[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 150 (Monday, September 25, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S14156-S14199]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1996

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will turn 
to the pending business.
  The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 2099) making appropriations for the 
     Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
     Development, and for sundry independent agencies, boards, 
     commissions, corporations, and offices for fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1996, and for other purposes.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the bill. which had been reported 
from the Committee on Appropriations, with amendments; as follows:

  (The parts of the bill intended to be stricken are shown in boldface 
brackets and the parts of the bill intended to be inserted are shown in 
italic.)

                               H.R. 2099

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Departments of 
     Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for 
     sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, 
     corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1996, and for other purposes, namely:

                                TITLE I

                     DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

                    Veterans Benefits Administration


                       compensation and pensions

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the payment of compensation benefits to or on behalf of 
     veterans as authorized by law (38 U.S.C. 107, chapters 11, 
     13, 51, 53, 55, and 61); pension benefits to or on behalf of 
     veterans as authorized by law (38 U.S.C. chapters 15, 51, 53, 
     55, and 61; 92 Stat. 2508); and burial benefits, emergency 
     and other officers' retirement pay, adjusted-service credits 
     and certificates, payment of premiums due on commercial life 
     insurance policies guaranteed under the provisions of Article 
     IV of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of 1940, as 
     amended, and for other benefits as authorized by law (38 
     U.S.C. 107, 1312, 1977, and 2106, chapters 23, 51, 53, 55, 
     and 61; 50 U.S.C. App. 540-548; 43 Stat. 122, 123; 45 Stat. 
     735; 76 Stat. 1198); $17,649,972,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That not to exceed [$25,180,000] 
     $27,431,000 of the amount appropriated shall be reimbursed to 
     ``General operating expenses'' and ``Medical care'' for 
     necessary expenses in implementing those provisions 
     authorized in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, 
     and in the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1992 (38 U.S.C. chapters 
     51, 53, and 55), the funding source for which is specifically 
     provided as the ``Compensation and pensions'' appropriation: 
     Provided further, That such sums as may be earned on an 
     actual qualifying patient basis, shall be reimbursed to 
     ``Medical facilities revolving fund'' to augment the funding 
     of individual medical facilities for nursing home care 
     provided to pensioners as authorized by the Veterans' 
     Benefits Act of 1992 (38 U.S.C. chapter 55): Provided 
     further, That $12,000,000 previously transferred from 
     ``Compensation and pensions'' to ``Medical facilities 
     revolving fund'' shall be transferred to this heading.


                         Readjustment Benefits

       For the payment of readjustment and rehabilitation benefits 
     to or on behalf of veterans as authorized by law (38 U.S.C. 
     chapters 21, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 39, 51, 53, 55, and 61), 
     $1,345,300,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That funds shall be available to pay any court order, court 
     award or any compromise settlement arising from litigation 
     involving the vocational training program authorized by 
     section 18 of Public Law 98-77, as amended.

                   veterans insurance and indemnities

       For military and naval insurance, national service life 
     insurance, servicemen's indemnities, service-disabled 
     veterans insurance, and veterans mortgage life insurance as 
     authorized by law (38 U.S.C. chapter 19; 70 Stat. 887; 72 
     Stat. 487) $24,890,000, to remain available until expended.


                 Guaranty and Indemnity Program Account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, such sums as 
     may be necessary to carry out the purpose of the program, as 
     authorized by 38 U.S.C. chapter 37, as amended: Provided, 
     That such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, 
     shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974, as amended.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct and guaranteed loan programs, $65,226,000, which may 
     be transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.


                     Loan Guaranty Program Account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, such sums as 
     may be necessary to carry out the purpose of the program, as 
     authorized by 38 U.S.C. chapter 37, as amended: Provided, 
     That such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, 
     shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974, as amended.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct and guaranteed loan programs, $52,138,000, which may 
     be transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.


