) WAIVERS REQUESTED.—A description of 1; relating to public housing agency plans ONSTRATION PROJECTS. the statutory and regulatory requirements and resident advisory boards); (a) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section with respect to which a waiver is requested (D) in the case of a program under the is to establish a program of demonstration in order to carry out the project, and a jus- Workforce Investment Act, with respect to projects in a State or portion of a State to tification of the need for each such waiver. any requirement the waiver of which would coordinate multiple public assistance, work- (5) COST NEUTRALITY.—Such information violate section 189(i)(4)(A)(i) of such Act; force development, and other programs, for and assurances as necessary to establish to (E) in the case of the food stamp program the purpose of supporting working individ- the satisfaction of the administering Sec- (as defined in section 3(h) of the Food Stamp uals and families, helping families escape retary, in consultation with the Director of Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2012(h)), with respect to welfare dependency, promoting child well- the Office of Management and Budget, that any requirement under— being, or helping build stronger families, the proposed project is reasonably expected (i) section 6 (if waiving a requirement using innovative approaches to strengthen to meet the applicable cost neutrality re- under such section would have the effect of service systems and provide more coordi- quirements of subsection (d)(4). expanding eligibility for the program), 7(b) nated and effective service delivery. (6) EVALUATION AND REPORTS.—An assur- or 16(c) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: ance that the applicant will conduct ongoing U.S.C. 2011 et seq.); or (1) ADMINISTERING SECRETARY.—The term and final evaluations of the project, and (ii) title IV of the Personal Responsibility ‘‘administering Secretary’’ means, with re- make interim and final reports to the admin- and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of spect to a qualified program, the head of the istering Secretary, at such times and in such 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.); Federal agency responsible for administering manner as the administering Secretary may (F) with respect to any requirement that a the program. require. State pass through to a sub-State entity part (2) QUALIFIED PROGRAM.—The term ‘‘quali- (7) PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCY PLAN.—In the or all of an amount paid to the State; fied program’’ means— case of an application proposing a dem- (G) if the waiver would waive any funding (A) a program under part A of title IV of onstration project that includes activities restriction or limitation provided in an ap- the Social Security Act; referred to in subsection (b)(2)(H) of this propriations Act, or would have the effect of (B) the program under title XX of such section— transferring appropriated funds from 1 ap- Act; (A) a certification that the applicable an- propriations account to another; or (C) activities funded under title I of the nual public housing agency plan of any agen- (H) except as otherwise provided by stat- Workforce Investment Act of 1998, except cy affected by the project that is approved ute, if the waiver would waive any funding subtitle C of such title; under section 5A of the United States Hous- restriction applicable to a program author- (D) a demonstration project authorized ing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437c–1) by the Sec- ized under an Act which is not an appropria- under section 505 of the Family Support Act retary includes the information specified in tions Act (but not including program re- of 1988; paragraphs (1) through (4) of this subsection; quirements such as application procedures, (E) activities funded under the Wagner- and performance standards, reporting require- Peyser Act; (B) any resident advisory board rec- ments, or eligibility standards), or would (F) activities funded under the Adult Edu- ommendations, and other information, relat- have the effect of transferring funds from a cation and Family Literacy Act; ing to the project that, pursuant to section program for which there is direct spending

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.004 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2530 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 (as defined in section 250(c)(8) of the Bal- istering Secretary receives an application or receive any benefit under, this Act except anced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control submitted pursuant to this section, the ad- as provided in this section. Act of 1985) to another program. ministering Secretary shall submit to each ‘‘(c) LEAD AGENCY.— (3) AGREEMENT OF EACH ADMINISTERING SEC- Committee of the Congress which has juris- ‘‘(1) DESIGNATION.—A State desiring to par- RETARY REQUIRED.— diction over a qualified program identified in ticipate in the program established under (A) IN GENERAL.—An applicant may not the application notice of the receipt, a de- subsection (a) shall designate, in an applica- conduct a demonstration project under this scription of the decision of the administering tion submitted to the Secretary under sub- section unless each administering Secretary Secretary with respect to the application, section (d)(1), an appropriate State agency with respect to any program proposed to be and the reasons for approving or dis- that complies with paragraph (2) to act as included in the project has approved the ap- approving the application. the lead agency for the State. plication to conduct the project. (2) REPORTS ON PROJECTS.—Each admin- ‘‘(2) DUTIES.—The lead agency shall— (B) AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO FUNDING istering Secretary shall provide annually to ‘‘(A) administer, either directly, through AND IMPLEMENTATION.—Before approving an the Congress a report concerning demonstra- other State agencies, or through local agen- application to conduct a demonstration tion projects approved under this section, cies, the assistance received under this sec- project under this section, an administering including— tion by the State; Secretary shall have in place an agreement (A) the projects approved for each appli- ‘‘(B) develop the State plan to be sub- with the applicant with respect to the pay- cant; mitted to the Secretary under subsection ment of funds and responsibilities required of (B) the number of waivers granted under (d)(1); and the administering Secretary with respect to this section, and the specific statutory provi- ‘‘(C) coordinate the provision of food as- the project. sions waived; sistance under this section with other Fed- (4) COST-NEUTRALITY REQUIREMENT.— (C) how well each project for which a waiv- eral, State, and local programs. ‘‘(d) APPLICATION AND PLAN.— (A) GENERAL RULE.—Notwithstanding any er is granted is improving or enhancing pro- ‘‘(1) APPLICATION.—To be eligible to receive other provision of law (except subparagraph gram achievement from the standpoint of assistance under this section, a State shall (B)), the total of the amounts that may be quality, cost-effectiveness, or both; prepare and submit to the Secretary an ap- paid by the Federal Government for a fiscal (D) how well each project for which a waiv- plication at such time, in such manner, and year with respect to the programs in the er is granted is meeting the performance ob- containing such information as the Sec- State in which an entity conducting a dem- jectives specified in subsection (c)(3)(B); retary shall by regulation require, onstration project under this section is lo- (E) how each project for which a waiver is including— cated that are affected by the project shall granted is conforming with the cost-neu- ‘‘(A) an assurance that the State will com- not exceed the estimated total amount that trality requirements of subsection (d)(4); and the Federal Government would have paid for ply with the requirements of this section; (F) to the extent the administering Sec- ‘‘(B) a State plan that meets the require- the fiscal year with respect to the programs retary deems appropriate, recommendations if the project had not been conducted, as de- ments of paragraph (2); and for modification of programs based on out- ‘‘(C) an assurance that the State will com- termined by the Director of the Office of comes of the projects. Management and Budget. ply with the requirements of the State plan (g) AMENDMENT TO UNITED STATES HOUSING (B) SPECIAL RULE.—If an applicant submits under paragraph (2). ACT OF 1937.—Section 5A(d) of the United to the Director of the Office of Management ‘‘(2) REQUIREMENTS OF PLAN.— States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437c– and Budget a request to apply the rules of ‘‘(A) LEAD AGENCY.—The State plan shall 1(d)) is amended— this subparagraph to the programs in the identify the lead agency. (1) by redesignating paragraph (18) as para- State in which the applicant is located that ‘‘(B) USE OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDS.—The graph (19); and are affected by a demonstration project pro- State plan shall provide that the State shall (2) by inserting after paragraph (17) the fol- posed in an application submitted by the ap- use the amounts provided to the State for lowing new paragraph: plicant pursuant to this section, during such each fiscal year under this section— ‘‘(18) PROGRAM COORDINATION DEMONSTRA- period of not more than 5 consecutive fiscal ‘‘(i) to provide food assistance to needy in- TION PROJECTS.—In the case of an agency years in which the project is in effect, and dividuals and families residing in the State, that administers an activity referred to in the Director determines, on the basis of sup- other than residents of institutions who are section 701(b)(2)(H) of the Personal Responsi- porting information provided by the appli- ineligible for food stamps under section 3(i); bility, Work, and Family Promotion Act of cant, to grant the request, then, notwith- ‘‘(ii) to administer an employment and 2002 that, during such fiscal year, will be in- standing any other provision of law, the training program under subsection (g) for cluded in a demonstration project under sec- total of the amounts that may be paid by the needy individuals under the program and to tion 701 of such Act, the information that is Federal Government for the period with re- provide reimbursements to needy individuals required to be included in the application for spect to the programs shall not exceed the and families as would be allowed under sec- the project pursuant to paragraphs (1) estimated total amount that the Federal tion 16(h)(3); and through (4) of section 701(b) of such Act.’’. Government would have paid for the period ‘‘(iii) to pay administrative costs incurred with respect to the programs if the project SEC. 702. STATE FOOD ASSISTANCE BLOCK in providing the assistance. had not been conducted. GRANT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT. ‘‘(C) ASSISTANCE FOR ENTIRE STATE.—The The Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2011 (5) 90-DAY APPROVAL DEADLINE.— State plan shall provide that benefits under et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the (A) IN GENERAL.—If an administering Sec- this section shall be available throughout retary receives an application to conduct a following: the entire State. demonstration project under this section and ‘‘SEC. 28. STATE FOOD ASSISTANCE BLOCK ‘‘(D) NOTICE AND HEARINGS.—The State does not disapprove the application within 90 GRANT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT. plan shall provide that an individual or fam- days after the receipt, then— ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall ily who applies for, or receives, assistance (i) the administering Secretary is deemed establish a program to make grants to under this section shall be provided with no- to have approved the application for such pe- States in accordance with this section to tice of, and an opportunity for a hearing on, riod as is requested in the application, ex- provide— any action under this section that adversely cept to the extent inconsistent with sub- ‘‘(1) food assistance to needy individuals affects the individual or family. section (e); and and families residing in the State; ‘‘(E) OTHER ASSISTANCE.— (ii) any waiver requested in the application ‘‘(2) funds to operate an employment and ‘‘(i) COORDINATION.—The State plan may which applies to a qualified program that is training program under subsection (g) for coordinate assistance received under this identified in the application and is adminis- needy individuals under the program; and section with assistance provided under the tered by the administering Secretary is ‘‘(3) funds for administrative costs incurred State program funded under part A of title deemed to be granted, except to the extent in providing the assistance. IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 inconsistent with paragraph (2) or (4) of this ‘‘(b) ELECTION.— et seq.). subsection. ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A State may elect to ‘‘(ii) PENALTIES.—If an individual or family (B) DEADLINE EXTENDED IF ADDITIONAL IN- participate in the program established under is penalized for violating part A of title IV of FORMATION IS SOUGHT.—The 90-day period re- subsection (a). the Act, the State plan may reduce the ferred to in subparagraph (A) shall not in- ‘‘(2) ELECTION REVOCABLE.—A State that amount of assistance provided under this clude any period that begins with the date elects to participate in the program estab- section or otherwise penalize the individual the Secretary requests the applicant to pro- lished under subsection (a) may subsequently or family. vide additional information with respect to reverse the election of the State only once ‘‘(F) ELIGIBILITY LIMITATIONS.—The State the application and ends with the date the thereafter. Following the reversal, the State plan shall describe the income and resource additional information is provided. shall only be eligible to participate in the eligibility limitations that are established (e) DURATION OF PROJECTS.—A demonstra- food stamp program in accordance with the for the receipt of assistance under this sec- tion project under this section may be ap- other sections of this Act and shall not re- tion. proved for a term of not more than 5 years. ceive a block grant under this section. ‘‘(G) RECEIVING BENEFITS IN MORE THAN 1 (f) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.— ‘‘(3) PROGRAM EXCLUSIVE.—A State that is JURISDICTION.—The State plan shall establish (1) REPORT ON DISPOSITION OF APPLICA- participating in the program established a system to verify and otherwise ensure that TIONS.—Within 90 days after an admin- under subsection (a) shall not be subject to, no individual or family shall receive benefits

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.004 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2531

under this section in more than 1 jurisdic- ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—For each fiscal year, the the District of Columbia, Guam, and the Vir- tion within the State. Secretary shall pay to a State that has an gin Islands of the United States. ‘‘(H) PRIVACY.—The State plan shall pro- application approved by the Secretary under ‘‘(2) STATE ALLOTMENT.— vide for safeguarding and restricting the use subsection (d)(3) an amount that is equal to ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in and disclosure of information about any indi- the allotment of the State under subsection subparagraph (B), from the amounts made vidual or family receiving assistance under (l)(2) for the fiscal year. available under section 18 of this Act for this section. ‘‘(2) METHOD OF PAYMENT.—The Secretary each fiscal year, the Secretary shall allot to ‘‘(I) OTHER INFORMATION.—The State plan shall make payments to a State for a fiscal each State participating in the program es- shall contain such other information as may year under this section by issuing 1 or more tablished under subsection (a) an amount be required by the Secretary. letters of credit for the fiscal year, with nec- that is equal to the sum of— ‘‘(3) APPROVAL OF APPLICATION AND PLAN.— essary adjustments on account of overpay- ‘‘(i) the greater of, as determined by the During fiscal years 2003 through 2007, the ments or underpayments, as determined by Secretary— Secretary may approve the applications and the Secretary. ‘‘(I) the total dollar value of all benefits State plans that satisfy the requirements of ‘‘(3) SPENDING OF FUNDS BY STATE.— issued under the food stamp program estab- this section of not more than 5 States for a ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in lished under this Act by the State during fis- term of not more than 5 years. subparagraph (B), payments to a State from cal year 2002; or ‘‘(e) CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES.—No an allotment under subsection (l)(2) for a fis- ‘‘(II) the average per fiscal year of the funds made available under this section shall cal year may be expended by the State only total dollar value of all benefits issued under be expended for the purchase or improve- in the fiscal year. the food stamp program by the State during ment of land, or for the purchase, construc- ‘‘(B) CARRYOVER.—The State may reserve each of fiscal years 2000 through 2002; and tion, or permanent improvement of any up to 10 percent of an allotment under sub- ‘‘(ii) the greater of, as determined by the building or facility. section (l)(2) for a fiscal year to provide as- Secretary— ‘‘(f) BENEFITS FOR ALIENS.—No individual sistance under this section in subsequent fis- ‘‘(I) the total amount received by the State shall be eligible to receive benefits under a cal years, except that the reserved funds for administrative costs and the employment State plan approved under subsection (d)(3) may not exceed 30 percent of the total allot- and training program under subsections (a) if the individual is not eligible to participate ment received under this section for a fiscal and (h), respectively, of section 16 of this Act in the food stamp program under title IV of year. for fiscal year 2002; or the Personal Responsibility and Work Oppor- ‘‘(4) PROVISION OF FOOD ASSISTANCE.—A ‘‘(II) the average per fiscal year of the tunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. State may provide food assistance under this total amount received by the State for ad- 1601 et seq.). section in any manner determined appro- ministrative costs and the employment and ‘‘(g) EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING.—Each priate by the State to provide food assist- training program under subsections (a) and State shall implement an employment and ance to needy individuals and families in the (h), respectively, of section 16 of this Act for training program for needy individuals under State, such as electronic benefits transfer each of fiscal years 2000 through 2002. the program. limited to food purchases, coupons limited to ‘‘(B) INSUFFICIENT FUNDS.—If the Secretary ‘‘(h) ENFORCEMENT.— food purchases, or direct provision of com- ‘‘(1) REVIEW OF COMPLIANCE WITH STATE finds that the total amount of allotments to modities. which States would otherwise be entitled for PLAN.—The Secretary shall review and mon- ‘‘(5) DEFINITION OF FOOD ASSISTANCE.—In a fiscal year under subparagraph (A) will ex- itor State compliance with this section and this section, the term ‘food assistance’ ceed the amount of funds that will be made the State plan approved under subsection means assistance that may be used only to available to provide the allotments for the (d)(3). obtain food, as defined in section 3(g). fiscal year, the Secretary shall reduce the al- ‘‘(2) NONCOMPLIANCE.— ‘‘(j) AUDITS.— lotments made to States under this sub- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary, after ‘‘(1) REQUIREMENT.—After the close of each section, on a pro rata basis, to the extent reasonable notice to a State and opportunity fiscal year, a State shall arrange for an audit necessary to allot under this subsection a for a hearing, finds that— of the expenditures of the State during the total amount that is equal to the funds that ‘‘(i) there has been a failure by the State to program period from amounts received under will be made available.’’. comply substantially with any provision or this section. requirement set forth in the State plan ap- ‘‘(2) INDEPENDENT AUDITOR.—An audit TITLE VIII—ABSTINENCE EDUCATION proved under subsection (d)(3); or under this section shall be conducted by an ‘‘(ii) in the operation of any program or ac- SEC. 801. EXTENSION OF ABSTINENCE EDU- entity that is independent of any agency ad- CATION FUNDING UNDER MATER- tivity for which assistance is provided under ministering activities that receive assist- NAL AND CHILD HEALTH PROGRAM. this section, there is a failure by the State ance under this section and be in accordance Section 510(d) (42 U.S.C. 710(d)) is amended to comply substantially with any provision with generally accepted auditing principles. by striking ‘‘2002’’ and inserting ‘‘2007’’. of this section, the Secretary shall notify the ‘‘(3) PAYMENT ACCURACY.—Each annual State of the finding and that no further pay- audit under this section shall include an TITLE IX—TRANSITIONAL MEDICAL ments will be made to the State under this audit of payment accuracy under this sec- ASSISTANCE section (or, in the case of noncompliance in tion that shall be based on a statistically SEC. 901. ONE-YEAR REAUTHORIZATION OF the operation of a program or activity, that valid sample of the caseload in the State. TRANSITIONAL MEDICAL ASSIST- no further payments to the State will be ‘‘(4) SUBMISSION.—Not later than 30 days ANCE. made with respect to the program or activ- after the completion of an audit under this (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1925(f) (42 U.S.C. ity) until the Secretary is satisfied that section, the State shall submit a copy of the 1396r–6(f)) is amended by striking ‘‘2002’’ and there is no longer any failure to comply or audit to the legislature of the State and to inserting ‘‘2003’’. that the noncompliance will be promptly the Secretary. (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section corrected. ‘‘(5) REPAYMENT OF AMOUNTS.—Each State ‘‘(B) OTHER SANCTIONS.—In the case of a shall repay to the United States any 1902(e)(1)(B) (42 U.S.C. 1396a(e)(1)(B)) is finding of noncompliance made pursuant to amounts determined through an audit under amended by striking ‘‘2002’’ and inserting subparagraph (A), the Secretary may, in ad- this section to have not been expended in ac- ‘‘2003’’. dition to, or in lieu of, imposing the sanc- cordance with this section or to have not SEC. 902. ADJUSTMENT TO PAYMENTS FOR MED- tions described in subparagraph (A), impose been expended in accordance with the State ICAID ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS TO other appropriate sanctions, including plan, or the Secretary may offset the PREVENT DUPLICATIVE PAYMENTS recoupment of money improperly expended amounts against any other amount paid to AND TO FUND A 1-YEAR EXTENSION for purposes prohibited or not authorized by OF TRANSITIONAL MEDICAL ASSIST- the State under this section. ANCE. this section and disqualification from the re- ‘‘(k) NONDISCRIMINATION.— ceipt of financial assistance under this sec- ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall not Section 1903 (42 U.S.C. 1396b) is amended— tion. provide financial assistance for any program, (1) in subsection (a)(7), by striking ‘‘section ‘‘(C) NOTICE.—The notice required under project, or activity under this section if any 1919(g)(3)(B)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (x) subparagraph (A) shall include a specific person with responsibilities for the operation and section 1919(g)(3)(C)’’; and identification of any additional sanction of the program, project, or activity discrimi- (2) by adding at the end the following: being imposed under subparagraph (B). nates with respect to the program, project, ‘‘(x) ADJUSTMENTS TO PAYMENTS FOR AD- ‘‘(3) ISSUANCE OF REGULATIONS .—The Sec- or activity because of race, religion, color, MINISTRATIVE COSTS TO FUND 1-YEAR EXTEN- retary shall establish by regulation proce- national origin, sex, or disability. SION OF TRANSITIONAL MEDICAL ASSIST- dures for— ‘‘(2) ENFORCEMENT.—The powers, remedies, ANCE.— ‘‘(A) receiving, processing, and deter- and procedures set forth in title VI of the ‘‘(1) REDUCTIONS IN PAYMENTS FOR ADMINIS- mining the validity of complaints con- Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et TRATIVE COSTS.—Effective for each calendar cerning any failure of a State to comply with seq.) may be used by the Secretary to en- quarter in fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year the State plan or any requirement of this force paragraph (1). 2004, the Secretary shall reduce the amount section; and ‘‘(l) ALLOTMENTS.— paid under subsection (a)(7) to each State by ‘‘(B) imposing sanctions under this section. ‘‘(1) DEFINITION OF STATE.—In this section, an amount equal to 50 percent for fiscal year ‘‘(i) PAYMENTS.— the term ’State’ means each of the 50 States, 2003, and 75 percent for fiscal year 2004, of

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.004 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2532 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 one-quarter of the annualized amount deter- matic claims made by its opponents Every welfare recipient is not the mined for the medicaid program under sec- about dire and Draconian cir- same. In some cases a welfare recipient tion 16(k)(2)(B) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 cumstances that would form a dark should go to work immediately, a tra- (7 U.S.C. 2025(k)(2)(B)). cloud over America if the legislation ditional job. In other cases an indi- ‘‘(2) ALLOCATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—None of the funds or expenditures passed. I happen to believe one of the vidual needs to have English pro- described in section 16(k)(5)(B) of the Food bright points of the Clinton adminis- ficiency. And in another case one may Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2025(k)(5)(B)) may tration was his willingness after re- need to deal with the overcoming of be used to pay for costs— peated offers to sign the 1996 legisla- disabilities. The States need the abil- ‘‘(A) eligible for reimbursement under sub- tion. Oftentimes claims are made with- ity of flexibility to determine what is section (a)(7) (or costs that would have been out the ability to determine whether or best. eligible for reimbursement but for this sub- not the, if you will, experiment was This bill does not do it. Instead, lis- section); and going to be successful or not. I think ten to what our States are saying. The ‘‘(B) allocated for reimbursement to the program under this title under a plan sub- there is no question that the general new requirements would require States mitted by a State to the Secretary to allo- shift in emphasis from welfare to work to take resources away from job train- cate administrative costs for public assist- has been a success. ing programs and child care programs ance programs; Has it been an unqualified success? into workfare programs. The under- except that, for purposes of subparagraph No, but it clearly has been a success, lying Republican bill will require (A), the reference in clause (iii) of that sec- and what we are embarking on now is States to develop workfare programs tion to ‘subsection (a)’ is deemed a reference an attempt to put legislation together denying people real jobs and the oppor- to subsection (a)(7) and clause (iv)(II) of that that will focus on areas that need tunity to move up in the workplace. section shall be applied as if ‘medicaid pro- greater attention to maximize the op- The New York Times said the House gram’ were substituted for ‘food stamp pro- portunity to move people from poverty bill would almost certainly force gram’.’’. to productive work, from welfare to a States to make jobs in order to meet TITLE X—EFFECTIVE DATE respect for those basic, tantamount, the new Federal requirements. SEC. 1001. EFFECTIVE DATE. underlying American concepts, and Most disturbingly, the Republican (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise pro- there is no area more important than bill takes away the flexibility of the vided, the amendments made by this Act focusing on the people who are on wel- States to provide educational services shall take effect on October 1, 2002. (b) EXCEPTION.—In the case of a State plan fare and the needs they have to be able to the people on welfare. They remove under part A or D of title IV of the Social to assist themselves. Education, and, education as one of the core ways of Security Act which the Secretary deter- especially for women who have young meeting the work requirements. mines requires State legislation in order for children, having available child care Mr. Speaker, it is surprising to me the plan to meet the additional requirements are absolutely critical components that all of us in this body talk about imposed by the amendments made by this that need to be focused on in this reau- education being our top priority. We Act, the effective date of the amendments thorization of the program. want for our own children, we want for imposing the additional requirements shall And I am pleased to say that in both our own family maximum educational be 3 months after the first day of the first calendar quarter beginning after the close of the subcommittee and the full com- opportunities. We want it to be the top the first regular session of the State legisla- mittee and now additionally on the priority for everybody in this country ture that begins after the date of the enact- floor, these areas of concern have been except the people on welfare. For them ment of this Act. For purposes of the pre- focused on. education cannot be a high priority. ceding sentence, in the case of a State that Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of That is a mistake. has a 2-year legislative session, each year of my time. Mr. Speaker, my Republican friends the session shall be considered to be a sepa- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without talk about the fact that we should not rate regular session of the State legislature. objection, the gentleman from Mary- be placing unfunded mandates on our The SPEAKER pro tempore. After 2 land (Mr. CARDIN) may control the States. This is clearly an unfunded hours of debate on the bill, it shall be time. mandate. The Congressional Budget Of- in order to consider an amendment There was no objection. fice has estimated that complying with printed in the House Report 107–466, if Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the new requirements in the Repub- offered by the gentleman from Mary- myself such time as I may consume. lican bill will cost the States anywhere land (Mr. CARDIN) or a designee, which Mr. Speaker, let me say that I am between $15 to $18 billion. shall be considered read, and shall be one of those who supported the welfare debatable for 1 hour, equally divided reform bill in 1996, and I think we made b 1100 and controlled by the proponent and an the right decision in 1996. I am proud of Republicans have provided in their opponent. the progress that we have made for bill $1 billion more in child care and a The gentleman from California (Mr. people who are on welfare to try to get promise of $1 billion in addition to that THOMAS) and the gentleman from New them out of the need of cash assistance over the next 5 years. The Congres- York (Mr. RANGEL) each will control 25 and get them to real jobs. That is why, sional Budget Office indicates that we minutes; the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat surprised need $8 to $11 billion alone in child care BOEHNER) and the gentleman from Cali- as I was listening to the Republican to meet these new requirements. It fornia (Mr. GEORGE MILLER) each will leadership talk about the legislation does not add up. control 20 minutes; the gentleman from before us. For the people of Maryland, the pas- Louisiana (Mr. TAUZIN) and the gen- I was somewhat surprised because I sage of this bill will be an unfunded tleman from Michigan (Mr. DINGELL) heard, on one hand, the Republican mandate of $144 million. For the people each will control 15 minutes. leadership talk with pride of what we of my chairman’s State of California, it The Chair recognizes the gentleman have accomplished during the past 6 will be a $2.5 billion unfunded mandate. from California (Mr. THOMAS). years, but then I look at the bill that Mr. Speaker, we can do better. Later Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield they have recommended, the under- in this debate, I will offer a substitute myself such time as I may consume. lying bill before us, and I see that they that will correct these shortcomings; Mr. Speaker, there will be a number scrap and dismantle the system that and I hope that I will have support as of claims made on the floor during the we have put in place in 1996. They ig- we move forward to the next level of debate of this particular piece of legis- nore the lessons learned over the past 6 welfare reform. The underlying bill lation. The one thing I hope people years. does not do it. We can do better. keep in mind is that it is my fervent Over the past 6 years we have learned Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of hope that the goals of the legislation that if we give the States flexibility my time. are supported by all. It is always pos- and if we give the States the resources, Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield sible to argue emphasis, direction, they can get the job done. Instead, the myself such time as I may consume. focus, degree of emphasis. bill before us is a Washington one-size- I had not expected in the very first When we debated this bill repeatedly fits-all, Washington-knows-best man- comments to find out that, in fact, in 1996, there were some rather dra- date on the States. misrepresentations are rampant on the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.004 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2533 floor of the House. What the Congres- In my State, we are finding that welfare reform’s successes, not exacer- sional Budget Office said was, ‘‘Because child care for infants, children with bating its weaknesses.’’ the TANF program affords States such disabilities and during evening and The Democratic substitute solidifies broad flexibility, new requirements weekend hours is expensive and scarce. those successes. would not be considered,’’ would not be That is why our bill provides an addi- Ms. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, I yield my- considered, ‘‘intergovernmental man- tional $2 billion over 5 years for child self 30 seconds. dates as defined by the Unfunded Man- care despite its already historically I will remind the gentlewoman from dates Reform Act.’’ high levels. Further, we add report lan- Florida that the number that we are The CBO said they are not unfunded guage asking States to pay special at- increasing child care by is not $1 bil- mandates, and now to focus on an area tention to the needs to expand child lion over 5 years, it is $2 billion over 5 that I think is absolutely critical to care options for infants, children with years, and that the States are provided the success of this program, which is disabilities and during evenings and with very liberal waiver authority to the expansion in this bill of child care weekends. handle anything that might be a prob- support of between 2 and $4 billion ad- I hope my colleagues will support lem to them in their States. ditional to the underlying almost-$5 this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the billion contained in the bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes of my my time. BIGGERT), a lawyer herself, a leader in time to the gentlewoman from Wash- Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 the State senate before she came to us. ington (Ms. DUNN), a member of the minutes to the gentlewoman from Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Washington Ways and Means Committee; and I ask Florida (Mrs. THURMAN), a distin- (Ms. DUNN) for yielding me the time. unanimous consent that she control guished member of our committee. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure the 10 minutes of time. Mrs. THURMAN. Mr. Speaker, first that I join the Republican women of The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. of all, let me say that my under- the House in strong support of H.R. SIMPSON). Is there objection to the re- standing is what CBO said is that it 4737. This bill keeps our commitment quest of the gentleman from Cali- would not be an unfunded mandate, to America’s kids and to America’s fornia? only because my colleagues are asking great promise of welfare reform; and There was no objection. the States or the States would have to Ms. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, I yield my- with the addition of at least $2 billion, make cuts in other programs. I can tell self such time as I may consume. one in mandatory spending and one in In 1996 we made historic changes to my colleagues, in Florida, they are al- discretionary spending, at least, and the welfare system. We transformed ready in so much trouble they have extra funding for child care and devel- the welfare system from a permanent been cutting these programs for the opment block grants, a very good bill entitlement that tolerated an average last couple of weeks because they have has become even better. of 13 years of government dependence no money; and I would say to the last Why is that? Well, more funding to a temporary assistance program speaker, she is talking about $289 mil- means more kids covered. More kids that gave people the opportunity to lion in Washington. In Florida, we are covered means more parents working, start working, gain the necessary looking at $311 million in an unfunded and that is our ultimate objective, to skills to retain a job and to become mandate. give every American the opportunity self-sufficient. I think it is interesting that we are to work and to gain dignity and self-re- This year we have a chance to build having this conversation. I, like the spect that comes with providing for upon those successes while improving gentleman from Maryland (Mr. CARDIN) their own family. the program to further assist individ- and others, also supported this bill in The past 6 years of welfare reform uals and families move out of poverty. 1996; and, yes, I too am very proud that have shown us what works and what I believe, Mr. Speaker, one realistic we have given hope and that we have does not. When I meet with former wel- way to look at the reauthorization given the opportunity for people to go fare recipients throughout my congres- that we are debating today is that back to work and have dignity. But I sional district, each and every one tells when we reform such a massive pro- also want to remind my colleagues me that their success simply would not gram as welfare, as we did in 1996, that welfare reform is about children. have been possible without child care there are some people who may fall That is what welfare reform is, chil- assistance. through the cracks. That, Mr. Speaker, dren, what happens to their safety net. I thank all my colleagues who have is exactly what we are analyzing in our In the Republican bill that we are worked so hard to include this extra $2 changes to the bill today, and we have looking at today, we would increase billion-plus in the bill for American been told by welfare recipients in those child care funding by $1 billion over the kids. early days of 1995 and 1996 that pro- next 5 years. Let me just say to my Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am viding adequate child care services colleagues, just in my State alone, in pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gen- would help them move from welfare on Florida, it would require an additional tleman from Washington (Mr. to work. In fact, that if they did not $155.5 million over 5 years in child care MCDERMOTT), a distinguished member have to worry about their children funding. of the Committee on Ways and Means being well taken care of, they could The Republican bill doubles work and on the Subcommittee on Human focus all their energies and their skills hours for mothers with children under Resources. on what for some was to be a brand- the age of six from 20 to 40. This means Mr. MCDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, this new job. that young children will spend more whole issue of how much money, I do In fact, child care spending has more time in child care. Yet the bill offers not know how the American people fol- than tripled under welfare reform, ris- insufficient child care funding. How do low it, but the fact is that the bill ing from $3 billion in 1995 to $9.4 billion we ensure that they receive adequate makes mandatory $1 billion for child in the year 2000. Equipped with more care? More importantly, when will care. Any additional money is subject funding and greater flexibility to these working mothers be able to spend to appropriation. That second billion transfer money out of the block grant quality time with their children? dollars is not guaranteed, and we have for child care, States have been able to H.R. 4737 fails to answer those ques- a terrible budget mess. Those of us sit- provide more quality child care options tions. If that is not a reason enough to ting on the Budget Committee know so working mothers can concentrate on vote against H.R. 4737, listen to what that, and the fact is that even that $2 these new jobs. the St. Petersburg Times said: ‘‘Even billion is not going to cover the $11 bil- However, Mr. Speaker, our job is not the Nation’s Republican governors are lion in child care that is needed to hold done. As we increase the working hours chafing under the prospect, for fear the the line. from 30 to 40 and as more single moth- new mandates will prove difficult to In the State of Washington, my dis- ers and dads participate in jobs on meet and counterproductive to the goal tinguished colleague from the State of weekends and evenings, we must en- of pulling recipients out of poverty, not Washington, when she votes for this, is sure that they can access quality and merely putting them to work. After 5 putting a $280 million unfunded man- affordable child care services. years, Congress should be solidifying date on our State, in a State where

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.051 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2534 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 they are already $1 billion in the hole. on this success and add more money often unskilled, minimum wage work- The gentlewoman from Illinois, she into child care and focus on a couple of ers baby-sitting our children into what stands up here and blithely puts $322 things. should be early educational opportuni- million on the Illinois State legisla- The real key I believe is quality, ties so that the children can hope for a ture; they must fund this because they quality child care. So that we have better future than that of their par- have to have a program for people for trained providers, we are paying close ents. more than 30 hours. to or at or above market rates. We With 40,000 Texas children already That means make-work programs. have a stable nurturing workforce and waiting for child care assistance, and Never mind what happens to kids and stimulating settings for kids so that so many of our neighbors confronting a whether they get taken care of or not. those who are growing up in poverty, true child care crisis in our State, the We are going to be back to CETA jobs. those whose parents are working off members of the Human Services Com- I do not think there is anybody left in welfare have a fair start at the starting mittee of the Texas House of Rep- here except a few of us who remember gate of life. resentatives, chaired by Representative CETA jobs in the 1960s. My colleagues This $2 billion I hope States will use Elliott Naishtat, have rejected the un- are going to be putting States and to increase what they pay for child reasonable provisions of this bill. Our counties and cities to making work care because so many of our States are excellent Texas Center for Public Pol- programs, and my colleagues can stand underpaying what it really costs, and icy Priorities has explained the exten- up here and say that they have all of kids whose parents are working their sive harm that this bill will wreak. this in here and all this flexibility. If way off welfare often do not have ac- This legislation claims to honor fa- this was such a flexible bill, I would cess to the best child care settings. therhood, motherhood and matrimony, like to understand why it is they took This bill will also allow States to but actually it threatens our neighbor- away vocational training. What pos- move more of this money from those hoods by failing to give the state the sible reason could they take vocational on welfare where they have reduced the means to provide the support that fam- training out as one of the work activi- rolls to those who never were on wel- ilies need to feed, to clothe, and to ties? Do my colleagues not think peo- fare but are the low-income working raise our next generation of Ameri- ple ought to train to get a better job or poor. cans. do they want them all to work as Child care keeps America working. We cannot afford the true cost of ne- maids in hotels or something at a $7- Child care is everybody’s business, and glecting these children. This bill may an-hour job with no child care and no most of our businesses understand be good electioneering but it does too health care benefits? That is what my that. I commend the gentlewoman little for our country’s future. Unless colleagues call lifting them out of pov- from Washington and my colleagues in we reject this grossly deficient ap- erty. bringing an emphasis, and increased proach, we will reap tomorrow the bit- Ms. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, I yield my- funding to child care in this country. ter harvest that the bill’s deliberate self 30 seconds. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield neglect of these needy children sows I will remind the gentleman from myself such time as I may consume. today. Washington State that we have ex- Let me just point out to the gentle- Ms. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 tended the ability to transfer funds woman from New Mexico that voting minutes to the gentlewoman from West from one portion of the TANF dollars Virginia (Mrs. CAPITO), a leader in her that are granted to the States into for this bill will cost the citizens of her State an extra $100 million. State legislature who has been very ef- child care or any other area. In 1996, fective in increasing the child care sup- there was a 30 percent exchange. Now Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 port in this bill by $2 billion. it is a 50 percent exchange. One of the minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DOGGETT), a member of the Com- Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I thank cores of this bill is the flexibility for my colleagues for joining in the discus- States to use money in a way that will mittee on Ways and Means and a mem- ber of the Subcommittee on Human Re- sion on the much-needed increase in make their programs the most effec- child care funding that is provided tive. sources. through H.R. 4737. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, parents When a mom is going to work for the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. at every economic level sometimes first time, and she has children, she is WILSON), who is formerly a cabinet must balance the demands of being a thinking to herself, I want to con- Secretary for families and children. good parent with being a good em- Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. ployee. This is especially challenging centrate on my job, I want to do the Speaker, I thank my colleague from when it is a minimum-wage job with no best thing I can do, but a part of her the State of Washington for yielding health insurance and a single parent. mind is thinking about her children be- me the time. I thank her for her leader- This partisan bill focuses solely on cause she is a good mom and she is try- ship in bringing focus to the problem of the work aspect, forgetting the value ing to do the best for them. The best child care and the challenge of child of parenting, not only for our children, way to ensure her success in the work care so that we can build on the suc- who lose irreplaceable opportunities, force and her success with her family is cess that we have already achieved but for communities, who suffer and good solid child care. with welfare reform. bear the burden of neglected children As a representative of an economi- There are 2.3 million fewer children having children of their own and com- cally distressed State, I know that who are in poverty today because their mitting adult crimes. thousands of parents in my district de- moms have gotten good jobs. There are When asked how much of an invest- pend on subsidized child care. In my almost 2 million children who are not ment in our children is required to sat- home State of West Virginia, 85 per- hungry today because they have been isfy the new requirements of this new cent of the children in child care are in raised out of poverty and their parents law, the Bush administration responds subsidized child care. I am from a rural can afford food. That is because of wel- basically, ‘‘don’t know and don’t care.’’ State. It is tremendously expensive for fare reform. parents to transport their children and 1115 Funding for child care from the Fed- b to provide child care in rural States. eral Government has tripled over the But the Republican Congressional Today, there are over 13,000 parents last 5 years, and that is at the same Budget Office was forced to estimate and children who benefit from this in time that welfare caseloads have been this cost of meeting our children’s West Virginia, and this increase will cut in half, so that there is more child care needs. It says, at a min- ensure that more parents will have the money per child, and States have been imum, $8 billion is required, while the opportunity to benefit. Parents are in allowed to move that money from House Republican leadership provides desperate need to find quality, safe, those on welfare to the low-income only $1 billion. and affordable child care for their chil- working poor so that they can afford Additionally, this bill provides noth- dren. H.R. 4737 will continue high lev- high quality child care. ing, zero, zip—to meet rising child care els of support for child care while add- We are not satisfied with the success costs, to transform the frequently poor ing, at a minimum, $2 billion in addi- we have already seen. We want to build quality of child care from what is too tional funds for child care over 5 years.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.026 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2535 Let us ensure the success of the par- (Ms. GRANGER), who is the former the courage to speak up and speak out ents and the children and their futures. Mayor of Fort Worth and who has for what is morally right? Where is our I urge all my colleagues to stand up worked with many folks who have been sense of what is fair? Where is our and support this increased funding for forced to go on welfare. She brings sense of what is right? child care. Parents and children alike great knowledge to our effort today. My colleagues, please join me to vote need it. Ms. GRANGER. Mr. Speaker, I am against this reckless bill. We can do Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield talking today more as a single parent better. We must do better. myself such time as I may consume to myself, who worked very hard to sup- Ms. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, I yield my- point out to the gentlewoman from port my children from the time they self the balance of my time. West Virginia that by voting for this were tiny, and I know that quality I simply want to wrap up, with the bill her State will actually have $78 child care is absolutely necessary, first time we have left, to say that I think million less in resources to deal with of all to meet the needs of the children, it is very important for us to remember the problems of child care. but to meet the financial needs of the what it is we are trying to do in this Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the family. welfare legislation. gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. KLECZ- A job well done adds dignity to the In 1996, we talked to welfare moms KA), a member of the Committee on individual but it adds stability to the and dads. We said, what can we do to Ways and Means and one of the individ- family. I know we are setting the bar help you bridge the gap between wel- uals who helped us craft the substitute. high for welfare recipients. They can fare and work? And they said give us Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, welfare make that bar if we provide quality the ability to know that our children programs come in various sizes and child care, and we are doing that at are well taken care of. Let us put the shapes. There are good welfare pro- more than double what we did, a min- full focus of our energy and our exper- grams and bad welfare programs. A few imum of $2 billion. tise into going into a job that is going weeks ago the Congress passed a farm But after my children were grown to provide us greater self-respect, bill, a farm bill that was signed by the and my business was successful, I greater dignity, and provide for our President this last weekend. That bill served as mayor of my city, so I under- children that one role model in their increased farm spending $180 billion, an stand local control, and the flexibility life that might have a job. increase of almost 80 percent, giving that we are allowing under this bill is We were successful there to the point growers in this country, large cor- extremely important so that States that, as we moved money into TANF, porate farmers, up to $360,000 a year of can move the funds where they are we left, as of last September, $7.5 bil- taxpayer money. Under a loophole in needed most. It will allow the States to lion in TANF funds in States through- the bill, they can get as high as $700,000 make their individual decisions. out the Nation that they could move to per year. We have made great progress in wel- child care. Mr. Speaker, welfare to corporate fare, moving people off the rolls, but Child care was the answer then and it farmers and agribusiness is good wel- what is important is the hope we see in continues to be the answer now. This is fare. However, welfare to poor people is the faces of those children and those why we are advocating an additional $2 not good welfare. That is bad welfare. parents. billion to the $4.8 billion we spend each Mr. Speaker, I voted for the welfare I strongly support this legislation. I year in dollars for child care. bill back in 1996, and when I did so I in- think it is very important, this min- I think it is our responsibility, Mr. dicated to the Members that my major imum of $2 billion, to add a sense of Speaker, to help people who want to reservations were that we did not do hope to the lives of those people. hold jobs know their children are taken enough to promote education, and Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am care of as they move into the work- clearly the child care funding was inad- pleased to yield 11⁄2 minutes to the gen- force. I recommend the support of this equate. Now, with 6 years experience, tleman from Georgia (Mr. LEWIS), a bill. we find out that that I was right. And, distinguished member of the Com- Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance the Republican bill does nothing to ad- mittee on Ways and Means. of my time. dress these two most serious concerns. Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield Yes, we have dramatically reduced I rise against the majority party’s pro- myself such time as I may consume to the welfare rolls over the last number posal. I read someplace, ‘‘What does it point out to my colleagues that less of years, but we have not reduced the profit a great Nation to gain a whole than 20 percent of the children who are poverty rate. The Cardin substitute world and lose her soul?’’ federally eligible for child care assist- truly does address the poverty rate. This Republican proposal does not re- ance are now being served under the Right now we say, get a job, and then flect the soul of America. It is out of Republican bill. That number will even after you are done working and taking step and it is out of tune. This proposal get smaller. care of your kids, you can also go to turns its back on the basic needs of our Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to school and that will be counted as poor, our mothers, and our dependent yield 11⁄2 minutes to the gentleman work. But we have put the cart before children. from Vermont (Mr. SANDERS), one of the horse. Let us make sure that indi- No one, but no one, wants to be on the leaders for working people in this viduals get adequate training, be it a welfare. People want to work. They country. GED, English as a second language, or want to pay their own way. They want Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank a vocational associate degree before training so they can secure a perma- the gentleman for yielding me this mandating the job. We are not going to nent living wage job. Yet this bill time. lift people out of poverty, forcing them throws in the towel. It eliminates edu- Mr. Speaker, when we talk about to go right to work to get the most me- cation and job training from the list of welfare reform, I would hope that we nial jobs that we have in this country. work opportunities. It does nothing to would include in that discussion many So if my colleagues are really intent promote job stability or reduce poverty of the largest corporations in this on lifting the poverty rate and helping in our country. country who rip off tens of billions of these individuals, vote for the Cardin We can spend hundreds, thousands, dollars from taxpayers every year in substitute, which does address edu- billions of dollars on missiles, bombs, subsidies, loan guaranties and tax cation and provides for adequate child and even tax breaks for the wealthy in- breaks, while then moving their fac- care. dividuals, but when it comes to pro- tories and bank accounts to China, Ms. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, may I in- viding a helping hand to our poor and Mexico or Bermuda. quire as to how much time we have re- our needy, Republicans want to pass But that is not what we are talking maining? the buck. about today. Today, we are talking The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. When it comes to welfare of our citi- about low-income women and children. SIMPSON). The gentlewoman from zens, we must cross every T and dot We are talking about a severe crisis in Washington has 2 minutes remaining. every I. Do we have the courage to put child care that leaves millions of Ms. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 people who have been left out and left American families unable to afford minute to the gentlewoman from Texas behind back on their feet? Do we have quality child care or, in some cases,

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.016 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2536 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 any child care they can afford. We are tinuing to increase in those areas that hours, people can do essentially any- talking about child care workers who need increases. I suppose somebody on thing they want with the 16 hours. are grossly underpaid, who are under- the other side of the aisle could ask for That is how they build flexibility into trained, and who experience a huge $100 billion in child care. The fact of their inflexible system. So anything turnover rate to the detriment of the matter is they cannot deny the fact counts, and they vitiate their own American babies. Today, we are talk- that this bill increases by almost $4 rhetoric. ing about a child care situation that is billion the amount that was in the bill. Look, in a word, welfare reform is a disgrace and a shame to this Nation, That is undeniable. Those are the facts. much too important to simply maneu- and I want anyone over there to deny The program works, and we propose to ver for political advantage this year or that reality. make it work better. simply talk about 5 years ago. It is too And how have our Republican friends Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of important for a lot of pious platitudes. responded to that situation? In real, in- my time. The substitute is a serious effort to flation-accounted-for dollars, the Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield address the needs of this new face of President has actually cut funding for myself such time as I may consume. welfare reform. We will present it child care, while the House Repub- Mr. Speaker, let me point out to the proudly; and we will say to the major- licans have offered a proposal that is gentleman from California that I am ity, shame on them for not lifting one finger to sit down with us to try to totally inadequate. They have provided glad to see that he agrees with the fun- work out a bipartisan product. Welfare hundreds of billions of dollars in tax damental thrust which his bill would reform deserves much better than the breaks for the richest people in this not try to fundamentally change a pro- gram which I believe has been success- majority has given it. country, but pennies for babies and for Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield ful. the kids who are the future of America. myself such time as I may consume. I urge a strong no vote on the Repub- Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the Mr. Speaker, I suppose as a rhetor- lican proposal. gentleman from Michigan (Mr. LEVIN), ical device it is useful to come down Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield who is not only a member of the Com- and point fingers and claim shame. Ac- myself such time as I may consume. mittee on Ways and Means, but is also tually, the bill has been an enormous And, of course, the gentleman from one of the key architects of many of success. It has reduced the rolls by Vermont’s urging of a ‘‘no’’ vote is not the provisions in the Democratic sub- half; and yet President Bush has said unexpected. He voted against the bill stitute. keep the funding at a steady level, i.e., in 1996. As a matter of fact, the gen- (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given per- fewer people same amount of money. In tleman from Washington (Mr. mission to revise and extend his re- this bill, we are putting more money MCDERMOTT) voted against the bill. marks.) back in. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, let me I guess when we take away from LEWIS) voted against the bill. There speak as a Member who worked a cou- them what they believe is their divine were dire statements made then about ple of years on welfare reform in the right, to be for people in poverty, and what was going to happen to those in- mid-1990s, who worked on the legisla- for women with children, and we actu- dividuals on welfare. tion to make sure that it had adequate ally show compassion and we actually But I do want to say that there are health care and child care, and who put money where our mouth is and we some Members of the other party who voted for the legislation. The majority actually put a program out that really get it, or at least have been willing to has apparently decided it wants a polit- works instead of all of the rhetoric admit that they get it. For example, on ical issue rather than a bipartisan that have been used for years about March 21, 1995, the gentleman from product. It did not seriously work with wanting to help these people, and I Missouri (Mr. GEPHARDT) said, ‘‘A Re- any of us no matter how we voted in think helping people is moving them publican welfare bill will throw mil- 1996. With none of us. from welfare to work, not saying how lions of children out on the street with- Mr. Speaker, the majority comes desperate they are, making speeches on out doing anything to move people here and talks about the past instead the floor, and voting against programs from welfare to work.’’ This was a gen- of looking at the present and thinking that actually work. erally held assumption, based upon the about the future. Shame. We have a program that actually number of Members on that side of the As a result of the majority’s lack of works. We are putting more money in aisle who voted no. any bipartisan effort, they have a very relative to the people available, and we To his credit, on May 9 of this year, flawed product. Child care, there is a are putting even more money in with the gentleman from Missouri said billion guaranteed, that is all; and this bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of ‘‘Welfare reform has been a good effort. Members come here saying something my time to the gentleman from Cali- A lot of people have gone back to work. else. Oh, and then they say let the States transfer, even though they fornia (Mr. HERGER) and ask unani- And so it is the right thing to do, to mous consent that the gentleman con- ask them to go back to work and to know from the figures that more and more States are using their TANF trol the balance of the time. make them go back to work.’’ The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. funds, and they are not going to have So in terms of the fundamental SIMPSON). Is there objection to the re- the monies to transfer, and their budg- thrust of the bill, we are pleased that quest of the gentleman from Cali- ets are in dire straits. people are beginning to back away fornia? from the cataclysmic statements that On health care, the bill does not do a There was no objection. had been made. darn thing to improve it. In terms of Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield helping people move from welfare to b 1130 myself such time as I may consume. productive work and independence, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the What we now hear is Members who they clamp down on vocational edu- Personal Responsibility, Work and have voted against the bill com- cation. We have a President who says Family Promotion Act, which takes plaining about the Republican effort education is the key; and then we come the next step in welfare reform. During because it is going to put approxi- to a welfare reform bill, and the major- the welfare debate in 1996, critics pre- mately $4 billion additional monies ity clamps down and takes back what dicted 1 million children would be into child care when it should be $11 is in present law. Again, I say shame. forced into poverty and recipients billion. It seems to me that the move- All right, so then the majority says, would be worse off. The opposite oc- ment in the direction that we are going and it looks like it is a clever political curred. Since 1996, nearly 3 million under the current circumstances is sig- approach, let us emphasize those peo- children left poverty. Overall, 9 million nificant and deserves support. But ple who are on welfare and make sure parents and children have left welfare sometimes some Members on the other they are working. So they set up an in- dependence and moved on to a better side of the aisle cannot bring them- flexible proposition, and then the life. selves to admit that they were wrong. States say, oh no, that is taking away Today we will again hear from the The fact of the matter is they were our flexibility. So then the majority naysayers. They will say needy fami- wrong. We are right, and we are con- says, all right, 24 hours of work and 16 lies cannot work, they must collect

