[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 146 (Tuesday, September 19, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H9145-H9150]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1617, CAREERS ACT

  Mrs. WALDHOLTZ. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, 
I call up House Resolution 222 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 222

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
     XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 1617) to consolidate and reform workforce 
     development and literacy programs, and for other purposes. 
     The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. 
     General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not 
     exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
     chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Economic and Educational Opportunities. After general debate 
     the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-
     minute rule. In lieu of the amendment recommended by the 
     Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities now 
     printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an 
     original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-
     minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     consisting of the text of H.R. 2332. That amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute shall be considered by title rather 
     than by section. The first six sections and each title shall 
     be considered as read. Points of order against that amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute for failure to comply with 
     clause 5(a) of rule XXI or section 302(f) or 401(b) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 are waived. Before 
     consideration of any other amendment it shall be in order to 
     consider the amendment printed in the report of the Committee 
     on Rules accompanying this resolution, if offered by 
     Representative Goodling or his designee. That amendment shall 
     be considered as read, may amend the portions of the bill not 
     yet read for amendment, shall be debatable for ten minutes 
     equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
     opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be 
     subject to a demand for division of the question in the House 
     or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against 
     that amendment are waived. After disposition of that 
     amendment, the provisions of the bill as then perfected shall 
     be considered as original text. During further consideration 
     of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of 
     the Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of 
     whether the Member offering an amendment has caused it to be 
     printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated 
     for that purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII. Amendments so 
     printed shall be considered as read. At the conclusion of 
     consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
     rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as 
     may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote 
     in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the 
     Whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute made in order as original text. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and 
     amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.

                              {time}  1030

  Mrs. WALDHOLTZ. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall], pending 
which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration 
of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 222 is the rule for the consideration 
of H.R. 1617, the Consolidated and Reformed Education, Employment, and 
Rehabilitation Systems Act, better known as the CAREERS Act.
  This is an open rule. It provides for 1 hour of general debate, to be 
divided between the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities. After general 
debate, the bill will be considered for amendment under the 5-minute 
rule. The bill will be considered by title. The first six sections in 
each title now printed in the bill shall be considered as read. The 
rule provides priority recognition for Members who have preprinted 
their amendments. Finally, the rule provides for a motion to recommit 
with instructions.
  This bill will consolidate more than 150 existing separate, 
duplicative and fragmented education and job training programs into 
four consolidated grants to the States. It represents a dramatic 
improvement over current law not only by consolidating so many 
different programs but also by providing States and local communities 
with greater opportunity and flexibility to design programs to meet the 
needs of their citizens, rather than the needs of the Federal 
Government.
  This bill will also turn two Government sponsored enterprises 
``Sallie Mae''--the Student Loan Marketing Association--and ``Connie 
Lee''--the College Construction Loan Insurance Association--entirely 
over to the private sector. And last, but certainly not least, this 
bill reduces the Federal deficit by cutting bureaucracy and waste, 
saving $6.5 billion over 5 years with no disruption of service to 
individuals.
  This rule provides for full, fair, and open debate and is brought up 
under an 

[[Page H9146]]
open rule at the request of the chairman. Concerns have been raised 
about how the needs of individuals with disabilities will be addressed 
under H.R. 1617. This open rule will permit thorough consideration of 
this and other important issues by allowing amendments to be offered on 
the floor for consideration by the full House.
  I urge my colleagues to adopt this rule. It permits for the fair 
consideration of a bill that will provide for a better prepared and 
more knowledgeable work force--benefiting both the American people and 
American business. At the same time, it protects the right of Members 
to offer amendments for consideration by the full House.
  Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the following statistical 
information from the Committee on Rules:

  THE AMENDMENT PROCESS UNDER SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE,\1\ 103D CONGRESS V. 104TH CONGRESS 
                                           [As of September 18, 1995]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  103d Congress                        104th Congress           
              Rule type              ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Number of rules    Percent of total   Number of rules    Percent of total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open/Modified-open\2\...............                 46                 44                 46                 74
Modified Closed\3\..................                 49                 47                 14                 23
Closed\4\...........................                  9                  9                  2                  3
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Totals:.......................                104                100                 62                100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\This table applies only to rules which provide for the original consideration of bills, joint resolutions or 
  budget resolutions and which provide for an amendment process. It does not apply to special rules which only  
  waive points of order against appropriations bills which are already privileged and are considered under an   
  open amendment process under House rules.                                                                     
\2\An open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule. A       
  modified open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule     
  subject only to an overall time limit on the amendment process and/or a requirement that the amendment be     
  preprinted in the Congressional Record.                                                                       
\3\A modified closed rule is one under which the Rules Committee limits the amendments that may be offered only 
  to those amendments designated in the special rule or the Rules Committee report to accompany it, or which    
  preclude amendments to a particular portion of a bill, even though the rest of the bill may be completely open
  to amendment.                                                                                                 
\4\A closed rule is one under which no amendments may be offered (other than amendments recommended by the      
  committee in reporting the bill).                                                                             


