[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 57 (Wednesday, May 11, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 11, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          HUMAN SERVICES AMENDMENTS OF 1994--CONFERENCE REPORT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will now 
proceed to consideration of the conference report on S. 2000, which the 
clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The committee on conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendments of the House to the bill (S. 
     2000) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1995 
     through 1998 to carry out the Head Start Act and the 
     Community Services Block Grant Act, and for other purposes, 
     having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to 
     recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses this 
     report, signed by a majority of the conferees.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the Senate will proceed to 
the consideration of the conference report.
  (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the 
Record of May 9, 1994.)
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today the Senate gives its final approval 
to S. 2000, the Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1994. This bill 
is part of our national efort to help children, strengthen families, 
and rebuild communities. It reauthorizes three mainstays of our current 
effort--Head Start, the community services block grant, and the Low-
Income Home Energy Assistance Program.
  Thirty years ago next week, President Lyndon Johnson declared war on 
poverty by signing the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 into law. Head 
Start, our first multigenerational, family centered, one-stop shopping 
program, quickly became one of the Nation's most popular and most 
effective social programs.
  Today we pay tribute to Head Start with an overwhelmingly bipartisan 
vote and affirm our commitment to renew and expand it.
  The Head Start provisions in the bill give new support to staff 
development and training, in order to provide the best possible 
services to children and families. It enhances parent involvement, and 
helps parents to be the first and best teachers of their children.
  This action provides new flexibility to local programs to meet the 
needs of today's families, many of whom are working full time jobs or 
going to school to find better jobs. They need full-day and full-year 
Head Start--and this bill will help see to it that such services are 
available.
  We have found that 1 year of Head Start at age 4 often comes too 
little and too late for families struggling to survive against a rising 
tide of poverty, drugs, violence, and hopelessness. This bill allows 
programs to provide more than 1 year of service--and to focus on both 
the comprehensiveness of service and the continuity of service.
  Building on the success of the comprehensive child development 
programs and the lessons we have learned from parent-child centers, S. 
2000 sets aside significant resources for a new Early Start initiative 
for infants and toddlers to give new families the support they need to 
learn and grow together.
  This legislation also includes two other priorities--the community 
services block grant [CSBG] and the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance 
Program [LIHEAP].
  CSBG reauthorizes the community action programs, community 
development corporations, and community food banks that serve on the 
front lines of the war on poverty. In recent years, we have witnessed a 
much greater rise in the number of families living in poverty than in 
the resources dedicated to reducing it.
  In neighborhoods across the country, these community-based public-
private partnerships are a central part of the low-income service 
delivery network. They promote self sufficiency, family stability, and 
community revitalization. S. 2000 affirms our commitment to these 
grassroots efforts to help people help themselves.
  The reauthorization of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program 
is equally important. This year's winter weather in New England and 
across the country demonstrated the lifesaving nature of LIHEAP. 
President Clinton recognized the importance of this program by 
approving emergency appropriations to help low income families pay for 
the fuel they need to survive.
  Without this heating assistance, we would have lost far more lives. 
No parents should have to chose between heating their homes and feeding 
their children. Yet, every winter, doctors in Boston and cities across 
the country see the number of malnourished children double or triple as 
fuel costs continue to rise. Thanks to LIHEAP, many families are spared 
from making the heat or eat decision.
  Despite the widely acknowledged success of measures such as these, no 
one program can be expected to permanently innoculate children against 
the problems that plague too many youth. We also know that our 
commitment to help cannot end with Head Start.
  Four years ago I sponsored a demonstration transition project to 
begin to build bridges between Head Start programs and local public 
schools. These efforts have enabled children to make a smooth 
transition to elementary school, and helped parents to continue to be 
active participants in the education of their children. Head Start 
programs and public schools have learned from each other and both 
systems have benefitted. But the real winners are the children and 
families.
  Diane Hebert, a parent from Woburn, MA, told the Labor Committee how 
Head Start had prepared her for her son's transition to public school 
by saying:

       When my son went to kindergarten, his teacher wouldn't let 
     me volunteer in the class. That February, she realized that 
     she had overlooked him. He was having trouble with his work, 
     but because he wasn't a behavior problem he didn't stand out. 
     Head Start helped me to make sure the school gave him a core 
     evaluation. How he receives the education he needs and 
     deserves. Today I advocate for all my son's education even at 
     the middle school and high school. Head Start showed me that 
     being a parent gave me a seat in my children's education even 
     if I have to push my way in.