                      Direct Loan Program Account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, such sums as may be necessary 
     to carry out the purpose of the program, as authorized by 38 
     U.S.C. chapter 37, as amended: Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended: Provided further, That during 1996, within 
     the resources available, not to exceed $300,000 in gross 
     obligations for direct loans are authorized for specially 
     adapted housing loans (38 U.S.C. chapter 37).
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct loan program, $459,000, which may be transferred to 
     and merged with the appropriation for ``General operating 
     expenses''.


                  Education Loan Fund Program Account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, $1,000, as authorized by 38 
     U.S.C. 3698, as amended: Provided, That such costs, including 
     the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in 
     section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as 
     amended: Provided further, That these funds are available to 
     subsidize gross obligations for the principal amount of 
     direct loans not to exceed $4,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the direct loan program, $195,000, which may be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.
     
[[Page S 14157]]



            Vocational Rehabilitation Loans Program Account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, $54,000, as authorized by 38 
     U.S.C. chapter 31, as amended: Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended: Provided further, That these funds are 
     available to subsidize gross obligations for the principal 
     amount of direct loans not to exceed $1,964,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the direct loan program, $377,000, which may be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.


          Native American Veteran Housing Loan Program Account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For administrative expenses to carry out the direct loan 
     program authorized by 38 U.S.C. chapter 37, subchapter V, as 
     amended, $205,000, which may be transferred to and merged 
     with the appropriation for ``General operating expenses''.

                     Veterans Health Administration


                              medical care

       For necessary expenses for the maintenance and operation of 
     hospitals, nursing homes, and domiciliary facilities; for 
     furnishing, as authorized by law, inpatient and outpatient 
     care and treatment to beneficiaries of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, including care and treatment in facilities 
     not under the jurisdiction of the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs, and furnishing recreational facilities, supplies, 
     and equipment; funeral, burial, and other expenses incidental 
     thereto for beneficiaries receiving care in Department of 
     Veterans Affairs facilities; administrative expenses in 
     support of planning, design, project management, real 
     property acquisition and disposition, construction and 
     renovation of any facility under the jurisdiction or for the 
     use of the Department of Veterans Affairs; oversight, 
     engineering and architectural activities not charged to 
     project cost; repairing, altering, improving or providing 
     facilities in the several hospitals and homes under the 
     jurisdiction of the Department of Veterans Affairs, not 
     otherwise provided for, either by contract or by the hire of 
     temporary employees and purchase of materials; uniforms or 
     allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-
     5902); aid to State homes as authorized by law (38 U.S.C. 
     1741); and not to exceed $8,000,000 to fund cost comparison 
     studies as referred to in 38 U.S.C. 8110(a)(5); 
     [$16,777,474,000] $16,450,000,000, plus reimbursements: 
     Provided, That of the funds made available under this 
     heading, $789,000,000 is for the equipment and land and 
     structures object classifications only, which amount shall 
     not become available for obligation until August 1, 1996, and 
     shall remain available for obligation until September 30, 
     1997: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, any veteran eligible for hospital care or 
     medical services under section 1710 of title 38 may be 
     treated in the most efficient manner.


                    medical and prosthetic research

       For necessary expenses in carrying out programs of medical 
     and prosthetic research and development as authorized by law 
     (38 U.S.C. chapter 73), to remain available until September 
     30, 1997, [$251,743,000] $257,000,000, plus reimbursements.


                [health professional scholarship program

       [For payment of health professional scholarship program 
     grants, as authorized by law, to students who agree to a 
     service obligation with the Department of Veterans Affairs at 
     one of its medical facilities, $10,386,000.]


      medical administration and miscellaneous operating expenses

       For necessary expenses in the administration of the 
     medical, hospital, nursing home, domiciliary, construction, 
     supply, and research activities, as authorized by law; 
     administrative expenses in support of planning, design, 
     project management, architectural, engineering, real property 
     acquisition and disposition, construction and renovation of 
     any facility under the jurisdiction or for the use of the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, including site acquisition; 
     engineering and architectural activities not charged to 
     project cost; and research and development in building 
     construction technology; $63,602,000, plus reimbursements.