                          SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE, 104TH CONGRESS                         
                                           [As of September 18, 1995]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  H. Res. No. (Date                                                                                             
       rept.)               Rule type             Bill No.                 Subject           Disposition of rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Res. 38 (1/18/95)  O...................  H.R. 5..............  Unfunded Mandate Reform..  A: 350-71 (1/19/   
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 44 (1/24/95)  MC..................  H. Con. Res. 17.....  Social Security..........  A: 255-172 (1/25/  
                                            H.J. Res. 1.........  Balanced Budget Amdt.....   95).              
H. Res. 51 (1/31/95)  O...................  H.R. 101............  Land Transfer, Taos        A: voice vote (2/1/
                                                                   Pueblo Indians.            95).              
H. Res. 52 (1/31/95)  O...................  H.R. 400............  Land Exchange, Arctic      A: voice vote (2/1/
                                                                   Nat'l. Park and Preserve.  95).              
H. Res. 53 (1/31/95)  O...................  H.R. 440............  Land Conveyance, Butte     A: voice vote (2/1/
                                                                   County, Calif.             95).              
H. Res. 55 (2/1/95).  O...................  H.R. 2..............  Line Item Veto...........  A: voice vote (2/2/
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 60 (2/6/95).  O...................  H.R. 665............  Victim Restitution.......  A: voice vote (2/7/
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 61 (2/6/95).  O...................  H.R. 666............  Exclusionary Rule Reform.  A: voice vote (2/7/
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 63 (2/8/95).  MO..................  H.R. 667............  Violent Criminal           A: voice vote (2/9/
                                                                   Incarceration.             95).              
H. Res. 69 (2/9/95).  O...................  H.R. 668............  Criminal Alien             A: voice vote (2/10/
                                                                   Deportation.               95).              
H. Res. 79 (2/10/95)  MO..................  H.R. 728............  Law Enforcement Block      A: voice vote (2/13/
                                                                   Grants.                    95).              
H. Res. 83 (2/13/95)  MO..................  H.R. 7..............  National Security          PQ: 229-100; A: 227-
                                                                   Revitalization.            127 (2/15/95).    
H. Res. 88 (2/16/95)  MC..................  H.R. 831............  Health Insurance           PQ: 230-191; A: 229-
                                                                   Deductibility.             188 (2/21/95).    
H. Res. 91 (2/21/95)  O...................  H.R. 830............  Paperwork Reduction Act..  A: voice vote (2/22/
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 92 (2/21/95)  MC..................  H.R. 889............  Defense Supplemental.....  A: 282-144 (2/22/  
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 93 (2/22/95)  MO..................  H.R. 450............  Regulatory Transition Act  A: 252-175 (2/23/  
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 96 (2/24/95)  MO..................  H.R. 1022...........  Risk Assessment..........  A: 253-165 (2/27/  
                                                                                              95).              
H. Res. 100 (2/27/    O...................  H.R. 926............  Regulatory Reform and      A: voice vote (2/28/
 95).                                                              Relief Act.                95).              
H. Res. 101 (2/28/    MO..................  H.R. 925............  Private Property           A: 271-151 (3/2/95)
 95).                                                              Protection Act.                              
H. Res. 103 (3/3/95)  MO..................  H.R. 1058...........  Securities Litigation      ...................
                                                                   Reform.                                      
H. Res. 104 (3/3/95)  MO..................  H.R. 988............  Attorney Accountability    A: voice vote (3/6/
                                                                   Act.                       95)               
H. Res. 105 (3/6/95)  MO..................  ....................  .........................  A: 257-155 (3/7/95)
H. Res. 108 (3/7/95)  Debate..............  H.R. 956............  Product Liability Reform.  A: voice vote (3/8/