  Jill Ryan, a Head Start parent from Worcester, MA, said:

       Head Start taught me to reach out, to ask questions, and to 
     voice my opinions openly. It prepared me to deal effectively 
     with the public school system and stand up for my child's 
     rights. Head Start taught me about the Chapter I program. 
     When Jennifer was in the first grade, she needed help in 
     reading. I appealed to the school for that help. They told me 
     she didn't need the program. But they didn't see her 
     struggling the way I did. Eventually, I convinced the school 
     to get her help.
       Now my daughter is nine, and I am very proud to say that 
     her reading is at the A level. Jennifer has been chosen for 
     the Providing Equity for Able Kids program, which provides 
     challenging elementary learning opportunities for 
     academically and creatively talented elementary school kids.
       Now Head Start is helping to change the schools for all 
     children and families. Three years ago, Worcester Head Start 
     got a grant to do one of the Transition Projects. I sat on 
     the committee with the Head Start Directors, Head Start 
     parents, and public school principals. We talked about why 
     parent input in schools is so important. We answered 
     questions, and explained why the schools need to provide 
     parent workshops, activities, and transportation, the way 
     that Head Start does.

  As we have learned from these transition projects, Head Start cannot 
be singlehandedly responsible for the success or failure of our poorest 
children. As Head Start families move into the public schools their 
continued success will be largely dependent on the schools.
  We now have an opportunity--with the reauthorization of ESEA--to 
provide incentives for school systems to work with Head Start and build 
effective partnerships. Head Start is setting children and families on 
the right path, and it is up to the elementary schools to continue that 
progress.
  The transition projects have shown that this can be done. We now have 
an historic opportunity to solidify the lessons we have learned. We 
have set-aside $35 million in Head Start funds to facilitate his 
progress, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to create a 
bipartisan proposal within ESEA to invest the schools as well.
  We must give children and families a Head Start on life--and we must 
prevent it from fading away. The benefits are too valuable--children 
are too important--and the stakes are too high.
  This is a moment of both victory and preparation. I urge my 
colleagues to join in the challenge. We will not rest until we have 
given America's children all that they deserve.
  For American business that seeks a skilled and educated workforce--
for American families who seek safe streets--and for all American 
citizens who seek a country true to its ideals--this is essential 
legislation, and I urge the Senate to approve it.