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.018 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2537 welfare for more than 5 years, that it is abuse program to change their lives, THOMAS) has said we are asking for way cruel to expect them to support them- we should be doing that. too much money. I saw in today’s selves and their children like other Instead, what we are doing is taking paper that the head of the Congres- American families. We have heard it away vocational education, doing noth- sional Budget Office, Mr. Crippen, has all before. ing to make sure that the health care decided not to go on for 4 years. I know The bill before us today builds on the needs are taken care. why, because they want to get rid of successful 1996 reforms. It recognizes No, there is not enough money in this him because it was his memo on Feb- that work is the only true path from budget for child care. Parents cannot ruary 2, 2002, that says this bill is going poverty to self-sufficiency. It expects go to work and be trained without to cost between 8 and $11 billion in un- more work and allows more education child care. Yet there is a lot of money funded liability. and training to count as work. To sup- in the bill, $300 million, to talk about We did not make that number up. port more work, we added $2 billion promoting marriage. Give me a break. That came from the Congressional over 5 years for more child care. We Let us give welfare recipients a chance Budget Office. The director is selected also provided States more flexibility in to become independent. by the majority, and they put him in. how they can spend cash welfare funds Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 Here he is. Now he gives them informa- on child care, including for low-income minutes to the gentleman from Michi- tion they do not want. The chairman is families that have never been on wel- gan (Mr. CAMP). ignoring 280,000 kids in California who fare. Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, the 1996 wel- are not served. The bill does more to promote fare law, which many of us here helped b 1145 healthy marriage which will reduce write, really brought us unparalleled poverty and improve child well-being. success by almost any measure. If we Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am Too many children today are raised by look at the fact that more parents are pleased to yield 1 minute to the gen- single parents, most often by single working, child poverty has declined tleman from Texas (Mr. HINOJOSA). mothers struggling mightily to get by. sharply, dependence has declined dra- (Mr. HINOJOSA asked and was given Compared with children raised by mar- matically, there is a 60 percent de- permission to revise and extend his re- ried parents, their children are at a dis- crease in the case loads of welfare re- marks.) advantage, including in terms of avoid- cipients. This bill today builds on that Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise ing poverty and welfare as adults. Pro- success and improves this legislation. in strong support of the Democratic moting stronger families will help Let me just talk a little bit about substitute and in opposition to the un- break the cycle of long-term welfare State flexibility because we have re- derlying bill. Education and training dependence, and deserves our support. ceived a letter, both the chairmen and are the cornerstones upon which we on This legislation allows for new State ranking members of the Committee on this floor have built our future. This flexibility, including under the State Ways and Means and the Committee on bill should be stressing basic literacy, flex provisions allowing social service Education and the Workforce from the English as a second language, GED programs to be better aligned to better American Public Human Services Asso- completion and on-the-job training serve needy families. Yet those who ciation, which is a bipartisan group of rather than cynically labeling them now extol flexibility when it comes to welfare directors around the United welfare scholarships. not expecting more work of welfare re- States complimenting us on the flexi- In my congressional district, I have cipients argue that governors cannot bility in this bill for things like im- seen how education can bring economic be trusted with this expanded author- proving and continuing the whole idea prosperity to one of the poorest regions ity. Truly amazing. of a TANF block grant contingency in the country. Our unemployment Mr. Speaker, in these and many fund; removing the restrictions on un- rates have dropped from over 20 per- other ways, this legislation takes the obligated TANF funds; excluding child cent to almost 10 percent. Only a few next step in helping millions of fami- care and transportation from the defi- days ago, the President signed the agri- lies move from welfare to work. I urge nition of assistance; creating State culture bill to restore access to food all Members to support it. rainy day funds for unobligated funds stamps for legal permanent residents Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of under this bill; continuing the transfer and overcame the mean-spirited denial my time. of 30 percent to the child care develop- of food for poor families that had been Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield ment block grant; restoring full trans- in effect for 5 years. myself such time as I may consume. fer to the social services block grant; The Democratic substitute provides Mr. Speaker, the gentleman talked and maintaining the TANF block grant significant reforms as well as the re- about State flexibility; but if the ma- free from set-asides. These are some- sources needed to implement them. I jority is really interested in State what technical provisions, but the urge my colleagues to vote for the flexibility, why do they take away the State welfare directors from around Democratic substitute and against the ability of States to provide educational the country have come together and Republican bill. services for people on welfare? complimented this committee for put- Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the ting in these provisions which will Democratic substitute and in opposition to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. WA- bring much more flexibility to this underlying bill. First, I want to commend my TERS). bill. They say, ‘‘These provisions will colleagues GEORGE MILLER, PATSY MINK and Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, here we dramatically increase State and local BEN CARDIN for their hard work and leadership go again. Welfare reform is a serious flexibility in the administration of the in drafting this substitute. We all agree that we issue, and we should not play politics TANF program.’’ need to encourage work, but people need ac- with it. This is a bad bill, and Members Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. This cess to real jobs that will lead them out of on the other side of the aisle know will continue to build on the successes poverty. The ‘‘make work’’ approach of that. we have had. I urge support for it. workfare in this Republican bill, has only led This President has put forth a bill Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield people into working poor status, and has not that will penalize those who are trying myself such time as I may consume. improved their economic situation. so desperately to change their lives. Mr. Speaker, I point out to the gen- Education and training are the cornerstones What do they mean by making a wel- tleman from Michigan that the popular upon which we on this Floor have built our fu- fare mother with children under 6 work 10–10–10 program in Michigan would ture. This bill should be stressing basic lit- for 40 hours while they are trying to not satisfy the requirements of this eracy, English-as-Second-Language, GED get into training programs and change bill. It would be an unfunded mandate completion, and on-the-job training rather than their lives? We need to assess each in- of $377 million to a State. cynically labeling them ‘‘welfare scholarships.’’ dividual and decide what they need. If Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the In my congressional district, I have seen how they need to be in school for 2 years be- gentleman from Washington (Mr. education can bring economic prosperity to cause they dropped out early, if they MCDERMOTT). one of the poorest regions in the country. Our need counseling, if they need to have Mr. MCDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, the unemployment rates have dropped from over an opportunity to have a substance gentleman from California (Chairman 20 percent to almost 10 percent.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.020 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2538 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 Only a few days ago, the President signed H.R. 4737 improves nothing . . . it will do mental thrust of welfare is where we the Agriculture bill to restore access to food one thing and one thing only—keep mothers need to continue. Yet the underlying stamps for legal permanent residents and and their children in poverty. bill changes that. I do not understand overcame the mean-spirited denial of food for Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 it. We trusted the States in 1996. Now poor families that had been in effect for 5 minute to the gentleman from Lou- we do not trust the States. Now we years. Yet today we stand here ready to again isiana (Mr. MCCRERY), a very active have to be prescriptive. We have to tell weaken this program purely for ideological member of our subcommittee. them how to do it. purposes. Mr. MCCRERY. Mr. Speaker, first of The gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. The Republican ‘‘super waiver’’ provision all, I want to respond briefly to the re- MCCRERY) said, well, they are going to would undermine critical programs like the marks by the gentleman from Wash- have plenty of money to do it. The Workforce Investment Program and the ington about the unfunded mandates in truth is the States are spending $2 bil- Childcare Development block grant. Yet with- this bill. This is a report from the same lion more a year than they are cur- out adequate childcare, transportation and Congressional Budget Office dated May rently getting from the Federal Gov- flexible work-hours, what mother can con- 13, 2002. CBO says the TANF grant pro- ernment for their TANF programs. The centrate on work when their child is home gram, which is the subject of this bill, reason, quite frankly, and the gen- alone or in substandard childcare? affords States broad flexibility to de- tleman from Louisiana (Mr. MCCRERY) The Republican proposal is empty rhetoric termine eligibility for benefits and to did not tell the whole factual truth, because it is critically underfunded. It puts ide- structure the programs offered as part there are a lot more people receiving ological sound bites over real welfare reform. of a State’s family assistance program. TANF services than those in cash as- Even the Nation’s Governors have expressed Consequently, any new requirements to sistance, and we should be proud of their reservations about the poor policy and the program as proposed by H.R. 4090 that. We want people off of cash assist- unfunded mandates in this bill. The Demo- would not be intergovernmental man- ance. We think the programs that lift cratic substitute provides significant reforms as dates as defined in the Unfunded Man- people out of poverty is where we well as the resources needed to implement date Reform Act to the States. should go. They do not have the re- them. I urge my colleagues to vote for the With respect to the question of sources. Democratic substitute and against the Repub- money, this chart clearly illustrates The gentleman from California (Mr. lican bill. that we are giving the States more HERGER) talks about flexibility in re- Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am very money for welfare on a per-family sources. The States have far less flexi- pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentle- basis. In 1996, the year prior to welfare bility on providing educational serv- woman from California (Ms. WOOLSEY), reform going into effect, States had ices for the people on welfare under the one of the real leaders on welfare re- about $7,000 per family for welfare. Republican bill than current law. They form, the architect of the Democratic Next year under the first year in this do not move ahead. They take away substitute. bill, States will have almost $16,000 per the ability to have vocational edu- (Ms. WOOLSEY asked and was given family for welfare. Tell me how we are cation for 1 year towards the work re- permission to revise and extend her re- shortchanging the States. They are quirements in the Republican bill. marks.) getting over twice as much money, and Gone. Is that giving States additional Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, 6 years that is not counting the $4 billion extra flexibility? No. That is why the Congressional Budg- ago I voted against the welfare reform we are giving them in child care. Give et Office, our scorekeepers, tell us that bill because I had been a welfare moth- me a break. implementing this bill will cost our er 35 years ago. I knew what we needed Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am States an extra $18 billion, $11 billion to do to bring families out of poverty. pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentle- in direct cost. That is the unfunded I was right. Unfortunately, we have not woman from New York (Mrs. mandate, whatever we want to call it. brought families out of poverty. Yes, MALONEY). It is going to cost our States more indeed, we have gotten many, many Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. money to implement the requirements. families to go to work. That is the Speaker, I rise in support of the Demo- We are being prescriptive. We are not good side of what has gone on. But we cratic substitute. Earlier this Congress using the formula that worked 6 years had a very good economy. When the passed legislation that heavily sub- ago that I voted for, flexibility in re- economy is dropping, families are los- sidized big farms and military con- sources to States so they can work tracts. But when it comes to helping ing their jobs. But the worst thing with the people in their State to not poor women and children, the cupboard about taking women and their families only get them off cash assistance but is bare. How can my colleagues on the from welfare to work that we have ex- to lift them out of poverty. We can do other side of the aisle call themselves perienced is they have gone from wel- better and we are going to have a fare to poverty, and we are keeping pro-family when they do not ade- chance to do it when we offer the those families in poverty. quately fund training and education to Democratic substitute. The reason I got off welfare is be- lift welfare recipients out of poverty? I urge my colleagues, both Demo- cause I was educated. I had a good edu- How can they call themselves pro-fam- crats and Republicans, look at the sub- cation, I had good job skills, and I ily when they do not provide adequate stitute. Support it. It is what we need could take advantage of that. We have funding for quality, affordable, avail- in order to live up to our commitment to provide just that for our families on able child care so that working moms to the people of our Nation. welfare. Then we will have a successful have a place for their children to go? Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield welfare reform program. We need our families to thrive, not just the balance of my time to the gen- I voted against the bill in 1996 because I survive. tleman from Florida (Mr. SHAW), the feared that moving from welfare to work would A welfare recipient wrote me earlier architect and chairman back in 1996 of leave mothers stuck in poverty—especially this month and she said, ‘‘When you the Subcommittee on Human Re- during an economic downturn. cut off money for education and train- sources. Well, 6 years we succeeded in doing just ing, you cut me off, too. You cut my The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. that!! Women are working and women and children and myself into a never ending SIMPSON). The gentleman from Florida their families are living in poverty. We have to cycle of poverty.’’ is recognized for 2 minutes. learn from what didn’t work. The Democratic substitute provides Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Now, we have a new bill . . . one that actu- support to lift families out of welfare. gentleman for yielding me this time. ally goes backwards on education . . . which, Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield My congratulations to the gentleman of course, is the way to prepare for a good myself the balance of my time. from California (Mr. HERGER) for tak- job, one that pays a ‘‘living wage.’’ Mr. Speaker, I have listened to my ing what I think is an historic piece of And, then the Republicans demand mothers colleagues talk on the other side of the legislation and improving it. with small children, under 6, go to work with- aisle about this bill. Let me at least In listening to the debate on the floor out the child care they need . . . especially try to set the record straight. Our today and late into last night, there child care for infants and parents working eve- chairman the gentleman from Cali- was an effort, I think, to rewrite his- nings and weekends. fornia (Mr. THOMAS) said the funda- tory that was going on here on the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.005 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2539 floor of the House of Representatives. I jobs. My friends on the other side of ities to develop innovative solutions to heard time and time again speakers the aisle may say, ‘‘The system is help welfare recipients achieve inde- from this side of the aisle getting up working. Why fix it? Why argue with pendence. It will give States and local and talking about how President Clin- success?’’ agencies the opportunity to integrate ton had input into the bill and finally Here is why. Welfare caseloads have certain welfare and workforce develop- he signed it after vetoing it three fallen dramatically since 1996, but as ment programs and try to improve times. That is simply not true. We this chart right here shows, 58 percent their efficiency. reached out time and time again to the of TANF recipients still are not work- Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like White House and we were met with si- ing for their benefits, according to the to echo the sentiments of President lence. They had no interest in working Department of Health and Human Bush when he said, ‘‘No level of despair with Republicans on welfare reform. It Services. And we all know that work is should be acceptable in our society.’’ was not until right before the election essential to help people get the skills With this bill today, we are going to that the President decided that it was that they need to move up the eco- help some of the most vulnerable mem- about time that he looked at this issue nomic ladder. bers of our society achieve self-suffi- that was very much on the conscience The bottom line is that approxi- ciency, and I urge my colleagues to of the American voters. On August 22, mately 2 million families remain on support the bill. 1996, President Clinton did finally sign welfare rolls today and we need to do Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of a welfare reform bill. something about it. Earlier this my time. This historic legislation has pulled 3 month, the Committee on Education Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. million children out of poverty when and the Workforce approved a bill in- Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. we were hearing time and time again troduced by my friend, colleague and (Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California from the other side of the aisle that subcommittee chairman the gentleman asked and was given permission to re- they were going to be sleeping on the from California (Mr. MCKEON), the vise and extend his remarks, and in- grates. Yes, half of the Democrats did Working Toward Independence Act, clude extraneous material.) support us. That is a good thing, be- which is now part of this overall Re- Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. cause that sent the message out that publican bill. It strengthens work re- Mr. Speaker, what this debate has America expected more of the poor, the quirements to ensure that we move come down to is a question of whether economic disadvantaged. But what is these welfare recipients on the path to or not those individuals who seek to separating us on this issue is that we self-reliance. As Connecticut Governor get off of welfare, whether or not those believe in the human spirit so strongly John Rowland has said, ‘‘The most individuals who seek to stay off of wel- that we feel that if we raise that level compassionate way to break the cycle fare, who have been successful in escap- of expectation that they will rise up to of poverty, dependency and hopeless- ing the welfare system, whether or not meet it, and history tells us that we ness is through work.’’ they will have the means to do so. were right. The bill requires welfare recipients What this debate comes down to is We were absolutely right, because to participate in work activities for 40 whether or not a single individual or a what we did was take people out of a hours a week. But within these new re- family makes a decision about going to life of dependence and made them role quirements, there is significant flexi- work, about participating in the Amer- models for their kids, and they did do bility for States and recipients them- ican economic system, whether or not better. Now we expect the States to get selves. Welfare families will have 16 they will have the child care and the more of their people on the work rolls. hours a week to pursue education and training available so they can take the We have lowered the amount of people job training. They can also attend best advantage of what this system has on welfare across this country by over school full-time for up to 4 months dur- to offer them. 50 percent, but we are not through. We ing a 2-year period. The measure also Over the last 5 years we have learned are going to do better. Together we increases the percentage of welfare a great deal about welfare reform. will do better. families in each State that must be en- There are two things we have learned Vote ‘‘yes’’ on this bill and ‘‘no’’ on gaged in work activities; currently, 50 that are absolutely crucial: First, that the substitute. percent, moving to 70 percent by 2007. good job training and extensive job The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- Some have questioned whether training in the beginning is better for tleman from Ohio (Mr. BOEHNER) and States can meet these new require- the employee as they go out on that the gentleman from California (Mr. ments, suggesting that we are setting new job, it is better for their chance of GEORGE MILLER) each will control 20 the bar too high. But I agree with advancing to a second and better job, minutes. President Bush who said last week, ‘‘If and it is also better for the employer The Chair recognizes the gentleman it brings dignity into someone’s life, because it reduces the amount of turn- from Ohio (Mr. BOEHNER). it’s not too high of a goal.’’ over that the employer must suffer GENERAL LEAVE And, remember, the bill gives States with the employment of individuals. Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask 5 years to comply with the new work That is very important. unanimous consent that all Members requirements. The bill also includes The second thing is that the biggest may have 5 legislative days in which to significant funding increases for child barrier of people going to work is the revise and extend their remarks on care, boosting discretionary spending care of their children. We ask people on H.R. 4737. for the child care and development welfare, we mandate that they must go The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there block grant by $1 billion over 5 years. to work, and yet we tell middle class objection to the request of the gen- In addition to this new money, it is women we want them to stay home and tleman from Ohio? important to remember that States we give them a tax credit to stay home There was no objection. have half of the caseloads they had in and take care of their child. So the per- Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1996, which means they have got twice son who is on welfare is asking the myself such time as I may consume. as much money available to spend on question, will my child be safe? Will Mr. Speaker, the 1996 welfare reform work programs or on child care. my child have a chance at child devel- law that we are reauthorizing today opment while I am working? This is has been an unprecedented success, one b 1200 what every mother, every father, every of the most important pieces of social H.R. 4737 also incorporates key ele- brother, every sister thinks about their policy since the civil rights legislation ments of President Bush’s Good Start, siblings and their children. of 1965. Grow Smart Plan to improve early The Republican bill simply does not Today with the Personal Responsi- childhood education, and encourages provide the sufficient resources to the bility, Work, and Family Promotion States to address the cognitive needs of States to provide quality child care for Act, we are set to build on that suc- young children so they are develop- those children and the needs that are cess. The bill marks the beginning of a mentally prepared to enter school. now presented today to this Nation, second phase of reform that will help Finally, the bill includes a promising not after you up the work requirement, even more Americans find productive new plan to empower States and local- but today.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.025 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2540 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 Hundreds of thousands of children The Republican bill takes a very different million people have left welfare for are on a waiting list for child care, and approach: massive new work requirements work. Over 3 million former welfare re- the Republicans want to continue to without adequate training, as well as other un- cipients know the satisfaction of earn- tell us that all the care that is nec- funded mandates and punishing requirements ing a day’s pay for a day’s work. essary is available. Child care lists are for state administrators and for welfare recipi- As the debate goes forward on this frozen. This debate is about whether or ents alike—with little financial assistance for bill, it is important to remember that not we will enable these individuals to either. And this Republican bill, unlike the the true benefactors of welfare reform go to work with the security of mind Democratic substitute, fails to protect working are young Americans. Because of wel- that their child is in a quality place- men and women by fully applying our nation’s fare reform, young Americans are able ment and their child is receiving child civil rights, wage, and health and safety laws to see their parents get up each morn- development while they try to engage to welfare recipients who are working. Nor ing and go to work. Without this very in the American economic system. does the Republican bill protect those who basic ethic, those young people are at a Mr. Speaker, the debate about welfare currently have jobs from being displaced by great disadvantage, and it becomes dif- should be a debate about how to move peo- subsidized welfare recipients. That is just ficult for them to escape the cycle of ple—mostly women with young children—from wrong. poverty in which their families have dependency on government assistance to full- This Republican bill tells the taxpayers of lived for generations. H.R. 4737 helps time, permanent employment that lifts, and California: you better raise taxes by $2.5 bil- these families and builds on the success keeps, the family out of poverty. lion, or cut your already deeply reduced of the 1996 welfare reform. That is our goal for welfare reform. spending, because you’ve got to pay billions The work requirements were the cen- Six years ago, Democrats and Republicans to comply with this new bill, or face more pun- terpiece to welfare reform. It is only agreed that the welfare system of the prior ishment. And don’t expect any additional help through work that individuals can get half century was a failure. The new system for the 280,000 families already waiting for out of poverty and lead productive emphasized moving people from dependence child care, because the Republicans aren’t lives. The bill before us increases the to jobs while providing them with education, going to give you more assistance. work requirements to 40 hours of work training, child care and the other supports that But it isn’t California. The Republican bill per week. That is the bare minimum most Americans recognize are essential to tells Michigan to raise taxes or cut spending that most Americans work every week. achieving the goal. by $377 million, a state that has already cut That is only 10 hours more than the There have been some successes: welfare more than half a billion in spending. The Re- current requirements. rolls are down—dramatically in some states. publican bill tells Pennsylvania: your bill is For 24 hours, TANF recipients are re- But let us remember that cutting the rolls $433 million; Ohio, it’s $444 million; New Jer- quired to be involved in direct work. alone was not the goal. The evidence gath- sey, $233 million; Connecticut, $133 million; For 16 hours, they may take part in ered in study after study documents that while Texas, $688 million; Florida, $311 million; New educational or job training programs we have moved many off welfare, we have not York, $1.2 billion. State after state, billions that will lead to self-sufficiency and a achieved the goals of promoting long-term upon billions in new mandates piled on by this better life. The structure of the 16 economic independence, jobs that lift and Republican bill that fails to fund them. hours is defined by the State. keep families out of poverty, or improved living There is no evidence that the harsh and Understanding that child care is standards for millions of children. rigid revisions dictated by the Republican bill most important to helping families Since 1996, the welfare rolls have been cut will increase the success of welfare reform; leave welfare, H.R. 4737 increases the by over 50 percent nationally. But millions of but they will severely restrict the flexibility the already extremely high levels of fund- those who have left welfare remain des- states have been able to use to meet the ing for the Child Care Development perately poor, dependent on food stamps, needs of their residents, as 39 out of 44 states Block Grant. The high level of funding WIC and other public assistance, raising chil- agreed earlier this year. is increased even as the number of fam- dren in deep poverty with all of its harmful im- Some will try to paint those who raise con- ilies being served has dropped by over 3 pacts, and without the education, training or cerns about education, training, workforce pro- million. child care that is necessary to move them to tections and child care as ‘‘soft on welfare re- The bill also provides State flexi- real independence. form.’’ The American people know better than bility while maintaining State ac- In one review of 900 former welfare families, that. We are all for moving people from wel- countability by permitting States or researchers concluded that most still live fare to work, from dependence to independ- local entities to integrate a broad below the poverty line and have been forced ence, from poverty to self-support. The Amer- range of public assistance and work- to cut back on food to save money. Another ican people also know we need to get people force development programs. major review of seven Midwestern states also the flexible tools they need to give them a fair At the same time, it is important concluded that many of the former recipients chance to succeed. This bill is grossly unfair, that local areas created under the remained in poverty while Indiana and Wis- it imposes billions in new costs to the states, Workforce Investment Act be heavily consin’s rolls grew by 13 percent last year. In and we are not being given the opportunity to involved in the process. Therefore, I am Michigan, 71 percent of those who combined improve it, and that is why we will oppose its pleased that the bill provides provi- welfare and work, and nearly 50 percent of passage and support the Democratic sub- sions ensuring that local administering those former recipients who worked full time, stitute. entities join in the flexibility applica- remained poor with many unable to buy food, Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I am tion submitted to the Secretaries. This pay utilities or rent or losing their phone serv- pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gen- will, in effect, give the locals veto au- ice. Those findings demonstrate clearly that tleman from California (Mr. MCKEON), thority over provisions that they be- more must be done to move people off wel- the chairman of the Subcommittee on lieve will not improve the quality or fare and into employment. 21st Century Competitiveness. effectiveness of the programs involved. We should finish the job begun in 1996, by Mr. MCKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in The results of welfare reform are directing the needed services to those who strong support of H.R. 4737, the Per- clear. The work requirement has led 3 must leave dependency while still holding sonal Responsibility, Work and Family million families to live independent of them accountable for achieving independence Protection Act. I want to thank the government handouts. While it is im- from government aid. Instead, the bill before leadership and in particular the gen- portant to talk about the significant us today—which we are denied the oppor- tleman from Ohio (Chairman BOEHNER) reduction in welfare caseloads, the goal tunity to improve—imposes costly new man- and other members of the House Com- is not simply to move families off of dates on states without the federal support to mittee on Education and the Workforce welfare; the goal is to help families be- pay even a fraction of the additional burden. It who have devoted countless hours to come self-sufficient, to end generations also imposes rigid welfare programs that are putting together a package that every and generations of welfare dependency. fundamentally different than the programs the Member of this body should support. As such, I strongly urge my colleagues Republicans have been heralding as great Six years ago, the Nation’s welfare to support the bill. successes. We need to make welfare reform rolls bulged with more than 5.1 million Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. work, not punish the governors and the recipi- individuals and families. Today, the Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the ents alike because it hasn’t moved fast rolls have decreased tremendously. Be- gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. enough yet. tween 1996 and this very day, over 3 MCCOLLUM).

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.028 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2541 Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I But I would like to say that in ad- creating the most effective welfare programs. would like to inform the last speaker dressing the need for welfare reform, at Finally, I am pleased with the increased fund- that the unfunded mandate in this bill that time and again today, I stress ing for child care programs, which allows par- would cost the State of California $2.5 what we need is what I call ‘‘tough ents to go to work while their children are pro- billion. love,’’ and the tough love that is need- vided with the care they need. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues on ed is in this bill; namely, that the wel- SELF-SUFFICIENCY PLANS the other side of the aisle why would I, fare recipients must become more self- Too often, families with significant barriers as a Member of Congress, tell working sufficient while at the same time this to full employment are not given appropriate mothers to leave their small children legislation is sensitive to the genuine opportunities and adequate services to re- behind and go to work without pro- family needs and the needs for children move those barriers and allow them to be- viding them safe child care? to be properly cared for and educated, come successful and independent. I am In Minnesota alone today there are and I believe that this bill does that. pleased that the bill before us today includes nearly 5,000 families on the waiting list In fact, my amendment, only one of language from an amendment I offered during for child care. That is the entire popu- the portions of the bill, but my amend- the Education Committee markup to ensure lation of the City of St. Paul Park. The ment, the self-sufficiency plan, gives that states and welfare recipients work to- Republican bill provides only a slight the authority to the States and the gether to define what barriers stand in the way increase in child care, not even enough welfare recipients to work together to of permanent employment and subsequently to keep up with inflation. It would re- create these self-sufficiency plans and create ‘‘self-sufficiency plans’’ to address move only 300 of the 5,000 children from to address any barriers that are there these barriers. These plans will provide wel- Minnesota’s waiting list. that are preventing the families and fare recipients the ‘‘road map’’ they need to But then, wait. We are now doubling the children from getting the road map become independent of government assist- work requirements for mothers with that they need to this self-sufficiency, ance when they leave the welfare rolls while children under the age of 6. This will and I am proud that that language is in maintaining the proper focus on the purpose add thousands more families to our this bill. of welfare—individual responsibility. waiting list, costing Minnesota more The bottom line is that this bill may than $100 million. not be perfect, it may not be, but it is CONCLUSION It is completely irresponsible to a significant reform building on the The bottom line is that this bill builds on our think that Minnesota and other States successes of 1996, and passage of this past successes to ensure that those we move facing deficits will be able to provide bill today is a vital step to completing off of welfare have sustainable job opportuni- child care. We owe it to our children, the task that we started in 1996 and to ties and the ability to secure a promising fu- we owe it to their parents that they restore public assistance to its original ture for their families. While this legislation is have safe, reliable places for their chil- purpose, providing a temporary safety not perfect it is significant reform. Passage of dren to be while they are working. net for those in need, and genuine this bill today is a vital step toward completing I served in the Minnesota State- tough love for all the little children. the task we started in 1996 to restore public house, where I worked on a bipartisan And they are protected in this bill. assistance to its original purpose: providing a effort after Congress passed the law 6 I rise in support of this bill. First and fore- temporary safety net for those in need, gen- years ago. We had success. Minnesota most, I would like to commend the Education uine ‘‘tough love’’ for all the little children. is cited as one of the most successful and Workforce Committee Chairman BOEHNER EDUCATION AND TRAINING programs and it is rated top in the Na- and Subcommittee Chairman MCKEON for their I believe the bill before us today takes im- tion for making families self-sufficient. leadership, hard work, and diligence on this portant steps to helping welfare recipients Today, I am being asked to vote on a important issue. Of course, I commend the achieve self-sufficiency. However, the bill falls bill that seeks to undo the success in President for making welfare reform a priority short in one critical way: it fails to ensure that Minnesota. The new Federal mandates for our nation. welfare recipients have the skills they need to limit the flexibility and fail to provide INTRODUCTION remain employed in the private sector. needed funding for these new require- When we started down this road to welfare It is of paramount importance that we allow ments. reform years ago, the American people were for the education and training of those moving We cannot have it both ways. You convinced that the welfare system was out of into the workforce. Education and training will cannot have it both ways. You cannot control. They worried that we were wasting bil- enable welfare individuals to hold sustainable say you are trying to move people out lions upon billions in hard-earned taxpayer quality jobs, rather than menial, low-paying po- of poverty and then not give them the dollars to support a system that promoted sitions that will not provide independence from means to accomplish that. unhealthy, unproductive, dysfunctional families government assistance when they leave the Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I am and sentenced children to a lifetime of eco- welfare system. pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gen- nomic, social, and emotional deprivation. In a Research supports the effectiveness of en- tlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. ROU- system like that, the children were the victims. suring that welfare recipients have the skills KEMA), who will be retiring, a long time In addressing the need for reform we must they need to retain a quality occupation. In Member of the Committee on Edu- demonstrate what I characterize as a ‘‘tough one study by the U.S. Department of Health cation and the Workforce. love’’ approach. Namely, ‘‘tough love’’ so that and Human Services and the U.S. Department (Mrs. ROUKEMA asked and was welfare recipients can become more self-suffi- of Education, individuals leaving welfare who given permission to revise and extend cient while at the same time being sensitive to were most successful in sustaining employ- her remarks, and include extraneous genuine family needs and that the children are ment were twice as likely to have a technical material.) properly cared for and educated. or 2-year degree. Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Speaker, I The 1996 Welfare Reform Act was based We must recognize that there are basic thank the chairman for yielding me on the notion of individual responsibility. The skills necessary for the occupations that we time, and I certainly commend the gen- reforms restored public assistance to its origi- are hoping welfare recipients will enter into. In tleman from Ohio (Chairman BOEHNER) nal purpose: a temporary safety net for those fact, the Educational Testing Service reports and the gentleman from California in need—not a permanent way of life for gen- that nearly 70 percent of the jobs created (Chairman MCKEON) for their hard erations of families. The 1996 Welfare Reform through 2006 will require workers with edu- work and diligent leadership here. Act was good policy, however we all agree cation skills that are higher than the levels of Mr. Speaker, the gentleman has indi- that we have much more to do. We must en- most current welfare recipients. As I am sure cated that I have had a long history sure that welfare recipients are self-sufficient all of my colleagues have heard, numerous here in the Congress, certainly on this when they leave the system. employers in technical fields and healthcare committee. I go back to 1996 and the The bill before us today represents the next are experiencing workforce shortages and welfare reform, and I have got to take phase of welfare reform. It continues to focus being forced to bring in immigrants to fill their the credit for being one of the first, a on individual responsibility through work. It jobs. Northeast moderate Republican, one of provides the necessary mechanisms to help Honestly, this makes no sense to me be- the first to be advancing welfare re- welfare recipients independently support their cause we have a number of welfare recipients form, and I think that bill has proven families when they leave the system. The bill in this country that could fill these positions if its own success. also recognizes that states need flexibility in they had the appropriate training. As I see it,

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.030 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2542 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 proper training of welfare workers could have less programs. Under this bill, states and/or substance abuse, domestic violence, a tremendous impact on welfare recipients local governments are given the ability to seek mental illness in someone in their fam- AND employers. new and innovative solutions to old problems ily, extreme disability of a child, phys- Current law allows for 12 months of voca- of service delivery. Through the hearing in my ical illness, perhaps illness of their tional training for 30 percent of the state’s wel- Subcommittee, we have heard time and time own, alcoholism. I think that what fare population. While this was an important again about the need for coordinated services. they have put on are blinders to re- first step, it did not allow for the education and Housing and homeless problems cannot be ality. training of all welfare recipients. It also did not solved merely with brick and mortar. Chances Mr. Speaker, I urge this House to be take into account the range of programs of- are, if you are in need of housing, you also real, to take into account the real es- fered by community colleges that lead to qual- are in need of a multitude of other services— sence of these families. They need help. ity occupations. whether they be medical, food, transportation, They do not need a requirement to do The bill before us today wisely removes the childcare or counseling. Programs that fall 40 hours of work. It is a struggle for 30 percent limit in current law so that all wel- under the jurisdiction of other agencies like them to just stay alive and to maintain fare recipients can participate in activities that HHS. their families. will help them improve their job training skills. The legislation we are considering today will I urge this House to consider the peo- However, the bill falls short because it does allow entities, such as the public housing au- ple on welfare as real people, as our not allow for the full participation in these ac- thority, and the local and state governments to neighbors and as our friends. Mr. Speaker, I include for the tivities for more than 4 months (one semester) blend programs various programs to address RECORD a list of groups opposed to H.R. in a 2-year period. What this means is that a the problems of services delivery. An example 4737. person can receive up to 8 months (two se- of this waiver could be a child-care center and mesters) of education while they are on wel- a local public housing agency jointly peti- GROUPS OPPOSED TO H.R. 4737—AS OF 5/15/02 fare but this training can not be consecutive. tioning the Federal Review Board to waive the Alaska Federation of Natives I do not believe that this is the best approach regulations and requirements of their applica- American Association of University Women American Civil Liberties Union for helping welfare recipients achieve inde- ble programs to achieve a certain purpose. H.R. 4735 will give community groups and American Federation of Government Em- pendence. ployees We should allow for one consecutive school local and state entities the opportunity to cut American Federation of Labor—Congress of year of education and training to count as an through some of the red tape that many hous- Industrial Organizations (AFL–CIO) allowable work activity. This would only be a ing organizations complain about when at- American Federation of State, County, and minor change to the bill but it would achieve tempting to blend programs from different Municipal Employees the results we are hoping for. agencies. American Federation of Teachers After 1 year of training, welfare recipients Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Americans for Democratic Action will be able to attain a skill or trade and then Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the American Jewish Committee gentlewoman from Hawaii (Mrs. MINK), Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance move on to a good job. According to the Asian Pacific American Legal Center American Association of Community Colleges, the subcommittee ranking member and a wonderful worker on this issue. Association of University Centers on Disabil- students can earn certificates at a community ities college in 1 year if they attend College full (Mrs. MINK of Hawaii asked and was Center for Community Change time. So by allowing a school year of edu- given permission to revise and extend Center for Women Policy Studies cation, welfare recipients would have the po- her remarks, and include extraneous Coalition on Human Needs tential to receive an occupational certificate, material.) Coalition of Labor Union Women Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Speaker, I which would set them on their way toward Communication Workers of America thank the gentleman from California Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. self-sufficiency. Friends Committee on National Legislation I firmly believe that welfare families need for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, there is so much that (Quaker) ‘‘tough love’’. They need a system to provide needs to be said about this issue, but I Hmong National Development, Inc. assistance when there is absolutely no other would like to inform the last speaker International Brotherhood of Electrical alternative. But we need to ensure that gov- Workers that the unfunded mandate in this bill International Brotherhood of Teamsters ernment assistance is no longer a way of life. would cost the State of New Jersey And the best way to achieve true independ- Jewish Council for Public Affairs about $233 million. That is the finan- Jewish Labor Committee ence for families, we need to make sure they cial aspect of it. The human aspect is have the skills to retain a job that pays Labor Council for Latin American Advance- what I want to address. ment enough to support their family. Moving families The people that get up and say what Laborers International Union of North back and forth between work and education a wonderful thing has happened under America without a true plan does not help them make the 1996 bill because half of the fami- Latino Coalition for Families their own way in the world. lies have been removed from welfare, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under We must help welfare participants secure we cannot deny those statistics, they Law high wages, benefits, and steady work by in- remain there. But what has happened Leadership Conference on Civil Rights vesting in their futures. And we must be real- Mexican American Legal Defense and Edu- to those families? No one can tell us cation Fund istic. Allowing welfare recipients to enroll in whether indeed they are still working, education programs for a limited time is a nec- National Alliance of Postal and Federal Em- whether they are out of poverty. Most ployees essary step in the struggle to transition from of the figures we have seen is that National Asian Pacific American Legal Con- poverty to self-sufficiency. those that still work, work for min- sortium STATE FLEXIBILITY imum wage. I dare say that people National Association for the Advancement of One of the hallmarks of the 1996 law is the working for minimum wage are not out Colored People flexibility it gives states and localities. The bill of poverty. In fact, we have 38 million National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education before us today offers states even more flexi- people considered in poverty. bility, authorizing them to integrate a variety of National Association of Counties So, with the requirements today of National Association of Human Rights federal welfare and workforce investment pro- 30-hours mandated work activity and Workers grams and make them more efficient. While all of these rave reports about the suc- National Association of Social Workers providing flexibility to allow the states to be in- cess of the program acknowledging National Campaign for Jobs and Income Sup- novative in their welfare programs, the bill also that the States have done most of this port includes significant protections to ensure that good work, why in the world would the National Coalition for Women and Girls in states and localities continue to comply with Republicans now want to come and Education federal civil rights, labor, and environmental make the work requirement tougher? National Council of Churches of Christ in the laws, and that no program will lose any fund- Why increase the 30 hours to 40 hours? USA National Council of Jewish Women ing. It pays no account to the 2 million National Council of LaRaja As Chair of the Financial Services Sub- families that are on welfare today who National Education Association committee on Housing, I want to take a mo- are struggling. National Employment Lawyers Association ment to comment on the state flex proposal Most of those families come to the National Federation of Filipino American and how it relates to the housing and home- welfare office with enormous stresses, Associations

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:42 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.011 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2543 National Gay and Lesbian Task Force In this particular legislation there is when they go out and meet individuals National Low Income Housing Coalition a lot of concern about where we are who have gotten off the rolls of wel- National Partnership for Women & Families going and what we are doing. There are fare. National Urban League concerns about the 70 percent require- I support this bill. This is the begin- National Women’s Law Center National Workrights Institute ment, can we meet that. I believe that ning of the efforts to empower the next NETWORK: A National Catholic Social Jus- we can. We have always met them be- generation of welfare-leavers, and I tice Lobby fore. Can the 40-hour work week with hope this entire Congress can get be- Organization of Chinese Americans 26 hours of work and 14 hours of other hind it and make sure we continue this Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Washington activities be met? I believe that we can opportunity for those who live in our office do that as well. districts around the country. Service Employees International Union One of the areas is child care. I intro- Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Southeast Asia Resource Action Center duced an amendment in the com- Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the Unitarian Universalist Association of Con- mittee, and we were able to get it done, gentleman from New York (Mr. gregations United Auto Workers to add $200 million. Later it was OWENS). United Food and Commercial Workers worked out that we would have $2 bil- (Mr. OWENS asked and was given United States Student Association lion more for child care. About 62 per- permission to revise and extend his re- United Steelworkers of America cent of all children in this country who marks.) Washington Ethical Action Office are not in school yet are in child care. Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I would Welfare Law Center How do we take care of that? If one like to begin by informing the gen- Welfare-to-Work Project, The Legal Aid So- looks at this chart, we get some idea of tleman from Delaware that the un- ciety—Employment Law Center where we are going and why we are funded mandate in this bill would cost Women Employed the State of Delaware about $33 mil- Women’s International League for Peace and adding $2 billion to the $4.8 billion of Freedom, U.S. Section the direct child care here. We are going lion. I think it is important to note Workmen’s Circle, Washington DC Area to find that when we look at all of the these unfunded mandates and the high- I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. discretionary funds, the transfers from er costs. Maybe the Governors in the 4737. the TANF block grant, a lot of which States would like to have the farm sub- Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I am goes to child care now, what the States sidy bill given to the States so that pleased to yield 4 minutes to the gen- do, and then add in Head Start at the they could have more flexibility there tleman from Delaware (Mr. CASTLE), bottom, we get to a point of $18.272 bil- and return the administration of the the chairman of the Subcommittee on lion that goes into child care in the TANF program strictly to the Federal Education Reform. United States today. That is a large Government. Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank number, and it will be a large increase We had our previous speaker from the chairman very much for this oppor- over what was there before; and my New Jersey, the gentlewoman from tunity to speak to this bill. judgment is it is something we are New Jersey, who talked about tough Actually, this legislation did not going to be able to live with. love. When she first spoke, I thought begin in 1996; it began in Washington in So I totally support this legislation. she was talking about tough luck is 1988 with a piece of legislation called I believe it will work. I believe perhaps what we are offering to welfare recipi- the Family Support Act of 1988. In re- some things need to be addressed, and ents. In the case of the farm subsidy ality, for those who were in State legis- I think they will be in the Senate and bill, it is tough luck too if we get up to latures or in the executive branch of perhaps in conference; and one of those $390,000 in taxpayer safety net benefits the States, as some of us were, it start- is the transitional medical assistance, if one is a farmer, and if that $390,000 a ed earlier than that. It started in 1985, a program that provides health cov- year is not enough, then tough luck when the States really began to look at erage for welfare recipients. I would after that. Consider the contrast. welfare reform, with governors like like to see that authorized for 5 years, Also, consider the fraud that per- Bill Clinton, for example, and Tommy because if you go off of welfare you are meates this legislation and the whole Thompson, who came along and got in- going to need that Medicaid assistance. process of discussion. If we really care volved in this. We did not quite complete that task, about children, if we care about getting Decisions were made there. They but we can resolve that at a later time. people out of poverty, then built into were not made in Washington, D.C. It I believe that the State flexibility pro- the legislation there ought to be some was set up in such a way that people visions, frankly, were better before the kind of punishment or incentives re- would have the opportunity to be able changes were made recently; and I lated to reducing the child care waiting to be educated and go to work, and think there should be State flexibility list. There ought to be an incentive for eventually Washington went along if we can possibly have it. reducing the child care waiting list. with it in 1988, and obviously we really Mr. Speaker, I hope that as all of this The waiting list in New York is so encompassed it in 1996. is looked at in terms of jurisdictional large, they will not even tell us what it b 1215 aspects of what Congress is doing is; and yet New York City has one of The arguments were the same then versus what they are doing in the the best day care systems in the world, as they are now. It is sort of like the States, we can give them the flexibility one of the largest day care systems, Star Wars business that was talked to carry out what they have to do. I am but still the waiting list is so long. The about last night. It is a rerun, to a de- somewhat concerned about some of the waiting list in Georgia is 46,800; in Mis- gree; and the same people were saying programs that we have with respect to sissippi, 10,422; Ohio will not even tell it will work and others were saying it dealing with unplanned pregnancies us what theirs is. North Carolina, will not work. Yet, each and every and achieving independence for work- 25,363. If we had some way to reward time, this program has worked. It is ing men and women. Abstinence edu- them for reducing the waiting list, the best social program in terms of im- cation I think is a very important part then children would be better taken proving people’s lives that we have of this effort. Yet the language in H.R. care of. There is no real way to see ever had, probably in the history of the 4737 provides a simple solution to a that that happens in the most basic Congress of the United States, or even very complex problem and I think way, and that is in the area of day this country. Because indeed, if we go probably needs some reworking. care. out and talk to that 50 percent of the Mr. Speaker, these are relatively Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I re- people who in recent years have gone minor concerns. Overall, this is legisla- serve the balance of my time. off of welfare and we get their story as tion which, in my view, each of us, and Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. to their opportunity to become self-suf- I would appeal to those who, perhaps Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the ficient and to become independent, to because of procedural concerns are op- gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. be able to live their own lives and posing it, but that each of us would TIERNEY). stand up for their families, we are come forward in support. My col- Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank going to find out how supportive they leagues will be proud of the fact that the gentleman for yielding me this are of welfare reform. they supported it and proudest yet time.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.012 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2544 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 Mr. Speaker, the Children’s Defense Taxpayers who object to paying for proposing to conduct a demonstration Fund, which so many of us remember able-bodied people to stay on welfare program involving such a program. As as the original individuals who doc- should object to this bill, because what the gentleman knows, local business- tored the slogan ‘‘leave no child be- it is going to lead to in the long run is led workforce investment boards ad- hind’’ before it was so unceremoniously more people who are able-bodied being minister the adult dislocated worker expropriated by our President for an back on public assistance. and youth employment training pro- education bill that he then went on and The flaw in this bill is that it makes grams authorized by the Workforce In- left all the children behind because he mothers choose between pursuing their vestment Act. did not fund it, here we have a welfare higher education and taking care of Is it the gentleman’s intent that such bill where they ask recipients to go to their children. Those mothers will boards would need to be a party to any work, but they do not give them the choose, and should choose, to take care application that is submitted to in- tools to really go to work that gets of their children. They will work clude WIA programs within a dem- them out of poverty. I think that is longer hours, but they will not pursue onstration project? why it is necessary to vote against this a higher education because the child Mr. MCKEON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? bill that the majority party is putting care that would let them pursue that Mr. ISAKSON. I yield to the gen- higher education and take care of their forward and look more seriously at the tleman from California. children is not guaranteed in this bill. alternative being put in by the sub- Mr. MCKEON. Mr. Speaker, the gen- stitute by the Democrats. This bill will breed a new generation tleman is correct. In order to coordi- Essentially, we need to expand the of permanent low-income, public as- nate those activities funded under the educational opportunities for individ- sistance recipients. We should move be- Workforce Investment Act that are ad- uals that are trying to move from wel- yond welfare to work, from poverty to ministered by local boards with one or fare to work to make sure that they independence. Let us reject this bill. more other programs listed in this bill, have the tools to get a job that pays Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I am local boards and the entity that admin- enough to lift their children out of pov- pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gen- isters the other programs would need erty. Vocational training, postsec- tleman from Georgia (Mr. ISAKSON). to submit a joint application to the ap- ondary education, work study, intern- Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank propriate Federal departments. As a re- ships, job training, English as a second the distinguished gentleman for yield- sult, local boards effectively can veto language, GED courses, basic adult lit- ing me this time. I commend him on demonstration projects that the board eracy, these are all tools necessary for his hard work, and I rise in support of believes do not enhance workforce de- people to be able to do work that, in H.R. 4737. velopment and improved service deliv- fact, will pay. Mr. Speaker, I have to make an ob- ery simply by choosing not to join in In my State of Massachusetts, we servation. The well-intended birth of the request. A State cannot seek to have a business community that under- aid to families with dependent children waive provisions within the Workforce stands this. In fact, a joint report and welfare in the 1960s was a tem- Investment Act that impact the local issued by the Massachusetts Taxpayer porary assistance to help Americans in delivery system without approval of Foundation and the United Way of need. It became a generational entitle- the local boards. Massachusetts Bay concluded that at ment that trapped generations of I will submit for the RECORD a letter no time in history have they had a Americans in subsistence. from the National Association of Work- greater need for people with a basic In 1996, Members on both sides of the force Boards supporting the protection education, at least 2 years beyond high aisle voted for a bill that some called language included in the bill. school, in order to fulfill their needs at that time a bill that would increase NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF for employees to be productive and to the welfare rolls, children in hunger WORKFORCE BOARDS, have an economy that really moves and in poverty. And today, 5 million Washington, DC, May 9, 2002. forward. Their recommendation, as em- American families that were on welfare Hon. HOWARD ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, ployers generally perceived as to be are off and their self-esteem is high. House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office They are now the taxpayers that the Building, Washington, DC. more conservative than others, was DEAR REPRESENTATIVE MCKEON: We are that we need a system that allows peo- gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. AN- writing on behalf of the Board of Directors of ple to have those educational tools so DREWS) referred to, who would have an- the National Association of Workforce that they can hire them now. It is not swered his question with a resounding Boards (NAWB) to express our support for enough to put them on a temporary no. They would have said yes, we do be- your efforts to establish increased linkages education program stretched out over 5 lieve the rest of ours who are entrapped between the Workforce Investment and TANF systems. We appreciate your leader- years so that some day down the road in poverty should be uplifted like we have been as well. ship on this and other issues that will ensure they might get a certificate. Our indus- the continuation of a business-led system for tries in business need them to get it I find it unfortunate that Members of workforce development. NAWB’s Board sup- sooner to put them to the level where this House would condemn a success ports the inclusion of waivers for WIA and they can be productive and effective and try and make the fact that it is not other related programs in the TANF reau- for those companies now. incrementally as good as they would thorization bill, provided these waivers meet So we have both the business commu- like it to be the reason why we ought a set of critical principles. nity and others who are interested in to go back to generational entrapment. First, the system of waivers needs to clear- One last thing. We gave waivers to ly and carefully balance the interests of the welfare and well-being of these in- local communities, where services are pro- dividuals, indicating that we have to States and Governors like Tommy vided and accountability can best be brought give them the kind of education that Thompson and Engler and others, and to bear, with state and federal interests. In really matters, have that educational they created programs that work. short, we strongly support your insistence opportunity be 24 months, lift people There have been some questions about that any waivers must be subject to a joint from poverty, and truly leave no child waivers, but let me tell my colleagues agreement between the state and the local behind. Just do not talk about it; do it. this. The creativity at the local level workforce board where the waiver would in Georgia and in California and in Ha- apply. By requiring both state local board Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I re- approval of a proposed waiver you can ensure serve the balance of my time. waii and Ohio has made the lives of that both sides will negotiate in good faith, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. poor Americans richer and has made with the local workforce board representing Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the welfare-to-work a reality. To that end the interests of businesses, education and gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. AN- I would like to engage the gentleman service providers. DREWS), a member of the committee. from California (Mr. MCKEON) in a col- Second, we believe that a sound system of (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given loquy to make sure the clarifications waivers must protect the local strategic permission to revise and extend his re- are clear on the authority at the local planning and governance structure that was set up through painstaking negotiations dur- marks.) level. ing passage of the Workforce Investment Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Speaker, this bill stipulates that Act. That is to say that any system of waiv- the gentleman from California for the entity that administers a qualified ers should reference or incorporate the provi- yielding me this time. program must join in any application sions in Section 189(i)(4)(i). In particular we

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.036 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2545 are concerned that the waiver structure pro- reduce poverty while reducing welfare to Enron? I am for accountability, but tect the authority vested in local boards, as rolls. After 5 years, welfare cash assist- for everyone. But the Republican wel- well as the local allocation of funding for the ance caseloads have decreased by near- fare bill is just mean. It makes it hard- workforce investment system. Finally, the waiver system needs to be as ly 50 percent; but overall, poverty has er for most people in need to achieve broad as politically possible. Congress needs declined by less than 2 percent. Do we self-sufficiency, something they want to ensure that the waivers include all major stand for a welfare system that gives even more than we want from them. federal legislation affecting education, work- people a chance to pursue education I say vote for the Democratic sub- force and social service programs as it pro- and training without additional make- stitute. Vote no on the Republican bill. motes a workforce system that is focused on work mandates? Work is at the center Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield the needs of both employers and jobseekers. of the debate, but the majority bill will 11⁄2 minutes to the gentleman from We believe that the so called ‘‘super waiv- not help people obtain and keep jobs Oklahoma (Mr. SULLIVAN), our newest ers’’ can succeed if they work to create a member. level playing field between state and local with decent wages. interests as communities grapple with how The bill imposes new requirements Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, I stand best to balance their economic development, and decreases State flexibility. The before you to strongly encourage my education and life-long learning strategies. majority’s bill is not what the States colleagues to support this bill. If, on the other hand, waivers are merely a support; 41 of 47 States indicate that Six years ago the Members of this way to shuffle which bureaucracy operates the administration’s proposal, the body united to pass a bill that revolu- which portion of the workforce development blueprint for this bill, would cause tionized the lives of welfare recipients. ‘‘system’’ they will lead to disillusionment them to make fundamental changes. In the 6 years since the passing of that among our business community about the The NGA survey found that most legislation America has witnessed a ability of public programs to respond to the huge decline in welfare dependence. We new economy. Because our members serve on States would not be able to meet the local workforce boards, they know first hand new requirements, so we do not stand must build upon those successes and how difficult it can be to drive quality and with the States. create new ways for people to become flexibility in the public system. At the same Mr. Speaker, this bill encourages independent and move from welfare to time, they realize that a system of voluntary work-fare programs that fail to in- jobs. waivers offers a reasonable option to the crease earnings and fail to increase em- This bill is about three things: Com- gridlock that has too often prevented pro- ployment. passion, work and marriage. Compas- gram integration. sion means encouraging work, which In addition to the inclusion of WIA in the b 1230 leads to dignity, self-respect and self- waiver authority of the TANF reauthoriza- Recipients want real jobs not tion legislation, we encourage you to retain sufficiency. Compassion also means fo- the positive provision of the addition of workfare. So it is clear that the bill cusing on marriage as a key part of the TANF as a mandatory partner in the WIA does not stand with low income fami- battle against poverty. Compassion in system that was added to H.R. 4092 during lies. So it does not seem that the ma- the context of welfare reform means Education and Workforce Committee consid- jority bill has been crafted with any that in the past 6 years over 3 million eration. We would like to take this oppor- key group of people in mind that im- children have been lifted out of the tunity to support this provision, and urge plement the law or are affected by it. depth of poverty. Now that is compas- you to retain it as TANF reform legislation The bill shows it is crafted by those sion. It also means independence. By is considered by the full House in the coming who are posturing to look tougher on weeks. focusing on work we not only help re- Again, we appreciate your continued ef- the poor. duce caseloads but build people up to forts on behalf of the workforce investment If States are forced to implement the be productive members of our society. system, and particularly in support of local majority bill that will be workfare pro- This bill directs funding from pro- workforce investment boards. We would ap- grams. Workfare is so overwhelmingly grams that encourage healthy stable preciate the opportunity to review any pro- bad. It overshadows nearly everything marriages. These programs include pre- posed language to see that it meets the needs else in the bill. Workfare meets the marital education and counseling as of local business-led boards and would be need for a 25 percent increase in child well as research so we find more and happy to meet with you or otherwise com- care, at the very least. This bill before ment as you move forward on this issue. more ways to make shaky marriages Sincerely, us does not even increase child care to solid again for the sake of both the par- KAY GEORGE HOCH, meet the current need, let alone a one- ents and the children. It also promotes Chairman. quarter increase. Workfare undermines responsible fatherhood, helping men in ROBERT KNIGHT, efforts to place people in good jobs. It particular be responsible, respectable President. undermines efforts to increase edu- models for children. Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank cation and job skills. Vote against this The House must finish its work it the gentleman for the clarification, bill. started 6 years ago. We must ensure and I thank the chairman for his dili- Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. that success of welfare reform by pass- gent work. I, for one, will vote in favor Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the ing this bill. We must have an oppor- of this bill to empower the American gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. tunity to help people work and give people. SCHAKOWSKY). them self-dignity in the process. I be- Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, lieve this legislation will bring genuine Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the something is seriously wrong here. improvement in the lives of Americans gentleman from Ohio (Mr. KUCINICH), a Last week this House authorized a de- who are dependent on welfare. I urge member of the committee. fense bill that will cost $400 billion, a my colleagues to support this measure. Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I just record increase of $48 billion, this de- Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. wanted my good friend from Georgia to spite the fact that the Inspector Gen- Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the know that the unfunded mandate in eral of the Department of Defense has gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. FORD), this bill would cost the State of Geor- testified publicly that the Department a member of the committee. gia about $266 million, and Georgia has cannot pass an audit and cannot track Mr. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the 16,000 children on the child care wait- $1.2 trillion in transactions. gentleman for yielding me time. ing list. The increase in the defense budget Mr. Speaker, what we are trying to The question before us is, Do we alone is three times greater than the do here is a good thing, and we are all stand for the dignity of the poor, or do cost of the welfare program, the major trying to build on the progress we in we believe in tough treatment for the program supposedly aimed at lifting the Congress and certainly President poor? Does Congress want to help poor poor women and children out of pov- Clinton made in reforming welfare. and low-income families, or does Con- erty, aimed at fostering responsibility. I think one of the things we believe gress want to push them further into We are demanding that poor women get the substitute will do is an improve- poverty? a job, any job, even as we lose track of ment on what the gentleman from Ohio Today we are considering the major- more than a trillion dollars? Bail out (Mr. BOEHNER) and some of my friends ity’s bill, which would push people fur- the airlines, give huge subsidies to on the other side are attempting to do, ther into poverty. This bill proposes to farmers, offer a $254 million tax rebate is to allow for people to go to work and

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:46 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.007 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2546 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 at the same time pursue some kind of Critics ask if it is not broken, why gentlewoman from California (Mrs. job training. Many of us know we will fix it. Well, even the best race cars go Davis). vote on some kind of fast track or an- for tune-ups, and that is what we are (Mrs. DAVIS of California asked and ticipate voting on it soon, and one of doing with this bill. This bill requires was given permission to revise and ex- the things we are trying to do is ensure States to put 70 percent of their wel- tend her remarks.) there is a reasonable component to fare caseloads to work 40 hours a week, Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speak- help people get additional training for 16 of which can be used for education er, I rise in support today of this im- those who may experience dislocations. and training. This bill encourages, not portant Democratic substitute. The same is true here, and that is why discourages work. It reflects the Presi- Mr. Speaker, as both a former social we think the substitute is better. dent’s plan to encourage healthy, sta- worker and a former legislator in the Two, this is an enormous unfunded ble marriages. California State Assembly, I under- mandate, as many of us know, and our Today we begin the next step in wel- stand firsthand the importance and the effort on this side is to try to alleviate fare reform based on the President’s significance of State flexibility in pro- some of that pressure on the States. I priorities. This legislation will help gram implementation. In particular, I have been informed the State of Okla- even more low income parents know would like to emphasize the impor- homa, this would cost them $78 mil- the dignity that comes with a pay- tance of increasing access to edu- lion. My home State of Tennessee, this check instead of a welfare check. By cational and training opportunities for will cost us an additional $100 million passing this bill we can help even more welfare recipients. in funding when my State is facing a low income Americans improve their We have heard a lot today about the $400 million budget shortfall. This is lives for themselves and their children, need for State flexibility, and I can tell not the way to go. and that is what welfare reform is all you from my personal experience serv- One of the things in which we hope about. ing in the State legislature that when on this side is that people can find Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. the 1996 welfare reform law went into ways to create that long-term suffi- Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the effect, that allowing State and local- ciency. It is my hope that, although I gentlewoman from California (Ms. ities the room to tailor programs in do not have enough time to say it, that WOOLSEY), a leader on this issue in our their regions and communities is abso- indeed my friends will support this sub- committee and in the House and the lutely vital to the overall success of stitute and urge my friend the gen- Nation. the program. (Ms. WOOLSEY asked and was given tleman from Ohio (Mr. BOEHNER) to go Under the TANF structure that was permission to revise and extend her re- back and negotiate a bill that makes implemented in 1996, California was marks.) senses for all people, not just his party permitted creativity in program design Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I would in their reelection efforts. and implementation to best meet the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- like to inform the last speaker that the needs of our welfare recipients. The tleman from Ohio (Mr. BOEHNER) has unfunded mandate in this bill would State legislature took advantage of 21⁄2 minutes remaining. The gentleman cost the State of Texas about $688 mil- this flexibility by creating a structure from California (Mr. GEORGE MILLER) lion and Texas has 37,000 children on that rewarded work, included more op- has 4 minutes remaining. their child care waiting list. portunities for education and allowed Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield This Republican bill does not reform counties to adapt the program to local 11⁄2 minutes to the gentleman from welfare. It deforms welfare. H.R. 4737 economic needs and realities. Texas (Mr. SAM JOHNSON), the chair- pushes more low income parents into man of the Subcommittee on Em- low paying workfare jobs while making Please, a one-size-fits-all agenda does ployer-Employee Relations of the Com- it impossible for them to get the edu- not fit for all of Californians or all mittee on Education and the Work- cation they need to actually prepare Michiganites or Pennsylvanians. We force. themselves for jobs that pay a liveable need more flexibility. (Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas asked wage, jobs that they can support their Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. and was given permission to revise and families on. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the extend his remarks.) H.R. 4737 doubles the number of hours gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. that mothers and children under the BONIOR), the former Whip of the Demo- Speaker, since 1996 nearly 9 million age of 6 will have to work each week cratic party. people have gone from collecting wel- and, even worse, this bill does not ade- Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I read a fare checks to paychecks thanks to Re- quately fund child care for the children story of a woman in Pontiac, Michigan publicans. One shining example of the of all the new working parents that are with a 7-year-old son and through the success of welfare is a constituent of going to have to go into the working Michigan Family Independent Agency mine I will call Janice. Janice is a sin- world. she was able to enroll in a 6-month in- gle mother of a 5-year-old. Last spring Mr. Speaker, I was a welfare mother formation training program in infor- she lost her job in the soft economy. 35 years ago. My children were 1, 3 and mation technology at her local com- Thanks to welfare reform and the good 5 years old. It was bad enough that munity college. After completing her people at the Texas Workfare Center in their father abandoned us, but the training, she got a full-time job for a McKinney, Janice found a job and child worst thing about the whole situation local construction company at $11 an care, becoming self-sufficient with full was trying to get adequate child care. hour. Now she is able to provide for her benefits and retirement after just 6 We had 13 different child care situa- son and for her family. months. tions the first 12 months that I went to She would not have been able to do Mr. Speaker, she illustrates what work. That was the hell year of our this under this bill. Michigan has a many of us have known all along, the lives, and I am going to tell you, it is program. It is called 10–10–10, 10 hours 1996 Republican welfare reforms have a miracle that my children are so won- of work, 10 hours of class time, 10 hours worked. Child poverty has fallen sharp- derful. But it was not until our child of study per week. It is a good pro- ly. Nearly 3 million children are no care situation settled down, and my gram. This bill basically says no to longer welfare kids, and that is because mother came to our town to take care that program. It eliminates it. more parents are working. Employ- of them that my job grew. Within a This bill is a step backwards because ment by mothers most likely to go on year of having stable child care, I be- it promotes workfare, make-work jobs welfare has risen by 40 percent. Welfare came an executive at the company that that do not teach skills, and that have caseloads have fallen by 9 million. Nine I was working for. no workplace protections. It is a step million people. Is that not great news? I am telling you, child care is the es- backwards because it does not provide Nearly 50 percent of Texas welfare re- sential ingredient, along with edu- adequate funds to help families with cipients have left welfare because of cation, for getting moms off welfare child care costs. It is a step backwards the successful model created by Con- and out of poverty. because it forces States to abandon gress and enacted by then-Governor Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. successful programs like 10–10–10 in George Bush. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the Michigan, and it is a step backwards