                   Transitional Housing Loan Program

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, $7,000, as authorized by 
     Public Law 102-54, section 8, which shall be transferred from 
     the ``General post fund'': Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended: Provided further, That these funds are 
     available to subsidize gross obligations for the principal 
     amount of direct loans not to exceed $70,000. In addition, 
     for administrative expenses to carry out the direct loan 
     program, $54,000, which shall be transferred from the 
     ``General post fund'', as authorized by Public Law 102-54, 
     section 8.

                      Departmental Administration


                       General Operating Expenses

       For necessary operating expenses of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, not otherwise provided for, including 
     uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by law; not to 
     exceed $25,000 for official reception and representation 
     expenses; hire of passenger motor vehicles; and reimbursement 
     of the General Services Administration for security guard 
     services, and the Department of Defense for the cost of 
     overseas employee mail; [$821,487,000] $880,000,000: 
     Provided, That funds under this heading shall be available to 
     administer the Service Members Occupational Conversion and 
     Training Act: Provided further, That the $25,500,000 
     earmarked in Public Law 103-327 for the acquisition of 
     automated data processing equipment and services to support 
     the modernization program of the Veterans Benefits 
     Administration is available for any expense authorized to be 
     funded under this heading: Provided further, That none of the 
     funds under this heading (including funds referred to in the 
     preceding proviso) may be obligated or expended for the 
     acquisition of automated data processing equipment and 
     services for Department of Veterans Affairs regional offices 
     to support Stage III of the automated data equipment 
     modernization program of the Veterans Benefits 
     Administration.


                        National Cemetery System

       For necessary expenses for the maintenance and operation of 
     the National Cemetery System not otherwise provided for, 
     including uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by 
     law; cemeterial expenses as authorized by law; purchase of 
     three passenger motor vehicles, for use in cemeterial 
     operations; and hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
     $72,604,000.


                      Office of Inspector General

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, $30,900,000.


                      Construction, Major Projects

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For constructing, altering, extending and improving any of 
     the facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, or for any of the purposes 
     set forth in sections 316, 2404, 2406, 8102, 8103, 8106, 
     8108, 8109, 8110, and 8122 of title 38, United States Code, 
     including planning, architectural and engineering services, 
     maintenance or guarantee period services costs associated 
     with equipment guarantees provided under the project, 
     services of claims analysts, offsite utility and storm 
     drainage system construction costs, and site acquisition, 
     where the estimated cost of a project is $3,000,000 or more 
     or where funds for a project were made available in a 
     previous major project appropriation, [$183,455,000] 
     $35,785,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That except for advance planning of projects funded through 
     the advance planning fund and the design of projects funded 
     through the design fund, none of these funds shall be used 
     for any project which has not been considered and approved by 
     the Congress in the budgetary process: Provided further, That 
     funds provided in this appropriation for fiscal year 1996, 
     for each approved project shall be obligated (1) by the 
     awarding of a construction documents contract by September 
     30, 1996, and (2) by the awarding of a construction contract 
     by September 30, 1997: Provided further, That the Secretary 
     shall promptly report in writing to the Comptroller General 
     and to the Committees on Appropriations any approved major 
     construction project in which obligations are not incurred 
     within the time limitations established above; and the 
     Comptroller General shall review the report in accordance 
     with the procedures established by section 1015 of the 
     Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (title X of Public Law 93-
     344): Provided further, That no funds from any other account 
     except the ``Parking revolving fund'', may be obligated for 
     constructing, altering, extending, or improving a project 
     which was approved in the budget process and funded in this 
     account until one year after substantial completion and 
     beneficial occupancy by the Department of Veterans Affairs of 
     the project or any part thereof with respect to that part 
     only: Provided further, That of the funds made available 
     under this heading in Public Law 103-327, $7,000,000 shall be 
     transferred to the ``Parking revolving fund''.