                               thank Yous

  Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the 
people without whom this legislation would never have happened.
  First and foremost, I would like to thank the Labor and Human 
Resources Committee staff--from both sides of the aisle--who worked 
extremely well together on this effort. I hope this bipartisan 
cooperation will continue as we move forward with the remainder of our 
agenda.
  Specifically, I would like to thank Michael Iskowitz and Catriona 
Macdonald of my staff, Patty Cole, from Senator Dodd's subcommittee 
staff, Kimberly Barnes-O'Connor from Senator Kassebaum's staff, and 
Stephanie Monroe from Senator Coats' staff. Together they formed the 
Senate team that made S. 2000 a reality. I commend them for their 
excellent efforts.
  In the House, I would like to thank Alan Lopatin and Chris Gilbert of 
Chairman Ford's staff, Lee Cowen of Representative Goodling's staff, 
and Les Sweeting and Terry Daschler of Representative Martinez's 
subcommittee staff. They did a great job on the bill in the House--and 
they too are to be congratulated for their efforts. Both sides were 
lucky enough to have extremely cooperative and supportive conferees. I 
would like to especially thank Lauren Gross, from Senator Pell's 
office, Cheryl Birdsall from Senator Metzenbaum's office, and Matt 
Bidgood from Senator Jeffords' office for their help.
  And we could not forget our supporters in the administration who--
from the start--have been committed to an inclusive, productive, and 
bipartisan process.
  I commend Secretary Shalala for establishing the Head Start Advisory 
Committee that launched this process, so effectively brought the staff 
together, and created the working group that hung together throughout 
this legislative process.
  I would also like to thank her able assistants, including Mary Jo 
Bane, Olivia Golden, Helen Taylor, John Busa, Rich Tarlin, and Mary 
Burdette. They reminded us how helpful it is to design programs with 
those who actually implement them.
  Last and not least--I would like to thank a few able individuals who 
have done so much for America's children.
  I would like to recognize four longstanding friends of children and 
friends of the Labor and Human Resources Committee--Ed Zigler, often 
referred to as the Father of Head Start, Joan Lombardi, now with HHS, 
Helen Blank of the Children's Defense Fund, and Bill Harris and Sarah 
von der Lippe of KIDS Project.
  Their energy and their commitment knows no bounds and I am grateful 
for their tireless efforts and leadership.
  And we could not conclude without thanking those in the community 
struggling day after day to give these laws real meaning. Our work here 
is far easier than theirs. I would like to send a special thank you to 
Linda Likins of the National Head Start Association, Janis Santos of 
the New England Head Start Association, Marie Galvin of the 
Massachusetts Head Start Association, and to the thousands of Head 
Start teachers and family services workers who give it their all every 
day. This act is for you.
  To the community action programs, community development corporations, 
community food and nutrition advocates, fuel assistance providers and 
all of the other front line workers who so ably use the resources of 
this act--I thank you for your dedication, your commitment, and your 
efforts.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to support the conference 
report to S. 2000, the Human Services Amendments of 1994, and to urge 
all of my colleagues to join me in voting for it. I would also like to 
salute Senators Kennedy and Kassebaum for their indispensable 
leadership in helping to guide this legislation.
  I am confident that the vast majority of my colleagues will vote for 
this bill because they recognize how critically important the programs 
it authorizes are to their constituents. These programs are also 
critically important to another group of Americans, a group that 
doesn't vote but that nonetheless demands and deserves our full 
attention. I am talking of course about the children of America.
  Our children have been calling out for help, and we in Washington 
have not done nearly enough to answer that call. For too many young 
Americans, childhood has become a minefield of risk. They must navigate 
their way through a series of explosive social problems in order to 
successfully make it to adulthood.
  The problems I am talking about are childhood poverty and unsafe 
neighborhoods; crumbling families and disappearing health care 
coverage; a cycle of abuse and a dimming of the once-bright dream of 
education. We all need to commit ourselves to defusing as many of these 
mines as possible and assisting our children in navigating their way 
through the ones we can't.
  That's exactly what the Human Services Act seeks to do. The programs 
in this act, overseen by the Subcommittee on Children which I chair, 
share a common orientation, in that they work within the community to 
address the needs of individuals living there. They share a common 
goal, that of helping people move toward self-sufficiency. They see 
families' needs as a whole and seek to address them comprehensively.
  While there is certainly no panacea in the legislation before us, the 
programs it authorizes lend a helping hand to children and families in 
need:
  Head Start gives disadvantaged children the early, extra boost they 
need to keep up once they start school.
  The Family Resource Program responds to families to help them grow 
strong and prevent crises.
  The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program keeps the heat on for 
millions of families who would otherwise go cold.
  The Community Services block grant supports local antipoverty 
agencies with deep roots in the communities they serve.
  The legislation before us makes changes in each of these programs, 
changes intended to make them as effective and efficient as possible.
  The reauthorization of Head Start continues the provision enacted in 
1990 that sets aside one-fourth of all new appropriations for improving 
quality. This money already has helped programs raise staff salaries, 
provide needed training, and improve facilities and equipment.
  To ensure that programs are offering quality services, the 
legislation strengthens performance standards and monitoring procedures 
so that programs that cannot correct their deficiencies within 1 year 
lose their funding. The bill seeks to build the work force Head Start 
needs to guide children into the next century by developing 
qualifications and credentials for family service workers and creating 
innovative approaches such as mentor teachers and Head Start 
fellowships.
  The reauthorization of Head Start also contains a set-aside for 
expanded services to families with infants and toddlers. It takes the 
comprehensive approach associated with Head Start and expands it to 
vulnerable children at the earliest possible age.


                        family resource centers

  The bill also contains a provision I authored to consolidate several 
existing programs into an expanded community-based family resource 
program. This new grant to States would help build networks of 
comprehensive family resource centers and services and promote a 
systematic approach to prevention.
  The approach rests on two guiding principles: locality and 
flexibility. It would provide comprehensive services at the local level 
where they can do the most good, and it would encourage States to 
approach funding family services creatively. This initiative also gives 
families a voice in how services are provided in their communities.