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 01:46 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.040 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2547 because it turns this assistance pro- In a recent speech in my home State Chlamydia, for example, is a major gram back into a handout and not a leg of Ohio, President Bush captured what cause of infertility in young women. It up. this issue is all about: dignity. It is is asymptomatic in about 85 percent of I urge my colleagues to vote against about helping welfare recipients the affected women but can still cause this bill. achieve independence, to become self- significant problems without the pres- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- reliant, and to be able to provide for ence of noticeable symptoms. For ex- tleman from California (Mr. GEORGE their own families. ample, in the population of young peo- MILLER) has 1 minute remaining. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance ple entering the armed services, U.S. Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. of my time. Army recruits, for example, we discov- Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. ered that 9 percent of the female popu- as I may consume. SIMPSON). Pursuant to the rule, the lation entering the U.S. Army, 9 per- Mr. Speaker, as we close this part of gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. TAU- cent of these young women were af- the debate, I simply want to say that it ZIN) and the gentleman from Michigan fected with chlamydia and did not even is rather interesting that the party (Mr. DINGELL) each will control 15 min- know about it, and this is a sexually who took over the Congress on the the- utes. transmitted disease that leads very ory of a Contract on America, of no un- The Chair recognizes the gentleman often to infertility in these young funded mandates is about to foist onto from Louisiana (Mr. TAUZIN). women, who were shocked to discover the States of this Nation billions of Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield that they had this disease, apparently dollars of additional costs. myself such time as I may consume. having been taught all along that if Their answer is flexibility. Yes, those I rise today in strong support of the they protected themselves in so-called States can choose to cut job training. Personal Responsibility, Work and safe sex that they would be safe, only Those States can choose to cut edu- Family Promotion Act of 2002. to discover to their great dismay that cational benefits. Those States can Mr. Speaker, this bill extends fund- they were now infected with an incur- choose to cut child care. They can ing for abstinence-only education and able disease that could possibly ruin choose to cut the quality of the child reauthorizes transitional medical as- their chance of ever having a child. care. They can choose to cut the TANF sistance, two items of particular inter- grant to these families. That is not Here is another number that shocked est to the Committee on Energy and us. Over 50 percent of the sexually-ac- flexibility. That is a failure to meet Commerce. the task at hand. tive young women in this country be- The 1996 welfare act included a per- tween the ages of 18 and 22, over 50 per- b 1245 manent appropriation of $50 million cent of sexually-active young women in over 5 years for abstinence-only edu- While we increase the requirement of this category are infected with HPV. cation under title V of the Social Secu- people that need to go to work, and I HPV, the human papillomavirus, is a rity Act. With tight State budgets and think we should, the fact of the matter precursor of cervical cancer. Fifty per- a requirement that States have to is we do not provide the States the cent of our young women are affected match every $4 Federal with $3 of their means to support those individuals by it, and here is the awful truth: there own, it is noteworthy that nearly all while they go to work and get off of is no evidence that condoms reduce the the States of our Nation have partici- welfare. sexual transmission of this infection. This is an unfunded mandate, it is pated in this block grant program. And so all the work we do in this coun- The participation rates suggest high that simple, because this bill, the Re- try of teaching safe sex and of being State interest in using abstinence-only publican bill before us, fails to meet careful if a child does become sexually education as one way to address teen the demands that are going to be active has never conveyed the notion pregnancy and even more importantly, placed upon the States to provide the to these young women that if they in some cases, sexually transmitted child care services. took that course they could be sub- diseases. The notion that somehow everybody jecting themselves to a disease that is Last month, my friend and colleague, who left welfare is now out of poverty a precursor to cervical cancer, and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. BILI- and that children are out of poverty, they did not even know, perhaps, that RAKIS), the chairman of the Sub- the average person leaving welfare left condoms are not a protection against committee on Health, held a hearing and earned $12,000 a year. $12,000 a year, this disease. Mr. Speaker. That does not sound like on abstinence-only education; and at that hearing we learned some pretty These statistics are terrifying. They we lifted them out of poverty. show that the safer-sex model does not Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield interesting things. We learned that problems stemming solve the problem; and despite more myself the balance of our time. than 20 years of a variety of edu- The success of the 1996 welfare re- from increased sexual activity among teens has not abated. Even though teen cational programs designed to promote form law is beyond dispute. Even the condom and contraceptive use, young New York Times has called it, ‘‘An ob- birthrates have declined over the past decade, we still have among the high- ladies are catching these incurable vious success.’’ viral diseases that can ruin their lives The debate today has been how to est teen birthrates of any industri- and kill them, render them infertile build on that success. We believe that alized nation in the world. Sexually and, in effect, take away their chance further flexibility to the States will, in transmitted diseases have grown dra- to ever be a mother. fact, be helpful to them to package matically. Every day in America 10,000 programs to meet the needs of each of young people contract a sexually trans- I urge my colleagues to vote in favor those individual families. mitted disease; 2,400 become pregnant; of this bill, which includes a 5-year ex- The discussion we have heard from and 55 contract HIV. tension of the abstinence-only edu- the other side about an unfunded man- In the 1960s really only two sexually cation. This bill maintains the status date is almost laughable. Today, we transmitted diseases were of real con- quo. It extends the funding level of $50 have less than half the welfare caseload cern. Now, our young people, senior million each year for the years 2003 to we had in 1996. Yet the amount of population as well, face a population of 2007. money being spent by the Federal Gov- sexually transmitted diseases that now New research is beginning to suggest ernment for welfare block granting to total 25; and these diseases primarily that abstinence-only education can ef- the States is the same amount of infecting the young people happen to fectively address the sexually trans- money; and in the bill that we are pro- be viral diseases such as human mitted disease prevalence among posing building on that success, this papillomavirus, HPV virus, herpes and young people and the proportion of ba- bill calls for $2 billion of additional aid chlamydia. These viral diseases are in- bies occurring to unmarried mothers, to go into child care. curable. So while our generation was the children that end up being the chil- We know that child care is, in fact, a concerned with basically two venereal dren of poverty in America all too key component to help make this sys- diseases, young kids today face 25, often. tem work and moving people from wel- some of which are totally incurable, We must continue this effort begun fare to work. only managed. in 1996 and support abstinence-only

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.042 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2548 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 education programs that empower stu- care benefits to welfare folks entering ing families. It’s their latest gimmick to keep dents to choose abstinence for them- the workforce. So this partial adjust- our workforce’s pay scales down. selves for receiving all the relevant ment lasts only for 2 years. Essentially this bill assures that individuals facts and information because absti- Let me also say that we are all busy transitioning off welfare will be locked into the nence in so many ways is a better seeing if we can find a better offset; lowest paying jobs, 40 hours a week, because choice for them. and if we can, in the process of negoti- not only are Republicans not creating high In 1996, the welfare reform law also ating this bill with the Senate, we will paying jobs—in fact since George Bush be- included a critical work support for certainly look for one, but in the came President we have lost 2 million more former welfare recipients, something meantime this is the offset that is good jobs across our Nation—but this bill de- called ‘‘transitional medical assist- available. It is a partial one, only lasts nies necessary education and training to help ance.’’ Former welfare recipients typi- 2 years; and it makes this incredibly workers gain some skills to negotiate troubled cally enter the low-wage jobs that are important program available. employment waters. available in this country, and those Let me remind my colleagues, there Incredibly in this high tech age, this Repub- generally do not offer private health has been a lot of requests for us to do lican bill restricts work-related training to no insurance coverage. They offer cov- a larger than 1-year extension. If a 1- more than 3 consecutive months over a 24- erage but only at very expensive pre- year extension costs 355 and we did not month period. Punish them, indeed. miums. Traditional medical assistance have the money for it except through To vividly make my point: in the past 2 dec- extends up to 1 year of Medicaid cov- this offset, imagine trying to extend it ades the poverty rate among working families erage to those individuals and their for longer than that at this time. Do has shot up 50 percent. The Bush plan families. we intend to extend it again next year? doesn’t reverse it but makes it worse. Essen- There is strong bipartisan support for I can tell my colleagues all on the floor tially people in our country are working for less this assistance. We provided it in 1996. that this program works. By extending because our good jobs—in textiles, steel, We extended it in 2000 and 2001, and medical health coverage under Med- automotive parts, electronics, and high tech— this bill would extend it again this icaid to folks leaving welfare and going are being exported to China, Mexico and Latin year for another year. If we do not ex- into work, we have encouraged more America. We are seeing a race to the bottom tend it, it is set to expire on September and more people out of welfare and into of the wage scale. Now we have a whole new 30, 2002. This 1-year authorization, how- the dignity and self-worth of a paying class of workers who are being relegated to fill ever, has a 5-year cost of $355 million. job and the independence that comes these low wage slots, with no hope for a living And here is the awful truth: because with it; and we will work to extend this wage. 16 tons and what have you got. Over this money was not included in the program as long as it is necessary to 8 million children in the United States live in budget resolution, we have had to find make sure that we continue the poor families that work. Half of all parents in a way to pay for it. progress we have seen in this vital ef- working poor families lack health insurance. As my colleagues know, under our fort in America. Rather than produce a bill that links edu- pay-go rule, if something is not funded So we have to recognize the careful cation and training to create some hope of a specifically in the budget resolution, balance we have achieved with this off- ladder of economic opportunity to true self suf- we have to find some other way of pay- set and that 1-year reauthorization; ficiency, this bill subjugates them to a shadow ing for it. Well, we have had to find and again, I want to commit we will re- economy where even minimum wages are not that money, and so this bill includes an visit the issue next year, and, as we guaranteed. Under the Republican bill, 39 offset. We recognize the Medicaid budg- have in the past, continue our efforts states could not fulfill the bill’s work require- et difficulties that many States are ex- to extend this program as long as we ment without violating the current minimum periencing, and we also understand know it is working and as long as we wage rate for a 2-person family. that important functions are funded know it is valuable. Vote for the Democratic substitute as a life with Medicaid administrative costs; I urge my colleagues to join me in preserver in most difficult economic waters. and for that reason, the offset included full support of this legislation. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I in this bill is merely a partial adjust- Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of yield myself 2 minutes. ment that lasts only 2 years to pay for our time. The President and House Repub- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without this 1-year extension of this critical licans’ message on welfare reform has objection, the gentleman from Ohio program of health coverage, particu- been loud and clear. States need great- (Mr. BROWN) will control the time for larly for women in welfare entering the er flexibility, but when it comes to ab- the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. DIN- workforce. stinence education, they are unwilling Before 1996, a common cost of admin- GELL). to afford that same flexibility. If There was no objection. istering the food stamp program, Medi- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The States want the Federal match, they care and welfare were often charged to Chair recognizes the gentleman from must do the Federal Government’s bid- the AFDC program, the predecessor of ding and use an abstinence-only cur- Ohio (Mr. BROWN). our TANF program. These common Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I riculum. In other words, Mr. Speaker, costs have been included in the cal- yield such time as she may consume to schools cannot use these dollars to culation of the States’ TANF fund. So the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. KAP- teach kids about AIDS, about STDs, or in effect, we are double-paying for ad- TUR). about birth control. ministrative costs of the States in (Ms. KAPTUR asked and was given The substitute bill we are offering these programs. The offset we are talk- permission to revise and extend her re- today does not affect the ability of ing about reduces this double payment, marks.) States to use these grants for absti- this Federal reimbursement for admin- Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in nence-only education if they choose to, istrative costs, to reflect the portion of opposition to H.R. 4737, the Republican if that is the direction they want to these costs that are indeed already in- punishment bill that makes people take. Our bill gives State and local sys- cluded in the TANF block grant the work 40 hours without a minimum- tems the flexibility, a word that Re- States receive. wage guarantee. publicans use on this floor regularly, We fully corrected this double reim- Mr. Speaker, a half century ago, the old the flexibility to provide additional in- bursement for food stamps in 1998, but miner’s song captured the plight of the work- formation to students that can help we did not correct it for the Medicaid ing underclass—‘‘16 tons and what do you protect them against STDs and teen program. In effect, the States are still get, another day older and deeper in debt.’’ pregnancy. getting double the administrative cost Today, author Barbara Eisenreich in her I would urge my colleagues to re- reimbursements for the Medicaid pro- contemporary book, Nickel and Dimed—on member that more than 80 percent of gram with Federal dollars, and we take Not Getting by in America, reports 1⁄3 of our parents support comprehensive sex some of that back. We take half of it workforce toils for $8 an hour or less. Indeed, education. Why is the Federal Govern- back 1 year, three-quarters of it back the fastest growing segment of our job market ment not listening? the next year for this 2-year take-back is part time jobs with no benefits. Regarding the transitional Medicaid in order to pay for this extraordinarily Today, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4737, the program, we support the extension of important 1-year extension of health Republican’s punishment bill for needy, work- transitional medical assistance which

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.047 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2549 helps working families keep health in- Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I This funding, a reauthorization of surance as they transition from welfare yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman the 1996 program, I think deserves to be to work. We should make this common- from California (Mrs. CAPPS), a reg- continued. Teen pregnancy is a prob- sense program permanent, consistent istered nurse and a very active advo- lem that affects the entire country, not with the welfare bill. cate for health care. just the young women who are forced Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I thank b 1300 to make the difficult decisions at an the gentleman for yielding me this early age. In the spirit of bipartisanship, we time, and I rise in opposition to this The number of teen pregnancies and agreed to a 1-year extension in com- bill and in support of the substitute. sexually transmitted diseases con- mittee to ensure that this provision In the last 6 years, welfare reform tinues to increase despite the number even made it into the TANF bill. has produced some real successes, and of family planning style sex education I commend the chairman, the gen- now we have the opportunity to build programs that have been offered. It is tleman from Louisiana (Mr. TAUZIN), upon these achievements. Unfortu- time to give another approach a chance who supported this measure despite the nately, the underlying bill does not do to succeed. fact that House Republican leadership this, but the substitute does. Abstinence-only education is a via- in the House Committee on the Budget For example, we now know that for ble, traditional program that only first included no money for Medicaid, and I single mothers with young children to received funding in 1996. There are appreciate the chairman’s comments go to work, we must ensure that qual- more than 20 sources of funding for sex today that he would continue year ity and affordable child care is avail- education programs. Abstinence-only after year to authorize this. However, able. And we should also ensure that has only two. Let us give this program Republican leadership has decided to legal immigrants are afforded the same a chance to prove its effectiveness. pay for transitional medical assistance safety net as other working families. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I by cutting other parts of Medicaid. The substitute includes these impor- yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman The bill cuts payments to State Med- tant provisions but the bill does not. from California (Ms. LEE). icaid programs. Those dollars are crit- Mr. Speaker, the part of the bill I Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ical. They fund activities like nursing wish to address is the funding for absti- gentleman for yielding me this time, home outreach and oversight and anti- nence-only education. I directed a teen and I rise today in the strongest oppo- fraud activities. States cannot afford parent and pregnancy program as part sition to this irresponsible Republican to lose them. Republican leadership of our local high school district in welfare reform legislation which will found more than $1.5 trillion in the Santa Barbara, California, and for sev- devastate poor families, especially treasury to give tax cuts to the richest eral years worked daily with teenagers women and children. people in this country, but they cannot struggling with these very issues. We talk about family values a lot in come up with $355 million to help wel- These teen parents were the first to this place, so when we have a chance to fare families reenter and stay in the urge abstinence to their peers, to their practice what we preach, we go in just workplace. Where, Mr. Speaker, are our younger brothers and sisters, even the opposite direction. This bill limits priorities? though they did not use that word. But access to education, does not ade- Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 their message was all about knowledge, quately increase child care for millions minute to the gentleman from Michi- comprehensive sex education. They did of needy families, and does not make gan (Mr. UPTON). not use that term either, but they did poverty reduction a real goal of welfare (Mr. UPTON asked and was given know the power it gives when informa- reform. permission to revise and extend his re- tion is not based on fear or incomplete H.R. 4737 would double the amount of marks.) and half-truths. time required for a parent on welfare Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in Young people are quick to pick up on with children under the age of 6 to strong support of this legislation. As a these half-truths and shoddy argu- work from 20 hours to 40 hours a week, member of both the House Committee ments, and then the trust is gone. This and yet we do not sufficiently increase on Energy and Commerce and the Com- bill sets aside $50 million for unproven child care funding to care for these mittee on Education and the Work- abstinence-only programs that do not children. What will happen to our chil- force, two of the three House commit- even ensure that the information they dren? We will have more latchkey kids tees with jurisdiction over welfare re- contain is truthful or medically accu- at younger and younger ages because form, I have worked very closely with rate. And, unfortunately, some of these their parents are working without the my colleagues and chairmen to further abstinence-only programs use terror child care they need. strengthen this legislation so that so tactics to try to keep teens from hav- We know that these children are many more families can know the ben- ing sex, they exaggerate the failure more at risk for future difficulties; efits of personal responsibility, work, rates of condoms, and some federally crime, drugs and teen pregnancy. This and stronger family units. funded programs denigrate women, goes totally counter to family values I would like to focus on two compo- suggesting that they are not as smart preached by so many. Making welfare nents of this legislation today. The or as capable as men. recipients spend even more time away first one is the Transitional Medical The substitute would allow States from home and their children makes it Assistance. One of the most important the flexibility to support proven absti- totally anti-family. It just does not items in the welfare reform bill that we nence-based programs that are medi- make any sense. passed in the Congress back in 1996 was cally accurate. These comprehensive Real family values entails allowing removing the incentive that folks had programs will help to reduce teen preg- parents on welfare to go to school to which otherwise kept them on welfare nancy and will give our young people get better jobs and to take care of their rather than trying to seek and gain real tools for success. So I urge my col- families. Unfortunately, or fortu- employment. Transitional Medical As- leagues to learn from our teenage par- nately, I have some experience in this sistance provided that bridge and the ents and support the substitute. area. I can tell my colleagues from per- safety net to encourage people to look Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am sonal experience that education does for work rather than stay on welfare. pleased to yield 1⁄2 minute to the gen- make a difference for those women on When we passed reform in 1996, we tleman from Rockwall, Texas (Mr. welfare. emphasized work and personal respon- HALL), our great friend. We must also educate young men and sibility. Important in this legislation is (Mr. HALL of Texas asked and was women to prevent unwanted preg- an abstinence program. Sexually trans- given permission to revise and extend nancies, not to mention HIV and AIDS, mitted diseases have reached epidemic his remarks.) and yet the GOP welfare bill continues proportions in our country. In the Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I the dangerous abstinence-only until 1960s, 1 in 47 sexually active teens were am pleased that this legislation con- marriage program, which will prohibit infected with a sexually transmitted tains a provision that extends funding any mention of contraception, even in disease. Today, it is 1 in 4. Please pass for abstinence-only education. It is a the context of preventing HIV and this legislation. provision that I originally cosponsored. AIDS.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 00:43 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.049 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2550 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 For all these reasons and many, children will be cared for. Without adequate State of Texas we have some 37,000 who many more we must defeat H.R. 4737. childcare, welfare recipients who find them- are on the waiting list for child care. We cannot continue to put our children selves in situations like Marcia’s will not be With respect to the issue of absti- at risk. This will be the beginning of able to meet the increased work requirements nence, no one opposes it, but we like to the end for any hope for a successful mandated on them by H.R. 4737. have the truth. Teenagers want to future. Vote ‘‘no’’ on H.R. 4737. If my colleagues on both sides of the aisle know the whole truth and nothing but Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I truly want self sufficiency I urge them to adopt the truth. This bill is limiting, and my yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman the Democratic substitute. colleagues know that this is wrong. from Missouri (Ms. MCCARTHY), a mem- Mr. Speaker, stricter work requirements with In addition, we realize if young moth- ber of the Committee on Energy and fewer resources is a losing equation for the ers are to transition from work to em- Commerce. welfare mothers of Kansas City and for the ployment that provides a career, they (Ms. MCCARTHY of Missouri asked children of our Nation. need child care. We realize that in this and was given permission to revise and Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am bill there is no real child care. extend her remarks.) pleased to yield 1 minute to the gen- In my County of Harris, where it is Ms. MCCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. tleman from Florida (Mr. BILIRAKIS), an enormously diverse community Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. the chairman of the Subcommittee on with legal immigrants, this is a burden 4737, the bill before us today, and in Health of the Committee on Energy upon our hospital system to discrimi- support of the Democratic alternative. and Commerce. nate against legal immigrants, tax- In a time when the States are al- (Mr. BILIRAKIS asked and was given paying, hardworking individuals. The ready facing serious budget cuts, this permission to revise and extend his re- bill that we have before us discrimi- bill exacerbates their budget woes. marks.) nates against legal immigrants. Missouri, my State, would have to Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I will And let me also mention that this is come up with over $316 million to im- limit myself here. The abstinence-only a midnight hour bill. This is a bill that plement the mandates in this bill, but education funds were first included as was brought to the floor without any- it is already facing a $536 million budg- part of the 1996 welfare reform law, and one understanding what is in it. That is et deficit. The bill before us inad- something that I do not think has been why I support the substitute offered by equately funds many of the programs said to date is that 49 of the 50 States the Democrats. I presented amendments that would and block grant monies States need in have elected to participate in this pro- help to train teenage parents and give order to carry out welfare reform and gram. them parenting skills and to provide improve upon it. During our hearing, we heard of a them with training on financial serv- I supported the original welfare re- program taking place in Miami-Dade ices or how to deal with finances. That form bill 5 years ago. I worked hard on County, Florida, where the lady told us was not ruled in order. I asked to have the issue of ending unfunded Federal that they have only a 1.1 percent teen an inflation factor in increasing the mandates in this House and was proud pregnancy rate. A 1.1 percent teen amount of money to our welfare recipi- when we adopted it into law, and I am pregnancy rate. By continuing this ents if the economy went bad. Not al- very chagrined and worried about what funding for another 5 years, we can en- lowed. I asked to increase child care we are attempting to accomplish in courage the development of more suc- dollars. Not allowed. I asked to deter- this bill today. cessful programs. It is really, really mine whether this bill diminishes child The Democratic substitute provides critically important, as has already abuse or helps people get off welfare. both inflationary increases in our been pointed out. Not allowed. block grants and increases child care I would like to accent that absti- This is a bad bill. We need to support funding by $11 billion over 5 years. nence-only programs do not, do not the Democratic substitute. It is a We must, if we are going to expect prohibit educators from discussing the shame we would rush to do this when our welfare recipients to stay in the facts about the effectiveness of contra- the legislation does not expire until work force, provide these services. ceptives, the spread of sexually trans- September 2002. I wonder why. The progress we have made as a result of mitted diseases, or any other topic Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the adoption the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, which I sup- that might be raised. The only require- of the Republican welfare bill. The bill restruc- ported, will be undermined by this measure. It ment is that the use of contraceptives tures welfare to focus on caseload reductions imposes up to $11 billion in unfunded man- cannot be advocated. Only abstinence rather than poverty reduction. The Repub- dates on the States over the next 5 years. can. licans offer a bill that does not allow the Missouri has been recognized nationally for its This is not a ‘‘just say no’’ type of a Democrats to provide one amendment. Demo- creative community-based partnerships with program. It is a program that is de- crats care about our less advantaged Ameri- youth mentoring, before and after school pro- signed for the overall individual. It cans. The bill would increase mandatory child grams, parenting classes and child develop- goes into character and all those dig- care funding by only $1 billion over the next 5 ment classes, all of which foster independence nity types of areas. years. That’s barely enough to keep pace with from public assistance and improve family Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I inflation, and nowhere near enough to imple- well-being. Missouri also makes excellent use yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman ment the bill’s new participation requirements. of case-by-case individual assessments, which from Houston, Texas (Ms. JACKSON- This funding at present does not provide child assists in making the transition to work by of- LEE). care coverage to the 15 million children who fering job training, post secondary education, (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked are now eligible for day care assistance but and job placement services. H.R. 4737 takes and was given permission to revise and who are not currently covered because States away Missouri’s flexibility in providing these extend her remarks.) lack sufficient resources. On Tuesday I at- programs by eliminating educational and occu- Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. tempted to offer an amendment to the legisla- pational opportunities that contribute to the Speaker, I thank the gentleman for tion that would increase funding to childcare outreach the State now provides. yielding me this time. by 20 percent between fiscal years 2003 to The Democratic substitute provides both an Let me say that this legislation that 2007. The amendment was not accepted. The inflationary increase in the TANF block grant, we now have before us, H.R. 4737, ren- Congressional Budget Office estimates that and additional $6 billion over 5 years, and in- ders to those who have fallen upon bad the increased mandatory work hours imposed creases child care funding by $11 billion over luck bad deeds. This bill should not be on States by the legislation will cost States an 5 years. H.R. 4737 adds no new money for passed, and let me just share with my additional $3.8 billion in child care costs ac- childcare. My constituent Marcia, a mother of colleagues why. cording to the Congressional Research Serv- three, came to Missouri’s Department of Fam- First of all, this gives to many of the ice. ily Services shortly after she and her family States unfunded mandates. In my Many employed recipients surveyed, suf- moved to Missouri to escape an abusive hus- State alone, Texas, $688 million will be fered when they were penalized for earning band. The Democratic substitute gives Marcia needed to implement this legislation, money which caused them to lose childcare the comfort in knowing that while she is work- and it is not funded. An additional $344 benefits. ing to improve her family’s quality of life and million for child care will be needed, The University of Oregon conducted a 2- getting support for her abusive situation her and it is not funded. Right now in the year study of welfare restructuring post the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:31 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.058 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2551 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Op- but yet we have the same aspirations Mr. Speaker, especially on health portunity Reconciliation Act. The finding re- as anyone else. care issues, this Congress has not garding childcare was more Federal funds are b 1315 taken the right approach. We should needed and expand eligibility for subsidized extend the State medical assistance childcare. Now we have a welfare bill that in- program more than just 1 year. It The legislation restricts State discretion to deed requires work. And by the way, should be at least 5 years, as this reau- provide education and training to welfare re- work is good for anyone and most of us thorization does; or it should be perma- cipients. H.R. 4700 goes so far as to remove love to work because we enjoy doing nent if we really do care about making vocational education from the current-law list something that gives us satisfaction. sure that people can get off welfare and In addition, it allows us to bring in- of work-related activities that count toward the get to work and have meaningful jobs. come into our families. core work requirement. In the end, as Republicans have, on In rural areas, there are very few On Tuesday I offered an amendment to this legislation, on prescription drugs, jobs. If mothers are forced to leave, we offer parenting and financial planning training on issue after issue after issue, Repub- should have day care. In rural areas, to teenage parents. The amendment was not licans have made a choice. They have there are few qualified day care cen- accepted. As the chair of the Children’s Cau- chosen tax cuts for the wealthiest peo- ters. cus I am concerned that the Republican bill Also, if jobs are not available imme- ple in the country rather than pro- hurts children, by hurting their parents. We diately nearby, we need transportation. viding services to help people keep must provide additional funding for childcare. Unless we speak to those issues that those jobs, get educated, have the kind We must provide funds for parenting skills allow for rural areas to make up for of health care benefits they need. They training and financial management training. that differential, this welfare bill is not have chosen tax cuts for the richest Last, we must provide funding for the legisla- adequate. Americans, to the tune of hundreds of tion that takes inflation into account. I offered Let me speak about another issue on billions of dollars overwhelmingly for an amendment to provide for this but the Re- which I have been working, and that is the richest 1, 2 and 3 percent of the publicans did not accept it. teenage pregnancy. Indeed I do not people in the country instead of a de- Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am claim any expertise in that area, but it cent prescription drug benefit. pleased to yield 1 minute to the gen- is an issue that I have been engaged in. They have chosen tax cuts for the tleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. PITTS), For 10 years I have been talking about wealthiest people instead of funding a distinguished member of our com- the fact if we want to give our young adequately the education bill that this mittee. people an opportunity, we must give Congress passed. Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, the same them productive, positive alternatives Mr. Speaker, when we think about group of liberals is crying foul the so they do not get involved in destruc- flexibility, when we think about alle- same way they did 6 years ago. There is tive activities. Abstinence does work, viating poverty and about providing only one thing that has done more to but it is not the only method. jobs so people can keep those jobs, keep people in poverty than the old If Members are interested in teen- think about the plan the Democrats welfare system did: Mr. Speaker, I am agers, we will give them information have moved towards with flexibility, talking about teen pregnancy. that is based on science and also in- with support for education, with sup- Statistically speaking, when low-in- spire them to believe in themselves and port for child care funding, and espe- come teenage girls get pregnant, they give them a reason to abstain. We cially with support for medical care. are dooming themselves to a lifetime should not say that they must have ab- Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of poverty and they are dooming their stinence. If we are truly committed to of my time. kids to a lifetime of poverty. Now, our young people rather than ideology, Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the some of them escape it and succeed de- we would do all of these things to make balance of my time to the gentleman spite the odds, but most do not. And, sure that they have a future. from Nebraska (Mr. TERRY) to close. Mr. Speaker, there is only one way Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I (Mr. TERRY asked and was given kids can avoid getting pregnant before yield myself the balance of my time. permission to revise and extend his re- they are ready, and that is to abstain Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this leg- marks.) from sex until they are married. islation is not just to get people off of Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, what we Some of our liberal friends say it is welfare, but to reduce poverty in this are talking about today at this point is unrealistic to expect kids to abstain country and to get people to work. our children; and it is about teaching from sex. Some even say that it is dan- Mr. Speaker, getting a job also our children, our boys and girls, it is gerous to teach abstinence. That tells means keeping a job. When we fall not men and women, but boys and me they do not believe in America’s short, as this legislation does, as our girls, about abstinence. kids. They expect them to fail, and hearings indicated, as our discussions For many years this Congress only when we expect a kid to fail, that kid indicated, as our debate indicates, put dollars aside to teach safe sex, probably will fail. when we fall short on helping Ameri- teaching our teenagers the proper way Let us be honest, the only real way cans keep jobs, we have missed the of putting on a condom. Fortunately, 6 to prevent our kids from getting STDs point of this legislation. We have fallen years ago this Congress took control is to teach them to abstain until mar- far short on education. and said we will give the option to riage. Now, I know a lot of kids who The Democratic plan allows edu- States and entities to have abstinence- are saving themselves for marriage. I cation to be counted towards the work only programs, and we will begin to know them. They are proud of it. requirement. We have fallen far short fund those. It is not a mandate; it is an The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on child care funding. The Democratic option for these organizations. It gives has a good program, and I urge support plan provides several billion dollars for them the opportunity. of the bill. child care. We have fallen far short on Since we have implemented this pol- Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I restoring benefits for legal immi- icy, teenage pregnancy has dropped, yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman grants. All of those issues will help teenage sexually transmitted diseases from North Carolina (Mrs. CLAYTON). people not just get jobs, but keep jobs. have dropped. That is fantastic, yet an- Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I At the same time, the other side of ecdotal, evidence. Frankly, we have all thank the gentleman for yielding me the aisle talks about flexibility and talked to teenagers in our districts, this time. giving States flexibility; yet from ab- and we have heard that they want a I want to raise two issues. I want to stinence education to a whole host of positive message and they want our raise first the issue of rural develop- other issues, the Republican bill falls support in abstaining from sex until ment, since my colleague gave me an far short on giving States the real married. President Bush said, ‘‘When extra minute. Those of us who live in flexibility they need to get people not our children face a choice between self- rural America are always reminding just off the welfare rolls, but to make restraint and self-destruction, govern- our colleagues that there are dif- sure people have good jobs, meaningful ment should not be neutral. Govern- ferences in terms of our infrastructure work, good training, child care, health ment should not sell children short by and our resources and our institutions, care, all of the things that are needed. assuming they are incapable of acting

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:31 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.014 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2552 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 responsibly. We must promote good viduals in the transition from dependence on a would people receive a welfare check in per- choices.’’ government welfare check—to independence petuity if they refused to work. The success of Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, preventing teen to earn a paycheck. For far too many, under this is irrefutable: since 1996, welfare rolls pregnancy is a key part of moving people from the old Welfare program that American dream have decreased by over 50 percent, and mil- welfare to work and reducing poverty. Over was out of reach. lions of people who were once collecting wel- half of all mothers on welfare had their first In response, the Republican Congress rose fare checks are now collecting pay checks. child as a teenager, and two-thirds of the fami- to the challenge and produced public policy Historic indeed, Mr. Speaker. lies begun by teen mothers are poor. with remarkable results that created hope and Today we consider legislation that increases For all these reasons, preventing teen preg- opportunity. In the past 6 years, the reformed work requirements over the next 5 years, and nancy is an issue we all should be able to Welfare program reduced poverty, child hun- simultaneously rewards states that have been agree on in Congress. It should not be a Re- ger, and dependency on government welfare particularly effective in moving people from publican issue, not a Democratic issue. But checks for survival. welfare to work. it also protects children by in- the critical need to reduce the number of teen Today we have a chance to build upon this creasing child care funding by $2 billion and pregnancies too often gets lost in an ideolog- success through improving our current welfare by increasing State flexibility in providing child ical debate over abortion, creating federal poli- program through the passage of the Personal care for low-income working families. Finally, it cies that don’t fit the reality of teen pregnancy Responsibility, Work, and Family Protection encourages healthy marriages and two-parent prevention across the country. Act. married families by directing up to $300 million Three weeks ago, the House Commerce The challenge of making the transition from annually for programs such as pre-marital Committee engaged in a disappointing debate welfare to stable jobs is very difficult. Con- education and counseling. Mr. Speaker, surely over the abstinence-only education. The Com- gress must make the commitment to ensure that is something we can all support. mittee rejected on ideological lines proposals all Americans have a chance of reaching the I am somewhat concerned about a few pro- to provide states flexibility in the way they use American Dream. The actions Congress takes visions in this legislation. While this bill does welfare funds for teen pregnancy, require ab- today will have a lasting impact as future gen- improve upon some work requirements stinence-only programs to give out medically erations will continue to break the cycle of passed in 1996, in some cases it does not go accurate information, and require that funds welfare and enjoy brighter futures. far enough. For instance, for purposes of go to programs that have proven effective. Mr. CONDIT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in TANF, it increases the number of hours a wel- The amendment I offered in Committee opposition of H.R. 4737, the Personal Respon- fare beneficiary must be involved in work or would have modified existing law so that sibility, Work, and Family Promotion Act of job training programs, but it allows the states states have the option of funding programs ac- 2002. Unfortunately, the bill before us today to define ‘‘work’’ in almost any way they see cording to the existing federal definition of ab- does not live up to its title and will actually un- fit for some of these additional hours. Thus, a stinence-only, or another approach to absti- dermine the successful reforms enacted in father could coach his son’s baseball team nence education that they deem appropriate. 1996. and get credit for ‘‘work training.’’ Mr. Speaker, This amendment was not an anti-abstinence For several reasons this proposal does not I am all for allowing states flexibility in admin- amendment—it specifically stated that pro- merit Congress’s approval. First of all, the bill istering welfare programs—flexibility is, after grams should promote abstinence. But it would impose an almost $2.5 billion unfunded all, the lynchpin of the terrifically effective re- would have allowed states the option to mandate on the state of California. Without forms we enacted in 1996—but in my view we choose the type of abstinence education they providing the funds necessary to implement should set some sort of minimal standards believe will help students, and most impor- the new work requirement provisions in H.R. and then let the states implement them as tantly, reduce the incidence of teen preg- 4737, this attempt to reform welfare will fail. they see fit. In general, the reauthorization bill builds nancy. And these unfunded mandates could not come upon the successes of the 1996 legislation, Between 1992 and 1994, under a Repub- at a worse time for states struggling to bal- and I believe it will continue to help break the lican governor, California instituted an absti- ance their budgets. cycle of poverty and dependence that millions nence-only education program across the en- This proposal also fails to address the most of Americans had become stuck in during the tire state—only to discover through evalua- rudimentary obstacles in attempting to move period when welfare was an entitlement. It is tions that this program was not effective. As a individuals from welfare to work. We will pay a very good piece of legislation, and I strongly result, California turns down the welfare the price for the lack of emphasis on worker support it. I urge my colleagues to do the money for abstinence-only education—a loss training and basic reading and writing skills. It same. of approximately $30 million from 1998Ð2002. is short sighted to believe welfare recipients Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, this welfare re-au- The purpose and spirit of the 1996 welfare will successfully make the transition to self- thorization legisation does nothing to prepare reform law I voted for allowed states to craft sufficiency without the necessary literacy welfare recipients to leave welfare and enter work promotion and poverty reduction pro- skills. the workforce and it is an profound fiscal bur- grams that worked best for them. This has Removing vocational education from the den on our state governments. worked remarkably well—states should have current list of work-related activities that satisfy I believe that since we reformed welfare six some flexibility on teen pregnancy prevention the core work requirement in current law is an years ago, we have been successful in programs. exceptionally bad idea and shortsighted idea. transitioning millions of people off of assist- President Bush, in his FY 2003 Budget, ar- There is also inadequate funding for child- ance. But, this remaining group of bene- gues for the elimination of federal programs care. We can’t expect to break the cycle of ficiaries will be much harder to prepare to that he says have not undergone rigorous poverty, if we are not willing to commit the enter the workforce. That is why I do not sup- evaluation. But this focus proven programs is needed resources. port this ‘‘one size fits all’’ program whose only missing from the Republican approach to wel- For all of these reasons, I urge my col- goal is to drop beneficiaries. fare reform. leagues to join me opposing H.R. 4737, the Welfare reform should give beneficiaries the Abstinence is an extremely important mes- Personal Responsibility, Work, and Family tools they need to enter the workforce. Miss- sage to send students, particularly younger Promotion Act of 2002. ing in this Republican legislation is a program teens. But current research shows that there Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong that allows welfare recipients to receive a are no ‘‘magic bullets’’ for preventing teen support of the legislation before us today, H.R. GED and if necessary, learn or improve their pregnancy—not sex education alone, not ab- 4737, the Personal Responsibility, Work, and English. It also lacks a real increase in child stinence alone. Indeed, the programs with the Family Promotion Act of 2002. I would like to care assistance and the necessary flexibility strongest evidence for success may work bet- commend Chairmen HERGER, THOMAS and for innovative state programs to reach out to ter for some populations and communities BOEHNER for their work in promulgating this those on welfare who are least prepared to than others. important legislation. get a job. Mr. Speaker, it is inevitable this Re- Rather than having ideology drive our teen Mr. Speaker, this bill builds upon and im- publican welfare bill will only lead to more pregnancy policy, we should focus on local so- proves the historic welfare reforms enacted in families falling between the cracks. lutions and solid research. This will allow us to 1996. The hallmark of the 1996 legislation was Further, this legislation lacks alternatives to make progress on a goal we all agree on— that it changed welfare from an entitlement abstinence-only education. We should not put preventing unwanted pregnancy and abortion. program to a block grant to the individual money into these programs before we have Mr. POMBO. Mr. Speaker, as you may well states. The significance of this was twofold: real debate on their actual effectiveness. This know, in 1996, Congress was faced with a fail- states were given a lot of flexibility to spend money could be more wisely spent on edu- ing welfare program that did little to assist indi- money where they needed to, but no longer cation and child care benefits.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:31 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.065 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2553 This legislation will also cost our state gov- Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, this Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in ernments $11 billion by imposing costly new is sweeping legislation affecting more than 5 opposition to the base bill, and in strong sup- mandates and it will force Illinois to direct a million families and we owe it to them to en- port of the Democratic substitute. much larger share of resources to welfare. My gage in thoughtful debate about the best ways In good conscience, I cannot support H.R. state of Illinois currently has a $1.35 billion to help them achieve permanent self suffi- 4737. The Republican base bill, which does budget shortfall. The Governor has threatened ciency. not allow for amendments, would increase to cut student aid, empty prisons, and close There has been lively and thoughtful discus- poverty and its sequelae, instead of reducing mental health centers in order to make up for sion on the best ways to do this—more than it as it purports to do. This bill imposes mas- the shortfall. Illinois simply cannot afford this. 43 amendments were submitted to the Rules sive new mandates and additional costs on Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support the Committee for consideration. I would have states at a time when they are struggling and Democratic alternative because it is a serious welcomed the opportunity to debate these op- cannot absorb not one penny more of new attempt to move welfare recipients into jobs tions on the House floor. However, this closed costs. In light of the fact that 39 States and and does it humanely without shifting the bur- rule, allowing a substitute but no other amend- the territories are struggling to meet work re- den to the states. It provides a real increase ments, denies us the opportunity. Frankly, this quirements in an atmosphere of recession and in child care benefits and allows beneficiaries is offensive to me and should be to the whole lack of available jobs, this bill would create the to earn a GED and learn or improve their House as well. scenario where precious resources are spent English language skills if needed. The Demo- My concerns abut the shortfalls in this legis- on fines and the safety net becomes full of cratic alternative also allows states the flexi- lation are numerous. This bill imposes a huge holes. bility needed to provide innovative programs to unfunded mandate on the States and reduces This country’s offshore areas, would be par- get people into the workforce. the States’ flexibility in determining the opti- ticularly negatively impacted, because of even We cannot throw millions of people into the mum mix of activities to help recipients be- less resources, and poor economic conditions streets when our economy is limping into a re- come more self-sufficient. In addition, it dou- with fewer jobs within geographical limitations. covery and not even give them the incentives bles the number of required work hours for Even worse, Mr. Speaker, this bill tightens and tools they need to enter the workforce. I mothers with young children but provides mini- the vise on those trying to transition from wel- urge my colleagues to vote no on this legisla- mal new child care funding to support this in- fare to work. It eliminates education from the tion and vote yes for the Democratic sub- creased work requirement. Two particular list that count as work related activity and stitute. items in this legislation are of serious concern does not provide adequate resources for Mr. LAFALCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposi- to me. childcare. On the other hand it doubles the tion to the procedure under which this welfare First, this bill fails to provide individuals and amount of hours that recipients are required to bill was put together and brought to the House families the opportunities and help they re- work, creating more hardship for mothers with floor. quire to rise out of poverty and gain self suffi- children under school age. Specifically, I object to the fact that without ciency. To attain a job with promotion potential Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of conservative any hearings or markups in the Financial and earnings above the poverty level requires ideology represented here. Where is the com- Services Committee, the bill’s superwaiver experience, education, and job skills. I wish passion? provision would authorize States, with ap- that success could be achieved as easily as The Democratic substitute would give States proval of the HUD Secretary, to sweep away the supporters of this bill lead us to believe. and territories more flexibility by giving them all of the rules and regulations that govern our But while an entry level or minimum wage job the option to require 40 hours if childcare and Federal public housing and homeless pro- is certainly a laudable start, the only way to educational resources are available, but would grams. This is an outrageous usurpation of get out of poverty and achieve permanent self only require 30 hours of work if not. The our committee’s authority. sufficiency is through education and training. If Democratic substitute would also remove the Just 4 years ago Congress enacted a com- you train someone for a dead end job, you will ban that prohibits states from serving legal im- prehensive bill to reform our public housing lead them to a dead end. migrants. The Democratic substitute would laws. Provisions dealing with rent burdens, en- With its emphasis on ‘‘make-work’’ jobs that also give the territories the tools they need to hanced local flexibility, resident participation, fail to offer any training or promotion opportu- successfully transition people from welfare to and other key public housing issues were nities, couple with its failure to acknowledge work. carefully developed over several years. Nota- the importance of education, this bill fails to Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4737 is a set back, not bly, the bill was enacted after the 1996 welfare offer any substantive solutions to help our Na- forward. If the reactionary political climate of reform bill was passed, and included many tion’s poor out of poverty. an election year precludes us getting a good provisions designed to complement welfare re- Mr. Speaker, the second issue I have with bill, lets simply extend the current authoriza- form, including eliminating work disincentives. this bill is that it discriminates against legal im- tion for one more year, and lets sit down again Now, with a single sweep of the pen, all migrants by denying them Federal assistance. next year and do it right. these provisions could be ignored under the Both the National Governors Association Let’s this of the people who are most af- ‘‘superwaiver.’’ This could jeopardize carefully and the National Conference of States Legis- fected by our actions, Let’s give our states crafted protections for the over 1 million low- latures have recommended that States be and territories flexibility and let’s give our peo- income families in public housing. Under the given the option to use TANF funds to serve ple hope. superwaiver, rent payments could skyrocket, legal immigrants immediately. However, under Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition families with small children could be evicted the Republican bill, legal immigrants must be to this misguided bill. for technical violations of new rules, resident living in this country for 5 years before they If this is welfare reform, our States don’t appeal procedures and lease protections could are eligible for Federal aid. Even more dis- need it. They will have to raise taxes or cut be wiped away. And, protections for use of tressing is the fact that many of those affected services to compensate for the 5-year, $11 bil- housing funds for our Nation’s most vulner- by this discrimination are children who were lion State government cost of this one-size- able, the homeless, could be eviscerated. born in this country and are, in fact, U.S. citi- fits-all, heavy-handed Federal policy. Maine Worse, because this bill has never even zens. will need $56 million to meet the new work re- seen the light of day within our committee, we In 1996, the most current year for which quirements. cannot even be sure the extent to which exist- records are available, 28,565 refugees were If this is welfare reform, our families can’t ing public housing and homeless laws could granted permanent residence in the United take it. The bill requires mothers with children be undermined. States. under 6 to double their required work week Representative FRANK and I offered an The responsibility for housing, feeding, and from 20 hours to 40 hours per week. amendment to delete the applicability of the caring for those who require assistance falls to For these mothers, this bill means less time superwaiver to housing programs. Of course, the States—and the top four States carrying with their children, and not enough money to the Rules Committee blocked debate on this this responsibility are California, New York, cover expanded child care costs. It probably and other amendments. Texas, and Florida. means at least two jobs for many mothers, be- This is a terrible way to do business. We I believe that States should be granted the cause low-wage jobs are usually part time. ought to send the different sections of this bill option of using TANF dollars for legal immi- For States like Maine, this bill reduces flexi- back to the relevant committees for consider- grants. bility. For example, Maine’s successful ‘‘Par- ation the old fashioned way—hold hearings, I regret that this closed rule has denied us ents as Scholars’’ program, which provides ac- then mark up the bill in subcommittee and the opportunity to debate these and a host of cess to post-secondary education, has in- committee. other issues on the floor. creased the wages and benefits of participants