                                                                                              95)               
H. Res. 109 (3/8/95)  MC..................  ....................  .........................  PQ: 234-191 A: 247-
                                                                                              181 (3/9/95)      
H. Res. 115 (3/14/    MO..................  H.R. 1159...........  Making Emergency Supp.     A: 242-190 (3/15/  
 95).                                                              Approps..                  95)               
H. Res. 116 (3/15/    MC..................  H.J. Res. 73........  Term Limits Const. Amdt..  A: voice vote (3/28/
 95).                                                                                         95)               
H. Res. 117 (3/16/    Debate..............  H.R. 4..............  Personal Responsibility    A: voice vote (3/21/
 95).                                                              Act of 1995.               95)               
H. Res. 119 (3/21/    MC..................  ....................  .........................  A: 217-211 (3/22/  
 95).                                                                                         95)               
H. Res. 125 (4/3/95)  O...................  H.R. 1271...........  Family Privacy Protection  A: 423-1 (4/4/95)  
                                                                   Act.                                         
H. Res. 126 (4/3/95)  O...................  H.R. 660............  Older Persons Housing Act  A: voice vote (4/6/
                                                                                              95)               
H. Res. 128 (4/4/95)  MC..................  H.R. 1215...........  Contract With America Tax  A: 228-204 (4/5/95)
                                                                   Relief Act of 1995.                          
H. Res. 130 (4/5/95)  MC..................  H.R. 483............  Medicare Select Expansion   A: 253-172 (4/6/  
                                                                                              95)               
H. Res. 136 (5/1/95)  O...................  H.R. 655............  Hydrogen Future Act of     A: voice vote (5/2/
                                                                   1995.                      95)               
H. Res. 139 (5/3/95)  O...................  H.R. 1361...........  Coast Guard Auth. FY 1996  A: voice vote (5/9/
                                                                                              95)               
H. Res. 140 (5/9/95)  O...................  H.R. 961............  Clean Water Amendments...  A: 414-4 (5/10/95) 
H. Res. 144 (5/11/    O...................  H.R. 535............  Fish Hatchery--Arkansas..  A: voice vote (5/15/
 95).                                                                                         95)               
H. Res. 145 (5/11/    O...................  H.R. 584............  Fish Hatchery--Iowa......  A: voice vote (5/15/
 95).                                                                                         95)               
H. Res. 146 (5/11/    O...................  H.R. 614............  Fish Hatchery--Minnesota.  A: voice vote (5/15/
 95).                                                                                         95)               
H. Res. 149 (5/16/    MC..................  H. Con. Res. 67.....  Budget Resolution FY 1996  PQ: 252-170 A: 255-
 95).                                                                                         168 (5/17/95)     
H. Res. 155 (5/22/    MO..................  H.R. 1561...........  American Overseas          A: 233-176 (5/23/  
 95).                                                              Interests Act.             95)               
H. Res. 164 (6/8/95)  MC..................  H.R. 1530...........  Nat. Defense Auth. FY      PQ: 225-191 A: 233-
                                                                   1996.                      183 (6/13/95)     
H. Res. 167 (6/15/    O...................  H.R. 1817...........  MilCon Appropriations FY   PQ: 223-180 A: 245-
 95).                                                              1996.                      155 (6/16/95)     
H. Res. 169 (6/19/    MC..................  H.R. 1854...........  Leg. Branch Approps. FY    PQ: 232-196 A: 236-
 95).                                                              1996.                      191 (6/20/95)     
H. Res. 170 (6/20/    O...................  H.R. 1868...........  For. Ops. Approps. FY      PQ: 221-178 A: 217-
 95).                                                              1996.                      175 (6/22/95)     
H. Res. 171 (6/22/    O...................  H.R. 1905...........  Energy & Water Approps.    A: voice vote (7/12/
 95).                                                              FY 1996.                   95)               