                   low-income home energy assistance

  Another component to the Human Services Act is the Low-Income Home 
Energy Assistance Program [LIHEAP], a critical segment of the safety 
net we try to provide for our most vulnerable citizens. LIHEAP provides 
millions of American families, many of them with elderly or disabled 
members, with the bit of extra help they need to pay for one of modern 
life's essentials: residential energy.
  The bill before us would reauthorize LIHEAP at $2 billion for fiscal 
1995. This puts Congress on record opposing the budget cuts that have 
been proposed for the program. The bill also reinforces LIHEAPS's 
primary mission to help disadvantaged individuals afford energy bills 
that would otherwise prove to be unaffordable. In addition, the bill 
would create a permanent authorization for the LIHEAP emergency fund 
and would allow the Secretary to target the money during particularly 
harsh winters.


                     community services block grant

  The reauthorization of the Community Services block grant would 
strengthen this program by making groups supported by it more 
accountable for the dollars they spend. It would also consolidate 
existing community economic development and rural housing and 
development activities into a new community initiative program.


                               conclusion

  Taken together, these programs represent key segments of the safety 
net we try to provide all America citizens. I believe the bill before 
us will play a critical role in strengthening those segments, and I 
look forward to its passage and signature by the President.
  I would like to once again thank Senator Kennedy, the chairman of the 
Committee on Labor and Human Resources, for all of his work on this 
bill. he continues to be an inspiration to all of us who share his 
vision of a caring and just America.
  I would also like to thank Senator Kassebaum, the ranking member of 
the committee, for all of her work on this legislation this was a truly 
bipartisan bill: It was crafted and moved along by Republicans and 
Democrats working together in complete tandem. Senator Kassebaum was 
especially instrumental in our efforts to consolidate and reform a 
number of existing programs into a new family resource grant. Senator 
Coats, ranking member of the Subcommittee on Children that I chair, was 
as always a full partner and highly valued colleague.
  I would also like to commend several members of the other body who 
made this legislation possible. Bill Ford, the chairman of the House 
Education and Labor Committee, is a passionate advocate of Head Start, 
and we could not have moved this legislation without him. We will 
sorely miss him when he retires at the end of his term.
  Major Owens and Matthew Martinez, chairman of the House Subcommittee 
on Human Resources, were absolutely critical to the consensus we 
reached on this legislation. I worked closely with them to craft a 
strong and effective family resources program authorized by title IV of 
this legislation, and I want to thank them and commend them for their 
hard work.
  Finally, as I have said on numerous occasions before this body, none 
of the work we do here would get done without the able work and 
tireless dedication of the staff. Although many were involved with this 
legislation, I would like to single out just a few here today for the 
significant contributions they made: Patty Cole, Joe Palmore, and Sarah 
Flanagan of my staff; Marsha Simon, Michael Iskowitz, and Catriona 
McDonald of Senator Kennedy's staff; Kimberly Barnes-O'Connor with 
Senator Kassebaum; Stephanie Monroe with Senator Coats; Mark Powden and 
Matt Bidgood with Senator Jeffords; Lauren Gross of Senator Pell's 
staff; and Cheryl Birdsall with Senator Metzenbaum. They should all be 
proud of what they have accomplished for the children and families of 
America.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I am pleased to speak in support of 
passage of the conference report to S. 2000. This legislation will 
reauthorize programs which are vital to helping low-income families and 
their children, including Head Start, the Low-Income Home Energy 
Assistance Program [LIHEAP], and the community services block grant 
[CSBG].
  At the heart of this conference report is the reauthorization of Head 
Start. In my mind, the Head Start reauthorization is a strong one. It 
will help Head Start programs across the United States improve the 
quality of services they provide as we move toward full funding. It 
will help them better meet the needs of families they serve in their 
communities. And it provides for expansion to serve more children. This 
is particularly important, since less than 40 percent of all eligible 
children are currently enrolled.
  I commend President Clinton for proposing a $700 million increase for 
Head Start in his fiscal year 1995 budget request. This increase 
signifies confidence that the program is sound, but also recognizes 
that there is a strong need for expanded enrollment.
  The bill also includes a new program to give an even earlier head 
start to children who most need our help. The initiative for families 
with infants and toddlers will build on the results and knowledge 
gained from programs currently serving families with very young 
children, including the Comprehensive Child Development Program [CCDP]. 
The CCDP's, such as the one I visited in Brattleboro, VT, have proven 
enormously effective in providing much-needed services to these 
families. I am pleased that existing CCDP's will be eligible to provide 
services under the zero to three program.
  I am also pleased that this bill contains provisions establishing a 
priority for longitudinal studies, as well as an authorization of up to 
$3 million in fiscal year 1995 and such sums as may be necessary 
through fiscal year 1998 for this purpose. Longitudinal studies on Head 
Start will allow us as policymakers to follow Head Start participants 
through the years to determine what effects the program has had on 
them.
  Mr. President, we live in a changing world. It is becoming more 
economically competitive than we could have imagined even a decade ago. 
If we are to succeed in this new world, our citizens must be adequately 
prepared. We must start with our youngest children, giving them the 
early, comprehensive, social, health, and education services they need 
so they won't fall through the cracks. Head Start does that for the 
most vulnerable children. Thanks to this reauthorization, it will 
continue to do it, for more children, and better than before.
  Mr. President, I won't go into detail about what the conferees agreed 
to with regard to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program 
[LIHEAP], but there are a few points I would like to highlight.
  First, the House receded to the Senate regarding the program's 
authorization levels. The conference report to S. 2000 stipulates that 
the authorized funding level for LIHEAP shall be $2 billion annually 
for each of the fiscal years 1995 through 1999. I wish we could do 
more, but the budget deficit constrains us. Making the $2 billion 
explicit, though, is certainly preferable to authorizing ``such sums as 
may be necessary.''
  We also have made permanent authorization for a $600 million 
contingency fund to help pull us through the sort of winter that much 
of the Nation just experienced. Clearly, the extreme cold that gripped 
much of the country this past winter stretched regular LIHEAP benefits 
way beyond the breaking point. Now we have the ability to respond to 
genuine weather-related fuel emergencies in a timely fashion. I just 
want to add here, as I did when the Senate first considered S. 2000, 
that the emergency fund is just that: for emergencies. Emergency funds 
are to supplement, not supplant, regular funding.
  I think the conference report contains some useful provisions for 
helping beneficiaries reduce their energy bills by reducing their 
energy consumption. Energy efficiency education is something we should 
always promote. But we do need to be careful that such efforts do not 
cause reductions in basic benefits.
  A final point, Mr. President, concerning the House-passed sense-of-
Congress language regarding funding for fiscal years 1995 and 1996. I 
am pleased that the conferees essentially retained the language. 
Congress already has appropriated $1.475 billion for fiscal year 1995. 
It's going to be very tough to keep that appropriation intact. But we 
must try. And we'll have to try mightily to preserve current services 
next year. Having Congress on record in support of such efforts will be 
helpful.
  The conference report also contains good improvements to the 
community services block grant. This block grant is a vital part of our 
efforts to address poverty in this country. The community action 
agencies funded by CSBG provide a critical service in my state and 
throughout the United States.