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:31 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.024 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2554 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 when compared to other strategies. But Maine workers’ rights to earn at least minimum wage Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Speaker, when I came to would probably be forced to divert those dol- and have other protections afforded all other Congress, the welfare system was in crisis— lars to other mandated work activities in order workers in this country. a record number of families were on welfare, to meet the requirements of this bill. Third, this bill does not provide adequate dependency on the system was enormous and To all those wealthy individuals who came training for jobs that would open the door for caseloads were rising. But in 1996, in the face to Congress last year with their hands out, the people to earn a living wage so they can sup- of fierce ideological resistance, we reformed Republican party said, ‘‘Here are your tax port their families. Instead, H.R. 4737 takes the welfare program, establishing work stand- cuts.’’ away recipients’ ability to fully engage in voca- ards and setting time limits while giving states To all those families who need a hand up to tional education, often a necessary step in the flexibility to implement them in a way that move from welfare to work, this Republican bill getting a job that pays and provides the op- suited their local situation. We did this after a says get off welfare, but do it by yourself, with portunity for advancement. This bill also does 30-year period when the Democratically con- inadequate child care, longer work hours, and not provide support to women who care for trolled House had spent $5 trillion of taxpayer less vocational education. young children or children with disabilities, and money on the welfare program, which resulted I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and instead it doubles the amount of hours women in skyrocketing poverty rates and welfare vote in favor of the Democratic substitute. The with children under 6 years old are required to cases. work. Furthermore, H.R. 4737 continues to Democratic substitute would give States the It was compassionate conservatism—and it deny legal immigrants access to benefits, in- option of raising the work requirement to 40 was marvelously successful. The results stead of allowing these families who pay taxes hours where adequate childcare and edu- speak for themselves: Caseloads have fallen and work hard to receive assistance when cational resources are available, allow States by 60 percent to their lowest levels since 1965 they hit tough times. to credit education toward the work require- and 9 million recipients have gone from wel- ment, and increase childcare funding by $11 Besides placing further restrictions on TANF recipients, H.R. 4737 also places further re- fare to work—from dependency to independ- billion over 5 years. ence. In Pennsylvania alone, more than Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise strictions on States. Instead of helping States to be innovative in addressing the particular 319,000 people were graduated from the today to urge my colleagues to vote against caseloads, working their way out of the wel- H.R. 4737, the Republican TANF reauthoriza- needs of their low-income population, this bill applies a one-size-fits-all philosophy and dra- fare system. This change is not only extraor- tion bill. Anyone who looks at this bill can see dinary, but unprecedented. that the Republican plan does not provide real matically diminishes States rights. It was clear that the welfare system was the assistance to needy families. Instead, this bill And, if all that was not bad enough, this Re- biggest, most costly domestic policy failure of aims to place further restrictions and require- publican bill includes a ‘‘superwaiver’’ provi- our time. And today, we have been hearing ments on those most in need and those who sion that extends to programs far beyond complaints from many who consistently op- already face tremendous barriers to work and TANF and could bring greater hardship to low- posed welfare reform until just before the bill self-sufficiency. income people helped by these programs. For signing ceremony. But we have learned from If the Republican leadership truly cared example, this provision would have adverse experience that you can strengthen work re- about providing assistance to needy families, it affects on Federal public housing and home- quirements; require states to closely monitor would have considered the needs of those lessness programs because the rules and reg- caseloads. And what we have learned is that families—the women, children, and parents ulations governing them could be swept away we can help people prosper and become self- who are directly affected by this program. at the whim of the Federal agencies. In these reliant, independent and proud. Their bill would have focused on what TANF cases, the real impact would be felt by fami- should really be about—helping families out of lies who would then be threatened with losing We have the opportunity to build on our their housing assistance and being forced onto poverty so they will have an acceptable stand- success without creating a personal entitle- the streets. Such far-reaching changes are un- ard of living. Instead, this bill only succeeds in ment program which deadens individual re- acceptable, particularly given that the various defining those families as statistics that should sponsibility, creating incentives for depend- committees with jurisdiction over programs af- be controlled and told what to do. ency. The Personal Responsibility, Work, and First and foremost, the amount of funding fected by this ‘‘superwaiver’’ did not have the Family Protection Act takes dramatic steps to opportunity to consider them nor to assess this Republican proposal gives to TANF, the maintain and strengthen the current program. their negative impact. primary program in this country to help poor Despite the enormous declines in caseloads, But none of this should come at any sur- this bill gives states the same record federal women and children, is pitiful. Last week the prise. This Republican bill is in line with all the House passed a $400 billion Department of welfare and child care funding, which means other legislation this leadership and the Bush more money per family. Defense authorization bill that included a $48 administration have offered in this Congress, billion increase. Not only is this the biggest in- H.R. 4737 maintains the flexibility that has legislation that has aimed to deprive those allowed states to tailor the program to meet crease in Defense spending since the cold most in need while giving to those who have war, but it was also provided despite the fact the specific needs of its residents, rewarding plenty. states for engaging recipients and reducing that the Department cannot pass an audit and Fortunately, we have an alternative in a caseloads. More importantly, it also provides cannot account for $1.2 trillion in spending. Democratic substitute that actually gives fami- an additional $2 billion for child care, ensuring Yet, this increase is three times greater than lies the tools they need to become self-suffi- that parents who are working hard to improve the amount the Republicans propose for the cient. This substitute allows women more op- the lives of their families are not being TANF block grant. This Congress has bailed portunity to access vocational or post-sec- slammed back to the ground by staggering out the airlines and given a $254 million re- ondary education, or go to ESL or GED class- child care costs. bate to Enron. It is a disgrace that we cannot es if needed; it restores benefits to legal immi- give more to those in this country that need it grants; it provides worker protections to all But my colleagues on the other side of the most. It is a disgrace that this bill does not TANF recipients; it provides resources to aisle are not interested in building on the wel- provide a single additional dollar in TANF states to foster employment advancement and fare reform of 1996, but rather that they want funds. In my State of Illinois, it would cost at promotion among recipients; it makes Puerto to dismantle it. They want to allow welfare re- least an additional $322 million in order to im- Rico and the territories eligible for assistance; cipients to work two days per week and stay plement the increased work requirements and it gives States the incentive to actually work on welfare forever. meet the child care needs that this bill would toward decreasing poverty. In addition, the Let me share with you some facts about the require. Democratic substitute increases child care Democratic substitute—it allows welfare recipi- Second, this bill neglects to help women get funding by $11 billion dollars and accounts for ents to work two days per week and stay on assistance to overcome barriers, such as sub- inflation in TANF block grant funding. welfare forever. It also provides partial credit stance abuse, limited English proficiency, and I urge every one of my colleagues to reject towards work rates for adults who work as few domestic and sexual abuse. Instead, it re- the Republican bill, H.R. 4737, and instead, to as 10 hours per week while collecting full wel- quires that recipients work longer hours. Be- think about all the individual lives we are af- fare benefits. In fact, according to the Depart- sides causing great hardship on single moms fecting. H.R. 4737 does not provide assistance ment of Health had Human Services, the and children, this increase from a 30-hour re- to needy families, it places arbitrary and re- Democrat’s a new ‘‘employed leaver credit’’ quirement to one that demands women work strictive mandates on needy families. If we would effectively eliminate the work require- 40 hours a week will likely force States to cre- truly want to help people leave poverty and ments in 2003—reducing from 50 percent to 2 ate workfare programs—programs that have become self-sufficient we must vote for the percent the share of the welfare caseload ex- been proven not to work and which threaten Democratic substitute and against H.R. 4737. pected to work.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.018 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2555 The Democratic proposal increases welfare is not self-sufficiency by anyone’s standards. fornia to fulfill its work participation require- dependence and poverty while seriously un- We need reform that will arm welfare recipi- ments, parents would have to participate in dermining the time limits designed to promote ents with the artillery they need to perma- work-related activities for 40 hours each week. self-sufficiency. But Mr. Speaker, if that is not nently improve their economic situations. If we double the number of hours mothers enough let’s look at the cost. For about $70 This necessary artillery is education and with children younger than 6 must work from billion over 10 years, the American taxpayers training for marketable jobs. Improving edu- 20 to 40, we simply must allot a more realistic would see welfare return to a program where cation never stops paying off for an individual level of funding for child care. able-bodied people do not work for their bene- or for society as a whole; 82.2% of high California now has 280,000 children waiting fits and bear little personal responsibility. The school graduates with parents who attained a to be placed into child care programs, and Democratic substitute is expensive and would bachelor’s degree or higher go on to college. H.R. 4700 would require $1.23 billion in addi- increase deficits. This is compared to only 36.6% with parents tional child care funding over the next 5 years. Unlike the Republican bill, the Democratic who attained less than a high school diploma, With California facing a deficit, due to Enron’s substitute includes NO offsets for its new according to the American Association of Uni- rogue statics with our energy, H.R. 4737 will spending, so it simply adds to deficits in the versity Women. It should be clear that edu- not allow us to help individuals successfully future. These are the same Democrats who cation is hereditary and the more education transition to full-time work. consistently opposed welfare reform until just parents have, the more likely their children are By enacting the Democratic Substitute, we before the bill signing ceremony in 1996. The to go on to college. Why in the world would will require states to increase to 70 percent Democrats also want to place additional, bur- we advocate legislation that impedes access the number of individuals who must work out densome mandates on the states, essentially to education for these individuals? H.R. 4737, of the overall population receiving benefits. tying the hands of states who know how best which imposes a 40-hour work week on single Further, states will be able to raise the work to meet the needs of their residents. mothers, significantly hinders their chances of requirement to 40 hours provided they have We cannot take a step backward—as the furthering their education. It is plainly counter- sufficient child care and educational re- Democrats advocate—returning to a welfare productive to finding a long-term solution to sources, as current law permits. Under the program where able-bodied people do not poverty. Substitute, $11 billion in additional child care work for their benefits and bear little personal Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4737, says clearly to funding will be available over the next 5 years responsibility. No public policy rationale exists America’s struggling families, ‘‘We don’t really so the stringent work requirements will be for the additional spending they propose to care about helping you. We don’t care that the achieved without hurting children. The Sub- mandate. This is not to say that at some point jobs we are pushing you into will do little to stitute will remove the ban that now prohibits in the future more money will be needed for help you provide a better life for your children. states from serving legal immigrants. this program but the case for that has not What we are most concerned with is no longer Under the Democratic substitute to H.R. been made today. I urge my colleagues to having to support you.’’ We are dealing with 4737, we would have up to $6 billion in addi- vote no on the substitute, ensuring that the re- human beings here, and more importantly, tional funding which must be earmarked in forms we enact maintain and strengthen the with children, and H.R. 4737 is legislation part to provide access to transportation so that current program, not return us to an entitle- about numbers. Please vote no on H.R. 4737. individuals can get their children to child care ment program with a staggering price tag and Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Mr. Speaker, providers and get to work on time. Yet another even greater social costs. I rise today as the Representative of Califor- reason why current funding levels will be in- Six years ago, we changed the way people nia’s 37th Congressional District and rep- sufficient to maintain child care assistance in look at welfare, making it a program that resenting some of the country’s most impover- the future is related to the problem of inflation. helped people find work, renew their self-suffi- ished areas! I would like to draw the attention The proposed TANF bill will freeze funding ciency and gave them financial freedom and of Congress to one of the key issues relating for both the TANF and child care block grants personal dignity. We must act responsibly and to the reauthorization of TANF. at the current levels. Over the next 5 years, continue these reforms. Vote yes on H.R. My concern is with the mandates imposed the purchasing power of these funding 4737. by H.R. 4737. By forcing states to absorb sources would erode steadily with inflation. Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, if self-suffi- costs that will total up to $11 billion over the This could occur at the same time that states ciency can be defined as raising a family just next 5 years, we are in effect crippling their such as California could be required to meet on or below the poverty level, with little or no ability to help people transition to work. The costly new work requirements. chance of increasing earning potential be- Republicans’ emphasis on creating ‘‘make In the case of California, the non-partisan cause the breadwinner is not equipped with work’’ workfare programs will defeat the pur- Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) estimates competitive education or job training, then I pose of trying to move individuals and families that California will have to spend an addition agree with my colleagues that 1996 welfare off of welfare. Workfare programs have been $2.8 billion over 5 years to meet the proposed reform has been a success. If self-sufficiency problematic for states to implement for years work requirements. About half the $2.8 billion means earning a median hourly wage of $6.61 and have in fact been scaled back. will go toward increased employment services’ or $13,788 annually, as the Urban Institute re- Without guaranteeing minimum wage pro- costs. The other half, $1.4 billion, will be spent ported former welfare recipients earned in tections, let alone creating jobs imparting on increased child care costs. An annual rate 2000, in jobs that 60% of time do not provide meaningful work experience, we are dooming of inflation of 3 percent would increase costs health care benefits, according to NOW, then our states and the people they serve to fail. to California by nearly $250 million between I agree with my colleagues that welfare reform We can do better. By limiting states’ ability to 2003 and 2007. has been a resounding success. However, I be flexible, and by forcing them to reinstate Mr. Speaker, I believe that the TANF reau- am reluctant to believe that my colleagues work requirements that have already been re- thorization provisions do not take into account would consider any of those circumstances to jected, we’re preventing welfare recipients the points that I have brought up and that the be anything near self-sufficiency and therefor from attaining financial independence. new provisions will not achieve their purpose. I implore you to rethink this idea that welfare If we are serious about wanting to move In addition, extra burdens will be placed on reform has been genuinely successful. people from welfare to work, we must enact the states, and, in the long run, children and The goal of welfare reform should be to cre- legislation that preserves state flexibility, cre- families will suffer. ate a system that promotes self-sufficiency, ates real work, and elevates families from pov- I will be voting against the TANF reauthor- not just lower numbers on the rolls and higher erty to full-time work. We cannot help anyone ization bill. It will do nothing to help persons to numbers in low-wage, unstable jobs. H.R. become self-sufficient by giving a ‘‘super- become self-sufficient who are trying to move 4737 provides a short term solution to a long waiver’’ authority to the executive branch that from welfare to work. term problem. We should not be battling wel- would sanction the waiver of any and every Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in fare dependency as much as we should be federal requirement pertaining to food stamps strong opposition to H.R. 4737, the Personal battling poverty. H.R. 4737 will only encourage and housing. The proposed changes to TANF Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion pushing recipients off the rolls and into the could cause this state of affairs to change. Act of 2002. The federal restrictions on state league of the working poor, under-educated The reason for this relates to the level of flexibility in H.R. 4737 are counter productive and constantly struggling to make ends meet. funding, which does not take into account how to achieving Temporary Assistance for Needy So that one negative circumstance, one set- inflation will negatively impact the $1 billion Families (TANF) primary goal to assist impov- back, such as illness or domestic violence, now proposed by the Republicans to provide erished families and to end the dependence of could see them plummeting back into poverty. for child care. This proposal will require fami- needy parents on government benefits by pro- Living one paycheck away from homelessness lies to work longer hours. In order for Cali- moting job preparation. Despite its faults, the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:50 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.026 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2556 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 1996 Welfare Reform Act was able to help strictions on immigrant access to federal pro- of returning participants, and responding to a many families reach self-sufficiency. This was grams impose a serious dilemma. The federal possible downturn in the economy. We should possible largely because of the amount of government should not continue to ignore the be helping Wisconsin implement these rec- state flexibility allowed in the TANF program. needs of LPRs. Since many LPRs work in the ommendations by increasing education and H.R. 4737 removes that state flexibility and re- service industries that are affected most training opportunities, not by cutting back on places it with unfunded mandates that under- acutely by recessions, they are in need of the them as this bill does. mine the state’s ability to help needy families back to work assistance that TANF can pro- Martha Garel could benefit from these edu- achieve sustained self-sufficiency. This bill will vide. cational opportunities. Martha lives in Madison destroy the key and successful elements of Mr. Speaker, this bill does nothing to ad- and has received WÐ2 payments for 3 years. TANF. dress the barriers that prevent recipients from When she first applied in 1999, she had re- The changes made to the work require- achieving sustained independence and self- cently left an extremely abusive husband. Mar- ments in this bill eliminate each state’s ability sufficiency. It does nothing to facilitate the tha does not have a college degree, but she to determine the best approach to place their education or job skills needed for recipients to would like to obtain a degree in social work. recipients into paying jobs. In particular, this gain employment. It does nothing to address Two of her three children living at home have bill will remove current state discretion to as- the overwhelming backlog of single parents disabilities. Her 10-year-old son has a disorder sign work requirements and amount of work who need adequate child care. It does nothing that requires him to take medication, and dur- hours. It mandates that the work participation to restore federal assistance to LPRs. It does ing the summer, Martha cannot find a child rate be at 70 percent by 2007, it requires all nothing to address poverty reduction or ad- care provider who will watch him. Her oldest recipients be assigned 40 hours work or work vance employment. daughter receives Supplemental Security In- related activities a week—even for mothers For these reasons and more, I urge Mem- come due to brain damage she received at with children under six years of age, and com- bers to oppose H.R. 4737. birth. pounds the restrictions by narrowing the defi- Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I urge my col- Martha has been avidly searching for a job nition of work related activities. Rather than al- leagues to vote against this bill. I believe that and interviewing since last fall, but nothing has lowing states to develop their own plans the test of success of welfare reform is its ca- come through. The only jobs Martha appears based on the unique needs of their recipients, pacity to lift families (especially children) out of to be qualified for pay only minimum wage, this bill restricts what work-related activities poverty. This bill fails that test. and she knows that a minimum wage job will can count toward the work participation rate I recently attended a listening session at the not meet the needs of her family. The medica- and the mandated 40 hours of work. Vera Court Neighborhood Center in Madison, tions her family requires run over $1,000 per States need the flexibility to assign the most Wisconsin to hear from people in my district month. It is clear that we need to expand the appropriate activities to recipients based on an who are affected by the changes being pro- educational and job-training opportunities for assessment of individual needs. For example, posed in this TANF reauthorization. The per- people like Martha. recipients with Limited English Proficiency sonal stories of those who came to this listen- I urge my colleagues to help families es- (LEP) need access to English as a second ing session were powerful, and they made it cape poverty by giving them the support they language programs before they can gain the clear how important child care and education need to secure jobs that can support a family. needed job skills and training that result in are to enabling people to break the cycle of I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. lasting jobs that pay livable wages and include poverty. 4737. benefits. Recipients with children need access H.R. 4737 would limit opportunities for edu- Mr. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to to quality child care before they can leave cation and training to 16 hours per week, at discuss my views on H.R. 4737 and explain home to work. In 2000, the Department of the most, and participants would have to be my reasons for opposing this legislation and Health and Human Services (HHS), Adminis- working at least 24 hours per week at the supporting a moderate, workable substitute. tration for Children and Families issued a re- same time—a difficult task for parents caring I believe in a ‘‘work first’’ policy for welfare port stating that only 12 percent of those eligi- for infants and young children. For parents to recipients—the best path to independence for ble for federal child care assistance receive even think about expanding their work hours welfare recipients is a job. I also believe that this much needed assistance. Instead of pro- they need affordable, reliable and safe child we should do all that we can to ensure that viding the funding necessary to offer assist- care. Unfortunately, the increase in child care work pays and remember that the reduction of ance to the 88 percent of parents in need of funding over the next 5 years in this bill is poverty, especially child poverty, is the ulti- child care, this bill doubles their amount of barely enough to keep up with inflation let mate goal of this reauthorization. work hours required. alone the expanded work requirements in this I have entered into the RECORD a letter from Most importantly this bill does nothing to re- bill. It is estimated that in order to implement Janet Schalansky, Secretary of the Kansas store federal assistance to Legal Permanent this bill, it would cost Wisconsin about $44.5 Department of Social Services. Ms. Residents (LRPs). On the contrary, H.R. 4737 million over 5 years in additional child care Schalansky’s letter expresses clearly many of contains two extremely harmful provisions that funding. Meanwhile, Wisconsin is suffering my concerns with H.R. 4737, and I believe would further restrict LPR access to federal from a deficit of $1.1 billion. We cannot shift that the substitute that I support addresses assistance, including to the food stamp pro- this burden to the states and, more impor- many of her concerns with the underlying leg- gram. The superwaiver provision will allow the tantly, we cannot let our children be the ones islation, especially her concerns regarding un- Executive Branch to waive virtually all program who suffer because of this policy. funded mandates and the need for education, rules completely disregarding Congressional As many of my colleagues know, Wisconsin training and other supports for individuals intent. Additionally, the food stamp block grant was at the forefront of the welfare reform de- leaving welfare. provision would allow five states to opt for a bate 5 years ago. Today, Wisconsin parents States, including my own state of Kansas fixed amount of food stamp funds for the next are making a good-faith effort to support their under Secretary Schalansky’s leadership, five years. The incentive to ensure program families through work but are not succeeding have done a good job implementing the provi- participation will be eliminated. These two pro- in raising their families standard of living— sions of the 1996 law. Kansas has reduced visions have the potential of reversing the even to the poverty level. A Wisconsin Legis- the cash assistance caseload by more than gains made by the restoration of food stamp lative Audit Bureau Report found that of those half, and helped approximately 37,000 adults benefits for LPRs in the Farm Bill, which was who left the Wisconsin Works (WÐ2) program become employed and retain employment. I just signed into law earlier this week. In times in the first quarter of 1998 (a period when the want to continue to do what I can to ensure when states face increasing budgetary deficits, economy continued to expand), more than that the states have the tools and flexibility a fixed block grant that can be used for other two-thirds reported having incomes below the they need to help welfare recipients move programs sends the wrong message. federal poverty level. An even sadder statistic from welfare to work, but H.R. 4737 falls far LPRs are disproportionately represented in is that one-third of those who left WÐ2 had no short of that goal. industries that are most affected during eco- reported earnings at all. Education is the path through which welfare nomic downturns. During these times LPRs H.R. 4737 would discourage efforts in Wis- recipients will truly find long-term, well-paying, are often hit the hardest, and they, like all consin to change WÐ2 in order to serve low- permanent employment. Only education and Americans, must be allowed to access the income families better. The audit bureau re- training will give welfare recipients the skills program that can help them to get back to port recommended that legislators, in order to they need to move permanently to a life of work. States have recognized the importance ensure the future success of WÐ2, focus on self-sufficiency. Unfortunately, H.R. 4737 of providing services to LPRs, but with more increasing former WÐ2 participants income greatly reduces the states’ discretion to allow and more states running budgetary deficits re- above the poverty level, addressing the needs welfare recipients to get education and training

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:31 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.029 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2557 to pull themselves out of poverty. This legisla- Provide cash assistance to approximately that all families engage in constructive ac- tion removes vocational education from the list 9,030 adults and 22,465 children each month. tivities leading to self-sufficiency for 40 of work-related activities that count toward the Create unique employment preparation hours per week, at least 24 hours of which must be in unsubsidized or subsidized work, core work requirement. In addition, the bill strategies and support services for address- ing the multiple employment barriers of on-the-job training, supervised work experi- does not provide an employment credit to the many TANF recipients. ence or supervised community service. Kan- states when individuals leave welfare for work. Provide innovative child care improve- sas does not support this change. There is That is why I am supporting a substitute that ments, including an Early Head Start Pro- overwhelming evidence from states that per- will allow states to combine successful ‘‘work gram; an infant/toddler specialist in each of sons now receiving TANF cash assistance first’’ initiatives with education and training. the sixteen child care resource and referral have significant barriers to employment, The substitute will give states credit when they agencies; and an early care and education such as mental illness, IQ’s below 75, domes- move individuals from welfare to private-sector professional development initiative. tic violence etc. Until these barriers are jobs, rather than giving them an incentive to Integrate child welfare services and TANF overcome or accommodated, it is unrealistic to help more children remain in their own to require TANF recipients to work 24 hours create government ‘‘make work’’ programs. per week. Many of the current TANF recipi- H.R. 4600 imposes an unfunded mandate home or be returned to their homes more quickly. ents will always struggle to find and keep on the states to the tune of $11 billion—$67 On February 26, the Bush Administration even part time jobs in a competitive work million for the state of Kansas alone. Kansas introduced the outline of its TANF reauthor- environment. States will have to start-up or is currently facing a budget crisis and its lead- ization proposal. Although the department expand subsidized work, on the job training ers are cutting services and raising taxes as supports the President’s overall goals for the (OJT), supervised work experience and com- we speak just to balance next year’s budget. TANF program, we do not support all of his munity service in order to meet the 24 hour An unfunded mandate of this magnitude could recommended changes to the program. His per week work requirement. According to re- devastate the state budget. If we are going to proposal to require all families to partici- cent press releases states will also have to continue paying minimum wage for work ex- raise the bar for the states, we must provide pate in work activities for 40 hours per week with 24 of those hours mandated to be in sub- perience or community service jobs. The re- support so that states can reach the bar. As sidized or unsubsidized work is especially sult of these proposals will require increased Secretary Schalansky notes in her letter, level problematic. Attached to this letter is a re- expenses not funded in the Bush plan. Fund- funding for TANF is not sufficient to accom- view of the department’s position on the key ing cuts in other TANF services, such as post plish and sustain the goals of the TANF pro- provisions of the President’s proposal. I hope employment services that assist the working gram. Furthermore, H.R. 4737 allocates fund- you will consider the agency’s position when poor to retain or advance in their jobs, will ing for child care that barely keeps pace with these issues are debated and voted on in Con- likely be the result. Additionally, employers gress. do not hire employees for twenty-four hour inflation and does not begin to provide the per week jobs. They generally hire for either funding necessary to provide the child care The Temporary Assistance for Needy Fam- ilies block grant has been successful in get- 20 hours per week or 40 hours per week. The that the additional work hours will demand. TANF program has been successful due to For these reasons, I am supporting a sub- ting families employed and off cash assist- ance. While much has been achieved, there is the design flexibility given states to develop stitute that will provide an extra $11 billion for an unfinished agenda of welfare reform, one programs tailored to the needs of their re- child care funding over five years to help that involves on-going supports to low-in- cipients. The Department believes the more states provide child care for working welfare come working families as well as one that stringent work requirement is counter- recipients and provide an inflationary increase seeks to remove the barriers for TANF re- productive and unnecessary to achieving the cipients with multiple barriers to employ- purposes of the TANF program. for the TANF block grant. Increases Work Participation Rates. Under ment. The work of the TANF agency does Finally, I have great concerns about the so- the Bush proposal, the state will be required not end when families exit the cash assist- called ‘‘superwaiver’’ provisions of this legisla- to have 70 percent of its adults participating ance caseload. tion. Although I am pleased that the authors of in 40 hours a week of constructive activities SRS supports continued emphasis on the H.R. 4737 decided to remove some of the leading to self-sufficiency, 24 of which must work first approach which is appropriate and be actual work, by the year 2007. There will most egregious provisions of the superwaiver, integral to continued success. The Depart- no longer be a caseload reduction credit or a I am still concerned that the legislation will ment recognizes that the caseload is not ho- separate two-parent participation rate. permit broad and unaccountable waivers of mogeneous and some clients can move to Under the work participation requirements federal requirements in several programs, in- work easily while others require more in- of the current TANF law, Kansas has 86 per- tense interventions. In order for employed cluding the Food Stamp program, Workforce cent of its families participating 30 hours per clients to remain employed, to increase Investment Act, Adult Education, and the Child week, and 60 percent participating 40 hours wages, and to seek and obtain new and better Care Development Fund. The states should per week. Kansas would support the proposed opportunities, the state’s work must con- be given the funds and flexibility they need to participation rate change only if the 24/40 tinue. In order to continue helping families hour work requirement explained above is run a welfare program, and they should be ac- be successful, it is important that the flexi- removed. Should the Bush plan be passed as countable for the result. The substitute that I bility currently afforded to states be contin- is, the state will have to choose between re- support includes no such broad waiver. ued and federal funding levels for the pro- quiring recipients, who may not be ready, to Mr. Speaker, the House should reject H.R. gram remain adequate. We need to stay the work for 24 hours a week knowing they will 4737 and approve the substitute. Our goal is course to accomplish the goals of welfare re- fail; or placing them in the right activities form. to move welfare recipients to work and help and accepting a penalty for failure to meet If you have any questions about the Presi- people lift themselves out of poverty. The sub- the participation rate requirement. The dent’s proposal or other TANF reauthoriza- stitute gives the states the tools they need to right activities might include remedial edu- tion bills that are introduced, please feel free achieve that goal. cation, learning disability accommodation to contact me. I would like to keep you up- training, substance abuse, mental health or KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL dated on how these proposals will affect the domestic violence counseling, or basic job AND REHABILITATION SERVICES, low income citizens of Kansas. skills training. The penalty for not meeting Topeka, KS, March 14, 2002. Sincerely, the work participation requirement would be Hon. DENNIS MOORE, JANET SCHALANSKY, a loss of $5.095 million in federal funds and a U.S. Representative, Cannon House Office Secretary. requirement to make up the loss with state Building, Washington, DC. Enclosure. DEAR REPRESENTATIVE MOORE: As you funds for a total penalty of $10.19 million. In study the issues surrounding the reauthor- KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND lieu of the 24 hour work requirement of the ization of the Temporary Assistance for REHABILITATION SERVICES Bush plan, Kansas supports retention of the Needy Families (TANF) program during this On February 26, 2002, the Bush Administra- current law which designates that 20 hours of Congressional session, please keep in mind tion introduced the outline of its TANF re- participation must be in primary activities, that it is the flexibility afforded the states authorization proposal, called Working To- which include work, on the job training, by TANF that has allowed Kansas to develop ward Independence. The administration indi- work experience, and job readiness activi- programs and initiatives which promote cates that child well-being is the overall goal ties. adult self-sufficiency and strengthen fami- of its plan. The plan also incorporates fa- Requires universal engagement of all lies. As a result of this flexibility, Kansas therhood and the formation and mainte- TANF families. States will be required to en- has been able to: nance of healthy two-parent married fami- gage all families in work and other construc- Reduce the cash assistance caseload by lies into the fourth purpose of the TANF pro- tive activities leading to self-sufficiency. 10,000 families since welfare reform began on gram. Main components of the President’s Within 60 days each family must have a self- October 1, 1996. reauthorization proposal include the fol- sufficiency plan for pursuing their maximum Help approximately 37,000 adults become lowing: degree of self sufficiency. The family’s employed and retain employment for a year Mandates More Stringent Work Require- progress must be monitored. Kansas supports or longer. ments. The President’s proposal requires this requirement as we currently develop and

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:31 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.062 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2558 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 monitor self sufficiency plans for all TANF learning disabilities, substance abuse, and ports this bonus plan which is superior to the families. domestic violence. The state has been able to current bonuses measuring high performance Retains the Current Five Year Time Limit accomplish this because of its waiver which and reduction of out-of-wedlock births. The and 20 Percent Exemption Limit. The De- allows all participation in job readiness ac- state plan requirements, however, will be partment supports retention of these provi- tivities to count toward meeting the state’s more stringent and intrusive, and thus is not sions. The five year time limit has been a work participation rate. With the adminis- supported. More authority is given to HHS good motivational tool for those recipients tration’s proposal to discontinue current for oversight in the approval process, which who are capable of working. Continuation of waivers, impose a new 24/40 work participa- will hinder state flexibility. the twenty percent exemption will allow per- tion requirement, and limit full time reha- Enhances Child Support Enforcement sons with documented hardship conditions to bilitative and substance abuse treatment to Strategies. The administration’s proposal receive assistance past the 60 month limit. 3 months out of each 24 months, Kansas will continues rigorous enforcement of child sup- Maintains TANF and Child Care Funding be forced to drop the successful programs de- port obligations while targeting additional Levels. The President’s proposal maintains scribed above, or fail the work participation child support collections to the families with the current level of funding for both the requirement and accept a financial penalty. greatest need by: Providing federal matching TANF and Child Care programs with no in- Kansas does support removing the limitation for states to provide or improve a pass dexing of grants for inflation. Level funding that exists in current TANF law of not al- through of child support to families that re- will not be sufficient to accomplish and sus- lowing more than 6 weeks of job readiness ceive TANF; giving states the option of pro- tain the goals of the TANF program for the activities (only 4 of which may be consecu- viding families that have left TANF the full following reasons: Families now receiving tive). The family, social and work barriers amount of child support collected on their cash assistance face serious work, family, faced by TANF recipients require much more behalf with federal sharing of the costs; col- and social barriers which they must over- than 6 weeks of job readiness activities to re- lecting a $25 annual user fee from families come before becoming successfully em- solve. that have never received welfare; lowering ployed. These services are expensive and far Promotes Child Well-Being and Health the threshold for passport denial to $2,500; exceed the expenditures for cash grants. Marriages. The Bush plan includes enhanced and expanding the federal offset program to Working poor families continue to need sup- funding for research, demonstrations, tech- allow states to collect past-due child support port services, such as child care, transpor- nical assistance, and matching grants to by withholding a limited amount of Social tation, tools, uniforms and other work re- states. An increased focus on marriage and Security Disability Insurance payments lated items, long after cash assistance eligi- child well-being will be added to both the from appropriate beneficiaries if benefits ex- bility ends, to retain work, advance in their purposes of the program and the state plan ceed $760 per month. Kansas supports these jobs, and improve their prospects to become requirements. This approach is designed to proposals if they remain options to the state. self-sufficient. As states transform TANF provide states with greater resources to pur- Reforms Food Stamp Program. The re- from cash assistance to work supports, a sue these goals while maintaining flexibility forms proposed by the administration, such larger clientele becomes eligible for these so that states can design programs that as simplifying some program rules, will benefits. With the additional participation work. make it easier for states to fashion a food requirements placed on states by the Bush Encourages Abstinence and Prevention of stamp program that is friendlier to working proposal, Kansas will not be able to continue Teen Pregnancy. The administration’s goal families. However, the President’s proposals funding all needed child care services. For for federal policy is to emphasize abstinence are not as extensive as those in the recently as the only certain way to avoid both unin- example, expanding the participation re- passed Senate version of the Farm Bill. We tended pregnancies and STDs. Although the quirement to 24/40 will cost $1.89 million support the Senate proposals. Kansas sup- scientific evaluation funded by Congress to more for child care each year if the parent ports the President’s proposal to provide study the effectiveness of abstinence-only and child are apart during all of the partici- food stamps to legal immigrants and to programs will not be completed until 2003, pation activities. If new work requirements eliminate the cap on EBT costs. Kansas is the administration proposes refunding the are mandated for TANF, federal child care not supportive of the President’s proposals Abstinence Education program at the same funding must be increased as well. In Kansas, regarding Quality Control. If the proposals level as in 1996 and retaining its strong defi- the cash assistance caseload has increased had been in place for FY 2000, the impact nition of how funds may be spent. The ad- due to the weakened economy. This trend would have been substantial. Our sanction ministration also proposes increasing fund- puts Kansas and other states in a difficult fi- would have increased from $79,313 to $804,036. nancial position as the increasing demands ing for community-based abstinence edu- Integration Waivers. Kansas is supportive for cash assistance make it difficult to con- cation grants by 83 percent to $73 million in of the ability to coorindation among agen- tinue providing the child care, diversion ben- 2003, including funding for comprehensive cies that provide services to TANF recipi- efits, state income tax credits, and job and evaluations of abstinence education pro- ents. Waivers have the potential to increase transportation assistance to the working grams. While the government’s evaluation of cost-effectiveness, reduce duplication, im- poor who are no longer receiving cash assist- abstinence education programs has not yet prove performance, streamline services, and ance. Unless TANF and child care funding been completed, many independent evalua- forge a client-friendly seamless system. levels remain adequate, states will be forced tions have found that abstinence-only pro- Waivers may be a means of: Coordinating to choose between reducing work support grams are ineffective in reducing unintended data collection and reporting requirements services and turning away some of the need- pregnancies, including teen pregnancies, and across programs and agencies; developing iest families. Kansas, therefore, supports in- STD’s. Because comprehensive programs common goals, policies, and performance dexing the block grants for inflation and pro- which include both abstinence education and measures for relevant aspects of TANF, Food viding increased funding for additional fed- birth control information have been found to Stamp, Medicaid, child care, child support, eral mandates. Kansas also supports the con- be the most effective, especially if they have child welfare, and workforce development tinuation of the states’ Maintenance of Ef- a youth development focus, Kansas does not programs; coordinating eligibility standards, fort (MOE) requirement as it exists in the support dedicating funds exclusively to ab- definitions, etc., for programs serving simi- current law. stinence education. If the goal is to reduce lar populations; enhancing federal funding Restores Supplemental and Contingency out-of-wedlock births, teen pregnancies, for cross-program information technology Funds, Allows for Rainy Day Funds, and Re- STD’s, and deaths from AIDS and Hepatitis, initiatives, including the sharing of adminis- stores Ability to Transfer 10 Percent of then states should be allowed the flexibility trative and program data across agencies; TANF Grant to Social Services Block Grant. to develop the programs that work best in simplifying federal procurement rules to bet- Although these provisions will be of no help reaching the youth and adults in their ter meet state needs; modifying federal con- to Kansas, they will greatly benefit some states. fidentiality rules to allow for client eligi- Focuses More on Program Performance. states. Kansas does not have the low rates of bility verification activities and tracking; States will be required to set performance unemployment or poverty required to ben- and integrating federal funding streams at standards in their state plans for addressing efit from the supplemental or contingency the state level for programs with similar each purpose of the TANF program, to annu- funds and does not have any carry-over funds goals for serving common clients. to benefit from the rainy day allowance. ally update their progress in meeting their Since all TANF funds are now obligated, goals, and to provide data to HHS to allow Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in transferring additional TANF funds to the federal oversight of the program. The Sec- opposition to H.R. 4737, the Republican wel- Social Services Block Grant would require retary of HHS will annually rank all states fare bill. This bill does nothing to improve the cuts to TANF services. Kansas supports re- in the order of their performance on indica- welfare system. stored federal funding of the Social Services tors measuring employment, retention, and Six years ago, Congress passed a sweep- Block Grant. wage increase. The administration will es- ing welfare reform bill to fix the failed system Discontinues State Program Waivers. The tablish a $100 million a year bonus to regard of cash payouts that rewarded not working. Bush administration proposes to discontinue employment achievement. Each state will TANF program waivers granted prior to the have numerical targets to strive for and will That bi-partisan bill encouraged work through 1996 welfare reform legislation. Kansas does compete against their performance in the both job training and child care services and not support this recommendations. Kansas previous year. All states could be eligible for by mandating a cut off of benefits after a fixed has received much national recognition for a bonus in any given year if their perform- period of time for those who refused to find the programs it has developed to address ance meets established targets. Kansas sup- work. The result, millions taken off the welfare

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:50 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.065 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2559 rolls and put into jobs. This was good for Again, I worked to add an amendment to Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in America and great for working, tax-paying the bill to allow for $20 billion to be invested support of our Nation’s families. As co-chair of Americans. over the next 5 years for child care for all of the Congressional Child Care Caucus, child But that bill was not perfect. For one, it ex- those participating in this program, but was care should not be a partisan issue. Every day cluded millions of tax-paying residents from again denied by Congressional Republicans. in this country, thirteen million children under qualifying for these work assistance programs, The result, a greater difficulty getting families the age of six are cared for by someone other namely America’s legal immigrants. with children either into jobs and off welfare, than their parents. And each day, children are Today, we have the opportunity to make or more latch-key kids left alone in the after needlessly placed in harm’s way because par- changes in those sections that failed and im- school hours to do whatever they please with- ents cannot afford to use high quality child prove upon our successes. Unfortunately, that out parental supervision. care services. will not happen. And so, not only does this bill not give wel- The need for quality child care and after Congressman XAVIER BECERRA and I fare beneficiaries the tools necessary to be- school care continues to grow throughout the planned on offering an amendment that would come economically self-sufficient. But the country and with the President’s recent call for have rectified this biggest of injustices of the process of bringing this bill to the floor has increased welfare work requirements, which I 1996 welfare bill. Our amendment would have been geared towards silencing dissenting support, it is imperative that the child care de- allowed legal immigrants—legal, tax paying voices. velopment block grants, CCDBG, are in- residents—to participate in the education, job My friends on the other side will try to say creased by $11 billion over the next 5 years. training and pregnancy prevention programs of that I am trying to give taxpayer money to In New York State alone, there is a need for this personal responsibility bill. But the House people who, they claim, refuse to work. an increase of $1.4 billion in CCDBG money Republican leadership overruled us and threw If we are to believe their premise that the over the next 6 years, which would allow an away the hopes of millions of our constituents. 1996 welfare bill was a proven success at pro- additional 79,000 families to enroll in the pro- Essentially, this bill discriminates against viding a temporary helping hand to get people gram each year. legal, tax-paying, residents, leaving them hun- off the dole and into jobs, then why shouldn’t Without this increase, many families are gry and out in the cold without assistance. Congress extend this same helping hand to all forced to choose more affordable, yet low I am particularly concerned about the effect of our residents in need. Shouldn’t we encour- quality child care services, and in turn, put this bill will have on my immigrant constitu- age, as opposed to discourage, work? their children at an unnecessary risk. In other ents. Queens is the fastest growing borough This current bill leaves more of my working cases, parents work 3 and 4 jobs in order to of New York City and my Congressional Dis- constituents paying a greater share of their pay for child care, which increases their need trict is one of the most diverse in the world. hard earned taxes to provide for those who for child care due to additional work hours. Over 100 languages are spoken in my part of are not given the tools to enter the workforce This endless cycle of working to pay for Western Queens, many by immigrants who and get off of government assistance. child care and needing child care because of came here for a better life for themselves and This Republican bill makes no sense. Let’s work, serves no one and in the long run, it for their children. vote it down and start again. Let’s invest in only hurts families as the number of hours Most of these people are here legally. They our people and give them the tools to get jobs, spent together diminishes. pay taxes, and they contribute to the social get off welfare and contribute to our national Each year, hundreds of children are injured and economic character of the United States. economy. We are richer for their presence, and I am This is not a question of budgets, this is or killed as a result of deplorable conditions, proud to represent them. However, many need about priorities. I urge the House to reject this unqualified personnel and the blatant lack of a temporary helping hand to get on their feet, Republican bill. respect for the laws intended to protect our get a job and taste their slice of the American Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, there’s no children. pie. small amount of irony that just one week after Many parents know that they are leaving This bill however would leave these families, Congress reinstated welfare for some of the their children in an unlicensed or unaccredited and their children, without any resources when largest agricultural interests in this country in center, but their hands are tied because this is in need of a helping hand. the farm bill, the Bush Administration and Re- all that they can afford. By providing additional I do not believe that this is right or fair and publican leadership in the House are imposing funds for the CCDBG, We can expand the I am greatly concerned that it will have a sig- new burdens on the poorest and most vulner- availability of child care services and increase nificant impact on the one in five children in able of our citizens. This Welfare Bill denies the amount of assistance to those families al- this country with immigrant parents. This bill states the ability to use their own approaches, ready enrolled in the program, allowing them undermines the civil rights of the over 35 mil- field-tested and improved by real-world experi- to place their children in safe child care condi- lion Latinos living in the U.S. legally and is not ence, to meet their own citizens’ needs. That’s tions. responsive to the needs of all immigrant fami- why the majority of governors, both Repub- There are already too many horror stories lies struggling through tough times. licans and Democrats, have opposed the ap- on the news about infants left in the hands of This bill limits access to job-training and proach in the Republican Welfare Bill. unqualified caregiver. This is our opportunity higher education opportunities, ensuring that As the national unemployment rate has in- to make a difference and to ensure that every individuals on welfare stay on welfare. Under creased, Oregon has had the highest rate in child, regardless of economic background, has this bill, those who do, by some miracle, man- the country. Welfare reform is no longer access to quality child care opportunities. Ac- age to get off of public assistance, would not propped up by a full-employment economy, cordingly, I urge colleagues to support the $11 be given any additional support, such as tran- and moving from welfare to work has become billion increase in the CCDBG to provide a sitional healthcare coverage, to stay off of wel- much more difficult. The Administration and better future for our children by making them fare. Republican leadership bill offers a rigid, de- our priority. Perhaps most importantly, this bill devotes signed-in-Washington, one size fits all ap- Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, today, the almost nothing to child care, while increasing proach. Instead, we should focus on sup- House of Representatives debated key legisla- work requirements, effectively forcing working porting what works: flexibility for the states, tion on Welfare Reform Reauthorization. Un- mothers to leave their children unattended in and total support for families through a com- fortunately, the legislation we passed does not order to earn enough money to feed them. In bination of work experience, training, edu- represent a step forward in welfare policy. short this bill is a disgrace. However does cation and child care. Since Congress passed the 1996 Welfare Re- such a law serve our society? I support the substitute offered by my col- form law, many have touted its success in re- Every 93 seconds a child is born into pov- league, BEN CARDIN, because it meets our ducing welfare rolls. While this is true, it paints erty in this country, and this bill does nothing goals, and supports efforts in the State of Or- a distorted picture on the realities of welfare. to help them. The GOP bill would increase egon. Instead of unfunded mandates, the sub- Yes, many States have seen a reduction in mandatory child care funding by only $1 billion stitute increases flexibility and encourages real welfare rolls, but many of the families that are over the next five years, that’s barely enough work. It also provides increased funding to moving off welfare are moving straight into to keep pace with inflation, and nowhere near make a down payment towards the needs of low-income, minimum wage jobs. Many still enough to implement the bill’s new work par- the 15 million unserved children eligible for rely on federal supports, such as Medicaid ticipation requirements, not to mention provide childcare. Most importantly, it provides guaran- and food stamps to stay afloat. Is this suc- child care coverage to the 15 million children tees that our poorest and most vulnerable citi- cess? who are now eligible for day care assistance zens who have the least political power will We cannot expect families to move forward but who are not currently covered because get real help moving into the workforce, not unless we provide them with the essentials to States lack sufficient resources. just more rules and requirements. succeed in life. Unfortunately, the bill that the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:31 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.068 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2560 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 Republicans introduced does not address or 6 years later, we have seen results from this must focus on how we are going to help fami- contain sound policies and provisions that will law being put in place. However, this welfare lies move from welfare and poverty to work help lift individuals out of poverty and off of bill is a step in the wrong direction. and prosperity. As I looked at both the Repub- welfare. This should be the focus of welfare No one will argue that the ‘‘welfare to work’’ lican and Democratic bills, I found the Demo- reform reauthorization—to help lift families out law isn’t successful. I believe that in our hopes crat proposal did a lot more to move families of poverty. If this isn’t the main goal, and it is to move forward on welfare reform, we are ig- from handouts to becoming active workers in not in the Republican bill, then we are failing noring an important population in our commu- today’s market. the system and more importantly we are fail- nities: our children. How can we support a bill To begin with, the Democrat substitute ing families. that wants welfare recipients to work 40 hour strengthens the current work requirements by: We need to improve upon what we know work weeks but provides no additional funding Increasing the number of work-focus activity from the 1996 Welfare Reform law and work for care? And how can we as a body entertain hours from 20 to 24 hours; requiring a min- with States to provide them with the funds and providing tax benefits for stay at home moth- imum of 30 hours of work and provides states flexibility they need to help families and chil- ers, while at the same time, forcing low-in- the option of increasing the number of re- dren not simply move off of welfare, but more come mothers to work more hours and be quired hours to 40 hours a week; and replaces importantly, move out of poverty. Greater em- separated from their children for longer peri- the current caseload reduction credit with an phasis should be placed on educational oppor- ods of time? The bottom line is that you can- employment credit that reduces states partici- tunities and programs—an approach that not expand work requirements without ex- pation rate according to the number of people would ensure that families are able to move panding child care. leaving welfare to work. up the economic ladder. Without the oppor- Should welfare recipients really have to In addition, the Democratic substitute pro- tunity to learn a trade or pursue post-sec- choose between being a good worker or a vides the state with the necessary resources ondary educational options, the outlook for good parent? The Democratic substitute pro- to meet the stronger work requirements. families being able to move off of welfare and vides states with the necessary resources, The Republican bill places a large unfunded improve their economic status is bleak. such as child care funding, to meet the strong- mandate burden on the states. The Demo- Education is the key to success—we all er work requirements. The Republican bill cratic substitute raises the bar on the work re- know that. Yet, the Republican bill does not does not. The Democratic substitute provides quirements and provides the states with the stress the importance of education. Instead of recipients with the chance to allow education, resources to meet these changes. providing States with the flexibility of offering vocational education as well as training, as For example, it provides an additional $11 more educational programs, the provisions in well as participation in English as a second billion for mandatory childcare funding over the Republican bill put States in a compro- language and GED programs to count toward five years to meet the work requirements. In mising position. In order to adhere to the strict the participation rate. The Republican bill addition, the bill increases the set-aside for work requirement of a 70 percent participation eliminates vocational education from the list of child care quality from 4 to 12 percent. rate by 2007 and a 40 hour work week re- work-related activities. Furthermore, the Democratic substitute pro- quirement, States would need to focus more Most of us are parents. We know the daily vides states with the flexibility. The most on pushing recipients into low-income or struggles of balancing work and family. Some- promising state programs that help welfare re- workfare type programs that offer no chance times these struggles prove even more difficult cipients obtain and advance in a job combine of a brighter future. This is the wrong choice for single-parent families. We need a system a ‘‘work first’’ approach with supplemental for families. that does not discriminate by family type or training and education. The Republican pro- While the Republican bill puts forth unreal- marital status. The Republican bill does just posal eliminates vocational education training istic expectations on States and welfare recipi- that. from the list of work related activities that ents, it does not, at the same time, adequately In a perfect America, children would be count toward the state’s participation rate. increase Temporary Assistance for Needy raised in two-parent families. In a perfect Finally, the Democratic substitute rewards Families (TANF) funding and child care fund- America, all citizens would be trained and self-sufficiency and gives families the help ing to States to help them meet the require- educated in order to choose any job they they need to successfully move from welfare ments. In fact, there is no increase in TANF wanted, not limited to only the ones they are to work. It improves the Individual Responsi- spending and only a $1 billion increase in qualified to do. Regrettably, this bill imposes bility Plan so that every family has a specific mandatory child care funding over five years. heavier work responsibilities on welfare recipi- plan detailing the steps and work supports Currently, many working parents on welfare ents without providing the tools to protect their needed to move the parent into meaningful are not able to find quality child care. How can families. work activities and achieve self-sufficiency. It we expect working mothers to work a 40 hour Another population that is largely ignored by also provides a 5-year extension of Transi- week if they do not have access to quality the Republican bill is our immigrant popu- tional Medical Assistance (TMA) for parents child care? Children should be our first priority, lation. While I still have many concerns with and children leaving welfare. The Republican but they are not in this bill. the farm bill that was signed into law on Mon- bill only extends TMA for 1 year. The Republican Welfare Reform bill focuses day, I was pleased to support the provision Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to on a one-size-fits-all policy that is concerned which restores food stamp benefits to legal im- support this Democrat alternative and reject more with moving families off of welfare rolls migrants. Let’s do one better for our immigrant the underlying bill that hurts American families. than providing families with opportunities to population. Let’s allow states to be able to Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support succeed. Instead of looking at disingenuous provide welfare benefits to legal immigrants. of H.R. 4737, the Personal Responsibility, numbers on paper, Congress needs to focus The welfare of all our nation’s children, wheth- Work and Family Promotion Act. more on looking at individual families when er they are born here in the United States, or The 1996 welfare law was the most signifi- implementing policies. If Republicans did this somewhere else, should be today’s most im- cant change in American social policy in a they would realize how unrealistic their bill portant consideration. The Democratic sub- generation. By liking benefits to work, the law truly is. It restricts States instead of providing stitute does just that. It will also allow states introduced economic rewards to families iso- them with more flexibility to determine what is to provide Medicaid to legal immigrant preg- lated in a cycle of dependence and despair. the right approach for individual families in nant women and children, certainly our most Welfare reform has changed many lives in their State. Helping families to succeed is the underserved citizens. dramatic ways, but there is still more to do. Democratic approach—and the right approach. Today, let’s send a message to America Despite the emphasis on work, nearly 58 per- If we fail to enact policies that will give families that we want citizens on the road to economic cent of adult welfare recipients today are not a chance to create a better life, we fail families independence. Let’s arm these citizens with working. Far too many individuals still do not and we fail children. the training and education necessary to sus- know the satisfaction of a job well-done and For these reasons, I vote ‘‘no’’ on H.R. tain and advance employment, while ensuring the dignity of a steady paycheck. This legisla- 4737. their family’s security by providing child care. tion sets a more challenging standard on Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise Let’s protect the welfare of our most important work, one that is tough but achievable. in strong opposition to this legislation which is commodity, our children. I urge all my col- H.R. 4737 requires states to engage at least falsely named, the Personal Responsibility, leagues to vote against H.R. 4700 and vote in 70 percent of their welfare recipients in 24 Work and Family Promotion Act. favor of the Democratic substitute. Let’s pass hours of direct work each week, and the other In 1996, when this body passed the ‘‘wel- a meaningful welfare reform bill today. 16 hours in job-related activities like edu- fare to work’’ bill, we changed welfare forever Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speak- cation, training, or counseling. This will allow and it was a giant in the right direction. Now er, as the House debates Welfare Reform, we individuals to work 3 days and go to school 2

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:31 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.071 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2561 days each week. Meaningful work require- recipients to work does raise valid concerns government, the lives of the poor would be ments blended with education and training will regarding how much control over one’s life ‘‘nasty, brutish and short.’’ However, as schol- lead to greater self-sufficiency. should be ceded to the government in ex- ar Sheldon Richman of the Future of Freedom As we set a higher standard of work and re- change for government benefits. Foundation and others have shown, voluntary quire welfare recipients to be active partici- In addition, Mr. Speaker, it is highly unlikely charities and organizations, such as friendly pants in improving their lives, Congress must that a ‘‘one-size-fits-all’’ approach dictated societies that devoted themselves to helping give families the support necessary to make from Washington will meet the diverse needs those in need, flourished in the days before this transition. A combination of work and so- of every welfare recipient in every state and the welfare state turned charity into a govern- cial services will provide a more effective ap- locality in the nation. Proponents of this bill ment function. Today, government welfare pro- proach to fighting welfare dependency and claim to support allowing states, localities, and grams have supplemented the old-style private poverty than an approach that relies primarily private charities the flexibility to design wel- programs. One major reason for this is that on government handouts. fare-to-work programs that fit their particular the policy of high taxes and the inflationary We also must remain responsive to people circumstances. Yet, as Minnesota Governor monetary policy imposed on the American with multiple barriers to employment. As the Jesse Ventura points out in the attached arti- people in order to finance the welfare state reauthorization process moves forward, I am cle, this proposal constricts the ability of the have reduced the income available for chari- hopeful there will be a focus on allowing older states to design welfare-to-work programs that table giving. Many over-taxed Americans take individuals to take the time necessary to get a meet the unique needs of their citizens. the attitude toward private charity that ‘‘I give GED, as well as a greater emphasis on help- As Governor Ventura points out in reference at the (tax) office.’’ ing those who need intensive drug rehabilita- to this proposal’s effects on Minnesota’s wel- Releasing the charitable impulses of the tion. fare-to-welfare work program, ‘‘We know what American people by freeing them from the ex- I applaud the decision to provide an addi- we are doing in Minnesota works. We have cessive tax burden so they can devote more tional $2 billion in child care funds. Safe, af- evidence. And our way of doing things has of their resources to charity, is a moral and fordable, high-quality child care is an important broad support in the state. Why should we be constitutional means of helping the needy. By part of the support network needed to move forced by the federal government to put our contrast, the federal welfare state is neither people from welfare to work. Additional child system at risk?’’ Why indeed, Mr. Speaker, moral or constitutional. Nowhere in the Con- care funds will allow parents to hold jobs. should any state be forced to abandon its indi- stitution is the federal government given the I am also pleased this bill helps states ad- vidual welfare programs because a group of power to level excessive taxes on one group dress the unique challenges faced by their self-appointed experts in Congress, the federal of citizens for the benefit of another group of populations. H.R. 4737 enables states to con- bureaucracy, and inside-the-beltway ‘‘think citizens. Many of the founders would have duct innovative demonstration projects and co- tanks’’ have decided there is only one correct been horrified to see modern politicians define ordinate a range of problems in order to im- way to transition people from welfare to work? compassion as giving away other people’s prove services. It gives states the freedom to Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4737 further expands the money stolen through confiscatory taxation. In better meet the needs of welfare recipients as reach of the federal government by authorizing the words of the famous essay by former Con- they work toward independence. $100 million dollars for new ‘‘marriage pro- gressman Davy Crockett, this money is ‘‘Not Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to sup- motion’’ programs. I certainly recognize how Yours to Give.’’ port this legislation. the welfare state has contributed to the de- Voluntary charities also promote self-reli- Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, no one can deny cline of the institution of marriage. As an ob- ance, but government welfare programs foster that welfare programs have undermined Amer- gyn with over 30 years of private practice. I dependency. In fact, it is the self-interests of ica’s moral fabric and constitutional system. know better than most the importance of sta- the bureaucrats and politicians who control the Therefore, all those concerned with restoring ble, two parent families to a healthy society. welfare state to encourage dependency. After liberty and protecting civil society from the However, I am skeptical, to say the least, of all, when a private organization moves a per- maw of the omnipotent state should support claims that government ‘‘education’’ programs son off of welfare, the organization has fulfilled efforts to eliminate the welfare state, or, at the can fix the deep-rooted cultural problems re- its mission and proved its worth to donors. In very last, reduce federal control over the provi- sponsible for the decline of the American fam- contrast, when people leave government wel- sion of social services. Unfortunately, the mis- ily. fare programs, they have deprived federal bu- named Personal Responsibility, Work and Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, federal pro- reaucrats of power and of a justification for a Family Promotion Act (H.R. 4737) actually in- motion of marriage opens the door for a level larger amount of taxpayer funding. creases the unconstitutional federal welfare of social engineering that should worry all In conclusion, H.R. 4737 furthers federal state and thus undermines personal responsi- those concerned with preserving a free soci- control over welfare programs by imposing bility, the work ethic, and the family. ety. The federal government has no constitu- new mandates on the states which furthers H.R. 4737 reauthorizes the Temporary As- tional authority to promote any particular social unconstitutional interference in matters best sistance to Needy Families (TANF) block grant arrangement; instead, the founders recognized left to state local governments, and individ- program, the main federal welfare program. that people are better off when they form their uals. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to op- Mr. Speaker, increasing federal funds always own social arrangements free from federal in- pose it. Instead, I hope my colleagues will increases federal control as the recipients of terference. The history of the failed experi- learn the lessons of the failure of the welfare the funds must tailor their programs to meet ments with welfarism and socialism shows that state and embrace a constitutional and com- federal mandates and regulations. More im- government can only destroy a culture; when passionate agenda of returning control over portantly, since federal funds represent re- a government tries to build a culture, it only the welfare programs to the American people sources taken out of the hands of private indi- further erodes the people’s liberty. through large tax cuts. viduals, increasing federal funding leaves H.R. 4737 further raises serious privacy WELFARE: NOT THE FED’S JOB fewer resources available for the voluntary concerns by expanding the use of the ‘‘New (By Jesse Ventura) provision of social services, which, as I will ex- Hires Database’’ to allow states to use the In 1996, the federal government ended 60 plain in more detail later, is a more effective, database to verify unemployment claims. The years of failed welfare policy that trapped moral, and constitutional means of meeting New Hires Database contains the name and families in dependency rather than helping the needs of the poor. social security number of everyone lawfully them to self-sufficiency. The 1996 law H.R. 4737 further increases federal control employed in the United States. Increasing the scrapped the federally centralized welfare over welfare policy by increasing federal man- system in favor of broad flexibility so states states’ ability to identify fraudulent unemploy- could come up with their own welfare pro- dates on welfare recipients. This bill even ment claims is a worthwhile public policy goal. grams. It was a move that had bipartisan goes so far as to dictate to states how they However, every time Congress authorizes a support, was smart public policy and worked. must spend their own funds! Many of the new new use for the New Hires Database it takes Welfare reform has been a huge success. mandates imposed by this legislation concern a step toward transforming it into a universal Even those who criticized the 1996 law now work requirements. Of course, Mr. Speaker, national database that can be used by govern- agree it is working. Welfare case loads are there is a sound argument for requiring recipi- ment officials to monitor the lives of American down, more families are working, family in- come is up, and child poverty has dropped. ents of welfare benefits to work. Among other citizens. The reason is simple: state flexibility. In benefits, a work requirement can help a wel- As with all proponents of welfare programs, six short years the states undid a 60-year-old fare recipient obtain useful job skills and thus the supporters of H.R. 4737 show a remark- federally prescribed welfare system and cre- increase the likelihood that they will find pro- able lack of trust in the American people. They ated their own programs which are far better ductive employment. However, forcing welfare would have us believe that without the federal for poor families and for taxpayers.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:31 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.046 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2562 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 But now it appears the Bush administra- country’s welfare system in 1996, we have wit- that African American workers accounted for tion is having second thoughts about empow- nessed dramatic changes in how this nation only 27 percent of those collecting unemploy- ering the states. The administration’s pro- treats our poor children and families. While ment insurance benefits, even though they ac- posal would return us to a federally pre- count for about 37 percent of the jobless. For scribed system. It would impose rules on how welfare rolls have dropped by more than 50 states work with each family, forcing a ‘‘one percent, many families have lost Food stamp Latinos, the Pew Hispanic Center reports that size fits all’’ model for a system that for the benefits and Medicaid despite continued eligi- out of 1.26 million unemployed Latinos in De- past six years has produced individualized bility. In addition, numerous low-income fami- cember 2001, only 40 percent are likely to be systems that have been successful in states lies remain below the poverty line despite em- receiving unemployment benefits, leaving across the country. ployment. some 756,000 unable to access the benefits I would hope that as a former governor, One of the most important issues Congress to support their families. President Bush would understand that these must address when considering reauthoriza- Let me be clear: efforts to improve our problems are better handled by the indi- economy are not reaching people of color. Af- vidual states. The administration’s proposal tion of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act is how would cripple welfare reform in my state and race and ethnicity factor in why some welfare rican Americans are losing their jobs at nearly many others. recipients have failed to obtain gainful and twice the national average. Latino unemploy- I know that my friend Health and Human lasting employment. Research has shown that ment hovers near 5 year high. These numbers Services Secretary Tommy Thompson did a minorities face significantly more discrimina- are an outrage and are unacceptable. But, wonderful job of reforming Wisconsin’s wel- tion in the services they receive from welfare they don’t even tell the whole story. While fare system. But that doesn’t mean the Wis- agencies as well as in the treatment they re- these workers are losing their jobs and their consin system would be as effective in families are suffering, the Bush Administration Vermont. My state of Minnesota is also a na- ceive on the job. tional model for welfare reform. It is a na- Numerous studies have documented cases is proposing cutbacks in job training programs tional model, in part because we make sure of racial disparities in Welfare Reform, and I and reductions in education funding that would welfare reform gets families out of poverty. believe they are worth mentioning. help put people in a better position to earn a How do we do this? Exactly the way Presi- A recent Chicago Urban League study living wage. dent Bush and Secretary Thompson would found that while more than 50 percent of white Here we are poised to reauthorize welfare want us to do it: by putting people to work. recipients were referred to education pro- reform with Members on both sides of the But here’s the rub—it matters how fami- grams, less than 20 percent of African Ameri- aisle calling for an increase in the number of lies on welfare get to work. In Minnesota, we hours recipients must work to stay eligible for work with each family one on one and use a cans were referred to the same programs. broad range of services to make sure the A statewide study of welfare recipients in transitional assistance. I hope that these new family breadwinner gets and keeps a decent Virginia by Professor Susan Gooden of Vir- unemployment numbers indicating that more job. For some families it might take a little ginia Tech found that although African Amer- Americans are getting laid off will force Mem- longer that what the president is com- ican program participants were, on average, bers to rethink their positions. How can we fortable with, but the results are overwhelm- better educated than whites, zero African look these people in the eye and tell them to ingly positive. A three-year follow-up of Americans were directed to education pro- work longer hours when there aren’t even jobs Minnesota families on welfare found that grams to fulfill their requirements. At the same available to them? more than three-quarters have left welfare In 1996, we handed the administration of or gone to work. Families that have left wel- time, 41 percent of whites were steered to education programs. The study also found that the welfare programs over to states. And who fare for work earn more than $9 an hour, know better than the states that have been higher than comparable figures in other African Americans were also less likely to re- administering the TANF programs what will states. The federal government has twice ceive discretionary support such as transpor- cited Minnesota as a leader among the states and what won’t work? tation assistance, less likely to be placed in The National Governors Association (NGA) in job retention and advancement. jobs by the state employment agency, and An independent evaluation of Minnesota’s is very concerned about how the Republican more likely to be subjected to drug and back- welfare reform pilot found it to be perhaps plan takes away the state’s flexibility in admin- the most successful welfare reform effort in ground tests, than white recipients. istering TANF programs. In April of this year the nation. The evaluation found Min- A Gooden Employer study (1999) found that the National Governors Association (NGA) and nesota’s program not only increased employ- whites were more likely to have longer inter- the American Public Human Services Associa- ment and earnings but also reduced poverty, views than blacks (25 min v. 11 min), less tion (APHSA) conducted a joint survey of Gov- reduced domestic abuse, reduced behavioral likely to have a negative relationship with their ernors and state TANF administrators to as- problems with kids and improved their supervisor (29 percent v. 64 percent), and less school performance. It also found that mar- sess the impact proposed changes to the work likely to undergo pre-employment testing (24 requirements would have on current state wel- riage and marital stability increased as a re- percent v. 45 percent). sult of higher family incomes. fare reform initiatives. This study found that: The administration’s proposal would have Cruel and Usual, an Applied Research Cen- ‘‘As states work with families on a more indi- Minnesota set all this aside and focus in- ter survey of more than 1,500 welfare recipi- vidualized basis, many states are finding that stead on make-work activities. In Minnesota ents in 13 states, found that discriminatory a combination of activities on a limited basis, we believe that success in welfare reform is treatment on the basis of gender, race, lan- such as work, job training, education, and sub- about helping families progress to a self-suf- guage, and national origin was a common ex- ficiency that will last. While it may be po- stance abuse treatment, leads to the greatest perience. Forty-eight percent of African Amer- success for some individuals. Governors be- litically appealing to demand that all wel- ican women and 56 percent of Native Amer- fare recipients have shovels in their hands, it lieve the federal government should recognize makes sense to me that the states—and not ican women who received job training were the success of these tailored approaches to the feds—are in the best position to make sent to demeaning ‘‘Dress for Success’’ class- addressing an individual’s needs by providing those decisions. es, compared with only 24 percent of white states greater discretion in defining appro- We know what we are doing in Minnesota women. priate work activities.’’ works. We have evidence. And our way of At the same time that people of color are Also in the NGA report, ‘‘States expressed doing things has broad support in the state. being marginalized by our welfare system, (ac- concerns over the impact of level funding of Why should we be forced by the federal gov- cording to an Applied Research Center study) ernment to put our system at risk? the TANF block grant; citing inflation having I believe in accountable and responsive African Americans and other minorities are reduced the purchasing power of the block government, and have no problem with the disproportionately affected by our current re- grant, making it unlikely that the block grant federal government holding states account- cession: will keep pace with the rising costs of serv- able for results in welfare reform. But I also After September 11, the increase in unem- ices, such as case management, employment believe that in this case the people closest to ployment rates for African Americans and and training, transportation and child care.’’ the problem should be trusted to solve the Latinos was more than double that for whites. The majority of states (33) responding cited problem and be left alone if they have. Unemployment among African Americans concerns about meeting the proposed work re- Secretary Thompson, with the blessing of soared to 11.2 percent in April of this year and the president, seems to be taking us down a quirements in rural areas where the economy road that violates the tenets of states’ rose to 7.9 percent for Hispanics. African is often lagging and employment opportunities rights. Americans has reached its highest point in 8 are limited. Say it ain’t so, Tommy. As long as it’s years, while Latino unemployment is its high- The State of Illinois responded, ‘‘A 70 per- working, why not let the states do our own est in 5. cent participation rate with a 40 hour a week thing? In New York City, where unemployment has requirement will probably require two things. Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. skyrocketed since the events of September First, creation of a number of make work ac- Mr. Speaker since the historic overhaul of this 11, the New York Times reported in February tivities or greater use of current ones, whether