H. Res. 173 (6/27/    C...................  H.J. Res. 79........  Flag Constitutional        PQ: 258-170 A: 271-
 95).                                                              Amendment.                 152 (6/28/95)     
H. Res. 176 (6/28/    MC..................  H.R. 1944...........  Emer. Supp. Approps......  PQ: 236-194 A: 234-
 95).                                                                                         192 (6/29/95)     
H. Res. 185 (7/11/    O...................  H.R. 1977...........  Interior Approps. FY 1996  PQ: 235-193 D: 192-
 95).                                                                                         238 (7/12/95)     
H. Res. 187 (7/12/    O...................  H.R. 1977...........  Interior Approps. FY 1996  PQ: 230-194 A: 229-
 95).                                                              #2.                        195 (7/13/95)     
H. Res. 188 (7/12/    O...................  H.R. 1976...........  Agriculture Approps. FY    PQ: 242-185 A:     
 95).                                                              1996.                      voice vote (7/18/ 
                                                                                              95)               
H. Res. 190 (7/17/    O...................  H.R. 2020...........  Treasury/Postal Approps.   PQ: 232-192 A:     
 95).                                                              FY 1996.                   voice vote (7/18/ 
                                                                                              95)               
H. Res. 193 (7/19/    C...................  H.J. Res. 96........  Disapproval of MFN to      A: voice vote (7/20/
 95).                                                              China.                     95)               
H. Res. 194 (7/19/    O...................  H.R. 2002...........  Transportation Approps.    PQ: 217-202 (7/21/ 
 95).                                                              FY 1996.                   95)               
H. Res. 197 (7/21/    O...................  H.R. 70.............  Exports of Alaskan Crude   A: voice vote (7/24/
 95).                                                              Oil.                       95)               
H. Res. 198 (7/21/    O...................  H.R. 2076...........  Commerce, State Approps.   A: voice vote (7/25/
 95).                                                              FY 1996.                   95)               
H. Res. 201 (7/25/    O...................  H.R. 2099...........  VA/HUD Approps. FY 1996..  A: 230-189 (7/25/  
 95).                                                                                         95)               
H. Res. 204 (7/28/    MC..................  S. 21...............  Terminating U.S. Arms      A: voice vote (8/1/
 95).                                                              Embargo on Bosnia.         95)               
H. Res. 205 (7/28/    O...................  H.R. 2126...........  Defense Approps. FY 1996.  A: 409-1 (7/31/95) 
 95).                                                                                                           
H. Res. 207 (8/1/95)  MC..................  H.R. 1555...........  Communications Act of      A: 255-156 (8/2/95)
                                                                   1995.                                        
H. Res. 208 (8/1/95)  O...................  H.R. 2127...........  Labor, HHS Approps. FY     A: 323-104 (8/2/95)
                                                                   1996.                                        
H. Res. 215 (9/7/95)  O...................  H.R. 1594...........  Economically Targeted      A: voice vote (9/12/
                                                                   Investments.               95)               
H. Res. 216 (9/7/95)  MO..................  H.R. 1655...........  Intelligence               A: voice vote (9/12/
                                                                   Authorization FY 1996.     95)               
H. Res. 218 (9/12/    O...................  H.R. 1162...........  Deficit Reduction Lockbox  A: voice vote (9/13/
 95).                                                                                         95)               
H. Res. 219 (9/12/    O...................  H.R. 1670...........  Federal Acquisition        A: 414-0 (9/13/95) 
 95).                                                              Reform Act.                                  
H. Res. 222 (9/18/    O...................  H.R. 1617...........  CAREERS Act..............  ...................
 95).                                                                                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Codes: O-open rule; MO-modified open rule; MC-modified closed rule; C-closed rule; A-adoption vote; D-defeated; 
  PQ-previous question vote. Source: Notices of Action Taken, Committee on Rules, 104th Congress.               