  This bill will help them do an even better job by providing training 
and technical assistance, and improving governance and public 
participation. The bill will also make some improvements to our 
economic development efforts funded under CSBG, by creating a new 
Community Initiative Program. On this last point, I want to thank Bob 
Justis of Vermont for his contribution to our efforts.
  Finally, the conference report retains authorization for the 
Community Food and Nutrition Program. Despite its success, the Clinton 
Administration had proposed to eliminate CFNP when it sent its 
recommendations to the Senate. But my colleagues and I on the Senate 
Labor Committee, which has jurisdiction over the program, rejected the 
administration's proposal and renewed the authorization for the 
program. Importantly, we also left intact the provisions for small 
States we established in the last authorization of the program. All 
told, I think this is great news, because CFNP is a low-cost but 
vitally important anti-hunger program, in Vermont and across the 
country.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise in support of the conference version 
of the Head Start reauthorization bill.
  I have always been a strong supporter of the Head Start Program; 
2,300 Montana children benefit from this program, and that does not 
even include the children served through the programs on the Indian 
reservations.
  Concerns have been expressed about maintaining the program's quality 
during Head Start's expansion. I am glad that the final bill requires a 
setaside for quality improvements to address this issue.
  It is also my understanding that the bill includes a section that 
would allow Head Start to legally construct facilities. The need for 
this has been brought to my attention by the Head Start grantees in 
Montana.
  Head Start is an important and worthwhile program, and I will be 
voting in favor of the conference report.
  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues in 
support of the conference report on the Human Services Reauthorization 
Act, S. 2000. This legislation is the cumulation of a bipartisan, 
House-Senate-administration partnership that started a year ago with 
the appointment of the Advisory Committee on Head Start Quality and 
Expansion. I know that some people expressed sincere doubts that such a 
partnership would work. I believe that the Head Start provisions of S. 
2000 are a clear demonstration of the benefits of an inclusive 
thoughtful legislative process--and hope that this successful 
experience will serve as the catalyst for more bipartisan, bicameral 
efforts.
  In addition to the Head Start program, this legislation reauthorizes 
several important programs including the community services block grant 
the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act, the Ready To Learn Act, the 
State Dependent Care Development programs, the Child Development 
Associate Scholarship Initiative, and the new Family Resource Program. 
The Federal and State coordinating mechanisms created in the Claude 
Pepper Young Americans Act also are reauthorized in S. 2000, and I hope 
that appropriations are finally allocated so that this important 
initiative can begin.
  When I introduced the Head Start Quality Improvement Act, with 
Representative Goodling and Representative Molinari in March 1993, I 
hoped that our efforts to improve and ensure the quality of Head Start 
programs would be successful. With the passage today of the Human 
Services Reauthorization Act I believe that the Department of Health 
and Human Services now has the mandate and the tools it needs to 
provide quality early education and care services for low-income 
children and their families. This legislation will help Head Start 
programs to expand to meet the needs of local communities in a variety 
of ways. It is also important to note that as the new initiative to 
serve infants and toddlers begins, there are other provisions in the 
legislation which strengthen the activities designed to help children 
and their parents make the critical transition to elementary school. 
Both Head Start and schools must work together to sustain and build on 
the successes begun in Head Start.
  I would like to thank the staff for their diligence and commitment to 
crafting a truly bipartisan bill--Lee Cowen, Hans Meeder, Alan Lopatin, 
Lester Sweeting, Terry Zimmer-Deshler, Braden Goetz, Dennis Glaven, and 
Leslie Harris from the House Committee on Education and Labor and from 
the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, Kimberly Barnes-
O'Connor, Stephanie Monroe, Matthew Bidgood, Mark Powden, Michael 
Iskowitz, Patricia Cole, Catriona McDonald, and Joe Palmore. This 
legislation is better and stronger because of their efforts.
  Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise in support of 
final passage of the conference committee agreement on S. 2000 which 
includes reauthorization of the Head Start Program.
  There are a number of positive features in this reauthorization, Mr. 
President, including continued emphasis on improving quality, greater 
performance accountability for Head Start agencies, and increased 
authority to use Head Start funds for year-aground programs and 
initiatives that serve very young children and their families.
  In addition, the conference committee accepted the Senate's position 
authorizing the use of Head Start funds for facilities construction in 
low-income communities if there are not other facilities available, if 
the lack of facilities will inhibit the operation of the program, and 
if construction is more cost-effective than purchase of available 
facilities.
  The final bill also permits Head Start grantees to make capital 
expenditures--including amortizing the principal and paying the 
interest on loans--for construction of facilities, major renovation of 
facilities, and purchase of vehicles used for programs located at Head 
Start facilities.
  Unfortunately, the conference committee did not adopt the Senate 
position that Head Start children should be automatically eligible for 
meals under the child care food program.
  The conferees were sympathetic to the burdens placed on Head Start 
agencies in establishing eligibility for the child care food program, 
But, the conferees did not feel they had jurisdiction to expand 
eligibility for what is, in effect, an entitlement program under the 
jurisdiction of the Agriculture Committees in both Houses of Congress.
  The conferees did, however, urge the Secretaries of HHS and 
Agriculture to work together to accomplish the goal of joint 
eligibility through regulatory changes and urged the appropriate 
authorizing committees to address the problem during the 
reauthorization of other child nutrition programs.
  Mr. President, I am most pleased that the conference 
agreement maintains and expands on the goal I have been pushing 
throughout this reauthorization that we encourage flexibility to meet 
the changing needs of today's Head Start families and that we encourage 
a greater degree of collaboration between Head Start, subsidized child 
care, and other programs that serve low-income children and their 
parents.