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.049 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2563 or not warranted, just to fill the requirement. Texas would be forced to implement a sub- portant of an issue to consider under a proc- Second, a near total abandonment of allowing sidized employment program which it has al- ess that has more to do with scoring political any client that is able to work at all to partici- ready rejected as unworkable and change points than building on what has been suc- pate in such things as GED programs or post- parts of its welfare reform effort that have cessful. secondary education.’’ been a success in moving welfare recipients Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise Once we force States to send all these peo- into real jobs. It would be the height of arro- today in support of our continued effort to re- ple to work in 40-hour workweek jobs that gance for me to stand here in Washington and form welfare. Since 1996, more people across don’t exist, what are we going to do with their vote to require Texas to implement policies on the country and in my state of Kentucky have children? Childcare is expensive! The states welfare reform that the Texas legislature has become independent and free from their de- recognize this. In the NGA report, States were already considered and rejected. pendency on welfare. While in my district and asked to estimate the annual increase in child I must express my strong concern for the through our work in the Ways and Means care costs associated with the proposal to re- process that has brought us to the floor today. committee, I’ve heard their success stories quire 70 percent participation in activities total- On February 7, 8, 9 and 14, 1995 the Com- and also learned that we can do more to build ing 40-hours per week. Of the 32 states re- mittee on Agriculture held hearings on Re- upon the 1996 reforms. That is exactly what sponding to the question, 30 states indicated forming the Present Welfare System (Serial we are doing today. Our bill focuses on work that the costs would increase and two states 104Ð2). That is 4 days of hearings. That does and education options, provides more flexibility indicated that there would be no additional not include other related hearings that the for states and offers more assistance to costs associated with the proposal. Committee held on other nutrition issues. A strengthen families. But the Republican plan doesn’t even begin record was built on the issues regarding wel- One of the things we do in this bill is allow to meet this enormous expense—The CBO fare reform. I will grant you that the eventual participants in their state welfare programs to estimates the increased mandatory work hours path to enactment of Welfare Reform was a choose between job readiness activities and imposed on states by the Republican plan will tortuous and contentious one, but everyone job search activities. They have flexibility to re- increase child care cost an additional $3.8 bil- understood the issues compiling the legisla- ceive the services they need the most, wheth- lion—almost 4 times as much as the Repub- tion. er that is job search help, basic education, lican plan provides! In fact, my state of Texas Today is a totally different situation. We are training for a new skill to help them find a job alone would have an estimate of over 36,000 considering a bill that was only recently intro- or recovering from substance abuse. For up to children on childcare waiting list. duced. The Committee on Agriculture which five months, taking part in any of these serv- For these reasons, I have introduced legis- has jurisdiction over the Food Stamp provi- ices fulfills their work requirement. Beyond that lation that addresses racial inequalities and sions contained in the Welfare Reform Reau- time, welfare recipients still are able to receive mistreatment of minorities in welfare program. thorization legislation has not even considered a combination of education-focused and work- While we are providing states the flexibility the bill. Welfare Reform Reauthorization focused services so they can become em- and funding they need to empower welfare re- should be accorded the same consideration as ployed and can be successful on their own. cipients and address important issues like ac- other important legislation. We should hold Requiring work helps welfare recipients cess to child care, education, and job training. hearings on the proposals, mark it up in Com- achieve independence and gives them the The key provisions of this legislation include mittee and then bring it to the floor. No one ability to care for their families. ensuring equal access by expanding edu- here today can tell us if the provisions con- Last month I attended the graduation cere- cation and training opportunities, strengthening cerning food stamps are reasonable. They are mony for the Reach Higher welfare to work fair treatment and anti-discrimination protec- concepts that the majority is willing to put into program in Bowling Green, Kentucky. The tions and encouraging racial equality. law without asking any of the affected—nutri- state and local flexibility in the 1996 law al- I believe we should all agree that welfare re- tion advocates, state welfare administrators, lowed Reach Higher to develop services to form measures should not punish racial and and others what the practical effect will be meet community needs, and the program has ethnic minorities attempting to better them- upon the floor stamp program. turned people’s lives around. Participants in selves. Every American must be provided with We have a largely positive record to build Reach Higher must work 32 hours per week. the opportunity and the obligation to be a pro- upon with welfare reform. Why are we risking They also spend one day each week in life- ductive member of society. As we continue to that success for cheap political expediency. If skills and job training. Reach Higher asks a lot debate welfare authorization, we must make the concepts contained in the legislation are of the participants, and they respond to the certain that racial and ethnic discrimination are good, public scrutiny will only strengthen them. challenge because they want a better life and not vehicles used to hinder access to the road I have grave concerns about this process. find out that they are able to succeed. from poverty. The people that participate in these programs In 1998, a participant found herself trying to I urge my colleagues to vote ‘‘no’’ on the are the most vulnerable in the country. The raise two small children in public housing with Republican bill. programs that they rely on deserve a thorough no money and no job. Then she was assigned Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in op- examination. to Reach Higher and completed the program. position to this bill before us today. I was The so-called ‘‘super-waivers’’ advocated in She now holds a full time job with the Bowling proud to be a member of the conference com- this legislation has the potential to undermine Green Housing Authority and was approved mittee that wrote the welfare reform bill that current food stamp policy of providing nutrition for a home loan this year. Here is what she was enacted in 1996. At the time, there were assistance to all eligible citizens if they face had to say: ‘‘I began to accomplish things that many critics of welfare reform who said that economic hardships. The question is not I thought I would never accomplish alone. I the bill would be a disaster for those truly in whether states should or should not receive began to want more out of life for myself as need. We found out that they were for the the flexibility under waiver authority to tailor well as my children. I worked hard and had most part wrong about welfare reform. We the food stamp program rules. States already additional training classes that I knew would could move people from dependence to work have that flexibility. The question is whether further my skills.’’ in a responsible way and not shortchange our states should be allowed even greater flexi- We have been on the right track with wel- commitment to the neediest in our society. bility to change the very nature of the food fare. And this bill continues to build on that States have proven that if we give them stamp program. success. I encourage all of my colleagues to flexibility to develop programs that work in If there are innovative reforms that states vote for this legislation that gives more fami- their state they can effectively serve those citi- would like to implement that are prohibited lies who need help the chance to succeed. zens who strive to break the cycle of welfare under current law, should examine how to ad- Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, today the House dependence. That is why I am troubled by the dress those specific problems. That is what is considering the Personal Responsibility, provisions in the bill before us today that se- the Committee process is intended to do. Let Work, and Family Promotion Act, H.R. 4737. verely restrict the flexibility of states such as state administrators testify before the Agri- In keeping with the strong welfare reform prin- Texas to continue the activities that have been culture Committee about the changes they be- ciples outlined by President Bush, this legisla- successful in their welfare to work programs lieve would allow them to run the program bet- tion would reauthorize a very successful pro- and place a tremendous unfunded mandate ter and, let the Committee come up with legis- gram that encourages personal responsibility on states. lation to address those concerns. and work. H.R. 4737 builds upon the success- For my own state of Texas, this bill would The delay in bringing this bill to the floor ful reforms instituted in 1996 that I was create an unfunded mandate of $166 million a today highlights the problems of ignoring the pleased to support. year, in addition to the $78 million shortfall committee process and writing bills in the Welfare rolls have sharply declined since re- they will face under current law by 2007. leadership offices. Welfare reform is too im- form was enacted in 1996. Poverty rates have

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.052 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2564 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 declined, employment rates have climbed and petent and affordable child care providers. ings of low-income families increase, most of wages have increased. H.R. 4737 will build on Working families in America deserve better their benefits, such as housing, food-stamps, those successes. This legislation will maintain than what this Republican inadequacy has to child-care co-payments, and the Earned In- full funding for the Temporary Assistance for offer. come Tax Credit, phase-out in a manner that Needy Families (TANF), increase funding by It is for this reason that I urge my Demo- discourages working harder and advancing in $2 billion for improved child care programs cratic colleagues to vote yes for the Demo- a job. In some cases a pay raise of a dollar over the next 5 years, increase State flexibility cratic substitute. It provides a realistic increase an hour can mean the loss of benefits at a in use of welfare funding, and promote individ- of $11 billion dollars in mandatory child care rate that exceeds that raise. This effective uals in job preparation, work, and marriage. funding, and increases the role of training and marginal tax can exceed 100 percent and trap Building on the successful work require- education in improving the condition of our families in poverty. I am pleased that this bill ments of the 1996 reform, H.R. 4737 requires neediest citizens. In addition it includes provi- requires the General Accounting Office to un- welfare recipients to work 40 hours per week, sions for our neighbors who have immigrated dertake a comprehensive study of the obsta- either at a job or in a program designed to to this country. Vote ‘‘yes’’ on the Democratic cles created by the combined phase-outs of help them gain independence. substitute. It is a true step toward ensuring low-income support programs and recommend This is important legislation in the monu- that no child or family is left behind. ways to coordinate and reform these pro- mental task of bringing Americans out of pov- Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I rise grams. erty into independence by raising expectations in strong opposition to H.R. 4735, a bill to re- Because of this ‘‘Poverty Trap,’’ I also en- for work and personal responsibility. H.R. authorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy thusiastically support provisions within this bill 4737 will further strengthen this nation’s econ- Families program. which provide states and local governments omy and workforce to prepare all our citizens Unfortunately, many of the provisions in this with the flexibility to implement demonstration for the future. I urge the House to approve this bill are unfair and misguided. One of the most projects that coordinate multiple low-income legislation so that the Personal Responsibility, egregious examples, is the impact this legisla- support programs. Under these provisions Work and Family Promotion Act can be reau- tion will have on single mothers with young states can integrate eligible programs as long thorized without delay. children. For example, this bill provides insuffi- as those projects serve the populations and Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong cient funding for childcare, yet increases the achieve the purposes of the underlying pro- opposition to the Republican Welfare Bill, H.R. work requirement from 20 hours a week to 40 grams. This requirement further ensures that 4737. hours for mothers with children under the age beneficiaries of these underlying programs are This welfare bill, of such far-reaching impor- of 6. While the Republican bill touts the $1 bil- going to gain, not lose, as a result of these tance, does nothing to help move families out lion increase in childcare funding over the next demonstration projects. While I wish these of poverty. In fact, this bill would mean that 5 years, they fail to note that this increase flexibility provisions went further, they are an welfare families would be placed in an impos- barely keeps up with inflation, let alone meets important step that will enable needed innova- sible situation. The Republican bill requires a the increased demand for childcare created tion at the state and local level to help families 40 hour work week for mothers with children under the bill. escape poverty. The states have proven to be under six. That is twice the current work hour Mr. Speaker, mothers already find it ex- the laboratories for successful change in our requirement, yet there is an allotment of only tremely difficult to find safe and adequate day welfare system, and this flexibility will enhance $1 billion additional dollars for child care. Can care. With the current backlog of approxi- their capabilities. As a recent Wall Street Jour- nal editorial said, the state flexibility provisions someone please tell me how a working mother mately 15 million children waiting for day care help get Washington out of the way of local of children under the age of six is supposed due to a lack of funding, this bill will only make a bad situation worse. Disadvantaged single progress. to work a minimum 40 hour week without a I urge all my colleagues who want to help mothers and children are already a vulnerable way to fund the care of her children? And too low-income families leave welfare and achieve population. Without sufficient funding for add insult to injury, this bill doesn’t even en- self-sufficiency to support this bill and the childcare, many of these mothers will be sure that she will be compensated with min- state and local flexibility provisions within it. imum wage for her forty hours of work. forced to chose between leaving their young Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, today we are A paltry child care allotment of $1 billion dol- children alone, or losing the benefits that help debating the reauthorization of the welfare lars over the next 5 years is unconscionable. them provide for their children. Congress program. I believe that we have a responsi- It does not even keep pace with the current should be working to help these families get bility to help families transition into the work rate of inflation, and there are already 15 mil- back on their feet—not penalizing them with force and provide essential support to make lion American children eligible for child care unrealistic requirements that keep mothers work pay. The Democratic substitute will do who are not receiving it due to inadequate away from their children. that. Regrettably, the Republican bill will not. funding. This increase does not address the I urge my colleagues to vote against this pu- I focus these remarks on two provisions current need, and will certainly not address nitive, unfair and unrealistic bill. within this re-authorization that were consid- the need that will grow exponentially if the 40 Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in sup- ered by the Committee on Energy and Com- hour requirement is imposed. port of this bill, which will build upon the tre- merce: transitional medical assistance (TMA) Also, this bill removes education from the mendous successes of the 1996 welfare re- and abstinence-only education. TMA is a pro- current law-list of work related activities. This forms. When those reforms were enacted, op- gram that provides health insurance coverage measure strips needy families of their ability to ponents predicted apocalyptic scenes of pov- for families leaving welfare to go back to work. participate in GED and English literacy pro- erty and suffering among America’s low-in- It is a program that makes good sense. Indi- grams. With a mandate which strips the ability come families. Time has proven, however, that viduals moving off welfare often wind up in to obtain a GED and learn English, the playing those reforms were right. Child poverty is at its jobs that do not offer health insurance cov- field can never be level and the condition of lowest level in 25 years and poverty among erage or find that employer-sponsored cov- needy Americans will continue to deteriorate. African-American children is at its lowest level erage is too costly on the family’s limited I cannot leave this debate without also ad- in history. By requiring welfare beneficiaries to budget. TMA allows these families to keep dressing the renewed omission of immigrant work and engage in productive activities, Con- their health insurance coverage in Medicaid so families from the welfare bill. For the second gress helped change society. Former welfare that getting a job doesn’t mean losing health time, my Republican colleagues intend to deny beneficiaries now testify that by being pushed coverage. The Republican bill, however, only immigrant families the tools they require to into work activities, they are now better mem- extends this program for one year; many of us capture the American dream that brought bers of society and better parents to their chil- prefer making this common-sense program them here. It is hypocritical to celebrate the dren. permanent, as the Democratic substitute pro- tradition of America’s melting pot while deny- Although we have moved millions of families vides. Of added concern, Republicans would ing the people who make our rich diversity off welfare and into work, the road to advance- cut other parts of the Medicaid program in possible. ment and self-sufficiency remains a difficult order to pay for this extension. For some rea- All of this has been done in the interest of challenge. For a longtime I have been con- son, Republicans believe the only way they lowering welfare roles. But, inhumanely forcing cerned by the disincentives to working hard, can afford to help working families is if they people off of welfare rolls by requiring them to earning more money, and marriage that we cut other parts of safety net programs that adhere to conditions that are both fiscally and have created over time. The lack of coordina- truly allow the poor to work. This is illogical practically impossible does not constitute tion between federal programs directed to- and I oppose it. progress. Our constituents want the freedom wards low-income families has resulted in The second provision extends the Title V to work while trusting their children to com- what I call ‘‘The Poverty Trap.’’ As the earn- abstinence-only sex education program, but

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.041 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2565 locks states in to an inflexible curriculum; it is to fully integrate in the private sector through don’t vote, they think, so it’s easy to write controversial, and rightly so. The Democratic rental and homeownership opportunities. We them off. That’s a disgrace. This bill abrogates substitute to this bill provides states with the have heard time and time again that we need our responsibility to make laws that protect flexibility to offer programs that are best suited to blend more of the programs from HHS and and lift up all of our citizens. to the needs and desires of their citizens and HUD, for example, to tackle hopelessness. The bill’s added work requirements reduce to ensure that federal funds are spent on ef- H.R. 4737 gives us that opportunity. state flexibility to tailor a work plan for each in- fective programs that provide medically accu- Moreover, to ensure that residents in public dividual welfare recipient. The Republican plan rate information. State flexibility allows each housing have an opportunity to comment and limits the activities that states can count as state to use federal funds to support the absti- participate in the development’s strategic plan, work activities for the first 24 hours out of 40 nence-based comprehensive sex education H.R. 4737 requires that the concerns of the hours of work. This eliminates the capability program it determines will be most effective in residents to be incorporated into not only the for poor people to spend most of their first protecting its young people’s health. Many annual strategic plan submitted by the Public years on welfare building their jobs skills leading public and private sector health ex- Housing Authority but also the application for through education. The more skills a worker perts recommend school-based comprehen- State flexibility. This will provide a significant has, the better job he or she will get. More- sive sex education programs, yet states are opportunity for collaboration between the pub- over, this requirement traps poor people in unable to fund these types of programs with lic housing authority management, residents welfare or traps them at the poverty level. In federal dollars. and the administrators of other entities to craft Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Wyoming, The Democratic substitute also contains a demonstrations that will achieve meaningful and Texas, for example, anyone who works requirement that Title V programs provide in- results, as opposed to a dictate from top-man- 24 hours a week at minimum wage would not formation that is determined to be ‘‘medically agement only. I can’t underscore the impor- be eligible for welfare at all. In other words, accurate’’ by leading medical, psychological, tance of resident/tenant participation to the they would earn too much to get state help, psychiatric, and public health organizations. eventual success of these applications and but not enough to get out of poverty. It’s a Some abstinence-only programs are actually demonstrations. For that purpose, H.R. 4737 catch-22! harmful to teenagers because they provide in- is noteworthy. The next major flaw in this bill is its paltry, complete, inaccurate, and misleading informa- One of the reasons the ’96 welfare reforms inadequate commitment to child care. Evi- tion with regard to contraceptives, pregnancy, were so successful is that states had the flexi- dence shows that an overwhelming obstacle and sexually transmitted diseases. Depriving bility and leeway to shape their welfare pro- for welfare parents who want to work is the teens of medically accurate information will not grams in innovative ways. This bill enhances lack of quality, affordable childcare for their protect them; it will only make them more vul- that flexibility, offering ‘‘flexibility’’ to allow children. This bill totally ignores the current nerable to the very problems that such infor- states to integrate funding to improve services. need for childcare funds. Right now, less than mation is supposed to prevent. As Health & Human Services Secretary and one in five children who are eligible for The substitute also requires Title V pro- former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson childcare assistance actually get it. Not only grams be based on models that have dem- said, flexibility is ‘‘what the governors need does this bill do nothing for the current onstrated effectiveness in reducing teen preg- and that’s what the governors will have.’’ childcare pitfall, it also increases the amount nancies or the transmission of sexually trans- This new flexibility will help States create of hours that welfare recipients must work mitted diseases or HIV/AIDS, and calls for a broad, comprehensive assistance programs without providing an equivalent increase in comparative evaluation of programs so policy- for needy families—as long as they achieve childcare funding. makers can determine the relative merits of the purpose of the underlying program and Finally, the Republican bill spends $300 mil- abstinence-only programs versus comprehen- continue to target those in need. This new lion dollars to promote marriage between wel- sive school-based, age-appropriate, sex edu- flexibility will help States design fully inte- fare recipients. This misguided policy intrudes cation curricula. grated assistance programs that could revolu- on private decisions between adults and takes The Democratic substitute maintains state tionize service delivery. The exemptions in- needed funds away from programs that actu- flexibility, helps welfare recipients to find real cluded in H.R. 4737 should alleviate any con- ally help raise poor people out of poverty. In work, helps families escape poverty, removes cerns that fundamental rights and protections addition, government interference in promoting the sunset on TMA, and makes important are jeopardized. Those exemptions are: (1) or coercing people to marry could have unin- changes in the abstinence education provi- civil rights; (2) purposes or goals of any pro- tended, tragic consequences. According to a sions. I support it. gram; (3) maintenance of effort requirements; joint report by the Departments of Justice and Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of (4) health and safety; (5) labor standards Health and Human Services, 25 percent of H.R. 4737—the ‘‘Personal Responsibility, under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938; women said they have been raped or phys- Work, and Family Promotion Act.’’ or (6) environmental protection. ically assaulted by their current or former As Chairman of the Committee on Financial I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4737. spouse. More alarming still, research shows Services, and an original cosponsor of the leg- Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong op- that 60 percent of women on welfare have suf- islation, I want to lend my support to H.R. position to this welfare bill. fered from domestic violence. As these statis- 4737’s State flexibility authority that cuts statu- It does nothing to help people get the edu- tics confirm, if government were to encourage tory and regulatory red tape, to allow States cation and training they need to earn high- or coerce someone on welfare to get married, and/or local governments to conduct dem- paying jobs that will lift them out of poverty it would not guarantee a healthier or safer onstration projects to integrate Federal pro- and support their families. In California, more family, and it could endanger the lives of grams and funds. Under the plan, entities, than half of our welfare caseload doesn’t have mothers and children. such as the public housing authority, and the a high school degree. And in my community in Our Democratic alternative, on the other local and State governments could petition a Los Angeles County, 41 percent of the welfare hand, addresses the real problems facing our Federal review board for this broadened au- caseload has limited proficiency in English. welfare system today. Our bill makes poverty thority, with the appropriate Secretary exer- These women and men want to be working, reduction an explicit goal of TANF. Repub- cising veto authority over the plan. but they need education and training that in- licans just want to kick people off of welfare; As example of this waiver could be a child- cludes English as a Second Language Democrats want to lift people out of poverty. care center and a local public housing agency courses, high school equivalency programs, Our bill has work requirements that are broad jointly petitioning the Federal Review Board to and college courses first. Only the Democratic and flexible to allow welfare recipients to waive the regulations and requirements of substitute allows this kind of education. So I spend time job searching, to get vocational their applicable programs to achieve a certain urge my colleagues to vote against the Re- and post-secondary education, and to enroll in purpose. H.R. 4737 will knock down firewalls publican bill. substance abuse programs, if necessary. The and bureaucratic obstacles that many housing Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong Democratic bill increases our commitment to organizations complain about when attempting opposition to H.R. 4737, the so-called Per- affordable, quality childcare. If we want wel- to blend programs from different agencies. sonal Responsibility, Work and Family Pro- fare parents to work, then they shouldn’t have This proposal represents an opportunity to motion Act of 2002. to abandon their kids to do so. Our bill re- permit some innovation in Federal programs This Republican bill is bad public policy and wards those states who reduce child poverty, aimed at tackling the problem of service deliv- hurts people who really need help. The Re- giving them an incentive to really act on this ery, poverty, and a permanent underclass. Ev- publicans, unfortunately, care more about issue. eryone should have the opportunity to move looking tough on welfare than they do about The Republican welfare bill has the wrong beyond public housing and homeless shelters lifting poor people out of poverty. Poor people priorities, spends money where it shouldn’t

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.034 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2566 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 and does nothing to equip welfare bene- migrant populations, such as my State of Cali- mand quick results in areas where residents ficiaries with the tools they need to get out of fornia which has a 25 percent immigrant popu- face such significant barriers to employment. poverty. I urge my colleagues to vote no on lation. The Republican welfare reform bill does Even without the new work requirements, H.R. 4737 and to support the Democratic al- nothing to correct this injustice. In fact, it main- Native American tribes that have chosen to ternative. tains the current restrictions against legal im- run their own TANF programs need assist- Mr. HONDA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ex- migrant families. ance. While these programs have made admi- press my opposition to H.R. 4737, the Repub- Welfare reform will only succeed when it is rable strides in serving their populations, they lican welfare reform bill; a bill that will push adequately funded. Our Nation’s families can- still face many problems. Many State TANF millions of American families off the welfare not be expected to succeed off the welfare programs are unable to assist tribal programs, rolls into a life of poverty. rolls if they lack access to TANF benefits, edu- and tribes are left with insufficient funds to America is the land of opportunity and in to- cational opportunities, and affordable child provide cash assistance and other programs. day’s economic market, education is the key care. That is why I am please to support the Ironically, those that can afford cash payments to that opportunity. Higher levels of education Democratic proposal that maintains State flexi- are often forced to forego programs intended lead to higher earnings. Greater educational bility, focuses on real work, and helps families to move people from welfare to work. This is opportunities also increase women’s income, escape poverty and achieve permanent em- all tribes can afford in the short term, but in raise their children’s educational goals, and ployment. The Democratic proposal has tough the long term this path is extremely expensive, have a dramatic impact on their quality of life. work requirements, promotes education as a both in terms of dollars and in terms of human Research shows that families headed by means of financial stability, and increases suffering. someone with a high school diploma earn al- childcare funding $11 billion over 5 years, so Many tribal TANF programs need help to most 50 percent more than families headed by that the tough work requirements can be met develop the infrastructure that state and Fed- someone without at least a GED. In California without harming the children of those receiving eral welfare programs already have. Tribal alone, recipients who participate in education benefits. The Democratic proposal also lifts programs must struggle to provide services and training activities enjoyed earnings almost the ban on federal funds for legal immigrant from dilapidated buildings, and they do not 40 percent higher than those of untrained re- families. have the resources to reorganize and mod- cipients after 5 years. Mr. Speaker, accountability is a two-way ernize their facilities. Welfare laws need to emphasize general street. Congress must commit the necessary The Nation’s rural and tribal areas need education as a critical first step to achieving resources to make welfare reform a success. flexibility and support, not unrealistic work re- economic security. However, the Republican Only then will we leave no family behind. quirements. As we work to bring TANF into welfare reform bill goes in the wrong direction Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, let the 21st century, let us not forget the obsta- by restricting State discretion to provide edu- me begin by saying that if we are to be suc- cles and challenges facing rural areas; let us cation and training to welfare recipients. The cessful with moving people from welfare to work to assist them in overcoming those chal- bill goes so far as to remove vocational edu- work, then we must make sure there are ade- lenges and pursuing a vibrant future. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the majority’s cation from the current law’s list of work-re- quate resources for transportation, childcare bill falls far short in addressing these problems lated activities that count toward the core work and training. In rural America, Mr. Speaker, I for rural Americans and those living in Indian requirement. can tell you these services are critical. When reviewing our Nation’s welfare laws, I have several concerns with the H.R. country. I urge my colleagues to support the Democratic substitute and vote ‘‘no’’ on final we must also remember that work first policies 4737’s strict and unrealistic work require- passage of this unfair bill. do not just affect adult individuals. We are ments. These requirements are a bad idea for Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in oppo- talking about families, with children who re- any area of the country, but particularly in the sition not only to this bill, but to the entire quire quality and affordable child care while areas of rural New Mexico that I represent. process for its consideration today. parents are working. It is an unfortunate reality With the extreme unemployment in rural areas Meaningful democracy in America requires that many of the jobs performed by TANF par- and in tribal lands, the idea of imposing harsh- open, honest debate in the U.S. Congress. ents involve late night hours or irregular shifts, er requirements is not just unrealistic, it is bad The Republican leadership has blocked this when quality child care is hard to find. These social policy. opportunity by passing a rule that only allows circumstances are especially harsh for families For that reason, I introduced an amendment for one substitute amendment. Their new rule with young children and children with disabil- that would have provided much-needed flexi- just passed today is equally restrictive. ities. Even when childcare is available, most bility to states struggling to cope with ex- Welfare reform affects every State and lo- jobs do not pay enough to cover food, housing tremely poor areas with high unemployment. cality throughout the country. Members have a and utilities, let alone cover the child care bill. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership has right to engage in extended dialogue on this This is especially critical in my district of San chosen not to allow Democratic amendments legislation and to offer amendments to Jose, which has some of the highest child today. As I said before, that is not a demo- strengthen the bill. This is particularly nec- care costs in the State of California. cratic process. It does not serve this body essary due to the numerous problems with Congress needs to stand up for working well. It does not serve the country well. H.R. 4737. families by making safe, quality child care ac- TANF recipients in rural or tribal areas who This so-called welfare reform bill level funds cessible for all children. Fifteen million children wish to move into gainful employment are one of the most important national programs in this country are now eligible for day care faced with a tight job market aggravated by Congress has ever created and imposes mas- assistance, but are not currently covered be- the lack of economic development. The last 6 sive, costly new mandates on States that they cause States lack sufficient resources. How- years have shown that rural and Native Amer- cannot afford. ever, the Republican welfare reform bill in- ican TANF recipients were far less likely to Today’s economy is vastly different than it creases mandatory child care funding by only leave the TANF roles, and those who left were was when welfare reform was first enacted. $1 billion over the next 5 years—barely far more likely to quickly find themselves un- Six years ago, the economy was booming, un- enough to keep pace with inflation, and no- employed or barely scraping by. Some tribal employment was at a 50-year low, and em- where near enough to implement the bill’s new lands have unemployment rates approaching ployers were straining to find qualified work- participation requirements. 80 percent and the national poverty rate on ers. Today, the unemployment level is higher The Republican welfare reform bill also ne- tribal lands is 54 percent. Those who are lucky than it’s been in years. Workers are more vul- glects a critical community in this country— enough to find jobs must overcome the woeful nerable, and employers and struggling to keep legal immigrant families. Legal immigrant fami- inadequacy of transportation and childcare costs down by laying people off cutting em- lies work and pay taxes, yet cannot access that is so common in rural and tribal areas. ployee benefits and raising the workers’ share TANF benefits. Legal immigrants pay the In today’s economic conditions, it is unrea- of health insurance premiums. In Rhode Is- same taxes as citizens. This country reaps sonable to expect State and tribal TANF pro- land, 35,000 children—15 percent of all the $50 billion from taxes paid by immigrants to all grams to enforce the strict and unfair work re- children in the State—are still living in poverty levels of government. Legal immigrants should quirements being proposed by the administra- despite the fact that their parents are working. therefore share equally in taxpayer funded tion. TANF recipients in these areas cannot be With the economic boon long gone, H.R. 4737 services. Current TANF regulations place expected to find jobs where there simply are needs to provide increased funding, not level undue burdens on State and local govern- no jobs, or inadequate services to make a funding with expensive new mandates, for this ments, who are forced to use state funding to working lifestyle possible. Governors, legisla- vital program. extend benefits to these deserving families. tures, TANF caseworkers and the American Eighty percent of the States report they This is especially true for states with large im- people all agree that it is unreasonable to de- would have to implement fundamental

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.038 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2567 changes to their current welfare programs in does not follow the new participation rates, it Sec. 1. Short title. order to comply with H.R. 4737 which is pre- will lose $4.5 million per year in TANF funds. Sec. 2. Table of contents. cisely why I cannot support it. The bill also does not include guaranteed min- Sec. 3. Amendment of Social Security Act. Rhode Island has developed an effective imum wage protections even though 39 States TITLE I—CONTINUATION OF CERTAIN GRANTS welfare to work program that moves parents could not fulfill the bill’s work requirement with- into sustainable jobs as quickly as possible in Sec. 101. Family assistance grants. out violating the current minimum wage rate Sec. 102. Bonus to reward high performance a way that is consistent with their employment for a two-person family. States. readiness needs. Under the Rhode Island Further, the bill’s requirement that parents Sec. 103. Extension of supplemental grants. Family Independence Program (FIP), all par- spend at least 24 of their 40 hours in ‘‘direct Sec. 104. Additional grants for States with ents are required to develop and participate in work activities’’ to count toward the participa- low Federal funding per poor an employment plan within 40 days of apply- tion rate, would turn Rhode Island FIP on its child. ing for cash assistance. head. It would no longer be able to allow par- Sec. 105. Contingency Fund. Rhode Island also provides a cash supple- Sec. 106. Eligibility of Puerto Rico, the ents to engage in education or training prior to United States Virgin Islands, ment to low-wage-earning families and stops going to work, even though this is the best and Guam for the supplemental the 5-year clock in any month in which the way to prepare a parent for sustainable em- grant for population increases, parent works at least 30 hours. This provides ployment. the Contingency Fund, and much-needed stability for vulnerable families Currently, there are 1,000 parents partici- mandatory child care funding. and ensures that children live in families with pating in vocational education programs that Sec. 107. Direct funding and administration enough income to meet their basic needs. would no longer count toward the participation by Indian tribes. What makes the Rhode Island Family Inde- requirement. TITLE II—POVERTY REDUCTION pendence Program so effective is that its em- Finally, the superwaiver policy in this bill is Sec. 201. Additional purpose of TANF pro- ployment preparedness activities are tailored unnecessary and irresponsible. Allowing the gram. to the parents’ needs and include a range of Sec. 202. Child poverty reduction grants. Executive branch to override decisions made Sec. 203. Review and conciliation process. education and training services to help parents by Congress to target funds to specific popu- Sec. 204. Replacement of caseload reduction become job-ready. The program recognizes lations or for specific programs undermines credit with employment credit. that 25 to 40 percent of welfare recipients the safety net of services the States have Sec. 205. States to receive partial credit to- have learning disabilities by identifying such worked so hard to build. Flexibility in Federal ward work participation rate individuals early and providing specialized as- funding is precisely what was needed in 1996 for recipients engaged in part- sistance in preparing for, finding and maintain- to change the system and empower individ- time work. ing a job. In fact, the Rhode Island Learning Sec. 206. TANF recipients who qualify for uals to move from welfare dependence to self- supplemental security income Disabilities Project, a collaboration between sufficiency. That flexibility spurred the success benefits removed from work the Department of Human Services and the we see today in States like Rhode Island. participation rate calculation Vocational Rehabilitation program, has re- Maintaining the ability to waive certain pro- for entire year. ceived national recognition for ensuring that gram rules to improve service delivery and co- Sec. 207. State option to include recipients parents receive the services they need to be- ordination makes sense. Giving authority to of substantial child care or come gainfully employed. one branch of government to completely rede- transportation assistance in Since 1997, Rhode Island has seen a slow work participation rate. sign and redirect resources does not. Sec. 208. Effective date. but steady decrease in its caseload from The Republican so-called welfare reform bill 18,904 to 14,972. This progress is not due to TITLE III—REQUIRING AND REWARDING is a sham. It ignores the accomplishments WORK harsh cuts in benefits or forcing people to States have already made in moving people work without access to education and job Sec. 301. Effect of wage subsidies on 5-year from welfare to work. It limits State flexibility limit. training, but to prudent State policies that ex- and imposes work requirements most States Sec. 302. Child care. amine the holistic needs of the family and tai- have rejected, while making it much harder for Sec. 303. Competitive grants to improve ac- lor assistance to help individuals gain the skills welfare recipients to become economically cess to various benefit pro- to obtain and retain meaningful jobs. independent by eliminating education from the grams. Moreover, a recent report, ‘‘Rhode Island’s list of activities that count as a work-related Sec. 304. Assessments for TANF recipients. Sec. 305. Applicability of workplace laws. Family Independence Act: Research Dem- activity. Education opens the door to higher onstrates Wisdom of Putting Families First,’’ Sec. 306. Work participation requirements. earnings and a better quality of life. It is critical Sec. 307. Hours of work-related activities. concluded that the Rhode Island Family Inde- to effectively move people from welfare to Sec. 308. State option to require receipients pendence Program is working. Among other meaningful, long-term employment. to engage in work for 40 hours findings, the report found that parents who Mr. Speaker, I must encourage my col- per week. participated in education and training had sig- leagues to oppose this legislation. It does Sec. 309. Revision and simplification of the nificantly higher levels of both employment nothing to strengthen our welfare system and transitional medical assistance program (tma). and earnings as compared to the period be- imposes costly burdens on our States at a fore welfare reform was begun in Rhode Is- Sec. 310. Ensuring TANF funds are not used time when they cannot afford it. to displace public employees. land. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. If H.R. 4737 becomes law, the progress TITLE IV—HELPING WELFARE LEAVERS SIMPSON). All time for debate on the CLIMB THE EMPLOYMENT LADDER Rhode Island has made in helping parents bill has expired. gain sustainable jobs and overcome significant Sec. 401. State plan requirement on employ- AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE ment advancement. barriers to employment will come to a halt. OFFERED BY MR. CARDIN Sec. 402. Employment Advancement Fund. Rhode Island would need to radically change Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I offer an Sec. 403. Elimination of limit on number of its program or risk significant fiscal penalty for amendment in the nature of a sub- TANF recipients enrolled in vo- failing to meet the new participation rates. In stitute. cational education or high addition, since Federal TANF and childcare The SPEAKER pro tempore. The school who may be counted to- wards the work participation funds would not be increased, Rhode Island Clerk will designate the amendment in would need to find additional State funds to requirement. the nature of a substitute. Sec. 404. Counting of up to 2 years of voca- meet the new requirements. These funds sim- The text of the amendment in the na- tional or educational training ply do not exist. ture of a substitute is as follows: (including postsecondary edu- If this bill is enacted, the Rhode Island De- Amendment in the nature of a substitute cation), work-study, and re- partment of Human Services estimates it offered by Mr. CARDIN: lated internships as work ac- would cost an additional $5.6 million in Strike all after the enacting clause and in- tivities. childcare costs—31.2 percent of the current sert the following: Sec. 405. Limited counting of certain activi- ties leading to employment as expenditures for childcare—about $3 million SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. more for employment-related and other serv- work activity. This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Next Step in Sec. 406. Clarification of authority of States ices designed to offer participation opportuni- Reforming Welfare Act’’. to use TANF funds carried over ties and get parents into work, and about $1.1 SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS. from prior years to provide million for additional social work and case The table of contents of this Act is as fol- TANF benefits and services. management staff. In addition, if Rhode Island lows: Sec. 407. Definition of assistance.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0655 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.057 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2568 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 TITLE V—PROMOTING FAMILY FORMA- (D) by striking the period and inserting ‘‘; cal years that have not been expended by the TION AND RESPONSIBLE PARENTING multiplied by’’; and State by the end of the preceding fiscal year Sec. 501. Family Formation Fund. (E) by adding at the end the following: is less than 50 percent of State family assist- Sec. 502. Distribution of child support col- ‘‘(ii) 1.00, plus the inflation percentage (as ance grant for the particular fiscal year. lected by States on behalf of defined in subparagraph (F) of this para- ‘‘(C) AMOUNT OF GRANT.—The amount of children receiving certain wel- graph) in effect for the fiscal year specified the grant to be made under this paragraph to fare benefits. in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph.’’; and a State for a particular fiscal year shall be— Sec. 503. Elimination of separate work par- (2) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(i) if the particular fiscal year is fiscal ticipation rate for 2-parent ‘‘(F) INFLATION PERCENTAGE.—For purposes year 2003, an amount equal to— families. of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, the in- ‘‘(I) the number of children in poverty in Sec. 504. Ban on imposition of stricter eligi- flation percentage applicable to a fiscal year the State for the then preceding fiscal year, bility criteria for 2-parent fami- is the percentage (if any) by which— divided by the total number of children in lies; State opt-out. ‘‘(i) the average of the Consumer Price poverty in all States that are inadequately Sec. 505. Extension of abstinence education Index (as defined in section 1(f)(5) of the In- poverty-funded States for the then preceding funding under maternal and ternal Revenue Code of 1986) for the 12- fiscal year; multiplied by child health program. month period ending on September 30 of the ‘‘(II) the amount appropriated pursuant to TITLE VI—RESTORING FAIRNESS FOR immediately preceding fiscal year; exceeds subparagraph (G) for the particular fiscal IMMIGRANT FAMILIES ‘‘(ii) the average of the Consumer Price year; or Sec. 601. Treatment of aliens under the Index (as so defined) for the 12-month period ‘‘(ii) if the particular fiscal year is any of TANF program. ending on September 30, 2001.’’. fiscal years 2004 through 2007, an amount equal to— Sec. 602. Optional coverage of legal immi- SEC. 102. BONUS TO REWARD HIGH PERFORM- grants under the medicaid pro- ANCE STATES. ‘‘(I) the amount required to be paid to the gram and SCHIP. Section 403(a)(4) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(4)) is State under this paragraph for the then pre- Sec. 603. Eligibility of disabled children who amended— ceding fiscal year; plus are qualified aliens for SSI. (1) in subparagraph (D), by striking ‘‘(II) if the State is an inadequately pov- TITLE VII—ENSURING STATE ‘‘$1,000,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$1,800,000,000’’; erty-funded State for the then preceding fis- cal year— ACCOUNTABILITY (2) in subparagraph (E), by striking ‘‘and ‘‘(aa) the number of children in poverty in Sec. 701. Inflation adjustment of mainte- 2003’’ and inserting ‘‘2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and the State for the then preceding fiscal year, nance-of-effort requirement. 2007’’; and divided by the total number of children in Sec. 702. Ban on using Federal TANF funds (3) in subparagraph (F), by striking ‘‘2003 poverty in all States that are inadequately to replace State and local $1,000,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘2002 $800,000,000, poverty-funded States for the then preceding spending that does not meet the and for fiscal years 2003 through 2007 fiscal year; multiplied by definition of qualified State ex- $1,000,000,000,’’. ‘‘(bb) the amount appropriated pursuant to penditures. SEC. 103. EXTENSION OF SUPPLEMENTAL subparagraph (G) for the particular fiscal TITLE VIII—IMPROVING INFORMATION GRANTS. year. ABOUT TANF RECIPIENTS AND PRO- Section 403(a)(3) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(3)) is ‘‘(D) USE OF GRANT.—A State to which a GRAMS amended— grant is made under this paragraph shall use Sec. 801. Extension of funding of studies and (1) in subparagraph (A)— the grant for any purpose for which a grant demonstrations. (A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of clause made under this part may be used. Sec. 802. Longitudinal studies of employ- (i); ‘‘(E) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph: ment and earnings of TANF (B) by striking the period at the end of ‘‘(i) CHILDREN IN POVERTY.—The term ‘chil- leavers. clause (ii) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and dren in poverty’ means, with respect to a Sec. 803. Inclusion of disability status in in- (C) by adding at the end the following: State and a fiscal year, the number of chil- formation States report about ‘‘(iii) for each of fiscal years 2003 through dren residing in the State who had not at- TANF families. 2007, a grant in an amount equal to the tained 18 years of age and whose family in- Sec. 804. Annual report to the Congress to amount required to be paid to the State come was less than the poverty line then ap- include greater detail about under this paragraph in fiscal year 2001.’’; plicable to the family, as of the end of the State programs funded under (2) in subparagraph (E), by striking ‘‘1998’’ fiscal year. TANF. and all that follows and inserting ‘‘2003 ‘‘(ii) POVERTY LINE.—The term ‘poverty Sec. 805. Enhancement of understanding of through 2007 $1,597,250,000 for grants under line’ has the meaning given the term in sec- the reasons individuals leave this paragraph.’’; and tion 673(2) of the Omnibus Budget Reconcili- State TANF programs. (3) by striking subparagraph (G). ation Act of 1981, including any revision re- Sec. 806. Standardized State plans. Sec. 807. Study by the Census Bureau. SEC. 104. ADDITIONAL GRANTS FOR STATES WITH quired by such section. Sec. 808. Access to welfare; welfare out- LOW FEDERAL FUNDING PER POOR ‘‘(F) FAMILY INCOME DETERMINATIONS.—For CHILD. comes. purposes of this paragraph, family income Section 403(a) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)) is amended includes cash income, except cash benefits TITLE IX—EFFECTIVE DATE by adding at the end the following: from means-tested public programs and child Sec. 901. Effective date. ‘‘(6) ADDITIONAL GRANTS FOR STATES WITH support payments. SEC. 3. AMENDMENT OF SOCIAL SECURITY ACT. LOW FEDERAL FUNDING PER POOR CHILD.— ‘‘(G) APPROPRIATIONS.— Except as otherwise expressly provided, ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Out of any money in the wherever in this Act an amendment or repeal make a grant pursuant to this paragraph to Treasury of the United States not otherwise is expressed in terms of an amendment to, or a State— appropriated, there are appropriated for repeal of, a section or other provision, the ‘‘(i) for fiscal year 2003, if the State is an grants under this paragraph— amendment or repeal shall be considered to inadequately poverty-funded State for fiscal ‘‘(I) $65,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; be made to a section or other provision of year 2002; and ‘‘(II) $130,000,000 for fiscal year 2004; the Social Security Act. ‘‘(ii) for any of fiscal years 2004 through ‘‘(III) $195,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; TITLE I—CONTINUATION OF CERTAIN 2007, if the State is an inadequately poverty- ‘‘(IV) $260,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and GRANTS funded State for any prior fiscal year after ‘‘(V) $325,000,000 for fiscal year 2007. SEC. 101. FAMILY ASSISTANCE GRANTS. fiscal year 2002. ‘‘(ii) AVAILABILITY.—Amounts made avail- (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 403(a)(1)(A) (42 ‘‘(B) INADEQUATELY POVERTY-FUNDED able under clause (i) shall remain available U.S.C. 603(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking STATE.—For purposes of this paragraph, a until expended.’’. ‘‘1996’’ and all that follows through ‘‘2002’’ State is an inadequately poverty-funded SEC. 105. CONTINGENCY FUND. and inserting ‘‘2003 through 2007’’. State for a particular fiscal year if— (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 403(b) (42 U.S.C. (b) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—Section ‘‘(i) the total amount of the grants made to 603(b)) is amended— 403(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(1)) is amended— the State under paragraph (1), paragraph (3), (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘1997’’ and (1) in subparagraph (B)— and this paragraph for the particular fiscal all that follows and inserting ‘‘2003 through (A) by striking ‘‘means the greatest of—’’ year, divided by the number of children in 2007 such sums as are necessary for payments and inserting ‘‘means, with respect to a fis- poverty in the State with respect to the par- under this subsection’’; and cal year specified in subparagraph (A) of this ticular fiscal year is less than 75 percent of (2) in paragraph (3), by striking subpara- paragraph— the total amount of grants made to all eligi- graph (C) and inserting the following: ‘‘(i) the greatest of—’’; ble States under paragraph (1), paragraph (3), ‘‘(C) LIMITATION ON MONTHLY PAYMENT TO A (B) by redesignating each of clauses (i), and this paragraph for the particular fiscal STATE.—The total amount paid to a single (ii)(I), (ii)(II), and (iii) as subclauses (I), year, divided by the total number of children State under subparagraph (A) during a fiscal (II)(aa), (II)(bb), and (III), respectively; living in poverty in all eligible States with year shall not exceed 20 percent of the State (C) by indenting each of the provisions respect to the particular fiscal year; and family assistance grant.’’. specified in subparagraph (B) of this para- ‘‘(ii) the total of the amounts paid to the (b) APPLICATION OF REGULAR MAINTENANCE graph 2 additional ems to the right; State under this subsection for all prior fis- OF EFFORT REQUIREMENT.—Section 409(a)(10)