  Mrs. WALDHOLTZ. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. HALL of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)

[[Page H9147]]

  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend my colleague 
from Utah, Mrs. Waldholtz, as well as my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle for bringing this resolution to the floor.
  House Resolution 222 is an open rule which will allow full and fair 
debate on H.R. 1617, a bill to consolidate and reform work force 
development and literacy programs.
  As my colleague from Utah has ably described, this rule provides 1 
hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman 
and ranking minority member of the Committee on Economic and 
Educational Opportunities.
  Under the rule, germane amendments will be allowed under the 5-minute 
rule, the normal amending process in the House. All Members, on both 
sides of the aisle, will have the opportunity to offer amendments. I am 
pleased that the Rules Committee reported this rule without opposition 
in a voice vote and I plan to support it.
  Though I support the rule, I have reservations about a number of 
provisions in the bill.
  First, I am concerned about the overall cuts in the authorization 
level for Federal employment and training programs. Job training is an 
investment that will pay off in more productive citizens and increased 
human capital. We all agree that deficit reduction is important for the 
benefit of the next generation. However, the same can be said for 
education.

  Second, I oppose title V, which amends the Rehabilitation Act of 
1973. I have heard from a number of citizens with disabilities in my 
district as well as national organizations that represent persons with 
disabilities. They fear that rewriting the law will reduce the 
effectiveness of existing employment-related services.
  Third, I am concerned about the repeal of the School-to-Work 
Opportunities Act, which was just enacted last year with bipartisan 
support. This legislation helps States and local school districts 
create programs to prepare students for the world of work who do not go 
on to college. This is the kind of legislation that gets the most bang 
for the buck because the program provides only the seed money.
  Mr. Speaker, this open rule will permit full discussion of these 
issues and give Members an opportunity to amend the bill. I urge 
adoption of the rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. WALDHOLTZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling], the chairman of the Committee on Economic 
and Educational Opportunities.
  (Mr. GOODLING asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule to H.R. 
1617, the Consolidated and Reformed Education, Employment, and 
Rehabilitation Systems Act, better known as CAREERS.
  The rule we are considering today provides for an open, fair debate 
on this historic legislation. The bill represents an historic turning 
point for this Congress because CAREERS consolidates more than 150 
existing separate, duplicative and fragmented education and job 
training programs into four consolidated grants to the States.
  Never before has the Committee on Economic and Educational 
Opportunities agreed to consolidate and repeal so many existing 
programs under its jurisdiction. The CAREERS Act represents significant 
improvements over current law, not only by consolidating so many 
different programs, but also by recognizing that States are different 
and the needs of their individuals are different. The CAREERS Act 
promotes maximum flexibility for States while ensuring that they are 
held accountable for results through performance measurements they 
develop.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few minutes to talk a little bit 
about some of the criticisms that you will probably hear during the 
debate, and I would like to take them head on.
  There are some who believe we should maintain the status quo as far 
as vocational rehabilitation is concerned. In other words, keep the 
current overly bureaucratic system that fails to find jobs for more 
than two-thirds of the disabled people it serves in meaningful jobs. No 
doubt many Members have heard from interested parties on this issue in 
the past few days, but I ask you to keep in mind they are hearing 
primarily from the bureaucrats who provide these services.
  Our bill sides with the consumers of vocational rehabilitation 
services. Let me read to you a letter from ARC, formerly known as the 
Association for Retarded Citizens of the United States, concerning 
efforts to strike vocational rehabilitation from this bill, and I quote

       To delink the vocational rehabilitation system from this 
     new system in CAREERS will only serve to isolate the VR 
     system and people with mental retardation from the employers. 
     No one would gain except those professionals in the VR system 
     whose sole agenda is to protect turf. We do not think that is 
     what reform is all about.

  I could not have said it better myself.
  Some have complained that the bill could lead to mandatory Federal 
tracking forcing students into particular occupations at a very early 
age. To address that issue we have added the following provisions to 
the bill. Nothing in this act shall mandate that any individual, 
particularly youth served under title II of this act, be required to 
choose a specific career path or major. The bill does not mandate 
trapping.
  We have heard from various Members concerned about privacy of labor 
market and other data collected under the legislation. We have added 
specific language restating title XIII of the Census Act relating to 
confidentiality of information, and added language ensuring that this 
act is consistent with the Family Education Privacy Act.
  There have been some concerns expressed about the skills standards 
provisions of the bill. Our bill recognizes that because work force 
development programs are all about preparing individuals for careers, 
we must increase the involvement of business and industry, both small 
and large, in the design and implementation of State and local work 
force preparation programs. It is essential that employers identify the 
skills needed in the workplace in order that employment and training 
assistance programs are relevant and useful. As such, we included 
provisions in the bill that tied program performance to providing the 
skills that have been recognized by industry as necessary to perform in 
a specific occupation.