  For example, the conference committee agreement directs the Secretary 
of HHS to encourage the development and testing of innovative, locally 
designed options to extend the hours of service of Head Start agencies 
to meet local needs. Options identified by the conferees include 
collaboration with child care and other child and family service 
programs where such collaborations maintain the quality and integrity 
of services provided under Head Start's performance standards.
  Where administrative rules and regulations are a barrier to 
effectively combining funds from different Federal program sources, the 
conferees also urged that a timely mechanism for requesting and 
granting waivers be put into place.
  Head Start's authorizing legislation and administrative rules already 
allow national and regional administrators and local agencies 
considerable freedom to design local programs to meet local needs. So, 
the real test of whether we will see increased collaboration with other 
early childhood services will depend on how this reauthorization is 
actually administered.
  With that challenge in mind, Mr. President, I have today written HHS 
Secretary Donna Shalala to encourage her and others in the 
administration to fully implement the collaborative spirit of this 
reauthorization. I would ask that a copy of my letter to Secretary 
Shalala be printed at the conclusion of my remarks.
  Mr. President, I want to pay tribute to the principal authors of this 
legislation for their diligent efforts to steer its passage through the 
Senate and for their openness to the ideas and suggestions for 
improvements that I and others have authored.
  I also want to pay special tribute to the thousands of Minnesotans 
who labor each day in the Head Start classrooms, offices, and homes of 
my State--as teachers, aides, drivers, administrators and others. And, 
I want to offer a special word of encouragement to the parents and 
children who will benefit from this reauthorization. You are our hope 
for a future in which all children will have the opportunity to learn 
and to grow and to prepare for school and for life.
  I yield the floor.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