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.059 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2569 (42 U.S.C. 609(a)(10)) is amended by striking SEC. 106. ELIGIBILITY OF PUERTO RICO, THE for determining the amount of Federal pay- ‘‘100 percent of historic State expenditures UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS, ments to each State under section 403(n) of AND GUAM FOR THE SUPPLE- (as defined in paragraph (7)(B)(iii) of this this Act (as in effect before October 1, MENTAL GRANT FOR POPULATION 1995).’’. subsection)’’ and inserting ‘‘the applicable INCREASES, THE CONTINGENCY (3) GRANT PAYMENT DISREGARDED FOR PUR- percentage (as defined in paragraph (7)(B)(ii) FUND, AND MANDATORY CHILD POSES OF SECTION 1108 LIMITATION.—Section of this subsection) of inflation-adjusted his- CARE FUNDING. (a) SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT FOR POPULATION 1108(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. 1308(a)(2)), as amended by toric State expenditures (as defined in para- INCREASES.— subsections (a)(2) and (b)(2) of this section, is graph (7)(B)(vi) of this subsection)’’. (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 403(a)(3)(D)(iii) (42 amended by striking ‘‘or 403(b)’’ and insert- (c) MODIFICATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT TEST U.S.C. 603(a)(3)(D)(iii)) is amended by strik- ing ‘‘, 403(b), or 418’’. (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments TO BECOME NEEDY STATE.—Section ing ‘‘and the District of Columbia.’’ and in- made by this section shall take effect on Oc- 403(b)(5)(A) (42 U.S.C. 603(b)(5)(A)) is amended serting ‘‘, the District of Columbia, Puerto tober 1, 2002, and shall apply to expenditures to read as follows: Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, and Guam. For fiscal years beginning after the for fiscal years beginning with fiscal year ‘‘(A) the average rate of total unemploy- effective date of this sentence, this para- 2003. ment in the State (seasonally adjusted) for graph shall be applied and administered as if SEC. 107. DIRECT FUNDING AND ADMINISTRA- the period consisting of the most recent 3 the term ‘State’ included the Commonwealth TION BY INDIAN TRIBES. months for which data are available has in- of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Is- (a) TRIBAL FAMILY ASSISTANCE GRANT.— creased by the lesser of 1.5 percentage points lands, and Guam for fiscal year 1998 and Section 412(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 612(a)(1)) is or by 50 percent over the corresponding 3- thereafter.’’. amended by striking ‘‘1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, month period in the preceding fiscal year; (2) GRANT PAYMENT DISREGARDED FOR PUR- and 2001’’ and inserting ‘‘2003 through 2007’’. (b) GRANTS FOR INDIAN TRIBES THAT RE- or’’. POSES OF SECTION 1108 LIMITATION.—Section CEIVED JOBS FUNDS.—Section 412(a)(2) (42 1108(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. 1308(a)(2)) is amended by (d) MODIFICATION OF FOOD STAMP TEST TO U.S.C. 612(a)(2)) is amended by striking ‘‘1997, inserting ‘‘, or any payment made to the BECOME NEEDY STATE.—Section 403(b)(5)(B) 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001’’ and inserting ‘‘2003 Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United through 2007’’. (42 U.S.C. 603(b)(5)(B)) is amended to read as States Virgin Islands, or Guam under section follows: 403(a)(3)’’ before the period. TITLE II—POVERTY REDUCTION ‘‘(B) as determined by the Secretary of Ag- (b) CONTINGENCY FUND.— SEC. 201. ADDITIONAL PURPOSE OF TANF PRO- riculture, the monthly average number of (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 403(b)(7) (42 U.S.C. GRAM. households (as of the last day of each month) 603(b)(7)) is amended by striking ‘‘and the Section 401(a) (42 U.S.C. 601(a)) is that participated in the food stamp program District of Columbia’’ and inserting ‘‘, the amended— in the State in the then most recently con- District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para- cluded 3-month period for which data are Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Is- graph (3); available exceeds by at least 10 percent the lands, and Guam.’’. (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (4) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and monthly average number of households (as of (2) GRANT PAYMENT DISREGARDED FOR PUR- (3) by adding at the end the following: the last day of each month) in the State that POSES OF SECTION 1108 LIMITATION.—Section ‘‘(5) reduce the extent and severity of pov- participated in the food stamp program in 1108(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. 1308(a)(2)), as amended by subsection (a)(2) of this section, is amended erty and promote self-sufficiency among the corresponding 3-month period in the pre- by inserting ‘‘or 403(b)’’ after ‘‘403(a)(3)’’ be- families with children.’’. ceding fiscal year.’’. fore the period. SEC. 202. CHILD POVERTY REDUCTION GRANTS. (e) SIMPLIFICATION OF RECONCILIATION FOR- (c) CHILD CARE ENTITLEMENT FUNDS.— Section 403(a) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)) is further MULA.—Section 403(b)(6) (42 U.S.C. 603(b)(6)) (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 418(d) (42 U.S.C. amended by adding at the end the following: is amended to read as follows: 618(d)) is amended by striking ‘‘and the Dis- ‘‘(7) BONUS TO REWARD STATES THAT REDUCE CHILD POVERTY ‘‘(6) ANNUAL RECONCILIATION.— trict of Columbia’’ and inserting ‘‘, the Dis- .— trict of Columbia, the Commonwealth of ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Beginning with fiscal ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding para- Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Is- year 2003, the Secretary shall make a grant graph (3), if the Secretary makes a payment lands, and Guam’’. pursuant to this paragraph to each State for to a State under this subsection in a fiscal (2) AMOUNT OF PAYMENT.— each fiscal year for which the State is a year, then the State shall remit to the Sec- (A) GENERAL ENTITLEMENT.—Section qualified child poverty reduction State. retary, within 1 year after the end of the 418(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 618(a)(1)) is amended by ‘‘(B) AMOUNT OF GRANT.— first subsequent period of 3 consecutive striking ‘‘the greater of—’’ and all that fol- ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Subject to this subpara- months for which the State is not a needy lows and inserting the following: graph, the amount of the grant to be made to State, an amount equal to the amount (if ‘‘(A) in the case of the Commonwealth of a qualified child poverty reduction State for any) by which— Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Is- a fiscal year shall be an amount equal to— ‘‘(i) the maintenance of effort level (as de- lands, and Guam, 60 percent of the amount ‘‘(I) the number of children who had not at- fined in subparagraph (B)(i) of this para- required to be paid to the State for fiscal tained 18 years of age by the end of the then graph) for the fiscal year, plus the State con- year 2001 under the Child Care and Develop- most recently completed calendar year and tribution (as defined in subparagraph (B)(ii) ment Block Grant Act of 1990; or who resided in the State as of the end of such of this paragraph) in the fiscal year; exceeds ‘‘(B) in the case of any other State, the calendar year, divided by the number of such ‘‘(ii) the qualified State expenditures (as greater of— children who resided in the United States as defined in section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)) in the fiscal ‘‘(i) the total amount required to be paid to of the end of such calendar year; multiplied year. the State under section 403 for fiscal year by 1994 or 1995 (whichever is greater) with re- ‘‘(II) the amount appropriated pursuant to ‘‘(B) DEFINITIONS.—In subparagraph (A): spect to expenditures for child care under subparagraph (F) for the fiscal year. ‘‘(i) MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT LEVEL.—The subsections (g) and (i) of section 402 (as in ef- ‘‘(ii) LIMITATIONS.— term ‘‘maintenance of effort level’’ means, fect before October 1, 1995); or ‘‘(I) MINIMUM GRANT.—The amount of the with respect to a State and a fiscal year, an ‘‘(ii) the average of the total amounts re- grant to be made to a qualified child poverty amount equal to the applicable percentage of quired to be paid to the State for fiscal years reduction State for a fiscal year shall be not historic State expenditures (as defined in 1992 through 1994 under the subsections re- less than $1,000,000. section 409(a)(7)(B)) for the fiscal year. ferred to in clause (i).’’; ‘‘(II) MAXIMUM GRANT.—The amount of the ‘‘(ii) STATE CONTRIBUTION.—The term (B) ALLOTMENT OF REMAINDER.—Section grant to be made to a qualified child poverty ‘State contribution’ means, with respect to a 418(a)(2)(B) (42 U.S.C. 618(a)(2)(B)) is amended reduction State for a fiscal year shall not ex- fiscal year— to read as follows: ceed an amount equal to 5 percent of the ‘‘(I) the total amount paid to the State ‘‘(B) ALLOTMENTS TO STATES.—Of the total State family assistance grant for the fiscal under this subsection in the fiscal year; mul- amount available for payments to States year. tiplied by under this paragraph, as determined under ‘‘(iii) PRO RATA INCREASE.—If the amount ‘‘(II) 1 minus the greater of 75 percent or subparagraph (A) of this paragraph— available for grants under this paragraph for the Federal medical assistance percentage ‘‘(i) an amount equal to 65 percent of the a fiscal year is greater than the total for the State (as defined in section 1905(b)), amount required to be paid to each of the amount of payments otherwise required to divided by the greater of 75 percent or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United be made under this paragraph for the fiscal Federal medical assistance percentage for States Virgin Islands, and Guam for fiscal year, then the amount otherwise payable to the State (as defined in section 1905(b)).’’. year 2001 under the Child Care and Develop- any State for the fiscal year under this para- ment Block Grant Act of 1990, shall be allot- graph shall, subject to clause (ii)(II), be in- (f) INCREASE IN NUMBER OF MONTHS FOR ted to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, creased by such equal percentage as may be WHICH STATE MAY QUALIFY FOR PAYMENTS.— the United States Virgin Islands, and Guam, necessary to ensure that the total of the Section 403(b)(4) (42 U.S.C. 603(b)(4)) is respectively; and amounts payable for the fiscal year under amended by striking ‘‘2-month’’ and insert- ‘‘(ii) the remainder shall be allotted among this paragraph equals the amount available ing ‘‘3-month’’. the other States based on the formula used for the grants.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.059 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2570 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002

‘‘(iv) PRO RATA REDUCTION.—If the amount ‘‘(12) REVIEW AND CONCILIATION PROCESS RE- ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—The employment credit available for grants under this paragraph for QUIREMENTS.—A State to which a grant is for a State for a fiscal year is an amount a fiscal year is less than the total amount of made under section 403 shall not impose a equal to— payments otherwise required to be made sanction against a person under the State ‘‘(I) twice the average quarterly number of under this paragraph for the fiscal year, then program funded under this part, unless the families that ceased to receive cash pay- the amount otherwise payable to any State State— ments under the State program funded under for the fiscal year under this paragraph ‘‘(A) has attempted at least twice (using at this part during the most recent 4 quarters shall, subject to clause (ii)(I), be reduced by least 2 different methods) to notify the per- for which data is available and that were em- such equal percentage as may be necessary son of the impending imposition of the sanc- ployed during the calendar quarter imme- to ensure that the total of the amounts pay- tion, the reason for the proposed sanction, diately succeeding the quarter in which the able for the fiscal year under this paragraph the amount of the sanction, the length of payments ceased, plus, at State option, the equals the amount available for the grants. time during which the proposed sanction number of families that received a non-re- ‘‘(C) USE OF GRANT.—A State to which a would be in effect, and the steps required to curring short-term benefit under the State grant is made under this paragraph shall use come into compliance or to show good cause program funded under this part during the the grant for any purpose for which a grant for noncompliance; preceding fiscal year and that were employed made under this part may be used. ‘‘(B) has afforded the person an in during the calendar quarter immediately ‘‘(D) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph: opportunity— succeeding the quarter in which the non-re- ‘‘(i) QUALIFIED CHILD POVERTY REDUCTION ‘‘(i) to meet with the caseworker involved curring short-term benefit was so received; STATE.—The term ‘qualified child poverty re- or another individual who has authority to divided by duction State’ means, with respect to a fis- determine whether to impose the sanction; ‘‘(II) the average monthly number of fami- cal year, a State if— and lies that include an adult who received cash ‘‘(I) the child poverty rate achieved by the ‘‘(ii) to explain why the person did not payments under the State program funded State for the then most recently completed comply with the requirement on the basis of under this part during the preceding fiscal calendar year for which such information is which the sanction is to be imposed; year, plus, if the State elected the option available is less than the lowest child pov- ‘‘(C) has considered and taken any such ex- under subclause (I), the number of families erty rate achieved by the State during the planation into account in determining to im- that received a non-recurring short-term applicable period; and pose the sanction; benefit under the State program funded ‘‘(II) the average depth of child poverty in ‘‘(D) has specifically considered whether under this part during the preceding fiscal the State for the then most recently com- certain conditions exist, such as a physical year. pleted calendar year for which such informa- or mental impairment, domestic violence, or ‘‘(ii) SPECIAL RULE FOR FORMER RECIPIENTS tion is available is not greater than the aver- limited proficiency in English, that contrib- WITH HIGHER EARNINGS.—In calculating the age depth of child poverty in the State for uted to the noncompliance of the person; and employment credit for a State for a fiscal the calendar year that precedes such then ‘‘(E) in determining whether to impose the year, a family that, during the preceding fis- most recently completed calendar year. sanction, has used screening tools developed cal year, earned at least 33 percent of the av- ‘‘(ii) APPLICABLE PERIOD.—In clause (i), the in consultation with individuals or groups erage wage in the State (determined on the term ‘applicable period’ means, with respect with expertise in matters described in sub- basis of State unemployment data) shall be to a State and the calendar year referred to paragraph (D).’’. considered to be 1.5 families. in clause (i)(I), the period that— ENALTY.—Section 409(a) (42 U.S.C. ‘‘(C) PUBLICATION OF AMOUNT OF CREDIT.— ‘‘(I) begins with the calendar year that, as (b) P Not later than August 30 of each fiscal year, of October 1, 2002, precedes the then most re- 609(a)) is amended by adding at the end the the Secretary shall cause to be published in cently completed calendar year for which following: the Federal Register the amount of the em- such information is available; and ‘‘(15) PENALTY FOR FAILURE OF STATE TO ployment credit that will be used in deter- ‘‘(II) ends with the calendar year that pre- USE REVIEW AND CONCILIATION PROCESS.— mining the minimum participation rate ap- cedes the calendar year referred to clause ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary deter- plicable to a State under this subsection for (i)(I). mines that a State to which a grant is made the immediately succeeding fiscal year.’’. ‘‘(iii) CHILD POVERTY RATE.—The term under section 403 for a fiscal year has vio- ‘child poverty rate’ means, with respect to a lated section 408(a)(12) during the fiscal year, (2) AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY TO USE INFOR- State and a calendar year, the percentage of the Secretary shall reduce the grant payable MATION IN NATIONAL DIRECTORY OF NEW children residing in the State during the cal- to the State under section 403(a)(1) for the HIRES.—Section 453(i) (42 U.S.C. 653(i)) is endar year whose family income for the cal- immediately succeeding fiscal year by an amended by adding at the end the following: endar year is less than the poverty line then amount equal to 5 percent of the State fam- ‘‘(5) CALCULATION OF EMPLOYMENT CREDIT applicable to the family. ily assistance grant. FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING STATE WORK ‘‘(iv) AVERAGE DEPTH OF CHILD POVERTY.— ‘‘(B) PENALTY BASED ON SEVERITY OF FAIL- PARTICIPATION RATES UNDER TANF.—The Sec- The term ‘average depth of child poverty’ URE.—The Secretary shall impose reductions retary may use the information in the Na- means with respect to a State and a calendar under subparagraph (A) with respect to a fis- tional Directory of New Hires for purposes of year, the average dollar amount by which cal year based on the degree of noncompli- calculating State employment credits pursu- family income is exceeded by the poverty ance.’’. ant to section 407(a)(2).’’. line, among children in the State whose fam- SEC. 204. REPLACEMENT OF CASELOAD REDUC- (b) ELIMINATION OF CASELOAD REDUCTION ily income for the calendar year is less than TION CREDIT WITH EMPLOYMENT CREDIT.—Section 407(b) (42 U.S.C. 607(b)) is the applicable poverty line. CREDIT. amended by striking paragraph (3) and redes- ‘‘(v) POVERTY LINE.—The term ‘poverty (a) EMPLOYMENT CREDIT TO REWARD ignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs line’ has the meaning given the term in sec- STATES IN WHICH FAMILIES LEAVE WELFARE (3) and (4), respectively. tion 673(2) of the Omnibus Budget Reconcili- FOR WORK; ADDITIONAL CREDIT FOR FAMILIES SEC. 205. STATES TO RECEIVE PARTIAL CREDIT ation Act of 1981, including any revision re- WITH HIGHER EARNINGS.— TOWARD WORK PARTICIPATION quired by such section applicable to a family (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 407(a) (42 U.S.C. RATE FOR RECIPIENTS ENGAGED IN of the size involved. 607(a)), as amended by section 503 of this Act, PART-TIME WORK. ‘‘(E) FAMILY INCOME DETERMINATIONS.—For is amended by adding at the end the fol- Section 407(c)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 607(c)(1)(A)), purposes of this paragraph, family income lowing: as amended by section 307 of this Act, is includes cash income, child support pay- ‘‘(2) EMPLOYMENT CREDIT.— amended by adding at the end the following ments, government cash payments, and ben- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The minimum participa- flush sentence: efits under the Food Stamp Act of 1977 that tion rate otherwise applicable to a State ‘‘For purposes of subsection (b)(1)(B)(i), a are received by any family member, and fam- under this subsection for a fiscal year shall family that does not include a recipient who ily income shall be determined after pay- be reduced by the number of percentage is participating in work activities for an av- ment of all taxes and receipt of any tax re- points in the employment credit for the erage of 30 hours per week during a month fund or rebate by any family member. State for the fiscal year, as determined by but includes a recipient who is participating ‘‘(F) APPROPRIATIONS.— the Secretary— in such activities during the month for an ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Out of any money in the ‘‘(i) using information in the National Di- average of at least 50 percent of the min- Treasury of the United States not otherwise rectory of New Hires, or imum average number of hours per week appropriated, there are appropriated for each ‘‘(ii) with respect to a recipient of assist- specified for the month in the table set forth of fiscal years 2003 through 2007 $150,000,000 ance under the State program funded under in this subparagraph shall be counted as a for grants under this paragraph. this part who is placed with an employer percentage of a family that includes an adult ‘‘(ii) AVAILABILITY.—Amounts made avail- whose hiring information is not reported to or minor child head of household who is en- able under clause (i) shall remain available the National Directory of New Hires, using gaged in work for the month, which percent- until expended.’’. quarterly wage information submitted by age shall be the number of hours for which SEC. 203. REVIEW AND CONCILIATION PROCESS. the State to the Secretary not later than the recipient participated in such activities (a) REQUIREMENT.—Section 408(a) (42 U.S.C. such date as the Secretary shall prescribe in during the month divided by the number of 608(a)) is amended by adding at the end the regulations. hours of such participation required of the following: ‘‘(B) CALCULATION OF CREDIT.— recipient under this section for the month.’’.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.059 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2571

SEC. 206. TANF RECIPIENTS WHO QUALIFY FOR ‘‘(H) LIMITATION ON MEANING OF ‘ASSIST- ance under a State program under part A of SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME ANCE’ FOR FAMILIES WITH INCOME FROM EM- title IV of the Social Security Act, families BENEFITS REMOVED FROM WORK PLOYMENT.—For purposes of this paragraph, who are attempting through work activities PARTICIPATION RATE CALCULATION at the option of the State, a benefit or serv- to transition off of such assistance program, FOR ENTIRE YEAR. families with children with disabilities and Section 407(b)(1)(B)(ii) (42 U.S.C. ice provided to a family during a month 607(b)(1)(B)(ii)) is amended— under the State program funded under this other special needs, low-income families not receiving cash assistance under a State pro- (1) in subclause (I), by inserting ‘‘who has part shall not be considered assistance under gram under part A of title IV of the Social not become eligible for supplemental secu- the program if— Security Act, and families that are at risk of rity income benefits under title XVI during ‘‘(i) during the month, the family includes becoming dependent on such assistance.’’; the fiscal year’’ before the semicolon; and an adult or a minor child head of household and (2) in subclause (II), by inserting ‘‘, and who has received at least such amount of in- (D) by adding at the end the following: that do not include an adult or minor child come from employment as the State may es- ‘‘(I) AVAILABILITY OF STAFF.—Describe how head of household who has become eligible tablish; and the State will ensure that staff from the lead for supplemental security income benefits ‘‘(ii) the average weekly earned income of the family for the month is at least $100.’’. agency described in section 658D will be under title XVI during the fiscal year’’ be- available, at the offices of the State program fore the period. SEC. 302. CHILD CARE. NCREASE IN NTITLEMENT UNDING funded under part A of title IV of the Social SEC. 207. STATE OPTION TO INCLUDE RECIPI- (a) I E F .— Section 418(a)(3) (42 U.S.C. 618(a)(3)) is Security Act, to provide information about ENTS OF SUBSTANTIAL CHILD CARE eligibility for assistance under this sub- OR TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE amended— IN WORK PARTICIPATION RATE. (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara- chapter and to assist individuals in applying (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 407(a)(1) (42 graph (E); for such assistance. U.S.C. 607(a)), as amended by sections 503 and (2) by striking the period at the end of sub- ‘‘(J) ELIGIBILITY REDETERMINATION.—Dem- 306 of this Act, is amended by inserting ‘‘(in- paragraph (F) and inserting a semicolon; and onstrate that each child that receives assist- cluding, at the option of the State, a family (3) by adding at the end the following: ance under this subchapter in the State will that includes an adult who is receiving sub- ‘‘(G) $3,967,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; receive such assistance for not less than 1 stantial child care or transportation bene- ‘‘(H) $4,467,000,000 for fiscal year 2004; year before the State redetermines the eligi- fits, as defined by the Secretary, in consulta- ‘‘(I) $4,967,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; bility of the child under this subchapter. tion with directors of State programs funded ‘‘(J) $5,467,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and ‘‘(K) SUPPLEMENT NOT SUPPLANT.—Provide under this part, which definition shall speci- ‘‘(K) $5,967,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.’’. assurances that the amounts paid to a State fy for each type of benefits a threshold which (b) AMENDMENTS TO THE CHILD CARE AND under this subchapter shall be used to sup- is a dollar value or a length of time over DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ACT OF 1990.— plement and not supplant other State or which the benefits are received, and take ac- (1) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— local funds expended or otherwise available count of large one-time transition payments, Section 658B of the Child Care and Develop- to support payments for child care assist- except any family taken into account under ment Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858) ance and to increase the quality of available paragraph (2)(B)(i)(I))’’ before the colon. is amended to read as follows: child care for eligible families under this (b) STATE OPTION.—Section 407(b)(1)(B)(i) ‘‘SEC. 658B. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIA- subchapter.’’. (42 U.S.C. 607(b)(1)(B)(i)) is amended— TIONS; AMOUNTS AVAILABLE FOR (3) PAYMENT RATES.—Section 658E(c)(4)(A) (1) in clause (i), by inserting ‘‘plus, at the INCENTIVE GRANTS TO IMPROVE of the Child Care and Development Block option of the State, the number of families QUALITY OF CHILD CARE SERVICES. Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858c(c)(4)(A)) is that include an adult who is receiving sub- ‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— amended— stantial child care or transportation bene- There are authorized to be appropriated to (A) by striking ‘‘such access’’ and inserting fits, as determined under section 407(a)(1)’’ carry out this subchapter $2,350,000,000 for ‘‘equal access to comparable quality and before the semicolon. fiscal year 2003 and such sums as may be nec- types of services’’; and (2) in subclause (ii)(I), by inserting ‘‘in- essary for fiscal years 2004 through 2007. (B) by adding at the end the following: cluding, if the State has elected to include ‘‘(b) AMOUNTS AVAILABLE FOR INCENTIVE ‘‘(i) Market rate surveys (that reflect vari- families with an adult who is receiving sub- GRANTS TO IMPROVE QUALITY OF CHILD CARE ations in the cost of child care services by lo- stantial child care or transportation benefits SERVICES.—Of the amount made available to cality) shall be conducted by the State not under clause (i), the number of such fami- carry out this subchapter, $500,000,000 shall less often than at 2-year intervals, and the lies’’ before the semicolon. be used for each of the fiscal years 2003 results of such surveys shall be used to im- (c) DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING.—Sec- through 2007 to make grants under section plement payment rates that ensure equal ac- tion 411(a)(1)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 658H.’’. cess to comparable services as required by 611(a)(1)(A)) is amended in the matter pre- (2) STATE PLAN REQUIREMENTS.—Section this subparagraph. ceding clause (i) by inserting ‘‘(including any 658E(c)(2) of the Child Care and Development ‘‘(ii) Payment rates shall be adjusted at in- family with respect to whom the State has Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858c(c)(2)) tervals between such surveys to reflect in- exercised its option under section 407(a)(1))’’ is amended— creases in the cost of living, in such manner after ‘‘assistance’’. (A) in subparagraph (A)— as the Secretary may specify. SEC. 208. EFFECTIVE DATE. (i) in clause (ii) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the ‘‘(iii) Payment rates shall reflect vari- (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in end; ations in the cost of providing child care subsection (b), the amendments made by sec- (ii) in clause (iii) by adding ‘‘and’’ at the services for children of different ages and tions 204 through 207 shall take effect on Oc- end; and providing different types of care.’’. tober 1, 2003. (iii) by inserting after clause (iii) the fol- (4) CHILD CARE ACCOUNTABILITY IMPROVE- (b) STATE OPTION TO PHASE-IN REPLACE- lowing: MENTS.—Section 658G of the Child Care and MENT OF CASELOAD REDUCTION CREDIT WITH ‘‘(iv) in order to help ensure that parents Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 EMPLOYMENT CREDIT AND DELAY APPLICA- have the freedom to choose quality center- U.S.C. 9858e) is amended to read as follows: BILITY OF OTHER PROVISIONS.—A State may based child care services, the State shall ‘‘SEC. 658G. CHILD CARE ACCOUNTABILITY IM- elect to have the amendments made by sec- make significant effort to develop contracts PROVEMENTS. tions 204(b) and 205 through 207 of this Act with accredited child care providers in low- ‘‘(a) ACTIVITIES TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY not apply to the State program funded under income and rural communities;’’; OF CHILD CARE.—A State that receives funds part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (B) by amending subparagraph (D) to read to carry out this subchapter shall reserve until October 1, 2004, and if the State makes as follows: and use not less than 12 percent of the funds the election, then, in determining the par- ‘‘(D) CONSUMER EDUCATION INFORMATION.— for improvements in the quality of child care ticipation rate of the State for purposes of Certify that the State will collect and dis- services provided in the State and in polit- sections 407 and 409(a)(3) of the Social Secu- seminate to parents of eligible children and ical subdivisions of the State. rity Act for fiscal year 2004, the State shall the general public, consumer education in- ‘‘(1) Not less than 35 percent of the funds be credited with 1⁄2 of the reduction in the formation that will promote informed child reserved under this subsection shall be used rate that would otherwise result from apply- care choices, and describe how the State will for activities that are designed to increase ing section 407(a)(2) of the Social Security inform parents receiving assistance under a the quality and supply of child care services Act (as added by section 204(a)(1) of this Act) State program funded under part A of title for children from birth through 3 years of to the State for fiscal year 2004 and 1⁄2 of the IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 age. reduction in the rate that would otherwise et seq.) and other low-income parents about ‘‘(2) Funds reserved under this subsection result from applying such section 407(b)(2) to eligibility for assistance under this sub- shall be used for 1 or more activities con- the State for fiscal year 2004. chapter.’’; sisting of— TITLE III—REQUIRING AND REWARDING (C) by amending subparagraph (H) to read ‘‘(A) providing for the development, estab- WORK as follows: lishment, expansion, operation, and coordi- SEC. 301. EFFECT OF WAGE SUBSIDIES ON 5-YEAR ‘‘(H) MEETING THE NEEDS OF CERTAIN POPU- nation of, child care resource and referral LIMIT. LATIONS.—Demonstrate the manner in which services; Section 408(a)(7) (42 U.S.C. 608(a)(7)) is the State will meet the specific child care ‘‘(B) making grants or providing loans to amended by adding at the end the following: needs of families who are receiving assist- eligible child care providers to assist the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.059 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2572 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002

providers in meeting applicable State and (5) INCENTIVE GRANTS TO STATES.—The 658B(b) for a fiscal year shall be allotted local child care standards and recognized ac- Child Care and Development Block Grant among the eligible States in the same man- creditation standards; Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858 et seq.) is amended ner as amounts are allotted under section ‘‘(C) improving the ability of State or local by inserting after section 658G the following: 658O(b). government, as applicable, to monitor com- ‘‘SEC. 658H. INCENTIVE GRANTS TO STATES. ‘‘(d) USE OF FUNDS.—An eligible State that pliance with, and to enforce, State and local ‘‘(a) AUTHORITY.— receives a grant under this section shall use licensing and regulatory requirements (in- ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall use the funds received to significantly increase cluding registration requirements) applica- the amount made available under section the payment rate for the provision of child ble to child care providers; 658B(b) for a fiscal year to make grants to el- care assistance in accordance with this sub- ‘‘(D) providing training and technical as- igible States in accordance with this section. chapter up to the 150th percentile of the sistance in areas relating to the provision of ‘‘(2) ANNUAL PAYMENTS.—The Secretary market rate survey described in subsection child care services, such as training relating shall make an annual payment for such a (b)(1)(A). ‘‘(e) EVALUATIONS AND REPORTS.— to promotion of health and safety, pro- grant to each eligible State out of the allot- ‘‘(1) STATE EVALUATIONS.—Each eligible motion of good nutrition, provision of first ment for that State determined under sub- State shall submit to the Secretary, at such aid, recognition of communicable diseases, section (c). time and in such form and manner as the child abuse detection and prevention, and ‘‘(b) ELIGIBLE STATES.— Secretary may require, information regard- care of children with disabilities and other ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In this section, the term ing the State’s efforts to increase payment special needs; ‘eligible State’ means a State that— rates and the impact increased rates are hav- ‘‘(E) improving salaries and other com- ‘‘(A) has conducted a survey of the market ing on the quality of, and accessibility to, pensation paid to full-time and part-time rates for child care services in the State child care in the State. staff who provide child care services for within the 2 years preceding the date of the ‘‘(2) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary which assistance is made available under submission of an application under para- shall submit biennial reports to Congress on this subchapter; graph (2); and the information described in paragraph (1). ‘‘(F) making grants or providing financial ‘‘(B) submits an application in accordance Such reports shall include data from the ap- assistance to eligible child care providers for with paragraph (2). plications submitted under subsection (b)(2) training in child development and early edu- ‘‘(2) APPLICATION.— as a baseline for determining the progress of cation; ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—To be eligible to receive each eligible State in maintaining increased ‘‘(G) making grants or providing financial a grant under this section, a State shall sub- payment rates. assistance to eligible child care providers to mit an application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and accompanied by ‘‘(f) PAYMENT RATE.—In this section, the support delivery of early education and child term ‘payment rate’ means the rate of reim- development activities; such information, in addition to the informa- tion required under subparagraph (B), as the bursement to providers for subsidized child ‘‘(H) making grants or providing financial care.’’. assistance to eligible child care providers to Secretary may require. (6) ADMINISTRATION, ENFORCEMENT, AND make minor renovations to such providers’ ‘‘(B) INFORMATION REQUIRED.—Each appli- cation submitted for a grant under this sec- EVALUATION.—Section 658I of the Child Care physical environments that enhance the tion shall— and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 quality of the child care services they pro- ‘‘(i) detail the methodology and results of U.S.C. 9858g) is amended— vide; the State market rates survey conducted (A) in the heading by striking ‘‘and enforce- ‘‘(I) improving and expanding the supply of pursuant to paragraph (1)(A); ment’’ and inserting ‘‘, enforcement, and evalua- child care services for children with disabil- ‘‘(ii) describe the State’s plan to increase tion’’; ities and other special needs; payment rates from the initial baseline de- (B) in subsection (a)(3) by inserting before ‘‘(J) increasing the supply of high quality termined under clause (i); the period at the end ‘‘and including the es- inclusive child care for children with and ‘‘(iii) describe how the State will increase tablishment of a national training and tech- without disabilities and other special needs; payment rates in accordance with the mar- nical assistance center specializing in infant ‘‘(K) supporting the system described in ket survey results, for all types of child care and toddler care and their families’’; and paragraph (2); providers who provide services for which as- (C) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(L) providing technical assistance to fam- sistance is made available under this sub- ‘‘(c) FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION AND EVALUA- ily child care providers and center-based chapter; TION ACTIVITIES.—The Secretary shall— child care providers to enable them to pro- ‘‘(iv) describe how rates are set to reflect ‘‘(1) establish a national data system vide appropriate child care services for chil- the variations in the cost of providing care through grants, contracts or cooperative dren with disabilities; and for children of different ages, different types agreements to develop statistics on the sup- ‘‘(M) other activities that can be dem- of care, and in different localities in the ply of, demand for, and quality of child care, onstrated to increase the quality of child State; and early education, and non-school-hours pro- care services and parental choice.’’. ‘‘(v) describe how the State will prioritize grams, including use of data collected ‘‘(b) CHILD CARE RESOURCE AND REFERRAL increasing payment rates for care of higher- through child care resource and referral or- SYSTEM.—The State shall use a portion of than-average quality, such as care by accred- ganizations at the national, State, and local the funds reserved under subsection (a) to ited providers, care that includes the provi- levels; and support a system of local child care resource sion of comprehensive services, care provided ‘‘(2) prepare and submit to Congress an an- and referral organizations coordinated by a at nonstandard hours, care for children with nual report on the supply of, demand for, and statewide, nonprofit, community-based child disabilities and other special needs, care in quality of child care, early education, and care resource and referral organization. The low-income and rural communities, and care non-school-hours programs, using data col- local child care resource and referral system of a type that is in short supply. lected through State and local child care re- shall— ‘‘(3) CONTINUING ELIGIBILITY REQUIRE- source and referral organizations and other ‘‘(1) provide parents in the State with in- MENT.—The Secretary may make an annual sources.’’. formation and support concerning child care payment under this section to an eligible (7) REPORTS.—Section 658K(a) of the Child options in their communities; State only if— Care and Development Block Grant Act of ‘‘(2) collect and analyze data on the supply ‘‘(A) the Secretary determines that the 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858i(a)) is amended— of and demand for child care in political sub- State has made progress, through the activi- (A) in paragraph (1)(B)— divisions within the State; ties assisted under this subchapter, in main- (i) in clause (ix) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the ‘‘(3) develop links with the business com- taining increased payment rates; and end; munity or other organizations involved in ‘‘(B) at least once every 2 years, the State (ii) in clause (x) by adding ‘‘and’’ at the providing child care services; conducts an update of the survey described end; and ‘‘(4) increase the supply and improve the in paragraph (1)(A). (iii) by inserting after clause (x) the fol- quality of child care in the State and in po- ‘‘(4) REQUIREMENT OF MATCHING FUNDS.— lowing: litical subdivisions in the State; ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—To be eligible to receive ‘‘(xi) whether the child care provider is ac- ‘‘(5) provide (or facilitate the provision of) a grant under this section, the State shall credited by a national or State accrediting specialists in health, mental health con- agree to make available State contributions body;’’; and sultation, early literacy services for children from State sources toward the costs of the (B) in paragraph (2)— with disabilities and other special needs, and activities to be carried out by a State pursu- (i) in the matter preceding subparagraph infant and toddler care, to support or supple- ant to subsection (d) in an amount that is (A) by striking ‘‘aggregate data concerning’’; ment community child care providers; not less than 20 percent of such costs. (ii) in subparagraph (D) by striking ‘‘and’’ ‘‘(6) provide training or facilitate connec- ‘‘(B) DETERMINATION OF STATE CONTRIBU- at the end; tions for training to community child care TIONS.—State contributions shall be in cash. (iii) in subparagraph (E) by adding ‘‘and’’ providers; or Amounts provided by the Federal Govern- at the end; and ‘‘(7) hire disability specialists, and provide ment may not be included in determining (iv) by indenting the left margin of sub- training and technical assistance to child the amount of such State contributions. paragraphs (A) through (E) 2 ems to the right care providers, to effectively meet the needs ‘‘(c) ALLOTMENTS TO ELIGIBLE STATES.— and redesignating such subparagraphs as of children with disabilities. The amount made available under section clauses (i) through (v), respectively;

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.060 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2573 (v) by inserting after clause (v), as so re- Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) (in ice and higher participation rates in low-in- designated, the following: this section referred to as ‘‘TANF’’). come children’s support programs; ‘‘(vi) findings from market rate surveys, (2) LOW-INCOME FAMILY WITH CHILDREN SUP- (B) an applicant’s ability to reach hard-to- disaggregated by the types of services pro- PORT PROGRAM.—The term ‘‘low-income fam- serve populations; vided and by the sub-State localities, as ap- ily with children support program’’ means a (C) the level of innovation in the appli- propriate;’’; and program designed to provide low-income cant’s grant proposal; and (vi) by inserting before clause (i), as so re- families with assistance or benefits to enable (D) any partnerships between the public designated, the following: the family to become self-sufficient and and private sector in the applicant’s grant ‘‘(A) information on how all of the funds includes— proposal. reserved under section 658G were allocated (A) TANF; (2) SEPARATE CRITERIA.—Separate criteria and spent, and information on the effect of (B) the food stamp program established shall be established for the grants authorized those expenditures, to the maximum extent under the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. under paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (c). practicable; and 2011 et seq.) (in this section referred to as (e) USES OF FUNDS.— ‘‘(B) aggregate date concerning—’’. ‘‘food stamps’’); (1) STATES AND COUNTIES.— (8) DEFINITIONS.—Section 658P(4)(C) of the (C) the medicaid program funded under (A) IMPROVEMENTS IN PROGRAMS.—Grants Child Care and Development Block Grant title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 awarded to States and counties under sub- Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858n(4)(C)) is U.S.C. 1396 et seq.); section (c)(1) shall be used to— amended— (D) the State children’s health insurance (i) simplify low-income family with chil- (A) in clause (i) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the program (SCHIP) funded under title XXI of dren support program application, recertifi- end; the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397aa et cation, reporting, and verification rules; (B) in clause (ii) by striking the period and seq.); (ii) create uniformity in eligibility criteria inserting ‘‘; or’’; and (E) the child care program funded under for low-income family with children support (C) by adding at the end the following: the Child Care Development Block Grant Act programs; ‘‘(iii) is a foster child.’’. of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858 et seq.); (iii) develop options for families to apply (9) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—The Child (F) the child support program funded under for low-income family with children support Care and Development Block Grant Act of part D of title IV of the Social Security Act programs through the telephone, mail, fac- 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858 et seq.) is amended— (42 U.S.C. 651 et seq.); simile, Internet, or electronic mail, and sub- (A) in section 658E(c)(3)— (G) the earned income tax credit under sec- mit any recertifications or reports required (i) in subparagraph (B) by striking tion 32 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; for such families through these options; ‘‘through (5) of section 658A(b)’’ and insert- (H) the low-income home energy assistance (iv) co-locate eligibility workers for var- ing ‘‘through (6) of section 658A(c)’’; and program (LIHEAP) established under the ious low-income family with children sup- (ii) in subparagraph (D) by striking ‘‘1997 Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act of port programs at strategically located sites; through 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘2003 through 1981 (42 U.S.C 8621 et seq.); (v) develop or enhance one-stop service 2007’’; (I) the special supplemental nutrition pro- centers for low-income family with children (B) in section 658K(a)(2) by striking ‘‘1997’’ gram for women, infants, and children (WIC) support programs, including establishing and inserting ‘‘2003’’; and established under section 17 of the Child Nu- evening and weekend hours at these centers; (C) in section 658L— trition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786); and (i) by striking ‘‘July 31, 1998’’ and inserting (J) programs under the Workforce Invest- (vi) improve training of staff in low-income ‘‘October 1, 2004’’; ment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.); and families with children support programs to (ii) by striking ‘‘Economic and Edu- (K) any other Federal or State funded pro- enhance their ability to enroll eligible appli- cational Opportunities’’ and inserting ‘‘Edu- gram designed to provide family and work cants in low-income family with children cation and the Workforce’’; and support to low-income families with chil- support programs, provide case management, (iii) by striking ‘‘Labor and Human Re- dren. and refer eligible applicants to other appro- sources’’ and inserting ‘‘Health, Education, (3) NONPROFIT.—The term ‘‘nonprofit’’, as priate programs. Labor, and Pensions’’. applied to a school, agency, organization, or (B) CUSTOMER SURVEYS.— (c) APPLICABILITY OF STATE OR LOCAL institution means a school, agency, organi- (i) IN GENERAL.—A grant awarded to a HEALTH AND SAFETY STANDARDS TO OTHER zation, or institution owned and operated by State or county under subsection (c)(1) shall TANF CHILD CARE SPENDING.—Section 402(a) 1 or more nonprofit corporations or associa- be used to carry out a customer survey. (42 U.S.C. 602(a)) is amended by adding at the tions, no part of the net earnings of which (ii) MODEL SURVEYS.—The customer survey end the following: inures, or may lawfully inure, to the benefit under clause (i) of this subparagraph shall be ‘‘(8) CERTIFICATION OF PROCEDURES TO EN- of any private shareholder or individual. modeled after a form developed by the Sec- SURE THAT CHILD CARE PROVIDERS COMPLY (4) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ retary under subsection (g). WITH APPLICABLE STATE OR LOCAL HEALTH AND means the Secretary of Health and Human (iii) REPORTS TO SECRETARY.—Not later SAFETY STANDARDS.—A certification by the Services. than 1 year after a State or county is award- chief executive officer of the State that pro- (5) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means each ed a grant under subsection (c)(1), and annu- cedures are in effect to ensure that any child of the several States of the United States, ally thereafter, the State or county shall care provider in the State that provides serv- the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth submit a report to the Secretary detailing ices for which assistance is provided under of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, and the results of the customer survey carried the State program funded under this part the United States Virgin Islands. out under clause (i) of this subparagraph. complies with all applicable State or local (c) AUTHORIZATION OF GRANTS.— (iv) REPORTS TO PUBLIC.—A State or county health and safety requirements as described (1) STATES AND COUNTIES.— receiving a grant under subsection (c)(1) and in section 658E(c)(2)(F) of the Child Care and (A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is author- the Secretary shall make the report required Development Block Grant Act of 1990.’’. ized to award grants to States and counties under clause (iii) of this subparagraph avail- (d) AVAILABILITY OF CHILD CARE FOR PAR- to pay the Federal share of the costs in- able to the public. ENTS REQUIRED TO WORK.—Section 407(e)(2) volved in improving the administration of (42 U.S.C. 607(e)(2)) is amended by striking (v) PUBLIC COMMENT.—A State or county low-income family with children support ‘‘6’’ and inserting ‘‘13’’. receiving a grant under subsection (c)(1) programs, including simplifying application, SEC. 303. COMPETITIVE GRANTS TO IMPROVE AC- shall accept public comments and hold pub- CESS TO VARIOUS BENEFIT PRO- recertification, reporting, and verification lic hearings on the report made available GRAMS. rules, and promoting participation in such under clause (iv) of this subparagraph. (a) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this section programs. (C) TRACKING SYSTEMS.— are to— (B) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share (i) IN GENERAL.—A grant awarded to a (1) inform low-income families with chil- shall be 80 percent. State or county under subsection (c)(1) shall dren about programs available to families (2) NONPROFITS AND LOCALITIES.—The Sec- be used to implement a tracking system to leaving welfare and other programs to sup- retary is authorized to award grants to non- determine the level of participation in low- port low-income families with children; profits and localities to promote participa- income family with children support pro- (2) provide incentives to States and coun- tion in low-income family with children sup- grams of the eligible population. ties to improve and coordinate application port programs, and distribute information (ii) REPORTS.—Not later than 1 year after a and renewal procedures for low-income fam- about and develop service centers for low-in- State or county is awarded a grant under ily with children support programs; and come family with children support programs. subsection (c)(1), and annually thereafter, (3) track the extent to which low-income (d) GRANT APPROVAL CRITERIA.— the State or county shall submit a report to families with children receive the benefits (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in con- the Secretary detailing the effectiveness of and services for which they are eligible. sultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, the tracking system implemented under (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: shall establish criteria for approval of an ap- clause (i) of this subparagraph. (1) LOCALITY.—The term locality means a plication for a grant under this section that (D) IN-PERSON INTERVIEWS.—A State or municipality that does not administer a include consideration of— county awarded a grant under subsection temporary assistance for needy families pro- (A) the extent to which the proposal, if (c)(1) may expend funds made available gram funded under part A of title IV of the funded, is likely to result in improved serv- under the grant to provide for reporting and

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.060 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2574 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 recertification procedures through the tele- (A) include in-kind services and expendi- SEC. 307. HOURS OF WORK-RELATED ACTIVITIES. phone, mail, facsimile, Internet, or elec- tures by municipalities and private entities; Section 407(c)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 607(c)(1)(A)) tronic mail. and is amended by striking ‘‘20’’ and inserting (E) JURISDICTION-WIDE IMPLEMENTATION.— (B) be considered a qualified State expendi- ‘‘24’’. (i) IN GENERAL.—A grant awarded to a ture for purposes of determining whether the SEC. 308. STATE OPTION TO REQUIRE State or county under subsection (c)(1) shall State has satisfied the maintenance of effort RECEIPIENTS TO ENGAGE IN WORK be used for activities throughout the juris- requirements of the temporary assistance for FOR 40 HOURS PER WEEK. diction. needy families program under section Section 407(c)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 607(c)(1)(A)) (ii) EXCEPTION.—A State or county awarded 409(a)(7) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. is amended by adding at the end the fol- a grant under subsection (c)(1) may use grant 609(a)(7)). lowing flush sentence: funds to develop one-stop service centers and (2) LIMITATION ON EXPENDITURES.—Subject ‘‘At the option of a State, the State may re- telephone, mail, facsimile, Internet, or elec- to paragraph (3) of this subsection, not more quire, a recipient not referred to in para- tronic mail application and renewal proce- than 20 percent of a grant awarded under graph (2)(B) to engage in work for an average dures for low-income family with children subsection (c) shall be expended on customer of 40 hours per week in each month in a par- support programs without regard to the re- surveys or tracking systems. ticular fiscal year.’’. (3) REVERSION OF FUNDS.—Any funds not quirements of clause (i) of this subparagraph. SEC. 309. REVISION AND SIMPLIFICATION OF THE (F) SUPPLEMENT NOT SUPPLANT.—Funds expended by a grantee within 2 years after TRANSITIONAL MEDICAL ASSIST- provided to a State or county under a grant awarded a grant shall be available for redis- ANCE PROGRAM (TMA). awarded under subsection (c)(1) shall be used tribution among other grantees in such man- (a) OPTION OF CONTINUOUS ELIGIBILITY FOR to supplement and not supplant other State ner and amount as the Secretary may deter- 12 MONTHS; OPTION OF CONTINUING COVERAGE or county public funds expended to provide mine, unless the Secretary extends by regu- FOR UPTOANADDITIONAL YEAR.— support services for low-income families. lation the 2-year time period to expend (1) OPTION OF CONTINUOUS ELIGIBILITY FOR 12 (2) NONPROFITS AND LOCALITIES.—A grant funds. MONTHS BY MAKING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS awarded to a nonprofit or locality under sub- (4) NONAPPORTIONMENT.—Notwithstanding OPTIONAL.—Section 1925(b) (42 U.S.C. 1396r– section (c)(2) shall be used to— any other provision of law, a State, county, 6(b)) is amended— (A) develop one-stop service centers for locality, or nonprofit awarded a grant under (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ‘‘, at the low-income family with children support subsection (c) is not required to apportion option of a State,’’ after ‘‘and which’’; programs in cooperation with States and the costs of providing information about (B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ‘‘Sub- counties; or low-income family with children support ject to subparagraph (C)—’’ after ‘‘(A) NO- (B) provide information about and referrals programs among all low-income family with TICES.—’’; to low-income family with children support children support programs. (C) in paragraph (2)(B), by inserting ‘‘Sub- programs through the dissemination of ma- (5) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS OF THE SEC- ject to subparagraph (C)—’’ after ‘‘(B) RE- terials at strategic locations, including RETARY.—Not more than 5 percent of the PORTING REQUIREMENTS.—’’; schools, clinics, and shopping locations. funds appropriated to carry out this section (D) by adding at the end the following new shall be expended on administrative costs of (f) APPLICATION.— subparagraph: the Secretary. (1) IN GENERAL.—Each applicant desiring a ‘‘(C) STATE OPTION TO WAIVE NOTICE AND RE- grant under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— PORTING REQUIREMENTS.—A State may waive (c) shall submit an application to the Sec- There is authorized to be appropriated to some or all of the reporting requirements retary at such time, in such manner, and ac- carry out this section $500,000,000 for the pe- under clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (B). companied by such information as the Sec- riod of fiscal years 2003 through 2007. Insofar as it waives such a reporting require- retary may reasonably require. SEC. 304. ASSESSMENTS FOR TANF RECIPIENTS. ment, the State need not provide for a notice (2) STATES AND COUNTIES.— Section 408(b) (42 U.S.C. 608(b)) is under subparagraph (A) relating to such re- (A) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—Each State or amended— quirement.’’; and county applicant shall provide assurances (1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting (E) in paragraph (3)(A)(iii), by inserting that the applicant will pay the non-Federal the following: ‘‘the State has not waived under paragraph share of the activities for which a grant is ‘‘(1) ASSESSMENT.—The State agency re- (2)(C) the reporting requirement with respect sought. sponsible for administering the State pro- to such month under paragraph (2)(B) and if’’ (B) PARTNERSHIPS.—Each State or county gram funded under this part shall, for each after ‘‘6-month period if’’. applicant shall submit a memorandum of un- recipient of assistance under the program (2) STATE OPTION TO EXTEND ELIGIBILITY FOR derstanding demonstrating that the appli- who is a head of household, make an initial LOW-INCOME INDIVIDUALS FOR UP TO 12 ADDI- cant has entered into a partnership to co- assessment of the skills, prior work experi- TIONAL MONTHS.—Section 1925 (42 U.S.C. ordinate its efforts under the grant with the ence, and circumstances related to the em- 1396r–6) is further amended— efforts of other State and county agencies ployability of the recipient, including phys- (A) by redesignating subsections (c) that have responsibility for providing low-in- ical or mental impairments, proficiency in through (f) as subsections (d) through (g); come families with assistance or benefits. English, child care needs, and whether the and recipient is a victim of domestic violence.’’; (B) by inserting after subsection (b) the (g) DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY.— (2) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ‘‘may following new subsection: (1) SURVEY FORM.—The Secretary, in co- ‘‘(c) STATE OPTION OF UPTO12 MONTHS OF operation with other relevant agencies, shall develop’’ and inserting ‘‘shall develop’’; and ADDITIONAL ELIGIBILITY.— develop a customer survey form to deter- (3) by striking paragraph (4). ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any SEC. 305. APPLICABILITY OF WORKPLACE LAWS. mine whether low-income families— other provision of this title, each State plan Section 408 (42 U.S.C. 608) is amended by (A) encounter any impediments in applying approved under this title may provide, at the adding at the end the following: for or renewing their participation in low-in- option of the State, that the State shall offer come family with children support programs; ‘‘(h) No individual engaged in any activity to each family which received assistance and funded in whole or in part by the TANF pro- during the entire 6-month period under sub- (B) are unaware of low-income family with gram shall be subjected to discrimination section (b) and which meets the applicable children support programs for which they based on race, color, religion, sex, national requirement of paragraph (2), in the last are eligible. origin, age, or disability, nor shall such an month of the period the option of extending (2) REPORTS.— individual be denied the benefits or protec- coverage under this subsection for the suc- (A) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Not later than 1 tions of any Federal, State or local employ- ceeding period not to exceed 12 months. year after the date of enactment of this Act, ment, civil rights, or health and safety law ‘‘(2) INCOME RESTRICTION.—The option and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall because of such individual’s status as a par- under paragraph (1) shall not be made avail- submit a report to Congress describing the ticipant in the TANF program.’’. able to a family for a succeeding period un- uses of grant funds awarded under this sec- SEC. 306. WORK PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS. less the State determines that the family’s tion. Section 407(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 607(a)), as average gross monthly earnings (less such (B) RESULTS OF TRACKING SYSTEMS AND SUR- amended by section 503 of this Act, is amend- costs for such child care as is necessary for VEYS.—The Secretary shall submit a report ed to read as follows: the employment of the caretaker relative) as to Congress detailing the results of the ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A State to which a grant of the end of the 6-month period under sub- tracking systems implemented and customer is made under section 403 for a fiscal year section (b) does not exceed 185 percent of the surveys carried out by States and counties shall achieve a minimum participation rate official poverty line (as defined by the Office under subsection (e) as the information be- equal to not less than— of Management and Budget, and revised an- comes available. ‘‘(A) 50 percent for fiscal year 2003; nually in accordance with section 673(2) of (h) MISCELLANEOUS.— ‘‘(B) 55 percent for fiscal year 2004; the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of (1) MATCHING FUNDS.—Matching funds re- ‘‘(C) 60 percent for fiscal year 2005; 1981) applicable to a family of the size in- quired from a State or county awarded a ‘‘(D) 65 percent for fiscal year 2006; and volved. grant under subsection (c)(1) of this section ‘‘(E) 70 percent for fiscal year 2007 and each ‘‘(3) APPLICATION OF EXTENSION RULES.— may— succeeding fiscal year.’’. The provisions of paragraphs (2), (3), (4), and