  Mr. Speaker, we also say that program participants may, I repeat, 
may, receive skill certificates, portable credentials that certify an 
individual has mastered the occupational skills identified by employers 
as necessary to do the job. We do not require, however, that any 
individual must receive such certificates or that any employer must 
accept or use skill certificates in making hiring decisions. We also 
add language to the bill clarifying that skill certificates shall not 
replace high school diplomas or GED's.
  There are other issues I will bring forth later on. One other I might 
mention, maintenance of effort, is always very difficult. It is 
particularly difficult when you are talking about downsizing the amount 
of expenditures coming from the Federal Government. It would seem that 
if the Federal Government cuts back, then when we talk about 
maintenance of effort, we should also allow the States to cut back an 
equal amount, and if we do not, then of course we have unfunded 
mandates.
  Finally, one of the big issues that Members, particularly those from 
the other side of the aisle, may raise concerns a provision that allows 
Governors to transfer 10 percent of their funds between the youth and 
the adult training blocks, first, let me make it clear that under this 
transfer authority, transferred funds must be spent at the local level.
  Second, it is important that everyone knows exactly why we add the 
provision to the bill. That is to allow States additional flexibility 
to determine how best to meet the educational and training needs of 
their particular State. This is particularly important during this time 
of substantial cutbacks in Federal job training funds.
  I might mention, I agree with the minority member, who earlier 
indicated a concern about the amount of money only in the youth block, 
but hopefully, as we go through conference, that will be restored. It 
was somewhat restored on the floor of the House; hopefully, more will 
be restored when we complete our conference.

[[Page H9148]]


                              {time}  1045

  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Doggett].
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule, which allows for open 
debate, and in support of the general direction of this bill. I think 
we have had too many job training programs that have been duplicative, 
that have been overlapping. I think the concept of this bill is a good 
one in merging those, a concept that supports some of the evaluation 
that, frankly, has not occurred in the past with reference to many of 
these programs.
  The one very significant exception though that I would note to that 
support and on which I would focus public attention is the way that we 
handle the training programs for people with disabilities across this 
country.
  I believe that the amendment that my colleague, the gentleman from 
Texas, Mr. Gene Green, will offer to except vocational rehabilitation 
from the coverage of this one-stop bill to deal with some of the unique 
problems that our citizens with disabilities have is the approach that 
we must adopt.
  I am sure that there are people that are involved in one training 
program or another that have views on this subject. I have heard from 
some of them. But the most compelling stories are the stories that I 
have heard from people with disabilities themselves. They have been 
coming out to see me as I visit around my home of Austin, TX.
  This last weekend, recognizing that the Federal building may be a bit 
pretentious, I took my office out to the neighborhood and held office 
hours on a Saturday morning in front of a grocery store. I had a number 
of people with disabilities who came out. I expect they were concerned 
mainly about the way they are going to be hit on Medicare, since they, 
along with seniors, rely on Medicare, and it will reach into their 
pocket with this Republican plan to require that they pay more and get 
less under Medicare. But the second concern that they voiced, and a 
very real one, is having vocational rehabilitation lumped into House 
bill 1617.
  Last Saturday one of the people who came and talked to me during 
these grocery store hours in north Austin was Doris Varnell. Doris is a 
woman who lives in Austin, and who at age 40 was diagnosed with 
multiple sclerosis. Despite the debilitating effects of this terrible 
disease, she was determined to continue to work.
  She told me that without the support of the Texas Rehabilitation 
Commission, TRC, as we call it in Texas, she is not sure that she could 
ever have made the first tough job search. You see, she was accustomed 
to being a person without disabilities, and like any of us, who are 
just one accident or one unfortunate illness away from a disability, 
she was a person who lived without disability and now confronted 
disability and had to adapt to that and find out how to overcome that 
disability. She turned for the first time at a very scary time in her 
life to the Texas Rehabilitation Commission and found a way to avoid 
painful discrimination and found a way to benefit from the special 
services that have served her and have served literally hundreds of 
thousands of Texans, as they have served millions of Americans across 
this country. In fact, during the time the vocational rehabilitation 
system has been in effect in America, it has served and gotten into our 
work force some 9 million Americans.
  Every year, vocational rehabilitation gives 200,000 more Americans 
the opportunity to serve in the work force, despite of and in fact 
overcoming their disabilities.
  We hear so much in this Congress about the SSI Program under Social 
Security. Well, 40,000 people come off of SSI every year as a result of 
the services of vocational rehabilitation. All of this has been 
accomplished with a network of State vocational rehabilitation 
services, recognizing some of the unique needs of people with 
disabilities. In essence, we already have a block grant program for 
vocational rehabilitation. I fear that some have taken such a 
blockheaded approach to block grants that they are now going to block 
grant a block grant program.
  This is a solution without a problem when it comes to people with 
disabilities in Texas. We already have a Federal block grant program 
going to the Texas Rehabilitation Commission. It provides unique 
services to meet the needs of people with disabilities. It does it 
well. It does it efficiently. It does it with local input and support 
and consultation with local groups involved with people with 
disabilities, and that is the way it ought to continue to occur.
  I realize the appeal of a one-stop career center, and I think that 
that is appropriate for people who are unskilled, who are 
undereducated. But I am concerned that someone who faces multiple 
sclerosis, who has some other type of mental or physical disability, 
needs more than one stop. They may need extra assistance to deal with 
their disabilities and find a way to convince employers of how much 
they contribute.