         U.S. Senate, Committee on Labor and Human Resources,
                                     Washington, DC, May 11, 1994.
     Hon. Donna E. Shalala,
     Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Secretary Shalala: Today's final passage of the Head 
     Start reauthorization represents an excellent opportunity to 
     recommit our support--not only to the Head Start program, but 
     to the children and families it serves.
       I am also hopeful that this reauthorization will contribute 
     to a greater degree of collaboration between Head Start and 
     child care and other child or family support services in each 
     local community.
       That hope became more urgent for me during the Easter 
     recess when I had the opportunity to meet with a group of 
     Head Start and child care advocates in Minnesota.
       One of the themes of that meeting was that collaboration 
     among child and family service programs is especially 
     important to the growing number of Head Start parents who are 
     working or in school as part of federal land state welfare 
     reform initiatives. And, as additional changes are made in 
     AFDC and other welfare programs, we are likely to see even 
     more Head Start parents needing (and qualifying for) child 
     care services that extend beyond the traditional part-day, 
     part-week Head Start program.
       Fortunately, Head Start and other early childhood programs 
     are starting to respond to this growing need. In fact, five 
     different examples of child care/Head Start collaboration or 
     other locally designed Head Start delivery models were 
     described to me in some detail during the meeting I recently 
     held in Minnesota.
       All five of these initiatives are program models other than 
     the traditional full-day, part-day, or home-based models used 
     by most Head Start agencies. All five meet or exceed Head 
     Start's performance standards. And, all five are designed to 
     help meet the changing needs of today's Head Start families.
       In each case, however, the directors of these initiatives 
     expressed serious concerns that they will not be allowed to 
     continue or replicate these highly innovative programs. 
     Reasons for that concern range from uncertainty about future 
     funding availability to bureaucratic resistance.
       This uncertainty about the future of these programs is 
     troubling in light of the most recent round of Head Start 
     rulemaking--which articulated three different delivery 
     options but which also included authority on the part of a 
     senior HHS administrator to approved other locally designed 
     options.
       This centralized appeal and approval process is time 
     consuming, costly, and burdensome, however, and may 
     discourage agencies from designing and requesting approval 
     for locally designed options. This may be especially true in 
     smaller agencies or agencies in rural areas where 
     collaboration may be even more difficult because there are 
     fewer organized child care and other support services 
     available.
       According to several of the Head Start directors I met with 
     in Minnesota, there also appears to be a presumption in the 
     current system that more traditional delivery models are 
     preferred--perhaps because they are easier to monitor and 
     hold accountable.
       In fact, one irony in the current laudable move to better 
     monitor Head Start quality and agency performance is that 
     computerized data gathering is much easier if programs are 
     uniform in how they are organized. The same may be true in 
     designing and testing new forms of results-oriented 
     accountability.
       In responding to these sometimes competing objectives, it's 
     important to note that Head Start has always been a grass-
     roots, community and family-responsive program. So having 
     flexibility to tailor programs to meet unique community and 
     family needs is in keeping with the original purpose and 
     history of Head Start.
       That's why I felt so strongly that this reauthorization 
     must be used to encourage Head Start administrators to use 
     expansion funding to offer financial and other incentives to 
     design unique and innovative local delivery options--as long 
     as the underlying principles and strengths of Head Start are 
     maintained and as long as local needs and results-oriented 
     performance standards are met.
       Because of the importance of maximizing the use of all 
     available resources, any real or perceived barriers to 
     collaboration with other agencies and programs should also be 
     removed. That would include barriers to mixing funding 
     sources and contracting with other agencies who may actually 
     employ teachers and other staff.
       In addition, I strongly believe there should be a 
     presumption that locally designed delivery options are 
     acceptable unless its's determined that they do not meet 
     results--oriented standards through the normal Head Start 
     oversight process.
       And, finally, whatever changes are needed in Head Start 
     performance standards to promote an innovation-friendly 
     environment should be made.
       I realize that at least some of the encouragement needed to 
     innovate and collaborate may have to wait until we take up 
     the child care components of welfare reform later this year. 
     And, I look forward to working with you on this issue once 
     the President's welfare reform proposal is brought to the 
     Congress.
       At the same time, I believe implementation of this Head 
     Start reauthorization represents an excellent opportunity to 
     allow maximum flexibility in local communities to use 
     combined funding, waivers, demonstrations and administrative 
     flexibility to help meet the changing needs of Head Start 
     families.
       To seize that opportunity, I believe Head Start 
     administrators should do at least the following four things 
     as they implement this reauthorization:
       First, include the changing needs of Head Start families 
     for child care and the potential for collaboration with child 
     care and other early childhood and family services to Head 
     Start's new quality standards.
       Second, ensure that new performance measures created for 
     Head Start agencies be adaptable for non-traditional program 
     options including collaborations with local child care 
     programs.
       Third, reward collaboration with other community 
     organizations serving children and families in the allocation 
     of expansion funds within states.
       And, finally, use Head Start's R&D program, to encourage 
     the development and testing of innovative locally designed 
     program options including programs that involve collaboration 
     with child care and other child and family service programs.
       During the course of this reauthorization, I became 
     convinced that statutory changes were not needed to achieve 
     these objectives. At the same time, I was pleased that 
     Senators Kennedy and Kassebaum were willing to join me in a 
     colloquy affirming legislative intend that increased 
     collaboration with child care and other early childhood and 
     family programs should be an outgrowth of this 
     reauthorization.
       As you know, I was an original co-sponsor of this Head 
     Start reauthorization legislation. And, I was pleased to vote 
     to adopt this legislation at every step in the legislative 
     process. At the same time, I believe the full potential for 
     serving today's low income families and children will depend 
     on how this legislation is implemented and administered.
       Now more than ever, Head Start must be responsive to the 
     changing needs of the families it serves. That means Head 
     Start must be flexible enough to meet those needs through a 
     variety of different program models. And, it means Head Start 
     must encourage collaboration with child care and other 
     services available to those same families.
       With that kind of locally initiated flexibility and 
     collaboration, Head Start will enter its second 30 years an 
     even stronger and more effective resource for this children 
     and families of this nation.
       Thank you for your past and future leadership in making 
     these essential goals a reality.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Dave Durenberger
                                                     U.S. Senator.