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.060 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2575 (5) of subsection (b) shall apply to the exten- this title (whether under section 1931, (3) by inserting before clause (ii) the fol- sion provided under this subsection in the through a waiver under section 1115, or oth- lowing: same manner as they apply to the extension erwise) to families (including both children ‘‘(i) NONDISPLACEMENT.—A State shall es- provided under subsection (b)(1), except that and caretaker relatives) the average gross tablish and maintain such procedures as are for purposes of this subsection— monthly earning of which (less such costs for necessary to do the following with respect to ‘‘(A) any reference to a 6-month period such child care as is necessary for the em- activities funded in whole or in part under under subsection (b)(1) is deemed a reference ployment of a caretaker relative) is at or this part: to the extension period provided under para- below a level that is at least 185 percent of ‘‘(I) Prohibit the placement of an indi- graph (1) and any deadlines for any notices the official poverty line (as defined by the vidual in a work activity specified in section or reporting and the premium payment peri- Office of Management and Budget, and re- 407(d) from resulting in the displacement of ods shall be modified to correspond to the vised annually in accordance with section any employee or position (including partial appropriate calendar quarters of coverage 673(2) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation displacement, such as a reduction in the provided under this subsection; and Act of 1981) applicable to a family of the size hours of nonovertime work wages, or em- ‘‘(B) any reference to a provision of sub- involved.’’. ployment benefits, or fill any unfilled va- section (a) or (b) is deemed a reference to the (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Such sec- cancy, or performing work when any other corresponding provision of subsection (b) or tion is further amended, in subsections (a)(1) individual is on layoff from the same or any of this subsection, respectively.’’. and (b)(1), by inserting ‘‘, but subject to sub- substantially equivalent job). (b) STATE OPTION TO WAIVE RECEIPT OF section (h),’’ after ‘‘Notwithstanding any ‘‘(II) Prohibit the placement of an indi- MEDICAID FOR 3 OF PREVIOUS 6 MONTHS TO other provision of this title,’’ each place it vidual in a work activity specified in section QUALIFY FOR TMA.—Section 1925(a)(1) (42 appears. 407(d) which would impair any contract for U.S.C. 1396r–6(a)(1)) is amended by adding at (g) REQUIREMENT OF NOTICE FOR ALL FAMI- services, be inconsistent with any employ- the end the following: ‘‘A State may, at its LIES LOSING TANF.—Subsection (a)(2) of such ment-related State or local law or regula- option, also apply the previous sentence in section is amended by adding after and below tion, or collective bargaining agreement, or the case of a family that was receiving such subparagraph (B), the following: infringe on the recall rights or promotional aid for fewer than 3 months, or that had ap- ‘‘Each State shall provide, to families whose opportunities of any worker. plied for and was eligible for such aid for aid under part A or E of title IV has termi- ‘‘(III) Maintain an impartial grievance pro- fewer than 3 months, during the 6 imme- nated but whose eligibility for medical as- cedure to resolve any complaints alleging diately preceding months described in such sistance under this title continues, written violations of subclause (I) or (II) within 60 sentence.’’. notice of their ongoing eligibility for such days after receipt of the complaint, and if a (c) ELIMINATION OF SUNSET FOR TMA.— medical assistance. If a State makes a deter- decision is adverse to the party who filed (1) Subsection (g) of section 1925 (42 U.S.C. mination that any member of a family whose such a grievance or no decision has been 1396r–6), as redesignated under subsection aid under part A or E of title IV is being ter- reached, provided for the completion of an (a)(2), is repealed. minated is also no longer eligible for medical arbitration procedure within 75 days after re- (2) Section 1902(e)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. assistance under this title, the notice of such ceipt of the complaint or the adverse deci- 1396a(e)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘(A) determination shall be supplemented by a sion or conclusion of the 60-day period, Nothwithstanding’’ and all that follows one-page notification form describing the whichever is earlier. The procedures shall in- through ‘‘During such period, for’’ in sub- different ways in which individuals and fami- clude a right to a hearing. The procedures paragraph (B) and inserting ‘‘For’’. lies may qualify for such medical assistance shall include remedies for violations of the (d) CMS REPORT ON ENROLLMENT AND PAR- and explaining that individuals and families requirement that shall include termination TICIPATION RATES UNDER TMA.—Section 1925, do not have to be receiving aid under part A or suspension of payments, prohibition of the as amended by subsections (a)(2) and (c), is or E of title IV in order to qualify for such participant, reinstatemt of an employee, and amended by adding at the end the following medical assistance.’’. other appropriate relief. The procedures new subsection: (h) EXTENDING USE OF OUTSTATIONED WORK- shall specifiy that if a direct work activity ‘‘(g) ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS.— ERS TO ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FOR TRANSI- engaged in by a recipient of assistance under ‘‘(1) COLLECTION AND REPORTING OF PARTICI- TIONAL MEDICAL ASSISTANCE.—Section the State program funded under this part in- PATION INFORMATION.—Each State shall— 1902(a)(55) (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(55)) is amended volves a placement in a State agency or ‘‘(A) collect and submit to the Secretary, by inserting ‘‘and under section 1931’’ after local government agency pursuant to this in a format specified by the Secretary, infor- ‘‘(a)(10)(A)(ii)(IX)’’. section and the agency experiences a net re- mation on average monthly enrollment and (i) EFFECTIVE DATES.—(1) Except as pro- duction in its overall workforce in a given average monthly participation rates for vided in this subsection, the amendments year, there is a rebuttable presumption that adults and children under this section; and made by this section shall apply to calendar the placement has resulted in displacement ‘‘(B) make such information publicly avail- quarters beginning on or after October 1, of the employees of the agency in violation able. 2001, without regard to whether or not final of this subparagraph.’’. Such information shall be submitted under regulations to carry out such amendments (b) STATE PLAN REQUIREMENT.—Section subparagraph (A) at the same time and fre- have been promulgated by such date. 402(a) (42 U.S.C. 602(a)) is amended by adding quency in which other enrollment informa- (2) The amendment made by subsection (g) at the end the following: tion under this title is submitted to the Sec- shall take effect 6 months after the date of ‘‘(5) A plan that outlines the resources and retary. Using such information, the Sec- the enactment of this Act. procedures that will be used to ensure that retary shall submit to Congress annual re- (3) In the case of a State plan for medical the State will establish and maintain the ports concerning such rates.’’. assistance under title XIX of the Social Se- procedures described in section (e) COORDINATION OF WORK.—Section curity Act which the Secretary of Health 403(a)(5)(I)(i).’’. and Human Services determines requires 1925(g), as added by subsection (d), is amend- TITLE IV—HELPING WELFARE LEAVERS State legislation (other than legislation ap- ed by adding at the end the following new CLIMB THE EMPLOYMENT LADDER paragraph: propriating funds) in order for the plan to ‘‘(2) COORDINATION WITH ADMINISTRATION meet the additional requirements imposed SEC. 401. STATE PLAN REQUIREMENT ON EM- PLOYMENT ADVANCEMENT. FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES.—The Adminis- by the amendments made by this section, trator of the Centers for Medicare & Med- the State plan shall not be regarded as fail- (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 402(a)(1)(A) (42 icaid Services, in carrying out this section, ing to comply with the requirements of such U.S.C. 602(a)(1)(A)) is amended by adding at shall work with the Assistant Secretary for title solely on the basis of its failure to meet the end the following: the Administration for Children and Fami- these additional requirements before the ‘‘(vii) Establish goals and take action to lies to develop guidance or other technical first day of the first calendar quarter begin- improve initial earnings, job advancement, assistance for States regarding best prac- ning after the close of the first regular ses- and employment retention for individuals in tices in guaranteeing access to transitional sion of the State legislature that begins and individuals leaving the program.’’. medical assistance under this section.’’. after the date of the enactment of this Act. (b) INCLUSION IN ANNUAL REPORTS OF (f) ELIMINATION OF TMA REQUIREMENT FOR For purposes of the previous sentence, in the PROGRESS IN ACHIEVING EMPLOYMENT AD- STATES THAT EXTEND COVERAGE TO CHILDREN case of a State that has a 2-year legislative VANCEMENT GOALS.—Section 411(b) (42 U.S.C. AND PARENTS THROUGH 185 PERCENT OF POV- session, each year of such session shall be 611(b)) is amended— ERTY.— deemed to be a separate regular session of (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para- (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 1925 is further the State legislature. graph (3); amended by adding at the end the following SEC. 310. ENSURING TANF FUNDS ARE NOT USED (2) by striking the period at the end of new subsection: TO DISPLACE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. paragraph (4) and inserting ‘‘; and’’ ; and ‘‘(h) PROVISIONS OPTIONAL FOR STATES (a) WELFARE-TO-WORK WORKER PROTEC- (3) by adding at the end the following: THAT EXTEND COVERAGE TO CHILDREN AND TIONS.—Section 403(a)(5)(I) (42 U.S.C. ‘‘(5) in each report submitted after fiscal PARENTS THROUGH 185 PERCENT OF POV- 603(a)(5)(I)) is amended— year 2003, the progress made by the State in ERTY.—A State may (but is not required to) (1) by striking clauses (i) and (iv); achieving the goals referred to in section meet the requirements of subsections (a) and (2) by redesignating clauses (v) and (vi) as 402(a)(1)(A)(vii) in the most recent State plan (b) if it provides for medical assistance under clauses (iv) and (v), respectively; and submitted pursuant to section 402(a).’’.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.060 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2576 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 SEC. 402. EMPLOYMENT ADVANCEMENT FUND. (3) by adding at the end the following: SEC. 502. DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD SUPPORT Section 403(a) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)) is further ‘‘(13) Up to 6 months of participation (as COLLECTED BY STATES ON BEHALF amended by adding at the end the following: determined by the State) in services de- OF CHILDREN RECEIVING CERTAIN ‘‘(8) EMPLOYMENT ADVANCEMENT FUND.— signed to improve future employment oppor- WELFARE BENEFITS. (a) MODIFICATION OF RULE REQUIRING AS- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall pro- tunities, including substance abuse treat- SIGNMENT OF SUPPORT RIGHTS AS A CONDITION vide grants to States and localities for re- ment services, services to address sexual or OF RECEIVING TANF.—Section 408(a)(3) (42 search, evaluation, technical assistance, and domestic violence, and physical rehabilita- U.S.C. 608(a)(3)) is amended to read as fol- demonstration projects that focus on— tion and mental health services.’’. lows: ‘‘(i) improving wages for low-income work- (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section ‘‘(3) NO ASSISTANCE FOR FAMILIES NOT AS- ers, regardless of whether such workers are 407(c)(1) (42 U.S.C. 607(c)(1)) is amended by SIGNING CERTAIN SUPPORT RIGHTS TO THE recipients of assistance under a State pro- striking ‘‘and (12)’’ each place it appears and STATE.—A State to which a grant is made gram funded under this part, through train- inserting ‘‘(12), and (13)’’. ing and other services; and under section 403 shall require, as a condi- ‘‘(ii) enhancing employment prospects for SEC. 406. CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY OF tion of providing assistance to a family STATES TO USE TANF FUNDS CAR- recipients of such assistance with barriers to under the State program funded under this RIED OVER FROM PRIOR YEARS TO part, that a member of the family assign to employment, such as a physical or mental PROVIDE TANF BENEFITS AND SERV- impairment, a substance abuse problem, or ICES. the State any rights the family member may have (on behalf of the family member or of limited proficiency in English. Section 404(e) (42 U.S.C. 604(e)) is any other person for whom the family mem- ‘‘(B) ADMINISTRATION.— amended— ber has applied for or is receiving such as- ‘‘(i) ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.—The Secretary (1) in the subsection heading, by striking sistance) to support from any other person, shall allocate at least 40 percent of the funds ‘‘ASSISTANCE’’ and inserting ‘‘BENEFITS OR not exceeding the total amount of assistance made available pursuant to this paragraph SERVICES’’; and paid to the family under the program, which for projects that focus on the matters de- (2) after the heading, by striking ‘‘assist- accrues during the period that the family re- scribed in subparagraph (A)(i), and at least 40 ance’’ and inserting ‘‘any benefit or service ceives assistance under the program.’’. percent of the funds for projects that focus that may be provided’’. on the matters described in subparagraph (b) INCREASING CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS (A)(ii). SEC. 407. DEFINITION OF ASSISTANCE. TO FAMILIES AND SIMPLIFYING CHILD SUPPORT ‘‘(ii) DIVERSITY OF PROJECTS.—The Sec- (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 419 (42 U.S.C. 619) DISTRIBUTION RULES.— retary shall attempt to provide funds under is amended by adding at the end the fol- (1) DISTRIBUTION RULES.— this paragraph for diverse projects from geo- lowing: (A) IN GENERAL.—Section 457(a) (42 U.S.C. graphically different areas. ‘‘(6) ASSISTANCE.— 657(a)) is amended to read as follows: ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsections ‘‘(C) AID UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH NOT ‘AS- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘assistance’ (d) and (e), the amounts collected on behalf SISTANCE’.—A benefit or service provided means payment, by cash, voucher, or other with funds made available under this para- means, to or for an individual or family for of a family as support by a State pursuant to graph shall not, for any purpose, be consid- the purpose of meeting a subsistence need of a plan approved under this part shall be dis- ered assistance under a State program fund- the individual or family (including food, tributed as follows: ed under this part. clothing, shelter, and related items, but not ‘‘(1) FAMILIES RECEIVING ASSISTANCE.—In the case of a family receiving assistance ‘‘(D) APPROPRIATION.—Out of any money in including costs of transportation or child the Treasury of the United States not other- care). from the State, the State shall— wise appropriated, there are appropriated for ‘‘(B) EXCEPTION.—The term ‘assistance’ ‘‘(A) pay to the Federal Government the each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007 does not include a payment described in sub- Federal share of the amount collected, sub- $150,000,000 for grants under this paragraph.’’. paragraph (A) to or for an individual or fam- ject to paragraph (3)(A); ‘‘(B) retain, or pay to the family, the State SEC. 403. ELIMINATION OF LIMIT ON NUMBER OF ily on a short-term, nonrecurring basis (as TANF RECIPIENTS ENROLLED IN VO- defined by the State).’’. share of the amount collected, subject to CATIONAL EDUCATION OR HIGH (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— paragraph (3)(B); and SCHOOL WHO MAY BE COUNTED TO- (1) Section 404(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 604(a)(1)) is ‘‘(C) pay to the family any remaining WARDS THE WORK PARTICIPATION amended by striking ‘‘assistance’’ and in- amount. REQUIREMENT. serting ‘‘aid’’. ‘‘(2) FAMILIES THAT FORMERLY RECEIVED AS- Section 407(c)(2) (42 U.S.C. 607(c)(2)) is (2) Section 404(f) (42 U.S.C. 604(f)) is amend- SISTANCE.—In the case of a family that for- amended by striking subparagraph (D). ed by striking ‘‘assistance’’ and inserting merly received assistance from the State: SEC. 404. COUNTING OF UP TO 2 YEARS OF VOCA- ‘‘benefits or services’’. ‘‘(A) CURRENT SUPPORT.—To the extent TIONAL OR EDUCATIONAL TRAINING (3) Section 408(a)(5)(B)(i) (42 U.S.C. that the amount collected does not exceed (INCLUDING POSTSECONDARY EDU- the current support amount, the State shall CATION), WORK-STUDY, AND RE- 608(a)(5)(B)(i)) is amended in the heading by LATED INTERNSHIPS AS WORK AC- striking ‘‘ASSISTANCE’’ and inserting ‘‘AID’’. pay the amount to the family. ‘‘(B) ARREARAGES.—To the extent that the TIVITIES. TITLE V—PROMOTING FAMILY FORMA- amount collected exceeds the current sup- Section 407(d)(8) (42 U.S.C. 607(d)(8)) is TION AND RESPONSIBLE PARENTING amended to read as follows: port amount, the State— ‘‘(8) not more than 24 months of participa- SEC. 501. FAMILY FORMATION FUND. ‘‘(i) shall first pay to the family the excess tion by an individual in— Section 403(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(2)) is amount, to the extent necessary to satisfy ‘‘(A) vocational or educational training amended to read as follows: support arrearages not assigned pursuant to (including postsecondary education), at an ‘‘(2) FAMILY FORMATION FUND.— section 408(a)(3); eligible educational institution (as defined in ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall pro- ‘‘(ii) if the amount collected exceeds the section 404(h)(5)(A)) leading to attainment of vide grants to States and localities for re- amount required to be paid to the family a credential from the institution related to search, technical assistance, and demonstra- under clause (i), shall— employment or a job skill; tion projects to promote and fund best prac- ‘‘(I) pay to the Federal Government, the ‘‘(B) a State or Federal work-study pro- tices in the following areas: Federal share of the excess amount described gram under part C of title IV of the Higher ‘‘(i) Promoting the formation of 2-parent in this clause, subject to paragraph (3)(A); Education Act of 1965 or an internship re- families. and lated to vocational or postsecondary edu- ‘‘(ii) Reducing teenage pregnancies. ‘‘(II) retain, or pay to the family, the State cation, supervised by an eligible educational ‘‘(iii) Increasing the ability of noncustodial share of the excess amount described in this institution (as defined in section parents to financially support and be in- clause, subject to paragraph (3)(B); and 404(h)(5)(A)); or volved with their children. ‘‘(iii) shall pay to the family any remain- ‘‘(C) a course of study leading to adult lit- ‘‘(B) ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.—In making ing amount. eracy, in which English is taught as a second grants under this paragraph, the Secretary ‘‘(3) LIMITATIONS.— language, or leading to a certificate of high shall ensure that not less than 30 percent of ‘‘(A) FEDERAL REIMBURSEMENTS.—The total school equivalency, if the State considers the funds made available pursuant to this of the amounts paid by the State to the Fed- the activities important to improving the paragraph for a fiscal year are used in each eral Government under paragraphs (1) and (2) ability of the individual to find and maintain of the areas described in subparagraph (A). of this subsection with respect to a family employment.’’. ‘‘(C) CONSIDERATION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE shall not exceed the Federal share of the SEC. 405. LIMITED COUNTING OF CERTAIN AC- IMPACT.—In making grants under this para- amount assigned with respect to the family TIVITIES LEADING TO EMPLOYMENT graph, the Secretary shall consider the po- pursuant to section 408(a)(3). AS WORK ACTIVITY. tential impact of a project on the incidence ‘‘(B) STATE REIMBURSEMENTS.—The total of (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 407(d) (42 U.S.C. of domestic violence. the amounts retained by the State under 607(d)) is amended— ‘‘(D) APPROPRIATION.—Out of any money in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection with (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para- the Treasury of the United States not other- respect to a family shall not exceed the graph (11); wise appropriated, there are appropriated for State share of the amount assigned with re- (2) by striking the period at the end of each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007 spect to the family pursuant to section paragraph (12) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and $100,000,000 for grants under this paragraph.’’. 408(a)(3).

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.060 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2577

‘‘(4) FAMILIES THAT NEVER RECEIVED ASSIST- (d) STATE OPTION TO DISCONTINUE CERTAIN ‘‘(16) PENALTY FOR IMPOSITION OF STRICTER ANCE.—In the case of any other family, the SUPPORT ASSIGNMENTS.—Section 457(b) (42 ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR 2-PARENT FAMI- State shall pay the amount collected to the U.S.C. 657(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘shall’’ LIES.— family. and inserting ‘‘may’’. ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary deter- ‘‘(5) FAMILIES UNDER CERTAIN AGREE- (e) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— mines that a State to which a grant is made MENTS.—Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) (1) Section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)(I)(aa) (42 U.S.C. under section 403 for a fiscal year has vio- through (4), in the case of an amount col- 609(a)(7)(B)(i)(I)(aa)) is amended by striking lated section 408(a)(13) during the fiscal year, lected for a family in accordance with a co- ‘‘457(a)(1)(B)’’ and inserting ‘‘457(a)(1)’’. the Secretary shall reduce the grant payable operative agreement under section 454(33), (2) Section 404(a) (42 U.S.C. 604(a)) is to the State under section 403(a)(1) for the the State shall distribute the amount col- amended— immediately succeeding fiscal year by an lected pursuant to the terms of the agree- (A) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of para- amount equal to 5 percent of the State fam- ment. graph (1); ily assistance grant. ‘‘(6) STATE FINANCING OPTIONS.—To the ex- (B) by striking the period at the end of ‘‘(B) PENALTY BASED ON SEVERITY OF FAIL- tent that the State share of the amount pay- paragraph (2) and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and URE.—The Secretary shall impose reductions able to a family for a month pursuant to (C) by adding at the end the following: under subparagraph (A) with respect to a fis- paragraph (2)(B) of this subsection exceeds ‘‘(3) to fund payment of an amount pursu- cal year based on the degree of noncompli- the amount that the State estimates (under ant to clause (i) or (ii) of section 457(a)(2)(B), ance.’’. procedures approved by the Secretary) would but only to the extent that the State prop- SEC. 505. EXTENSION OF ABSTINENCE EDU- have been payable to the family for the erly elects under section 457(a)(6) to use the CATION FUNDING UNDER MATER- month pursuant to former section 457(a)(2) grant to fund the payment.’’. NAL AND CHILD HEALTH PROGRAM. (as in effect for the State immediately before (3) Section 409(a)(7)(B)(i) (42 U.S.C. (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 510(d) (42 U.S.C. the date this subsection first applies to the 609(a)(7)(B)(i)) is amended by adding at the 710(d)) is amended by striking ‘‘2002’’ and in- State) if such former section had remained end the following: serting ‘‘2007’’. in effect, the State may elect to use the ‘‘(V) PORTIONS OF CERTAIN CHILD SUPPORT (b) PURPOSE OF ALLOTMENTS.—For each of grant made to the State under section 403(a) PAYMENTS COLLECTED ON BEHALF OF AND DIS- the fiscal years 2003 through 2007, section to pay the amount, or to have the payment TRIBUTED TO FAMILIES NO LONGER RECEIVING 510(b)(1) of the Social Security Act is deemed considered a qualified State expenditure for ASSISTANCE.—Any amount paid by a State to read as follows: ‘‘(1) The purpose of an al- purposes of section 409(a)(7), but not both. pursuant to clause (i) or (ii) of section lotment under subsection (a) to a State is to ‘‘(7) STATE OPTION TO PASS THROUGH ADDI- 457(a)(2)(B), but only to the extent that the enable the State to provide abstinence edu- TIONAL SUPPORT WITH FEDERAL FINANCIAL State properly elects under section 457(a)(6) cation, and at the option of the State— PARTICIPATION.— to have the payment considered a qualified ‘‘(A) programs that the State defines as an ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding para- State expenditure.’’. appropriate approach to abstinence edu- graphs (1) and (2), a State shall not be re- (f) EFFECTIVE DATE.— cation that educates those who are currently quired to pay to the Federal Government the (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in sexually active or at risk of sexual activity Federal share of an amount collected on be- paragraph (2) of this subsection and section about methods to reduce unintended preg- half of a family that is not a recipient of as- 901(b) of this Act, the amendments made by nancy or other health risks; and sistance under the State program funded this section shall take effect on October 1, ‘‘(B) where appropriate, mentoring, coun- under part A, to the extent that the State 2006, and shall apply to payments under parts seling, and adult supervision to promote ab- pays the amount to the family and dis- A and D of title IV of the Social Security stinence from sexual activity, with a focus regards the payment for purposes of paying Act for calendar quarters beginning on or on those groups which are most likely to benefits under the State program funded after such date, without regard to whether bear children out-of-wedlock.’’. under part A. regulations to implement the amendments (c) MEDICALLY AND SCIENTIFICALLY ACCU- ‘‘(B) RECIPIENTS OF TANF FOR LESS THAN 5 are promulgated by such date. RATE INFORMATION.—For each of the fiscal YEARS.—Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2) STATE OPTION TO ACCELERATE EFFECTIVE years 2003 through 2007, there is deemed to (2), a State shall not be required to pay to DATE.—A State may elect to have the amend- appear in the matter preceding subparagraph the Federal Government the Federal share of ments made by this section apply to the (A) of section 510(b)(2) of such Act the phrase an amount collected on behalf of a family State and to amounts collected by the State, ‘‘a medically and scientifically accurate edu- that is a recipient of assistance under the on and after such date as the State may se- cational’’ in lieu of the phrase ‘‘an edu- State program funded under part A and that lect that is after the date of the enactment cational’’, and there is deemed to appear has received the assistance for not more of this Act and before the effective date pro- after and below subparagraph (H) of such sec- than 5 years after the date of the enactment vided in paragraph (1). tion the following: of this paragraph, to the extent that the SEC. 503. ELIMINATION OF SEPARATE WORK PAR- ‘‘For purposes of this section, the term State pays the amount to the family.’’. TICIPATION RATE FOR 2-PARENT ‘medically accurate’, with respect to infor- (B) APPROVAL OF ESTIMATION PROCE- FAMILIES. mation, means information that is supported DURES.—Not later than October 1, 2002, the Section 407 (42 U.S.C. 607) is amended— by research, recognized as accurate and ob- Secretary of Health and Human Services, in (1) in subsection (a), by striking paragraph jective by leading medical, psychological, consultation with the States (as defined for (2); and psychiatric, and public health organizations purposes of part D of title IV of the Social (2) in subsection (b)— and agencies, and where relevant, published Security Act), shall establish the procedures (A) by striking paragraphs (2) and (3); in peer review journals.’’. to be used to make the estimate described in (B) in paragraph (4), by striking ‘‘para- (d) EFFECTIVE MODELS FOR PROGRAMS.—For section 457(a)(6) of such Act. graphs (1)(B) and (2)(B)’’ and inserting ‘‘para- each of the fiscal years 2003 through 2007, (2) CURRENT SUPPORT AMOUNT DEFINED.— graph (1)(B)’’; section 510 of such Act is deemed to have at Section 457(c) (42 U.S.C. 657(c)) is amended by (C) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘rates’’ the end the following subsection: adding at the end the following: and inserting ‘‘rate’’; and ‘‘(e)(1) None of the funds appropriated in ‘‘(5) CURRENT SUPPORT AMOUNT.—The term (D) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) this section shall be expended for a program ‘current support amount’ means, with re- as paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively. unless the program is based on a model that spect to amounts collected as support on be- SEC. 504. BAN ON IMPOSITION OF STRICTER ELI- has been demonstrated to be effective in re- half of a family, the amount designated as GIBILITY CRITERIA FOR 2-PARENT ducing unwanted pregnancy, or in reducing the monthly support obligation of the non- FAMILIES; STATE OPT-OUT. the transmission of a sexually transmitted custodial parent in the order requiring the (a) PROHIBITION.—Section 408(a) (42 U.S.C. disease or the human immunodeficiency support.’’. 608(a)) is further amended by adding at the virus. (c) BAN ON RECOVERY OF MEDICAID COSTS end the following: ‘‘(2) The requirement of paragraph (1) shall FOR CERTAIN BIRTHS.—Section 454 (42 U.S.C. ‘‘(13) BAN ON IMPOSITION OF STRICTER ELIGI- not apply to programs that have been ap- 654) is amended— BILITY CRITERIA FOR 2-PARENT FAMILIES.— proved and funded under this section on or (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In determining the eli- before April 19, 2002.’’. graph (32); gibility of a 2-parent family for assistance (e) COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ABSTI- (2) by striking the period at the end of under a State program funded under this NENCE EDUCATION PROGRAMS.— paragraph (33) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and part, the State shall not impose a require- (1) STUDY.—The Secretary of Health and (3) by inserting after paragraph (33) the fol- ment that does not apply in determining the Human Services (referred to in this sub- lowing: eligibility of a 1-parent family for such as- section as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall, in con- ‘‘(34) provide that the State shall not use sistance. sultation with an advisory panel of research- the State program operated under this part ‘‘(B) STATE OPT-OUT.—Subparagraph (A) ers identified by the Board on Children to collect any amount owed to the State by shall not apply to a State if the State legis- Youth and Families of the National Acad- reason of costs incurred under the State plan lature, by law, has elected to make subpara- emy of Sciences, conduct an experimental approved under title XIX for the birth of a graph (A) inapplicable to the State.’’. study directly or through contract or inter- child for whom support rights have been as- (b) PENALTY.—Section 409(a) (42 U.S.C. agency agreement which assesses the rel- signed pursuant to section 408(a)(3), 609(a)) is further amended by adding at the ative efficacy of two approaches to absti- 471(a)(17), or 1912.’’. end the following: nence education for adolescents. The study

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.061 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2578 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 design should enable a comparison of the ef- ‘‘(4)(A) A State may elect (in a plan SEC. 702. BAN ON USING FEDERAL TANF FUNDS ficacy of an abstinence program which pre- amendment under this title) to provide med- TO REPLACE STATE AND LOCAL cludes education about contraception with a ical assistance under this title, notwith- SPENDING THAT DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF QUALIFIED similar abstinence program which includes standing sections 401(a), 402(b), 403, and 421 of STATE EXPENDITURES. education about contraception. Key out- the Personal Responsibility and Work Oppor- (a) PROHIBITION.—Section 408(a) (42 U.S.C. comes that should be measured in the study tunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, for aliens 608(a)) is further amended by adding at the include rates of sexual activity, pregnancy, who are lawfully residing in the United end the following: birth, and sexually transmitted diseases. States (including battered aliens described ‘‘(14) BAN ON USING FEDERAL TANF FUNDS TO (2) REPORT.—Not later than 5 years after in section 431(c) of such Act) and who are REPLACE STATE OR LOCAL SPENDING THAT DOES the date of the enactment of this Act, the otherwise eligible for such assistance, within NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF QUALIFIED STATE Secretary shall submit a report to Congress either or both of the following eligibility EXPENDITURES.—A State to which a grant is the available findings regarding the com- categories: made under section 403 and a sub-State enti- parative analysis. ‘‘(i) PREGNANT WOMEN.—Women during ty that receives funds from such a grant (3) FUNDING.—For the purpose of carrying pregnancy (and during the 60-day period be- shall not expend any part of the grant funds out this subsection, there are authorized to ginning on the last day of the pregnancy). to supplant State or local spending for bene- be appropriated such sums as may be nec- ‘‘(ii) CHILDREN.—Children (as defined under fits or services which are not qualified State essary for each of the fiscal years 2003 such plan), including optional targeted low- expenditures (within the meaning of section through 2007. income children described in section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)).’’. TITLE VI—RESTORING FAIRNESS FOR 1905(u)(2)(B). (b) PENALTY.—Section 409(a) (42 U.S.C. IMMIGRANT FAMILIES ‘‘(B) In the case of a State that has elected 609(a)) is further amended by adding at the to provide medical assistance to a category end the following: SEC. 601. TREATMENT OF ALIENS UNDER THE TANF PROGRAM. of aliens under subparagraph (A), no debt ‘‘(17) PENALTY FOR USING FEDERAL TANF shall accrue under an affidavit of support FUNDS TO REPLACE STATE OR LOCAL SPENDING (a) EXCEPTION TO 5-YEAR BAN FOR QUALI- against any sponsor of such an alien on the THAT DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF FIED ALIENS.—Section 403(c)(2) of the Per- QUALIFIED STATE EXPENDITURES.— sonal Responsibility and Work Opportunity basis of provision of assistance to such cat- ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary deter- Reconciliation Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1613(c)(2)) egory and the cost of such assistance shall mines that a State to which a grant is made is amended by adding at the end the fol- not be considered as an unreimbursed cost.’’. (b) SCHIP.—Section 2107(e)(1) (42 U.S.C. under section 403 for a fiscal year has vio- lowing: 1397gg(e)(1)) as amended by section 803 of the lated section 408(a)(14) during the fiscal year, ‘‘(L) Benefits under the Temporary Assist- Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Im- the Secretary shall reduce the grant payable ance for Needy Families program described provement and Protection Act of 2000, as en- to the State under section 403(a)(1) for the in section 402(b)(3)(A).’’. acted into law by section 1(a)(6) of Public immediately succeeding fiscal year by an (b) BENEFITS NOT SUBJECT TO REIMBURSE- Law 106–554, is amended by redesignating amount equal to 5 percent of the State fam- MENT.—Section 423(d) of the Personal Re- subparagraphs (C) and (D) as subparagraph ily assistance grant. sponsibility and Work Opportunity Rec- (D) and (E), respectively, and by inserting ‘‘(B) PENALTY BASED ON SEVERITY OF FAIL- onciliation Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1138a note) is after subparagraph (B) the following new URE.—The Secretary shall impose reductions amended by adding at the end the following: subparagraph: under subparagraph (A) with respect to a fis- ‘‘(12) Benefits under part A of title IV of ‘‘(C) Section 1903(v)(4) (relating to optional cal year based on the degree of noncompli- the Social Security Act except for cash as- coverage of categories of permanent resident ance.’’. sistance provided to a sponsored alien who is alien children), but only if the State has subject to deeming pursuant to section 408(h) TITLE VIII—IMPROVING INFORMATION elected to apply such section to the category of the Social Security Act.’’. ABOUT TANF RECIPIENTS AND PRO- of children under title XIX.’’. GRAMS (c) TREATMENT OF ALIENS.—Section 408 (42 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments U.S.C. 608) is amended by adding at the end SEC. 801. EXTENSION OF FUNDING OF STUDIES made by this section take effect on October the following: AND DEMONSTRATIONS. 1, 2002, and apply to medical assistance and Section 413(h)(1) (42 U.S.C. 613(h)(1)) is ‘‘(h) SPECIAL RULES RELATING TO THE child health assistance furnished on or after amended by striking ‘‘2002’’ and inserting TREATMENT OF 213A ALIENS.— such date. ‘‘2007’’. ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In determining whether a 213A alien is eligible for cash assistance SEC. 603. ELIGIBILITY OF DISABLED CHILDREN SEC. 802. LONGITUDINAL STUDIES OF EMPLOY- MENT AND EARNINGS OF TANF under a State program funded under this WHO ARE QUALIFIED ALIENS FOR SSI. LEAVERS. part, and in determining the amount or (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 402(a)(2) of the Section 413 (42 U.S.C. 613) is amended— types of such assistance to be provided to the Personal Responsibility and Work Oppor- (1) in subsection (h)(1)— alien, the State shall apply the rules of para- tunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. (A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of sub- graphs (1), (2), (3), (5), and (6) of subsection (f) 1612(a)(2)) is amended by inserting after sub- paragraph (C); of this section by substituting ‘213A’ for paragraph (K) the following new subpara- (B) by striking the period and inserting ‘‘; ‘non-213A’ each place it appears, subject to graph: and’’; and section 421(e) of the Personal Responsibility ‘‘(L) SSI EXCEPTION FOR DISABLED CHIL- (C) by adding at the end the following: and Work Opportunity Reconcilation Act of DREN.—With respect to eligibility for bene- ‘‘(E) the cost of conducting the studies de- 1996, and subject to section 421(f) of such Act fits for the specified Federal program de- scribed in subsection (k).’’; and (which shall be applied by substituting ‘sec- scribed in paragraph (3)(A), paragraph (1) (2) by adding at the end the following: tion 408(h) of the Social Security Act’ for shall not apply to a child who is considered ‘‘(k) LONGITUDINAL STUDIES OF EMPLOY- ‘subsection (a)’). disabled for purposes of the supplemental se- MENT AND EARNINGS OF TANF LEAVERS.— ‘‘(2) 213A ALIEN DEFINED.—An alien is a curity income program under title XVI of ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, directly 213A alien for purposes of this subsection if the Social Security Act.’’. or through grants, contracts, or interagency the affidavit of support or similar agreement (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment agreements shall conduct a study in each eli- with respect to the alien that was executed made by this section shall take effect on Oc- gible State of a statistically relevant cohort by the sponsor of the alien’s entry into the tober 1, 2002, and apply to benefits furnished of individuals who leave the State program United States was executed pursuant to sec- on or after such date. funded under this part during fiscal year 2003 tion 213A of the Immigration and Nation- and individuals who leave the program dur- ality Act.’’. TITLE VII—ENSURING STATE ing fiscal year 2005, which uses State unem- (d) EFFECTIVE DATE AND APPLICABILITY.— ACCOUNTABILITY ployment insurance data to track the em- (1) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments SEC. 701. INFLATION ADJUSTMENT OF MAINTE- ployment and earnings status of the individ- made by this section shall take effect Octo- NANCE-OF-EFFORT REQUIREMENT. uals during the 3-year period beginning at ber 1, 2002. Section 409(a)(7) (42 U.S.C. 609(a)(7)) is the time the individuals leave the program. (2) APPLICABILITY.—The amendments made amended— ‘‘(2) REPORTS.—The Secretary shall annu- by this section shall apply to benefits pro- (1) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ‘‘in- ally publish the findings of the studies con- vided on or after the effective date of this flation-adjusted’’ before ‘‘historic State ex- ducted pursuant to paragraph (1) of this sub- section. penditures’’; and section, and shall annually publish the earn- SEC. 602. OPTIONAL COVERAGE OF LEGAL IMMI- (2) in subparagraph (B), by adding at the ings data used in making determinations GRANTS UNDER THE MEDICAID PRO- end the following: under section 407(b).’’. GRAM AND SCHIP. ‘‘(vi) INFLATION-ADJUSTED HISTORIC STATE SEC. 803. INCLUSION OF DISABILITY STATUS IN (a) MEDICAID PROGRAM.—Section 1903(v) (42 EXPENDITURES.—The term ‘inflation-adjusted INFORMATION STATES REPORT U.S.C. 1396b(v)) is amended— historic State expenditures’ means, with re- ABOUT TANF FAMILIES. (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘paragraph spect to a fiscal year, historic State expendi- Section 411(a)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 611(a)(1)(A)) (2)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraphs (2) and (4)’’; tures with respect to the fiscal year, multi- is amended by adding at the end the fol- and plied by the sum of 1.00 plus the inflation lowing: (2) by adding at the end the following new percentage (as defined in section 403(a)(2)(F)) ‘‘(xviii) Whether the head of the family has paragraph: in effect for the fiscal year.’’. a significant physical or mental impairment.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.061 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2579 SEC. 804. ANNUAL REPORT TO THE CONGRESS TO SEC. 808. ACCESS TO WELFARE; WELFARE OUT- Mr. Speaker, I have listened with in- INCLUDE GREATER DETAIL ABOUT COMES. terest during the debate, and there is a STATE PROGRAMS FUNDED UNDER Section 411 (42 U.S.C. 611) is amended by TANF. adding at the end the following: better way. The substitute that I am Section 411(b)(3) (42 U.S.C. 611(b)(3)), as ‘‘(c) ANNUAL REPORTS ON WELFARE ACCESS submitting is submitted on behalf of amended by section 401(b)(1) of this Act, is AND OUTCOMES.— myself, the gentlewoman from Cali- amended to read as follows: ‘‘(1) STATE REPORTS.—Not later than Janu- fornia (Ms. WOOLSEY), the gentleman ‘‘(3) the characteristics of each State pro- ary 1 of each fiscal year, each eligible State from Wisconsin (Mr. KIND), the gen- gram funded under this part, including, with shall collect and report to the Secretary, tleman from Tennessee (Mr. TANNER), respect to each program funded with with respect to the preceding fiscal year, the the gentleman from California (Mr. amounts provided under this part or with following information: amounts the expenditure of which is counted ‘‘(A) The number of applications for assist- BECERRA), the gentleman from Wis- as a qualified State expenditure for purposes ance from the State program funded under consin (Mr. KLECZKA), the gentleman of section 409(a)(7)— this part, the percentage that are approved from California (Mr. THOMPSON), and ‘‘(A) the name of the program; versus those that are disapproved, and the the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. ‘‘(B) whether the program is authorized at reasons for disapproval, broken down by BLUMENAUER). a sub-State level (such as at the county race. Mr. Speaker, it provides for a real- level); ‘‘(B) A copy of all rules and policies gov- work requirement, a requirement for ‘‘(C) the purpose of the program; erning the State program funded under this real jobs. We reward the States for ‘‘(D) the main activities of the program; part that are not required by Federal law, ‘‘(E) the total amount received by the pro- and a summary of the rules and policies, in- finding real employment for the people gram from amounts provided under this part; cluding the amounts and types of assistance that are on welfare. We have put in the ‘‘(F) the total of the amounts received by provided and the types of sanctions imposed substitute an employment credit the program that are amounts the expendi- under the program. against the work requirement that was ture of which are counted as qualified State ‘‘(C) The types of occupations of, types of suggested by the gentleman from expenditures for purposes of section 409(a)(7); job training received by, and types and levels Michigan (Mr. LEVIN) and the gen- ‘‘(G) the total funding level of the pro- of educational attainment of recipients of tleman from Wisconsin (Mr. KIND) that gram; assistance from the State program funded rewards the States for finding employ- ‘‘(H) the total number of individuals served under this part, broken down by gender and by the program, and the number of such indi- race. ment for the people on welfare. Unlike the Republican bill, the viduals served specifically with funds pro- ‘‘(2) USE OF SAMPLING.—A State may com- vided under this part or with amounts the ply with this subsection by using a scientif- Democratic substitute provides flexi- expenditure of which are counted as quali- ically acceptable sampling method approved bility to our States, particularly as it fied State expenditures for purposes of sec- by the Secretary. relates to education. We increase, not tion 409(a)(7); and ‘‘(3) REPORT TO THE CONGRESS.—Not later eliminate, the opportunity of States to ‘‘(I) the eligibility criteria for participa- than June 1 of each fiscal year, the Sec- provide educational opportunities for tion in the program;’’. retary shall prepare and submit to the Com- the people on welfare. We increase the SEC. 805. ENHANCEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING mittee on Ways and Means of the House of amount of education from 1 year to a OF THE REASONS INDIVIDUALS Representatives and the Committee on Fi- LEAVE STATE TANF PROGRAMS. nance of the Senate, publish in the Federal maximum of 2 years, no caps on the (a) DEVELOPMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE LIST Register, and make available to the public a number of people who can participate, OF CASE CLOSURE REASONS.—The Secretary compilation of the reports submitted pursu- specifically provide for English as a of Health and Human Services shall develop, ant to paragraph (1) for the preceding fiscal second language and GED. in consultation with States and policy ex- year.’’. Mr. Speaker, by opening this up, perts, a comprehensive list of reasons why individuals leave State programs funded TITLE IX—EFFECTIVE DATE there are no requirements on the under this part. The list shall be aimed at SEC. 901. EFFECTIVE DATE. States. The States can then determine substantially reducing the number of case (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in sec- what is in the best interest of the peo- closures under the programs for which a rea- tions 208 and 502(f) and in subsection (b) of ple in their own State. We should not son is not known. this section, the amendments made by this mandate how the States respond to the (b) INCLUSION IN QUARTERLY STATE RE- Act shall take effect on October 1, 2002, and educational needs of their own citizens. PORTS.—Section 411(a)(1)(A)(xvi) (42 U.S.C. shall apply to payments under parts A and D 611(a)(1)(A)(xvi)) is amended— of title IV of the Social Security Act for cal- It is their decision, not ours under the (1) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of subclause endar quarters beginning on or after such substitute. (IV); date, without regard to whether regulations Mr. Speaker, that is flexibility. That (2) by striking the period at the end and in- to implement the amendments are promul- is what the States want. The Repub- serting ‘‘; or’’; or gated by such date. lican bill moves in the opposite direc- (3) by adding at the end the following: (b) DELAY PERMITTED IF STATE LEGISLA- tion and takes away flexibility. The ‘‘(VI) a reason specified in the list devel- TION REQUIRED.—In the case of a State plan under section 402(a) or 454 of the Social Secu- Democratic substitute provides more oped under section 805(a) of the Next Step in resources. We do that. We provide $11 Reforming Welfare Act.’’. rity Act which the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines requires State billion of new resources in mandatory SEC. 806. STANDARDIZED STATE PLANS. legislation (other than legislation appro- Within 6 months after the date of the en- spending for child care, unlike the Re- priating funds) in order for the plan to meet actment of this Act, the Secretary of Health publican bill which is $1 billion in man- the additional requirements imposed by the and Human Services, after consulting with datory spending. amendments made by this Act, the State the States, shall establish a standardized for- The Congressional Budget Office has plan shall not be regarded as failing to com- mat which States shall use to submit plans ply with the requirements of such section indicated that is necessary, otherwise under section 402(a) of the Social Security we are imposing additional mandates Act for fiscal year 2004 and thereafter. 402(a) or 454 solely on the basis of the failure of the plan to meet such additional require- on the States without providing the re- SEC. 807. STUDY BY THE CENSUS BUREAU. ments before the 1st day of the 1st calendar sources. I thank the gentleman from (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 414(a) (42 U.S.C. quarter beginning after the close of the 1st 614(a)) is amended to read as follows: California (Mr. STARK) and the gen- regular session of the State legislature that ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Bureau of the Cen- tleman from California (Mr. GEORGE begins after the date of the enactment of sus shall implement a new longitudinal sur- MILLER) for bringing forward the child this Act. For purposes of the previous sen- vey of program dynamics, developed in con- care issue. I regret their amendments sultation with the Secretary and made avail- tence, in the case of a State that has a 2-year legislative session, each year of such session were not made in order. able to interested parties, to allow for the The substitute also provides for an assessment of the outcomes of continued shall be deemed to be a separate regular ses- welfare reform on the economic and child sion of the State legislature. inflationary increase of $6 billion over well-being of low-income families with chil- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- the next 5 years for the basic grants to dren, including those who received assist- ant to House Resolution 422, the gen- our States. If we do not do that, we will ance or services from a State program fund- tleman from Maryland (Mr. CARDIN) have level funding for 10 years, and we ed under this part, and, to the extent pos- and a Member opposed each will con- would actually have had a decline of a sible, shall provide State representative significant amount of dollars available samples.’’. trol 30 minutes. (b) APPROPRIATION.—Section 414(b) (42 The Chair recognizes the gentleman in real purchasing power. U.S.C. 614(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘1996,’’ from Maryland (Mr. CARDIN). I have heard the Republicans com- and all that follows through ‘‘2002’’ and in- Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield ment the caseload is down. That is not serting ‘‘2003 through 2007’’. myself such time as I may consume. true. Cash assistance is down, but the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.061 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2580 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 people being served by TANF funds is of more than a billion dollars. So what progress of the 1996 act, to allow absti- actually increasing because we are now we really want to do as we discuss this nence-only education programs to providing employment services and day is not who is able to stack up the most work in our country, and to give our care to Americans who are working. Monopoly money in front of someone States what they already have, the We also provide additional incentives as to show how much they care about flexibility to opt into these programs to States to get people out of poverty. this issue, how much of this is real, or to opt out but never to allow them The Democratic substitute moves for- how much does it have a chance to be- to confuse the messages. Our kids need ward in removing the discrimination come law, and how much does it fit positive messages, not confused ones. against legal immigrants. We allow the within the other spending patterns I urge my colleagues to oppose the States at their discretion to cover legal that we have already committed our- Democratic substitute. immigrants with their TANF funds, selves to. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, let me and we make progress in both SSI and Mr. Speaker, that is the real ques- just point out to the gentleman from Medicaid in covering children and Med- tion, and there this substitute is fa- California (Mr. THOMAS), my chairman, icaid for pregnant women. tally flawed. that this bill spends less than half of Mr. Speaker, the Democratic sub- Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he what the farm bill spent and will not stitute moves us forward to the next may consume to the gentleman from even keep up the share of the Federal plateau, to the next level of expecta- Louisiana (Mr. TAUZIN), the chairman spending on these programs with the tion on our States. We provide the of the Committee on Energy and Com- increase. flexibility and the resources, but we merce. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. hold our States accountable to not b 1330 only get people out of cash assistance WOOLSEY), one of the coauthors of the off of the welfare rolls, but so Amer- Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank substitute. (Ms. WOOLSEY asked and was given ican families can also move out of pov- my friend for yielding me this time. I permission to revise and extend her re- erty. simply want to rise in opposition to marks.) Mr. Speaker, let me close this part of this alternative offered by the Demo- Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the debate by citing two of the groups crats for one of the many reasons that the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. that are in support of the substitute, I hope we oppose it, but for an impor- CARDIN) for his leadership and the gen- and there are many others. First, the tant one. The Democrats will argue that they want to put flexibility into tleman from Wisconsin (Mr. KIND) for Children’s Defense Fund when they his partnership in putting together this say: ‘‘Children deserve the chance to the title V funding for abstinence-only education programs. What that means substitute. Our substitute offers Mem- grow up out of poverty. The Demo- bers a clear alternative to H.R. 4737. cratic substitute bill represents gen- is they want to give the States the right to mix messages, to combine The Democratic substitute builds on uine progress for families with children what we have learned in welfare reform to escape from poverty. I urge you to their contraceptive-focused programs with the programs that help young over the past 6 years. The most impor- take the opportunity to help these tant thing that we learned is that it is working families to ensure that we people understand that there is an- other choice called abstinence. not hard to get people off the welfare truly Leave No Child Behind.’’ rolls, particularly in a good economy. From Catholic Charities U.S.A.: ‘‘We We included the definition of absti- nence education in the statute to pro- But it is especially easy if we do not believe your substitute will help fami- care where they end up. But if we want lies escape both welfare and poverty, tect the abstinence-only message from being diluted with the message of pro- people to go from welfare to self-suffi- and we offer our strong support.’’ ciency, then we have to work a little moting condom or contraceptive use. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of harder. We literally have to oppose an effort my time. The guiding principle of the 1996 wel- Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in that will give the States the flexibility fare reform was that welfare was the opposition to the amendment in the to mix those messages back up again. enemy. Welfare mothers were demon- nature of a substitute. There are 25 different Federal programs ized. But the enemy is not welfare, Mr. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gen- funding contraceptive-focused edu- Speaker. The enemy was then, and is tleman from California (Mr. THOMAS) is cation. There are only three income now, poverty. This substitute will en- recognized for 30 minutes. streams in the law that fund absti- able States to give welfare recipients Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield nence-only education programs and the supports and services they need to myself such time as I may consume. they are not mandatory on the States. get real jobs and lift themselves and I guess one of the things we could do The States have the flexibility, if they their families out of poverty. is run an auction on bills like this in want, to opt out of the abstinence-only First of all, our substitute will allow which each provision goes to the high- programs. education and training to count as est bidder. If that is the case, our As a matter of fact, 49 States choose work for up to 24 months, up to and in- friends on the other side of the aisle to opt in. They like the programs. cluding an AA employment-related de- would win every time, that is, as long They put up $3 for every $4 that the gree. The most recent census report as we were using Monopoly money. But Federal Government puts up. And if a shows that the median income of if we were using real money in terms of State does not really like this program women who have an associate’s degree having to pay for what it is that we say and does not want to be a part of it as is just under $24,000 a year. This is we are offering to the American people, the one State, California, does not more than twice what a woman who then the proposal that came out of our want to be, they can abstain from the works full-time at a minimum wage committees that we have just finished program. The other States like it, job earns. We know that education discussing fits within the budget that choose it, accept it, and the result is pays, and that is why the Democratic this House passed. that abstinence education is reducing substitute makes education count. The program that was partially out- teen pregnancy, reducing the incidence The vast majority of welfare recipi- lined by the gentleman from Maryland of transmitted diseases from sex and ents are single mothers. They cannot (Mr. CARDIN) adds up to about $70 bil- teaching young people that there is a go to school or work if their children lion over 10 years. There is no money better way, there is a better way to do not have child care. That is why the provided for it. The gentleman got up prepare themselves for a life in which Democratic substitute adds an addi- after virtually every speaker and they will not be afflicted with awful tional $11 billion in mandatory funding talked about an unfunded mandate. sexually transmitted diseases or the for child care over 5 years. As many of What the gentleman will not talk prospect of having a child in their teen my colleagues know, 25 years ago, about is the fact that they have over a years that they are not prepared to when my children’s father left me and billion dollars imposed upon States in rear and a child that will grow up like- my three young children, ages 1, 3 and their proposal requiring States to meet ly in poverty in our country. 5, I had to turn to welfare, even though an inflation number in the States. I urge my colleagues not to mix these I was working, in order to pay for child That produces a mandate on the States messages, to continue the great care and other basic necessities.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.067 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2581 The first year it was bad enough that is a living embodiment of an exception because we know that those on welfare I went to work. I had never intended to in a previous policy that just was not are not going to enter the workforce if leave my children and go to work. It working. What we have done over the they know the kids are not properly was bad enough that their father aban- last decade, or the last half of a decade, being taken care of in a quality envi- doned us. But the very worst part of is to change this program, to ronment. That is in contrast to the Re- the whole thing was trying to find incentivize and require work. publican version, which is very long on child care. That first year I had 13 dif- That is why I rise in opposition, not conservatism and very short on com- ferent child care arrangements. Can to score political points but to take a passion. you imagine what that is like? Finding look at what we have been able to do in If everyone truly believes that wel- new child care, watching your children the last 6 years. If we enact the sub- fare reform should be about welfare to make that adjustment, losing that care stitute offered by my friends on the work, then why do we not create an in- and starting over again. Thirteen times other side, we will weaken work re- centive rewarding States that help wel- in 12 months. It is an absolute miracle quirements. This would provide partial fare recipients get decent, meaningful that my children are the wonderful credit toward work rates for adults jobs? That is exactly what we accom- young adults they are today. who work as few as 10 hours a week plish with the Democratic substitute It was only after I was confident that while collecting full welfare benefits. with an employment credit rather than my children were well cared for that I Their substitute would add a new em- a caseload reduction credit that they was able to concentrate on my work, ployed leaver credit. According to esti- want to continue under current law. and within a year I was promoted to a mates from the Health and Human Their approach is to reward States for management position. Services, it would effectively eliminate merely kicking people off the welfare Mr. Speaker, this substitute does the work requirements in the year 2003, rolls yet we do not know what happens that for all the other women who need reducing from 50 percent to 2 percent to them because there is a paucity of it. the share of the welfare caseload ex- data in regards to where the families Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield pected to work. are, what they are doing and what hap- myself such time as I may consume. I What I think is important here is pens to the kids. do want to correct the record, because that we not reduce work requirements, The other important link with this is I indicated that the substitute bill re- because, after all, it is incentive to making sure that there is a greater re- quires a mandatory payment by the work that brings about true reform, sponsibility for the noncustodial par- States of $1 billion. My understanding and in the final analysis the best social ent. Our bill provides an incentive for is that that is only in the fifth year. program is a job. States to make sure that noncustodial My correction is that actually the Con- With all due respect, the substitute parents, fathers of these kids, to get a gressional Budget Office says that that offered by my friends, though it is not job and contribute with child support is an inflation mandate of $3.6 billion the intent of the other side, in essence payments rather than the entire bur- over 5 years. it would promote welfare dependence. den falling on single mothers. Their ap- We have fallen into the lexicon of the It would allow recipients working 2 proach is a $300 million experimental Federal Government and the State. days a week to stay on welfare forever. marriage counseling program that we The State pays, the Federal Govern- And my chairman mentioned the bot- have no information on whether it even ment pays. Obviously it is the taxpayer tom line, the cost of this substitute. works given again the paucity of re- who pays, whether it is at the State or Not only $70 billion over the next 10 search in this area. the Federal level. So as we are dis- years but my friends who on so many Finally, we must recognize there are cussing the costs of these bills, let us different projects say ‘‘Let’s watch def- those on welfare that are there for a remember, somebody has to put up the icit spending,’’ for this program they reason, either because of domestic taxes to pay for them. offer no budgetary offsets. Sound pub- abuse, sexual assaults, cognitive and In regard to the direction and the lic policy requires under our budget physical disabilities. Our legislation thrust, I find it interesting that 6 years rules offsets to bring this forward. It is recognizes the most vulnerable in our ago when we first offered this proposal not there. society and gives States the flexibility on the floor, the substitute that was of- For those reasons, I have to rise in they need in order to deal with those fered, in fact, saved $50 billion over 6 opposition to the Democratic sub- unique cases. I encourage support for years because they thought the entice- stitute. the substitute and reject the Repub- ment of saving money in this system Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, let me re- lican alternative. would convince enough people to vote mind my friend that just a week ago, The Republican bill is a step in the wrong with them rather than the reform of we approved over twice as much for the direction; it replaces state flexibility with un- requiring people to work. Six years farm bill, without offsets. funded mandates, it promotes make-work at later, when they know that requiring Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to the expense of wage-paying employment, and people to work works, their substitute yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from does nothing to help families escape poverty now spends $20 billion over 5 years. And Wisconsin (Mr. KIND), one of the co- when they leave welfare for work. I worked so if you cannot beat them, join them, authors of the substitute. closely, however, with Representatives and throw a few more dollars at the (Mr. KIND asked and was given per- CARDIN, WOOLSEY, TANNER, and THOMPSON in problem seems to be the direction that mission to revise and extend his re- crafting a Democratic substitute that better as- the substitute is going. marks.) sists the states in moving families from welfare Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I am one of to work and I empower individuals so they can yield 21⁄2 minutes to the gentleman the cosponsors of the Democratic sub- become self-sufficient. from Arizona (Mr. HAYWORTH), a mem- stitute and I also rise in opposition to During consideration of welfare reform in the ber of the Committee on Ways and the Republican base bill. Education and Workforce Committee I offered Means. Mr. Speaker, we have a tale of two three amendments that would have improved (Mr. HAYWORTH asked and was different visions here between these the base bill. The first amendment was an em- given permission to revise and extend two bills: Our vision that believes in ployment credit; the second amendment would his remarks.) maintaining the importance of State have given states incentives to put fathers to Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I flexibility and State innovation in im- work so they could pay child support; and the thank my chairman for yielding me plementing the next round of welfare third amendment would have allowed states to this time. reform, that believes in empowering consider domestic abuse or sexual violence in Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the words the individuals on welfare reforms the development of families’ self-sufficiency and heartfelt conviction of my friend through access to education and a job plan. Unfortunately, I withdrew the fatherhood from California. I do not doubt her in- training programs and that believes amendment under the agreement that Leader- tentions. The important thing in terms that we need to be careful in regards to ship would continue to work on the amend- of public policy is to step back and see what we do with the children of these ment between committee consideration and what can bring the greatest good. I ap- families. We provide the resources to the floor. They did not, however, stand by their preciate that my friend from California help with quality child care services commitment and excluded this amendment