  Mr. Speaker, the truth is that we have a system that works very well 
right now to meet the needs of people with disabilities. It involves 
people who are skilled as counselors in working with people with 
disabilities, and in the course of adopting a bill that has much merit, 
let us not destroy this hope that is out there of meeting the special 
needs of people with disabilities. Let us support the amendment of the 
gentleman from Texas Mr. Gene Green, to preserve a system that works 
and works well for people with disabilities.
  Mrs. WALDHOLTZ. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Riggs], a member of the Committee on 
Economic and Educational Opportunities.
  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our leadership for making time in our 
very busy schedule for this legislation to come to the floor. This is a 
good rule. It obviously continues our tradition in the 104th Congress 
of open rules under the Republican majority. I want to urge my 
colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill, H.R. 1617, the 
CAREERS Act.
  This has been very much in its development stages a bipartisan bill. 
We were able to report the bill out of the Committee on Economic and 
Educational Opportunities on a bipartisan basis. We have received a 
tremendous amount of assistance from the administration in crafting the 
bill, and I particularly want to salute Doug Ross, who is the immediate 
past assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment and Training for his 
role in helping us craft this legislation. It is ironic, just to 
underscore the bipartisan nature of the bill, that we have also been 
working with Robert T. Jones, the vice president of the National 
Association of Business, who was the Assistant Secretary of Labor for 
Employment and Training in the Bush administration. Again, I think that 
underscores the bipartisan nature of this bill.
  We have worked very hard in crafting the legislation to address the 
concerns of various interest groups. We have worked closely with the 
Governors, the National Governors Association, and various family and 
value oriented groups. We have always listened carefully to what the 
business community has had to say about how we can improve upon the 
existing service delivery system for job training programs.
  As the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
[Mr. Goodling], stressed, we have taken these 160-some odd separate 
Federal job training programs, what are called categorical programs, 
spread across 146 different Federal agencies and departments, and 
consolidated them into four block grants. The idea behind that is to 
give the States and Governors much more say and flexibility in 
designing and running these programs, and we have also included in the 
bill the idea of an individual voucher for job training recipients, 
what we call a career grant.
  This is a very important concept, because what we are really trying 
to do is tell American workers that they will have a greater say in 
determining what kind of career training or work force preparation is 
right for them.
  This is, again, a bipartisan concept that harkens back to the Bush 
administration. In the Bush administration, they first proposed a 
concept of a GI bill for workers, and this concept has 

[[Page H9149]]
continued in the present administration with the President and 
Secretary Reich pushing hard for the concept of skill grants. Again, we 
have been able to embody that concept, although we call it career 
grants, a slightly different term, in this legislation.
  Now, this legislation focuses in on several different groups of job 
training recipients. Of course, first and foremost are unemployed 
workers. In the legislation we take an employment first approach. We 
are trying to get these folks back into the work force as soon as 
possible.
  We are also trying to help disadvantaged youth, those youth that are 
at risk of dropping out of school, particularly in the face of all the 
recent evidence suggesting that some degree of post-secondary 
educational attainment and computer literacy, or some computer skills, 
are absolutely essential to a young person's chances for competing and 
succeeding in an increasingly global economy. We think we can do a much 
better job with this bill of serving youth, particularly those, 70 to 
75 percent of our young people, who are not college-bound or who, if 
they go to college, will drop out.