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I would like to ask a question 
regarding the LIHEAP provisions in the Human Services Act. I wanted to 
clarify that none of the changes made regarding the LIHEAP program, 
including the provisions directed at the Secretary of HHS, are intended 
to alter households' current ability to seek redress under the statute 
directly from the federal courts. Is that correct.
  Mr. DODD. The Senator's statement is correct.
  Mr. KENNEDY. That is also my understanding.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is on 
the adoption of the conference report.
  The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby] is 
absent because of illness.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 98, nays 1, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 109 Leg.]

                                YEAS--98

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boren
     Boxer
     Bradley
     Breaux
     Brown
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Coats
     Cochran
     Cohen
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     Danforth
     Daschle
     DeConcini
     Dodd
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durenberger
     Exon
     Faircloth
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Ford
     Glenn
     Gorton
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hatfield
     Heflin
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kempthorne
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     Mathews
     McCain
     McConnell
     Metzenbaum
     Mikulski
     Mitchell
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Nunn
     Packwood
     Pell
     Pressler
     Pryor
     Reid
     Riegle
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Sarbanes
     Sasser
     Simon
     Simpson
     Smith
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thurmond
     Wallop
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wofford

                                NAYS--1

     Helms
       
       

                             NOT VOTING--1

     Shelby
       
       
  So the conference report was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no objection, the motion to 
reconsider is laid upon the table.

                          ____________________