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:50 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.070 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2582 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 from HR 4735. Furthermore, Leadership We need to shift the focus and reward BOEHNER), the chairman of the Com- adopted the domestic violence and sexual states for not only moving families off the rolls mittee on Education and the Work- abuse amendment by voice vote in committee but also for moving them into jobs, with a force. but did not include it in the final bill. bonus for moving them into higher-paying Mr. BOEHNER. I thank my colleague Yesterday, in the Rules Committee I offered jobs. The amendment I offered during mark-up from California for yielding me this the employment credit amendment with Con- in committee would have done just that by re- time. gressman LEVIN and I offered the fatherhood placing the caseload reduction credit with an Mr. Speaker, the first thing I notice amendment with Congressman ROEMER. Yet, employment credit. Under the employment about the Democratic substitute is once again, the House Leadership voted credit, for every one percent of welfare recipi- that, at least on the surface, it has no against my amendments and prohibited them ents that leave the rolls for work, the state’s quarrel with strong work require- from consideration on the House floor. work participation requirement would be re- ments. This really tells me they have THE DEMOCRATIC SUBSTITUTE duced by one percent. In addition, it would come a long way since 1996, when many The Rules Committee did, however, accept have increased state flexibility and measured of my friends on the other side of the the Democratic substitute as part of the Rule the state’s performance along the entire con- aisle made so many doom-and-gloom for debate on the House floor. As one of the tinuum from welfare to work. predictions about how welfare reform would bring about the end of civiliza- new Co-chairs of the New Democrat Coalition, NONCUSTODIAL PARENT AMENDMENT I am pleased that the substitute incorporated tion as we know it. Former Senator The first round of welfare reform required Pat Moynihan famously said that those many of the New Democrats’ suggestions. In low-income mothers to work rather than make 1996, one of the signature New Democrat ini- who supported the 1996 reforms would welfare a way of life. Reauthorization, how- ‘‘take this disgrace to their graves.’’ tiatives was the successful welfare reform leg- ever, should challenge the fathers of TANF islation. Centered on the principle of ‘‘work Mr. Speaker, I am one who voted for children to also be responsible for raising their the bill and proud that I did. first’’, this approach, coupled with efforts to children. Thus, I offered an amendment with make work pay, has succeeded where pre- This is why I am supporting the un- Congressman ROEMER during committee derlying bill today. By strengthening vious attempts to reform welfare failed. mark-up that would have rewarded states with Our Democratic substitutes strengthen the the work requirements and expanding a credit towards its worker participation rate if current work requirements. It increases the flexibility, it builds on what is really they worked with fathers to increase their em- work participation rate to 70% and increased best about the 1996 act. And while the ployment and pay child support. The additional the number of direct work activities hours from Democrat substitute is a sign that my piece to this amendment would have rewarded 20 to 24 hours. These increased work require- friends on the other side of the aisle states even further, with a bonus to states that ments are consistent with the president’s pro- are reconciled to welfare reform, it is achieve or exceed employment performance posal. In addition, the caseload reduction also a sign they are unwilling to move targets. This bonus was authorized at $100 credit is replaced with the employment credit, beyond the status quo. million, and the money would have come from which I offered in committee. Our substitute the funding for the Family Formation and b 1345 also provides states with an additional $11 bil- Healthy Marriage program. While very little re- While caseloads have declined dra- lion for mandatory childcare funding over five search exists about marriage and its direct matically since 1996, there is room for years; it increases the set aside for child care benefit to children, substantial research shows improvement. Fifty-eight percent of quality from 4% to 12%; and it provides an in- working fathers most effectively improves chil- TANF recipients still are not engaged flationary increase for the TANF block grant. dren’s emotional and financial well-being. in any work-related activities. Now, Conversely, the Leadership’s bill would im- DOMESTIC AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE AMENDMENT there is one place where the substitute pose nearly $11 billion over the next five years offers radical change, and that is in the Violence is a fact of life for too many poor in unfunded mandate on the states, without area of child care. It proposes spending women; as many as 60% of women receiving the additional resources we include in our sub- $11 billion more on child care over the welfare have been victims of domestic vio- stitute. In Wisconsin, my home state, the un- next 5 years. funded mandates would add another $134 mil- lence as adults. The incidence and severity of Mr. Speaker, to say this is generous lion over five years to the state’s current $1.1 violence in their lives can keep them from es- would be an understatement. After not billion budget deficit. caping poverty. Therefore, the amendment I having even offered a budget here on Our substitute also provides the states with offered in committee would have required the floor, our Democrat friends are the flexibility and freedom to innovate. Specifi- states to screen women on welfare to deter- asking for huge spending increases cally, it allows states to count education and mine if they have been subjected to domestic without even attempting to pay for training towards its participation rate for up to or sexual violence and then states may refer them. Where would all this additional 24 months. This is significant because the them to necessary services. It is unfortunate child care money come from? We have most promising state programs that help wel- that this assessment will not be included in the no idea. In contrast to this fiscal irre- fare recipients obtain and advance in a job development of families’ self-sufficiency plan. sponsibility, the underlying bill sup- combine a ‘‘work first’’ approach with supple- It is critical that these women receive the nec- ports a $2 billion increase in child care mental training and education. The Republican essary assistance to help them heal and es- and development, and we pay for our proposal eliminates vocation educational train- cape poverty. proposed increases. ing from the list of work related activities that CONCLUSION The backers of the substitute are count towards the State’s participation rate While it is unfortunate that my amendments making the claim that the underlying and limits other education and training to a were not included in the base bill, I am bill does not do enough for education. mere four months. pleased to be a lead sponsor of the Demo- Mr. Speaker, the claim is dead wrong. Further, our substitute allows states to as- cratic substitute and to have the opportunity to Under our bill, the welfare recipients sist legal immigrant families with federal TANF offer it on the floor today. My colleagues and can attend school full-time for 4 funds while the Republican bill would maintain I worked hard to reach a compromise that we months in any 2-year period, and can the ban on providing legal immigrants with think will best serve our nation’s various popu- spend up to 16 hours each week getting Federal assistance. lations and their needs. Most importantly, our education and training to help further EMPLOYMENT CREDIT AMENDMENT alternative will allow states to focus on placing their ability to obtain gainful employ- Current law rewards states for removing welfare recipients into real jobs and helping ment. people from the rolls. Because the credit does them escape poverty. That should be our As chairman of the Committee on not take into account whether welfare leavers number one priority, which sadly, the Leader- Education and the Workforce, let me are working, states can win reductions in their ship’s bill does not accomplish. remind my colleagues of the $66 billion participation requirements without actually Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I would Federal education budget already helping leavers find jobs. Further, because indicate that the gentleman from Wis- available to low income individuals, in- caseloads are at historic low, states will have consin in his substitute is willing to cluding Pell Grants, student loans and a difficult time benefiting from the revised impose $58.5 million of mandated in- Perkins loans. While these programs caseload reduction credit included in HR 4735. creases to the taxpayers of Wisconsin. are taken into account, it is clear that Even the president eliminated the caseload re- Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to the welfare recipients will have time duction credit in his proposal and replaced it yield such time as he may consume to and the financial help they need to with his own employment credit. the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. seek an education.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:50 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.053 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2583 Mr. Speaker, we need to build on the the Democratic Governor we have a $24 we had hearings that said that? And success of the 1996 welfare reform law. billion tub of red ink to begin with, and what did the workforce investment bill I do not think the substitute we have that my colleagues on the other side of do? It block granted job training before us does adequately strengthen the aisle are more than happy to dump money so people could benefit more. the work requirements. It includes additional red ink into that cesspool in We need for States to integrate their wildly unrealistic spending increases, California. systems so we treat people holistically. and I urge my colleagues to defeat the Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to You have a problem; yes, you need a substitute and vote ‘‘yes’’ on the un- yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman job, your children may need special as- derlying bill. from Connecticut (Mrs. JOHNSON), the sistance, you may need a special kind Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield chairman of the Subcommittee on of food stamp help. We need to move myself such time as I may consume. Health. States toward a more holistic ap- Mr. Speaker, I know the gentleman Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. proach, a more creative and visionary from California (Mr. THOMAS), my Speaker, I thank the chairman for approach of how to help people in need chairman, wants the record to be accu- yielding me time. in America. rate, so let me just clarify the point he Mr. Speaker, in my brief time, I want Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield made about the States’ maintenance of to direct myself to the requirements in myself such time as I may consume. effort requirements, which is current this bill. First of all, the real work re- Mr. Speaker, if you believe in voca- law. Wisconsin would receive well over quirement is almost unchanged from tional education, you do not restrict $58 million in additional Federal sup- current law. Under current law a per- the States, you give them more author- port over and above the substitute, son must work 20 hours a week. Under ity, and that is what the substitute plus under the Republican bill they this bill they must work 24 hours a does. would truly have an unfunded mandate week. That is three 8-hour days. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to of $89 million. So I thank my friend the What is really changed in this bill is yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gen- tleman from Maryland (Mr. HOYER). gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. KIND) the opportunity requirement. And let us not miss this. In this bill you are re- Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for looking after the citizens of Wis- for yielding me time. quired to plan how you are going to use consin. Mr. Speaker, our conservative friends the other 16 hours of the normal 40- Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the must have checked their compassion at gentleman from California (Mr. THOMP- hour workweek to create your own fu- the door when they put this bill to- SON), a coauthor of the substitute. ture. If you have substance abuse prob- gether. Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. lems, part of that plan can be to deal Make no mistake, government assist- Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his with substance abuse. If you have men- ance is not a free meal. If you receive good work on this substitute. tal health problems, part of that plan assistance, in my opinion, you have the Mr. Speaker, I come down this after- can be to deal with your mental health responsibility to work, if you can. noon to the floor to speak in favor of problems. If you have educational defi- Work builds self-esteem, increases meaningful welfare reform, to speak in cits, part of that plan can be to deal independence and strengthens our fam- support of the substitute measure. The with your educational deficit. ilies, our communities and our society. first goal of welfare reform should be You have the whole 3 months, even a That is why, Mr. Speaker, I strongly poverty reduction, and this bill does re- semester, to start out on your edu- supported bipartisan welfare reform in duce poverty by equipping people with cational issues without any work re- 1996. the tools they need to find meaningful quirement, even the 3 days a week, But this Republican bill is a step employment and then be able to keep and, after that, you have Tuesdays and backwards. It sets up unrealistic re- that job once they get it. Many States Thursdays, 2 days a week, to continue quirements, it fails to provide nec- have already found what works in their to pursue your degree. essary funding and it imposes an $11 State, what is successful welfare re- You do not have that under current billion unfunded mandate on the form, and that is because they have the law, and most low income working par- States. flexibility to provide specific needs to ents do not have that today. Only This bill would double the number of the people in their State. women coming off of welfare will have required worker hours for mothers My State of California is a prime ex- the opportunity, and that is why I call with children under 6. However, it ample of that. We have figured out how it the opportunity requirement, to plan would flat-fund assistance for child to make welfare reform work. We have for the additional 16 hours, working care even though 15 million eligible crafted a plan that puts people to work with the State, in such a way that they children today go uncovered. It is nice and works for the people in our State. create for themselves the educational to talk about opportunity, but if you Under our welfare reform, because of base from which they can develop their do not have the necessary child care, that flexibility, California has tripled careers. you will not be able to avail yourself of the number of welfare recipients who I would point out that in this bill those opportunities. have moved into employment, and there are employment achievement bo- This bill, in my opinion, discrimi- their average monthly earnings has nuses. Those will go to States that cre- nates as well against legal immigrants, significantly increased. We have re- ate career paths for their people; that prohibiting States from using Federal duced our caseloads by over 40 percent help people coming off welfare get into funds to assist them, not giving them in California. Unlike the underlying minimum wage jobs, but then help the choice, the option, in Federalism. bill, the substitute continues to allow them move up through education and It even would eliminate education that flexibility to work. through performance and through good from the list of activities that count With 45 States experiencing budget recommendations to higher paid jobs. toward work requirements, and it problems right now, the unfunded So the vision in this bill for women is would flat fund temporary assistance State mandates in the majority’s bill about hope and opportunity, planning to needy families. I ask my Republican are unaffordable to all States. I ask one’s own individual course of action, friends, where is the compassion in Members to support the substitute bill. so that at the end of your time you not that? You voted a few months ago to Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield only will be in the workforce, but you give Enron $250 million in corporate myself such time as I may consume. will be earning a good living to support welfare and a handful of major corpora- Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that the your child. tions billions of dollars more, and now, gentleman from California is sup- Make no mistake about it: The other now you want to crack down on a sin- porting a substitute which, if they bill has no vision for women on welfare gle mom who is trying her best to work want to receive the carrot in the bill, now and no vision for our future. The and still take care of her kids. they are required to deal with the waiver provision in this bill is the only That is not common sense. It is not stick, which is a mandated inflationary hope of us breaking out of both a com- compassionate. It is not even conserv- payment by the State of almost $1 bil- mittee structure and a series of fund- ative. It is, however, shortsighted and lion over 5 years, $944 million, in a ing streams that were set 50 years ago. punitive, and, therefore, may well be State which has just discovered under Fifty years ago. How many times have consistent.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.074 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2584 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 I urge my colleagues to vote for the Mr. Speaker, I understand the Repub- from New Jersey a little more time so substitute and against the underlying lican sensitivity on the dollars because that he could cover up his tracks, be- bill. the people of Maryland over the next 5 cause 6 years ago he voted to keep peo- Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield years will get significantly more Fed- ple on the program, he was opposed to myself such time as I may consume. eral help for their $61 million invest- the program. Now, of course, what they Mr. Speaker, I would note that the ment. But under the Republican bill want to do is outbid people with Mo- gentleman from Maryland at the same they have to lay out $144 million and nopoly money to show how compas- time he urges that is telling the hard- they get nothing in return. I can under- sionate they are and how people work. working taxpayers of Maryland that he stand the sensitivity that you might They were wrong then and they are wants to create a $61 million stick for have on the other side of the aisle on wrong now. them to receive any of the proposals our States. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to that he is talking about. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, it is my yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she pleasure to yield 11⁄2 minutes to the Ohio (Mr. PORTMAN), a member of the may consume to the gentlewoman from gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Committee on Ways and Means. OHNSON Connecticut (Mrs. J ). MENENDEZ). Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I appre- Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. (Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was ciate the gentleman yielding me this Speaker, I want to make it absolutely given permission to revise and extend time. I was not planning to get into the clear that the opportunity bill is the his remarks.) issue of legal immigrants, but I would underlying bill, and I strongly oppose think that some people might take b 1400 this proposed substitute because it will from the last comments that somehow truncate opportunity for women in our Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, today the underlying legislation takes bene- country and undercut the accomplish- the Republican leadership, the party fits away from legal immigrants. No es ments in reducing poverty among chil- that wants to be known as the edu- verdad. dren and helping women realize their cation party and that has gone to great The truth is that there is no change potential that the current program has lengths to win Hispanic votes, has pro- with regard to illegal immigrants in initiated. posed a welfare reform bill that proves this legislation. If anything, we have Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my their rhetoric does not match their re- improved the benefits for legal immi- pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gen- ality. grants because in the farm bill which tleman from California (Mr. HERGER), Instead of providing and expanding was just passed we are now providing the chairman of the Subcommittee on educational opportunities for all, the food stamps for legal immigrants. So I Human Resources. Republicans deny poor people the op- hope the gentleman is not trying to Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in portunity to get an education, to get a strong opposition to the Democrat sub- leave the wrong impression. better job, and to get their family out stitute. This substitute weakens work Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill I of poverty permanently. Instead of pro- requirements, is fiscally irresponsible think is a great improvement to a viding an equal opportunity for perma- and ties the hands of States. great law. Since 1996, there are nearly We have found from the successes of nent residents who are here legally and 3 million children who have been lifted the 1996 welfare reform legislation that who have worked hard, paid taxes, out of poverty. This has been a huge work is the best path from poverty to served in the Armed Forces of the success. What the legislation does be- self-sufficiency. This substitute resur- United States in many cases, are vet- fore us today, the underlying bill, is it rects the failed AFDC program, which erans of our country, and who have builds on what works. was weak on work and trapped recipi- fueled the economic boom of the last I had the opportunity last week to go ents into a cycle of dependency. decade, Republicans refuse to give visit one of our great organizations This substitute would increase wel- them the helping hand they need to get back in my hometown of Cincinnati fare dependency by allowing a recipi- back on their feet. The current reces- that is taking the flexibility we gave ent to work as little as 2 days a week sion has not bypassed Hispanics, but them in 1996 and helping people move and stay on welfare forever. Without the Republican welfare plan does. from welfare dependency to the kind of work, recipients have no hope to leave It is ironic to me that less than a dignity and self-respect they get from poverty and support themselves. week before Republicans planned to work. They fix someone’s car if it is Furthermore, the substitute is fis- pour millions of dollars into new Span- broken, they help people with child cally irresponsible. It would cost the ish-language infomercials to woo His- care, they help people with medical working taxpayers about $20 billion panic voters, they refused to invest any bills. They provide that bridge, and over the next 5 years. Unlike the Re- money in helping poor Hispanic fami- they are flexible about it. They like publican plan, this amendment con- lies get the education and training this new flexibility built into the legis- tains no offsets to pay for the addi- they need to lift themselves out of pov- lation. They are using this already, and tional spending. erty. What family value refuses to in- they want more of it. My friends from the other side of the vest the money needed to provide child What has worked is requiring work. aisle speak of fiscal responsibility, but care to those families who are making What has worked is strengthening fam- show none in this substitute. In addi- every effort to work, but still cannot ilies, and the underlying bill does that tion to being fiscally irresponsible and afford the cost of child care? better, I would say, than the Democrat weak on work, the substitute places Today we see the true meaning of substitute. What works is protecting more burdens on the States and actu- ‘‘compassionate conservatism,’’ and children, improving child care, and ally limits their flexibility. Over the there is nothing really compassionate there is more money in child care in next 5 years, States would be forced to about it. The Republicans’ new mar- the underlying bill. In the Democratic spend more of their own money on wel- keting strategy should really be called substitute, there is more money, but it fare, despite the fact that rolls are ‘‘la mentira grande’’ or ‘‘the big lie’’ is not paid for. Creating additional op- going down. States must establish instead of forging new paths, because portunities, yes, for education and complicated new regulations restrict- today’s bill shows that Republicans training, that is important and that is ing their ability to place recipients in really have no intention of helping peo- in the underlying bill and, finally, giv- work experiment and community serv- ple forge new paths. Their rhetoric ing the States the tools to encourage ice programs. Also under the sub- simply throws up roadblocks on the self-sufficiency, and that is the flexi- stitute, the States are restricted in en- highway of opportunity. bility. forcing the expectation that recipients I will tell the gentleman before he I have heard some of my colleagues work. gets up that Republicans have already on this side say gee, to quote the gen- Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to left New Jersey with a $6 billion def- tleman from Maryland, not the gen- oppose this substitute, which rep- icit. tleman from Maryland who is here, but resents a step back in welfare reform. Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the one who left, it fails to provide ade- Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I quate funding, the underlying bill. myself such time as I may consume. was prepared to yield the gentleman Well, I do not know how they can say

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.076 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2585 that. We have had a more than 50 per- which is, again, helping people to help hope children throughout this country cent reduction in the welfare rolls; and themselves and believing in people and never have to feel the pain of this legis- yet we are continuing the Federal com- trusting people, and understanding lation. I hope it does not pass.’’ Indeed, mitment. So we are going to be pro- that every person has the ability to get there was offered a substitute which viding over $16 billion a year. We are on their own feet and to be able to pro- would have saved money in an attempt not cutting the TANF funding, plus we vide for themselves and their families, to not have the legislation go forward. are adding another at least $2 billion and that is what they want to do. Of course, now that we know the proc- on child care. In 1996 we were paying Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, normally ess works, as the gentleman from Mis- $7,000 per family on average. In the the gentleman from Ohio’s math is a souri (Mr. GEPHARDT) said it works, year 2003, we are going to be paying little better than it was today. they are now offering a substitute $16,000 per family on average. How is Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 11⁄2 which throws money at the problem. that a cut? How is that not adequate minutes to the distinguished gentle- Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, will the funding? woman from California (Ms. PELOSI), gentleman yield? Then I hear the debate over the un- the Democratic whip, formerly from Mr. THOMAS. I yield to the gentle- funded mandate, and I was the author Maryland. woman from California. of the Unfunded Mandate Relief Act, Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, the gen- and I have to tell my colleagues, I have the gentleman from Maryland for tleman is correct, I did not support it, the letter here from the Congressional yielding me this time and for his lead- because I thought the bill was harsh to Budget Office. This is not an unfunded ership on this important Democratic newcomers to our country, and some of mandate. The underlying bill is not an substitute that is on the floor today. those provisions have been corrected unfunded mandate. Why? Because as Unfortunately, our Republican col- over time due to the leadership on this we all set out, and I know the gen- leagues refuse to allow the Democrats side of the aisle. The gentleman’s col- league, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. tleman from Maryland and my other to bring an amendment to the floor PORTMAN), earlier referenced that in colleagues voted for the unfunded man- which would talk about child care, the farm bill there would be food date bill, we said that if you give which is one of the most serious defi- stamps for immigrants, yes; again, an States the flexibility to be able to ciencies in their bill. It is loaded with initiative from this side of the aisle. So move money, transferred monies from deficiencies; but if I could talk about there has been some of the harshness agency to agency and give adequate one, it would be child care. removed from the provisions of the ear- flexibility, then it is not an unfunded The Democratic substitute gives lier welfare reform bill and, I may say, mandate, and that is what CBO says. women and their families the tools to during the Clinton administration, a So with regard to this unfunded man- leave poverty behind. It gives women thriving and dynamic economy that in- date, let us just be clear. We have a access to job training, education, and deed lifted up our economy and lifted process here in Congress where the the chance to make better lives for themselves and their families. It gives many people out of poverty. Congressional Budget Office, a non- Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, reclaim- the States flexibility to implement the partisan part of our congressional or- ing my time, the gentlewoman well best approach. It focuses on real work ganization here, decides whether some- knows that the proficiency she just re- and helps families escape poverty and thing is an unfunded mandate or not, ferred to in the farm bill for immi- achieve permanent employment. and they have told us there is adequate grants was signed by President Bush The Republican bill that is on the flexibility and adequate funding in and moved out of this House. However, floor not only short-changes the impor- here, and it is not an unfunded man- in an attempt to make sure that they tant component of child care, which is date. do not agree with the fundamental essential to women lifting themselves So with all due respect to my col- thrust of this proposition, they have a out of poverty, it also foists on the leagues on this side who I know have substitute that spends $70 billion of States additional funding requirements the best intentions to try to pull more money that is not covered in any budg- to implement the requirements of H.R. people out of poverty and into work, I et to show that they rate higher on the 4737. In my own State of California think the underlying bill is a better ap- compassion level, because they will proach to it. I hope that my colleagues alone, a $2.5 billion addition in costs to never accept the proposition that Re- today will reject the substitute and California, costs we can ill afford in a publicans care, Republicans are con- stick with what we know works, and time of deficit, and that is required by cerned, and Republicans have programs that is encouraging work and encour- this bill. that work. They prefer illusory solu- aging sufficiency and doing so, yes, But I want to talk again about child tions to the real thing. Republicans of- with a compassionate edge and pro- care. The complete missing link in lift- fered the real thing in 1996, and they viding more funding per family than ing people out of poverty and putting offer it today. people to work is the answer to the has ever been provided by the Federal Mr. Speaker, I yield 21⁄2 minutes to Government. question, Who is going to take care of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. BRADY), Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, will the the children? We all talk about family a member of the Committee on Ways gentleman yield? values here; and we are all committed, and Means. Mr. PORTMAN. I yield to the gen- both Democrats and Republicans alike. Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, tleman from Maryland. But why is that not reflected in the Re- the facts show that the economy, as Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I appre- publican bill? The Democratic sub- good as it has been, did not bring about ciate the gentleman yielding. I just stitute puts five times more resources the progress in reform and welfare that wanted to correct the gentleman in to really enable women to get edu- occurred. In fact, during the 1980s and that the caseload has actually gone up cated, to work, to lift their families even through the first 2 years of Presi- significantly. More people are now re- out of poverty. I urge a ‘‘yes’’ on the dent Clinton’s administration, we cre- ceiving noncash assistance than cash substitute and a ‘‘no’’ on the Repub- ated some 18 million new jobs. That is assistance, and that is good; and there- lican bill. great. But welfare rolls continued to fore the amount of money being spent Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield skyrocket. It was not until 1996 when is being spent on purposes such as job myself such time as I may consume. we put these reforms in place that we training and child care, which I believe Once again, as a Member from Cali- really started to have able-bodied peo- your party supports. fornia, California currently, under the ple, able-minded people, those capable Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, re- Democratic Governor, is $24 billion in of working getting back to work, be- claiming my time, that is why there is the red and this would add another $1 cause we set such high standards. more funding being provided for each billion over 5 years of an induced stick, I served in the Texas legislature welfare family, because as we provide if they want to receive the illusory when we did welfare reform just 2 years those additional services, there is addi- benefits under the bill. Once again, as before Congress took it up. I am con- tional funding needed; and the under- my colleagues can see in the well, I vinced this is one of the most success- lying bill provides that. Yet it sticks to find it ironic that just 6 years ago, the ful reforms in history between govern- the basic formula that we know works, gentlewoman from California said, ‘‘I ments and States working together. We

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.079 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2586 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 have come such a long way from the other states’ caseloads are growing, Rhode Is- the reference by the gentleman from days where someone who is capable of land’s continues to drop. California (Mr. THOMAS) to ‘‘that Cali- working could not work for 15 years or Our steady progress can be attributed to the fornia cesspool.’’ Many of us in a bipar- more and still receive welfare benefits. policy decisions we made to invest in families tisan fashion worked for many, many That was giving up on them, and we no to help them gain the skills to obtain and re- months to come up with the California longer do that. It is important that as tain jobs. It also provides the resources for experiment. That was very, very suc- we debate this substitute we not go child care which enables people to work. But cessful. back to those failed experiments. the biggest problem with this bill is that while Why do I support the Democratic My concern is that we take in this increasing work requirements for recipients, it substitute to welfare reform? Because substitute an AFDC program that was only provides a modest increase for child care, the substitute provides the necessary good in intent and just horribly barely enough to keep up with inflation. Let’s funding to carry out needed revisions unimpressive, to say the least, that ex- examine the logic here. Increase work require- in welfare reform. The Republican bill empted various recipients; it gave up ments for mothers with children under six imposes massive and costly new man- on too many people. Let us not go back years old, yet not provide enough money to dates on States that they cannot af- to this. This substitute provides partial pay for care for their children while they’re out ford. The billions of new costs that credits toward work rates for adults working. States are being asked to burden will who work very few hours during the Since 1996, there have been tremendous force many States to raise taxes and week. Again, we are not insisting, not advances in how we understand early child- cut necessary services. Cutting services encouraging, not moving them to self- hood development. We know that the pre- will include a reduction in welfare pro- sufficiency. None of us work 10-hour school years are critical to children’s long term grams such as child care, transpor- workweeks, and we ought not expect success, because that’s where they learn the tation, and skills training to make re- that of those we are trying to help. cognitive and social skills needed to succeed cipients job ready. Education is so important, but we in life. Not only does this bill not improve ac- Is this reform? No, it is not. Imple- cannot reward people who will not get cessibility to quality early childhood programs, menting the Republican proposals in a job or cannot get a job by paying it’s going to add to the millions of children al- California will cost the State an addi- them to go to school. It actually ought ready on waiting lists who, as a result, are fall- tional $2.8 billion over the next 5 years. to be the opposite. Those who make ing behind before kindergarten even starts. I am expecting that apology. that extra effort to get a job, to learn I urge my colleagues to defeat this mis- Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield that skill, and to go to school, we pro- guided legislation and support the substitute. myself such time as I may consume. vide help and standards for both of Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 Since the gentlewoman from Cali- those; and I think long term, that is minute to the delegate from Guam (Mr. fornia (Ms. WATSON) wants me to ex- the route to go. UNDERWOOD). plain the reference about cesspools re- Finally, I think when we look at the (Mr. UNDERWOOD asked and was ferred to by me, I referred to it as a substitute, it is well intentioned; but it given permission to revise and extend cesspool of red ink. And if anybody actually, I think, increases welfare de- his remarks.) does not believe $24 billion of State pendency and poverty and seriously un- government mismanagement is not a b 1415 dermines the time limits that have red ink cesspool, then I do not know been such a key part to, again, not giv- Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I what you would call it. ing up on any person capable of being thank the gentleman from Maryland Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, all I can self-sufficient and having a job. (Mr. CARDIN) for yielding me time. point out to the gentleman is that in My point is that our job is not fin- Mr. Speaker, I am here to express my California they will be better off with- ished. We have a lot more people that opposition to the base bill and to speak out an extra $2.5 billion mandate. They we can help get out of poverty and off on behalf of inclusion, to speak on be- would be better off without that. of welfare, helping them get an edu- half of child care, to speak on behalf of Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the cation, helping them develop their true compassion, to speak on behalf of gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. skills, and insisting that they move to- the Democratic substitute to H.R. 4737. DELAURO), the assistant to our leader. ward what all of us hope to do, to work There is no compassion in requiring Ms. DELAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in full time in a job that one can raise States and Territories to increase strong support of this substitute. We one’s family and live on and move from workforce requirements when 39 States hear much talk of compassion, but the welfare to work. The Republican bill and all of the Territories are struggling underlying legislation does not address does exactly that. It continues what currently to meet work requirements. the needs or the aspirations of those works, invests in success; and that is In an atmosphere of recession, un- who are trying in earnest to make the what we should stick with. precedented unemployment rates and transition from welfare to work. Com- Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, let me lack of available jobs, the base bill passion is not eliminating education as just point out that in the motion to in- would create the scenario where pre- an activity that counts toward work struct on the agricultural bill con- cious resources are spent on fines and requirement. Compassion is not replac- cerning food stamps, all of the Mem- the safety net becomes full of holes. ing the successful food stamp program bers and the Republican leadership There is no compassion in continuing with a program that puts the nutri- voted against it to cover legal immi- to restrict access to programs that are tional needs of 19 million people at grants. supposed to help all American families risk. Compassion is not abandoning the Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he get help for work. The base bill denies 15 million children who are now eligi- may consume to the gentleman from the insular areas of Puerto Rico, the ble for child care assistance, but who Rhode Island (Mr. KENNEDY). Virgin Islands, and my home of Guam, are not covered because of inadequate (Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island which have been required to meet all funding. asked and was given permission to re- federally imposed TANF obligations, This legislation shortchanges work- vise and extend his remarks.) from accessing all the same TANF pro- ing mothers who need help affording Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. gram resources available to State. The child care. Democrats offered an Speaker, I rise in support of the Cardin insular areas are not eligible for TANF amendment. It would have increased substitute and against the leave-the- supplemental grants for population in- child care, enhanced child care quality, millions-of-children-behind act that is creases, for many other programs, and expanded the services to nearly 1 mil- currently before the House of Rep- the Democratic substitute does so. lion additional working families. The resentatives. I urge my colleagues to support the Republicans barely increased funding Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the sub- Democratic substitute. for child care, and the leadership did stitute legislation. We have done a good job Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 not even allow us an amendment to with welfare reform in Rhode Island. Our pro- minute to the gentlewoman from Cali- consider this critical issue. gram, one I would have supported imple- fornia (Ms. WATSON). This legislation is anything but com- menting nationally, has promoted a steady de- Ms. WATSON of California. Mr. passionate. It is disinterested, wrong- crease in our welfare caseload. Today, while Speaker, I am personally offended by headed, and it puts at risk all of the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.082 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2587 gains that we have made in moving as we address all issues we paid special York (Mr. RANGEL), the ranking mem- people from welfare to work in the past attention to rural America. Each of a ber of the Committee on Ways and 6 years. Vote yes on the substitute. State’s governors have to submit a Means. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 plan to the Secretary stating how they (Mr. RANGEL asked and was given minute to the gentlewoman from New are going to respond to poverty, how permission to revise and extend his re- York (Ms. VELA´ ZQUEZ). they will respond to economic oppor- marks.) Ms. VELA´ ZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise tunity and employment. I simply want Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, first let today in opposition to the Republican inserted language that said that we me thank the gentleman from Mary- bill. I am deeply troubled by the ter- would address the issue of rural Amer- land (Mr. CARDIN) and his team for an rible duplicity on display today. How ica as well. attempt to put together a bill that can a Congress that speaks so elo- Mr. THOMAS. Reclaiming my time, would wipe out partisanship as we deal quently on family values pass legisla- in response to the gentlewoman I agree with this very sensitive issue. tion that clearly threatens our need- with her. Although we often talk about It is tragic that when we talk about iest families? it, there is no reference in the legisla- aid to needy families or children that By increasing work requirements, tion. Notwithstanding the fact the sub- need some assistance from their gov- this bill forces parents to be away from stitute will not pass, the underlying ernment, albeit State government, their children for longer hours without bill, I will pledge to the gentlewoman that it gets so political that we start providing adequate funding for the day when we go to conference, representing talking about raising the standards, care. The authors of this bill claim it one of the poorest rural counties in forcing people to work, increasing the fosters respect and responsibility, then California. hours of work, but we do not con- coerces women into abusive marriages Mrs. CLAYTON. Are there any poor centrate on putting the resources there based in fear and distrust. counties in California? to see that we can reach these laudable Furthermore, the President has been Mr. THOMAS. There are, I can assure goals that we would want. touting the important role immigrants you, and I represent the poorest. And It is one thing to say that illegal im- play in both our economy and our cul- agricultural counties by nature of the migrants and the kids are not entitled ture. Yet this bill neither extends SSI cyclical work tend to be the poorest to assistance for shelter or for food or eligibility for legal permanent resi- and have the highest unemployment for medicine, but great States and dents nor ensures that adequate trans- and low literacy. Child care needs are great people like those in Florida and lation services will be provided for lim- very high. That is why we put the pro- California and New York and Texas, ited English proficient residents to ad- visions in the bill. But we will empha- somehow we cannot turn our eyes away vise them of what services they are eli- size that the States should respond from children who are in need, and that with a rural program as well as an gible for. is why my mayor and my Governor It is time that this Congress live up urban one. Rather than assuming that would appeal, notwithstanding their to its compassionate conservatism and they will do that, that language will be Republican credentials, that more sen- in the bill. provide not just the promise of respon- sitivity would be involved. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, what time sibility, work and family, but the tools They want people to work 40 hours a is remaining? week, but they do not like the manda- to achieve it. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 tory sense in working when the jobs SIMPSON). The gentleman from Mary- minute to the gentlewoman from North are not there, when you do not provide land (Mr. CARDIN) has 8 minutes re- the education and the training that the Carolina (Mrs. CLAYTON). maining. The gentleman from Cali- Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I workers are not going to be productive. fornia (Mr. THOMAS) has 21⁄2 minutes re- When you finally think about what we thank the gentleman for yielding me maining. time. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 are trying to do is to create a better Mr. Speaker, I serve as a co-chair of minute to the gentlewoman from Flor- life for our children, who can do that the Rural Caucus, so you should expect ida (Ms. BROWN). better than a mother? And if you are me to talk about rural America. But I (Ms. BROWN of Florida asked and saying that the mother with young want to say first I strongly support the was given permission to revise and ex- children should go to work, well, politi- substitute and believe it is more reflec- tend her remarks.) cally we will say yes, but what about tive to making people whole in not Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the child? Should we not have some only rural America but all America. it is truly an outrage that we are here concern about what happens to this kid This substitute nor the bill or the today debating how much money that as we feel good and we go to our town- bills before really went to rural Amer- we are going to spend on the weakest hall meetings and tell the voters we ica. Let me tell you that rural America when the President and the Republican were hard on welfare mothers today, is not the same as urban and our subur- leadership want to make permanent but would anyone ask, what about the ban America. Not to say that urban tax cuts in this country to their coun- children? Did you provide money for does not have problems but, indeed, we try club friends to the tune of over $500 day care for the kids? Can anyone real- are different. billion. And it is really worse for the ly work a productive day not knowing Consider these facts: In the year 2000 poor people of Florida because we have whether their child is being taken care the nonmetropolitan poverty rate ex- a Governor, Jeb Bush, our own reverse of? ceeded the national rate by 20 percent. Robin Hooder, deciding to spend the $6 If we said that we wanted to let the Two hundred and thirty-seven of the billion on corporate welfare instead of State work their will, how do we tell 250 counties that are the most poor in making sure that the State can afford them what they cannot do when they the Nation are in rural America. One- and look after all of its children. are begging as my mayor and as my half of rural American children in fe- Perhaps I should remind the Gov- Governor for the flexibility to do it? male households live in poverty. There- ernor and the President of Ril-ya Wil- Except when it comes to the money fore, indeed we need different atten- son, the poor little girl from Florida. I questions and you want the governors tion. have a picture here. Ril-ya Wilson, the to be able to play chess with the Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield poor little girl from Florida that has money, when you want them to be able myself such time as I may consume to been missing for 15 months. to do the things that normally the respond to the gentlewoman from It is so sad that the Republicans can Committee on Appropriations should North Carolina (Mrs. CLAYTON). come up with all of these little slogans, be doing, then you can go in the base- Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, will Leave No Child Behind, well, my ques- ment in the Republican rooms in the the gentleman yield? tion is where is the beef? Where are the middle of the night and work out how Mr. THOMAS. I yield to the gentle- resources to make sure that this does you will do this while we do not legis- woman from North Carolina. not happen to other children in this late. Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, we country? You know how to cook the books have engaged in this conversation be- Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 when you want to make certain it fore, but we wanted to make sure that minutes to the gentleman from New works for you politically, but it seems

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.085 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2588 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 to me if we are talking about a better land (Mr. CARDIN) has 4 minutes re- the opportunities for child care, rejects America, more productive families, maining. The gentleman from Cali- the notion of more unfunded Federal communities, that can have self-es- fornia (Mr. THOMAS) has 1 minute re- mandates, and does not play fiscal rou- teem, then when you talk about jobs maining. lette with the program at a time when you are not talking about just make- Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, it is my States are slipping into fiscal disarray shift jobs, you are talking about mak- pleasure to yield 11⁄4 minutes to the across the country. ing people feel good about themselves gentleman from California (Mr. BECER- That is not a prudent step. I strongly because they learned something, they RA), who is one of the co-authors of the urge support for the Democratic alter- have had training and they can be pro- substitute. native. ductive. Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, it is my Please vote for the Democratic sub- the gentleman for yielding me the pleasure to yield 15 seconds to the gen- stitute and reject the Republican polit- time. tleman from New Jersey (Mr. HOLT), ical plan and stick with something It seems that too often the 435 Mem- and I regret we do not have more time. that you can go back home and be bers of this body forget about the real (Mr. HOLT asked and was given per- proud of. Not that you beat up on the world. We, fortunately, are paid well. mission to revise and extend his re- mothers, that is easy to do in an elec- We are cared for by our government, marks.) tion year, but you did something for and we all try to do the same for our Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, empower- the kids. You did something for the constituents; but somehow this par- ment is a word that has become a cli- kids. ticular bill that is before us forgets che, but that is what this is about. The bill before us today does not empower b 1430 about that, because somehow it talks about helping a woman who for the people to become self-sufficient. This Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield most part is short on education or bill will result in more, not fewer, peo- myself such time as I may consume. short on training and expects her to go ple ending up in poverty. I would note that the gentleman I support strongly the substitute out to work and earn a wage that will from New York voted ‘‘no’’ in 1996; and amendment, and I urge my colleagues compensate her so she can feed her as a matter of fact, quoted in the Peo- to oppose the underlying bill. family because she has got kids, be- ple’s Weekly World, he said that if Mr. Speaker, the percentage of Americans cause otherwise she would not be on Clinton signs the bill, he would be, on public assistance today—about 2.1 per- quote, ‘‘throwing 1 million children welfare, and let her survive the daily cent—is at its lowest since 1964. The percent- into poverty.’’ grind of living well at $16,000, let me age of working recipients is also at its highest I have here the most recent edition of tell my colleagues, which is probably ever—at about 33 percent—and according to the Governor of New York’s statement what most of these women will be mak- the best figures available two-thirds of those on welfare in New York. It says on page ing, $16,000, $20,000, who are going to be who’ve left welfare since 1996 are holding 33: ‘‘Teen pregnancy rates and teen putting about a third of that money down jobs. Despite those statistics, in many births have declined. Child support has into day care and a third of that into ways welfare reform is still an experiment in increased and fewer children are living housing and the rest in food. progress. We still do not know what happens in poverty today than in 1994.’’ They do not have money for health to people who leave the welfare rolls. Are they What we did was right in 1996, and care, they do not have money for any working? Are they unemployed? Are they sim- what we are doing is right today, not- expectancies of life, and what is going ply off the rolls? No one knows for sure. An- withstanding the gentleman from New to happen is these women will be right other question is what are the factors that con- York’s (Mr. RANGEL) vote against us back in welfare because this Repub- tribute to the ability of people to comply with apparently both times. lican welfare bill does nothing to deal the TANF work requirement? Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to with reality. There are good indications that the 1996 yield 1 minute to the gentleman from My colleagues need to have flexi- welfare reforms are helping disadvantaged in- Georgia (Mr. KINGSTON). bility. If we had 50 votes here from the dividuals and society at large. We have an op- Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, what Governors of our Nation, they would portunity to build on the success of the 1996 seems to be happening here is a polit- vote against this bill. My colleagues welfare reform law, and to make it better; to ical sock hop; but instead of listening need to pay for unfunded mandates, do the things Congress should have done be- to old Elvis records, we are listening to and they need to deal with the realities fore. Congress should resist attempts to relax old Democrat rhetoric. We are hearing that children must be cared for. No TANF’s time limits and work requirements. it over and over again, over and over mother is going to let her kid go out That means continuing ambitious work and job again. there and not be cared for. This bill retention goals while also increasing financial The ranking member of the Com- should not pass. Vote for the sub- incentives and rewards for those who suc- mittee on Ways and Means, 1996: ‘‘The stitute. ceed. We must keep in mind that the goal of only losers we have are the kids.’’ The Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, it is my welfare is to create productive self-sufficient gentleman from New York (Mr. NAD- pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gen- citizens. There are a number of things we LER), 1996: ‘‘I am saddened for today it tleman from Oregon (Mr. must do to see that people on welfare can and seems clear that this House will abdi- BLUMENAUER), one of the co-authors of do meet these stronger requirements. cate its moral duty.’’ The president of the substitute. As we go through this reauthorization proc- NOW, who I do not quote very often, Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I ess it is vitally important that we improve the again denounced the plan in 1996. appreciate the gentleman’s courtesy. research and data reporting in TANF. In order It is the same group over and over I am from one of the States that was to make informed decisions on the direction again saying not this bill, not this involved with welfare reform 5 years that TANF and CCDBG should take we need time. But look what happened. Much to before the Federal action, and we made more information on the issue. I offered an their, I guess, chagrin, they are spend- real progress. We made real progress, amendment in the Rules Committee to begin ing on TANF and child care up to not with unfunded mandates from the this process. However, they refused to make $15,888 compared to 1996 where it was Federal Government, which the bill it in order. $6,900. The number of cases has dropped would be, not with goofy work require- While maintaining pressure on the states to from 4 million to 2 million, cut in half; ments that are rejected by virtually all move people from welfare to work, the re- and the number of welfare caseloads the Governors, Republicans and Demo- newed TANF should also help families move has fallen from 14 million to 5 million. crats alike, and not by underfunding up the job and income ladders. We should Welfare reform works. Just ask child care. That is why there is no en- consider a number of amendments to help do Tanya who was on public assistance thusiasm for the Republican alter- this. We should eliminate the caseload reduc- and now is buying her new home. I wish native from our Nation’s Governors, tion credit and phase in an employment credit. that we could get some good bipartisan whether they are Republican or Demo- For each 1 percent of the caseload that ob- support instead of the old Democratic crat. tains employment, the work participation rate rhetoric. I strongly urge support for the Demo- would be reduced by 1 percent. In addition, The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. cratic substitute which speaks to con- there would be extra credit for recipients who SIMPSON). The gentleman from Mary- tinuing the strong parts, strengthening obtain higher paying jobs. That is a good step.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\K16MY7.087 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 May 16, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H2589 Another way of assisting families in moving of the employment credit. What the grams under this state flexibility provision, up the income ladder is giving individuals the Republican bill does is essentially ig- which will allow the Secretary of Agriculture to tools to get a good job. This should be a job nore the important goal of welfare re- waive portions of the Food Stamp Act as long with the potential for advancement not a dead- form, and that is giving incentives to as she maintains that all benefits are used for end make-work job. This is the best way to the States to help people move off of food, as in the current food stamp program. ensure that families will not return to the wel- welfare into productive work. Instead, To ensure the integrity of the program states fare roles. In order for them to obtain quality their focus is on keeping people on wel- must also complete quality control reviews and jobs we need to provide the training for indi- fare, working even in makeshift jobs. cannot expand the food stamp program eligi- viduals to qualify for them. That is a stark difference. bility standards. We must also provide the resources for par- I want to close by saying a word Additionally, the Secretary of Agriculture will ents to achieve these work requirements. First about the very partisan nature of this be allowed to approve 5-year block grant dem- and foremost this means providing funding for discussion. My colleagues have for- onstration projects for up to 5 states. The quality childcare. A parent will not make a reli- feited the opportunity to work to- block grant will promote a competition for ex- able employee if she is concerned about the gether to fashion a bipartisan bill, for- cellence among states. Eligible state plans quality of her child’s care, or cannot get feited it. The employment credit is in must include a description of the eligibility childcare at all. This cannot be over-empha- the Senate bill on a bipartisan basis. rules to which a State would adhere when pro- sized. For a positive change in our society They have thumbed their nose at every viding assistance. The competition among welfare recipients must have real jobs that up- bipartisan effort. They have thumbed states would boil down to the selection of lift their self-sufficiency and if children are their nose at the efforts of the Clinton states with innovative management plans, going to have the care and attention they administration. They have twisted that quality of program proposals and maximizing need to grow positively, we must have pro- legacy. My colleagues also twisted the benefits to people in need. As in the food grams of adequate childcare. The bill before efforts of Democrats 5 and 6 years ago stamp state flexibility portion of this bill, states us today does not have adequate programs. to move ahead welfare reform in the must retain the current law that mandates that Finally Mr. Speaker, I hope that we will pro- right direction. Fortunately, there is a all benefits must be used for food. vide the states with the kind of resources and Senate to correct the hopelessly par- The temporary assistance for needy families flexibility that has allowed welfare caseloads to tisan effort of this majority. (TANF) program has shown that block grants fall by 57 percent since 1996. It is not Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my work. Critics’ assumed that the states cared achieved by simply allowing states to do what pleasure to yield the remainder of the less than people in Washington. States have they want or by eliminating a national safety time to the gentleman from Virginia proven the critics wrong with regard to their net for people who need help. Our action on (Mr. GOODLATTE), a member of the successful implementation of this program. the floor today is not the end of the process Committee on Agriculture, who with The American Public Human Service Associa- aimed at having all Americans support them- their contributions in terms of the food tion has testified that the continued state suc- selves and contribute to our common econ- stamp component of this bill have cess is contingent upon ‘‘maintaining and en- omy. made a significant contribution to hancing the flexibility of the TANF block I urge my colleagues to support the sub- make sure that Americans in need have grant.’’ The time has come for us to take the stitute of Mr. CARDIN, and if that should fail, I those needs met. first steps in allowing the same successes to urge them to oppose the bill before us today. (Mr. GOODLATTE asked and was be made with the food stamp program. This bill likely will result in more not fewer given permission to revise and extend This is a small stamp for the food stamp people trapped in poverty. program because only 5 states will be allowed And I must express outrage at how this has his remarks.) Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I to operate a food stamp block grant. It is up been handled. This afternoon the House will thank the gentleman from California to the Secretary of Agriculture to approve go into recess for an awards ceremony. Near- (Mr. THOMAS) for his good work. those states asking for a block grant. I expect ly everyone here has supported and does sup- I rise in strong opposition to this port that award, but no member should have that the Secretary will seize this opportunity to substitute and in strong support of the the nerve to tell us or the public that there just challenge states to design food stamp pro- bill. wasn’t time to debate and vote on amend- grams that will be effective, efficient and ease In 1995, this is what the current ments to his major bill on welfare reform, to the burdens of families applying for food bene- Democratic whip said about welfare re- improve education, childcare, or to gather fits and the people who administer the pro- form: ‘‘I hope children throughout this data. gram. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 15 country never have to feel the pain of States have proven over the past 5 years, seconds to the gentleman from Cali- this legislation. I hope it does not even to the most hardened skeptics, that they fornia (Mr. SCHIFF). pass.’’ It did pass. It was signed into can operate good public assistance programs Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I join my law by President Clinton. Here is what that meet the test of providing what needy colleagues in urging support for the happened. families need most—the ability to get and Democratic substitute in opposition to Children in hunger went down from keep a job and provide for their families. We the base bill for one simple reason, and 4.5 million to 2.5 million since that are asking that these same people in the that is, we cannot ask of a single par- time. Black children in poverty went states, at least 5 of them, are able to provide ent on welfare that they leave their from 42 percent. Of all black children this same proof to skeptics of food stamp children without adequate child care. in 1970, rose, rose to nearly 50 percent, block grants. Yes, we need to move them to work; and then when this bill was put into ef- In addition to these food stamp provisions, and yes, we need to increase the level fect in 1995, dropped to about one-third I support the bill’s flexibility for states. This Bill of that work, but we cannot leave their of all children, black children. offers our states more flexibility and allows children out in the street. Welfare caseloads dropped precipi- them to make these welfare programs more Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield tously from 12 million to about 6 mil- efficient by allowing states and localities to myself such time as I may consume. lion. Welfare reform works: 4.2 fewer combine certain program requirements so they Mr. Speaker, if I might, I am going to million Americans today live in pov- would have to submit only one application. I first urge my colleagues to support the erty than in 1996; 2.3 million fewer chil- urge my colleagues to support this bill as it substitute. If my colleagues believe in dren live in poverty today than in 1996, continues welfare as a temporary alternative flexibility on education, if they believe including 1.1 million African American and not a permanent crutch for folks who are States should have the resources and children. on hard times. they think we should have fairness to Build on that success by passing this Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in oppo- our immigrants, our only opportunity bill which promotes work, improves a sition of H.R. 4737, the ‘‘Personal Responsi- will be this vote. child’s well-being and promotes bility, Work and Family Promotion Act,’’ the Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of healthy marriages and all families. Republican attempt at reforming the current our time to the gentleman from Michi- This is a good bill. Support it. welfare system. Since we enacted welfare re- gan (Mr. LEVIN), one of the co-authors This welfare reform bill includes provisions form in 1996, a number of issues have been of the substitute. for additional state flexibility so that Governors brought to the forefront of the welfare reform Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I want to may coordinate welfare programs. The food debate including, job training, work require- say a word about a difference in terms stamp program is one of the qualified pro- ments, funding, legal immigrant assistance,

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.082 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1 H2590 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 16, 2002 and poverty reduction, all of which H.R. 4737 pregnant women and children, and it restores tough work requirements can be met without fails to adequately address. I believe the true Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits harming the children of those receiving bene- measure of the success of welfare reform is in for disabled legal immigrant children. fits. This substitute does not impose massive our ability to reduce poverty and to move re- The Cardin substitute rewards self-suffi- new mandates on states and work require- cipients off of welfare and into long-term em- ciency and gives families the help they need ments on impoverished mothers without the ployment. The Cardin Substitute, which I to successfully move from welfare to work. It assistance necessary to make welfare reform strongly support, builds on the success of the is the responsibility of Congress to build on work. 1996 welfare law by requiring welfare recipi- the successes of the 1996 welfare law’s and Mr. Speaker, although I support responsible ents to move toward employment, while pro- to ensure that low-income families are given a welfare reform, the Republican proposal is not viding the resources necessary to escape pov- legitimate opportunity to move out of poverty. sufficient. I do not want to see the federal gov- erty, to move up the economic ladder. For this reason, I urge my colleagues to sup- ernment take a step backward in our effort to H.R. 4737 places a huge unfunded mandate port the Cardin Substitute. reduce the welfare rolls. For these reasons, I burden on the states, while at the same time Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I oppose H.R. 4737 and support the Democratic significantly limiting the flexibility of states to rise today in opposition to the Republican bill. substitute. develop their own approaches to moving peo- My home state of Massachusetts has oper- The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time ple off welfare. If enacted over 80 percent of ated a successful welfare program, utilizing a for debate on the substitute offered by the states will have to implement fundamental waiver in order to focus mandatory work activi- the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. changes to their current welfare program The ties on families without major barriers to work. CARDIN) has expired. provisions in this bill will cost states an esti- Through this, we have succeeded in moving Pursuant to the order of the House of mated $8.3Ð11 billion dollars by 2007, almost most of these families into employment. The yesterday, further proceedings on H.R. four times what the Republican bill provides, current caseload is barely half of what it was 4737 will be postponed until later this at the same time states are facing large budg- before state welfare reform began. afternoon. et cuts and enormous budget deficits. Under Despite this success, three-quarters of f H.R. 4737, the State of Texas alone, would those remaining are families with serious bar- MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT have to provide over $688 million to support riers to employment, including a disability or such mandates, ultimately forcing the state to the need to care for a disabled child. Messages in writing from the Presi- either raise taxes or cut benefits. Massachusetts and other states need the dent of the United States were commu- Mr. Speaker, I also oppose H.R. 4737 be- ability to decide what is the approximate mix nicated to the House by Ms. Evans, one cause it jeopardizes our ability to protect of services and activities in order to move wel- of his secretaries. America’s children, by merely providing an ad- fare families from poverty to self-sufficiency. f ditional $2 billion dollars for mandatory child Unfortunately, this bill reduces state discretion. COMMUNICATION FROM THE HON. care. H.R. 4737 also imposes major new work Further, I believe this bill falls short in help- NANCY L. JOHNSON, MEMBER OF requirements on recipients, but made no ing teen mothers break the cycle of welfare CONGRESS progress toward reducing the severe child and poverty. While only 6 percent of the case- care shortage. The so-called ‘‘increase’’ that load in my home state of Massachusetts con- The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- its proponents are touting provides only sists of teen parents, historically about 50 per- fore the House the following commu- enough money to cover inflation, costing the cent of welfare mothers started parenting as nication from the Honorable NANCY L. states an additional $3.8 billion in child care teenagers. While the 1996 law set strong JOHNSON, Member of Congress: cost. This bill also unfairly continues the exist- goals for teen parents, this bill fails to make CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, ing ban on providing assistance to legal immi- some modest improvements which would help HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, DC, May 16, 2002 grants. these families break out of welfare depend- Since the enactment of the 1996 welfare Hon. DENNIS J. HASTERT, ency. Speaker, House of Representatives, law’s, millions of previously dependent families I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill and Washington, DC. joined the labor force in unprecedented num- support the Democratic alternative. DEAR MR. SPEAKER: This is to formally no- bers as caseloads fell by more than half and Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in tify you, pursuant to rule VIII of the Rules the percentage of working recipients rose to opposition to H.R. 4737 and in support of the of the House, that I have determined that historic heights. However, as one who sup- Democratic substitute. It is imperative that we the subpoena for documents and testimony ported the 1996 reforms, I believe there is a provide families with the necessary ingredients issued to me by the United States District point where we need to accept that those re- Court for the District of Columbia is not ma- to produce self-sufficiency and job stability. terial and relevant, nor is it consistent with maining on welfare are likely to be the hardest The Democratic substitute accomplishes this the privileges and rights of the House. Ac- to place in jobs due to a lack of education, important goal. cordingly, I have instructed the Office of training, or available child care. Mr. Speaker, I supported welfare reform under the Clinton General Counsel to object to and to move to there is a better way. My colleague from Mary- Administration and these reforms have been quash the subpoena. land, Mr. CARDIN has put forth an alternative effective in cutting our welfare rolls in half. In Sincerely, that focuses on providing opportunity, de- my home state of Illinois, the number of wel- NANCY L. JOHNSON, manding responsibility and reflect the ap- fare recipients has been reduced by 74 per- Member of Congress. proach that work itself is the fastest and most cent over the past five years. However, H.R. f effective means of preparing recipients for 4737 will undo the successful strategies states COMMUNICATION FROM THE HON. self-sufficiency. Yet the H.R. 4737 fails to rec- now employ to move Temporary Assistance to DAVID L. HOBSON, MEMBER OF ognize this reality. The Cardin Substitute, pro- Needy Families (TANF) recipients to jobs. CONGRESS vides states with the flexibility and freedom to While H.R. 4737 is well intended, I am con- The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- develop programs which allow recipients to cerned that we will undermine the law’s stated fore the House the following commu- count education and training, including post- goal of ending dependence on government as- nication from the Honorable DAVID L. secondary training toward participation rates sistance if we do not have adequate resources HOBSON, Member of Congress: for up to 24 months. this bill raises the bar on available for safe and affordable childcare, the work requirement and provides the states transportation, and healthcare. The legislation CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, with the resources to meet these challenges provides no help to states in implementing the Washington, DC, May 15, 2002. by providing an additional $11 billion for man- new work requirements, which I support, and Hon. DENNIS J. HASTERT, datory child care funding over five years to does nothing to extend childcare to the esti- Speaker, House of Representatives, meet the work requirement. By requiring those mated 15 million children who are currently eli- Washington, DC. who can work to do so, we recognize the dig- gible for such assistance, but lack coverage DEAR MR. SPEAKER: This is to formally no- nity of all labor and the moral imperative of because states do not have the necessary re- tify you, pursuant to rule VIII of the Rules self-reliance. We should insist on work for it’s sources. of the House, that I have determined that the subpoena for documents and testimony instructional value—it is the only certain route The Democratic substitute maintains state issued to me by the United States District out of dependence and poverty. Additionally, flexibility, focuses on real work, and helps Court for the District of Columbia is not ma- this bill removes the ban on states serving families escape poverty and achieve perma- terial and relevant, nor is it consistent with legal immigrants with Federal TANF funds, nent employment. It increases childcare fund- the privileges and rights of the House. Ac- eliminates the ban on providing Medicaid to ing by $11 billion over 5 years so that the cordingly, I have instructed the Office of

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:41 May 17, 2002 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A16MY7.085 pfrm04 PsN: H16PT1