  We are also working diligently in the legislation to help those who 
are extremely disadvantaged, either those who are disabled and must 
overcome certain physical and mental and architectural barriers to find 
gainful employment in the work force. We are trying to help those who 
are illiterate by having a separate block grant that is targeted to 
adult education and illiteracy.
  We have good accountability and performance standards in the 
legislation that gives States and local communities a much greater say 
in determining what the performance standards should be based on local 
conditions, but we do require in the legislation the States after 
setting those goals, in consultation with local communities, to show 
continuous improvement and progress above the baseline that has been 
established.
  Mr. Speaker, this is good legislation. Again, I urge support of the 
rule and support of the bill. This bill goes a long way toward 
improving the productivity of American workers, and therefore the 
quality of life or the standard of living for American workers. We will 
look forward as we get into the debate on separate amendments talking 
about in more detail about the bill. I urge my colleagues to support 
the rule and the bill.
  Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in 
support of H.R. 1617. The Consolidated and Reformed Education, 
Employment, and Rehabilitation Systems Act or CAREERS is quite an 
elaborate name for legislation aimed solely at simplifying and 
improving our current maze of job training and employment assistance 
programs. As a Member of the House who acknowledges the direct 
correlation between program design and program success, I urge all of 
my colleagues to listen closely to this debate today and decide to vote 
in favor of creating a well-designed model for the deliverance of job 
training and employment assistance services.
  We currently refer to our various fragmented job training and 
employment-related programs as ones formulating a system, which is 
laughable because the word system implies that there is some from of 
orderly program interaction taking place. This is not the case. The 
U.S. General Accounting Office [GAO] has identified 163 different 
programs, totaling $20 billion, which offer some type of career 
related, education, job training or employment assistance to youth and 
adults. Further, the Associate Director for Education and Employment 
issues at GAO recently testified that the current employment, training 
assistance programs are narrowly tailored, leaving programs to compete 
for clients and funds. He then, in his testimony, went on to question 
the system's overall efficiency.

  A potluck approach to Federal job training and employment assistance 
is a disservice to the adults and youth looking to utilize these 
programs. The CAREERS bill offers us a chance to streamline, improve 
the Federal effort in this important area. We will be working through 
this legislation to create a real training and employment system, 
equipped with easy customer access and choice. No one should be faced 
with a maze of noncoordinated programs when progressing toward 
employment objectives. CAREERS requires States and local work force 
development areas to establish integrated career center systems in 
which individuals may obtain services and familiarize themselves with 
the State's work force development system. This integrated system is 
user friendly and enables individuals to gain quick access to all parts 
of the system. Let us be clear, CAREERS does not mandate that you 
establish one-stop centers. Under CAREERS, one could enter the State 
career system through a colocated center, one-stop center or through an 
electronically linked affiliated site. The legislative intent is the 
creation of an integrated system where the user is best served.
  I think it is important to point out that when we talk of an 
integrated system, we are not advocating the creation of a generic 
delivery system, one unable to meet the needs of the diverse people who 
will ultimately use these programs. The block grants included in 
CAREERS are all structured to assure that attention is focused on the 
four, distinct populations seeking service. Clearly, the one-size-fits-
all approach will not work in this area. I am pleased that CAREERS not 
only allows for local control, customer choice, and customer 
accessibility but is also wisely structured so that diverse populations 
may be served.
  I urge my colleagues to support the rule and look forward to passage 
of H.R. 1617, the CAREERS.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. WALDHOLTZ. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I 
yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on 
the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Foley). The question is on adoption of 
the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground 
that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum 
is not present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 388, 
nays 2, not voting 44, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 664]

                               YEAS--388

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allard
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brownback
     Bryant (TX)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Coleman
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Conyers
     Cooley
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (TX)
     Filner
     Flake
     Flanagan
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fox
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Frost
     Funderburk
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee
     Jacobs
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Johnston
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     King
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lincoln
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Meyers

[[Page H9150]]

     Mica
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Paxon
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reed
     Regula
     Richardson
     Riggs
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Schroeder
     Scott
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stump
     Stupak
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                                NAYS--2

     Martinez
     Stockman
       

                             NOT VOTING--44

     Barrett (WI)
     Brown (FL)
     Bryant (TN)
     Callahan
     Chapman
     Clyburn
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Condit
     Danner
     Dixon
     Dornan
     Fields (LA)
     Ford
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Gejdenson
     Gibbons
     Holden
     Jefferson
     Kaptur
     Kingston
     Lantos
     LaTourette
     Lewis (GA)
     McCarthy
     Mfume
     Mineta
     Moakley
     Neumann
     Oberstar
     Parker
     Pryce
     Reynolds
     Roberts
     Rose
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Sisisky
     Torkildsen
     Tucker
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Wise

                              {time}  1117

  Mr. FOGLIETTA changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________