                      Construction, Minor Projects

       For constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of 
     the facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, including planning, 
     architectural and engineering services, maintenance or 
     guarantee period services costs associated with equipment 
     guarantees provided under the project, services of claims 
     analysts, offsite utility and storm drainage system 
     construction costs, and site acquisition, or for any of the 
     purposes set forth in sections 316, 2404, 2406, 8102, 8103, 
     8106, 8108, 8109, 8110, and 8122 of title 38, United States 
     Code, where the estimated cost of a project is less than 
     $3,000,000, [$152,934,000] $190,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended, along with unobligated balances of previous 
     ``Construction, minor projects'' appropriations which are 
     hereby made available for any project where the estimated 
     cost is less than $3,000,000: Provided, That funds in this 
     account shall be available for (1) repairs to any of the 
     nonmedical facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use 
     of the Department of Veterans Affairs which are necessary 
     because of loss or damage caused by any natural disaster or 
     catastrophe, and (2) temporary measures necessary to prevent 
     or to minimize further loss by such causes.
     
[[Page S 14158]]



                         Parking Revolving Fund

       For the parking revolving fund as authorized by law (38 
     U.S.C. 8109), income from fees collected, to remain available 
     until expended. Resources of this fund shall be available for 
     all expenses authorized by 38 U.S.C. 8109 except operations 
     and maintenance costs which will be funded from ``Medical 
     care''.


       grants for construction of state extended care facilities

       For grants to assist the several States to acquire or 
     construct State nursing home and domiciliary facilities and 
     to remodel, modify or alter existing hospital, nursing home 
     and domiciliary facilities in State homes, for furnishing 
     care to veterans as authorized by law (38 U.S.C. 8131-8137), 
     $47,397,000, to remain available until expended.


        grants for the construction of state veterans cemeteries

       For grants to aid States in establishing, expanding, or 
     improving State veteran cemeteries as authorized by law (38 
     U.S.C. 2408), $1,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 1998.


                       administrative provisions

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 101. Any appropriation for 1996 for ``Compensation and 
     pensions'', ``Readjustment benefits'', and ``Veterans 
     insurance and indemnities'' may be transferred to any other 
     of the mentioned appropriations.
       Sec. 102. Appropriations available to the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs for 1996 for salaries and expenses shall be 
     available for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
       Sec. 103. No part of the appropriations in this Act for the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs (except the appropriations for 
     ``Construction, major projects'', ``Construction, minor 
     projects'', and the ``Parking revolving fund'') shall be 
     available for the purchase of any site for or toward the 
     construction of any new hospital or home.
       Sec. 104. No part of the foregoing appropriations shall be 
     available for hospitalization or examination of any persons 
     except beneficiaries entitled under the laws bestowing such 
     benefits to veterans, unless reimbursement of cost is made to 
     the appropriation at such rates as may be fixed by the 
     Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
       Sec. 105. Appropriations available to the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 1996 for ``Compensation and 
     pensions'', ``Readjustment benefits'', and ``Veterans 
     insurance and indemnities'' shall be available for payment of 
     prior year accrued obligations required to be recorded by law 
     against the corresponding prior year accounts within the last 
     quarter of fiscal year 1995.
       Sec. 106. Appropriations accounts available to the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 1996 shall be 
     available to pay prior year obligations of corresponding 
     prior year appropriations accounts resulting from title X of 
     the Competitive Equality Banking Act, Public Law 100-86, 
     except that if such obligations are from trust fund accounts 
     they shall be payable from ``Compensation and pensions''.
       Sec. 107. (a) Effective October 1, 1995, section 5505 of 
     title 38, United States Code, as in effect when repealed by 
     section 1201(g)(4)(A) of Public Law 103-446 (108 Stat. 4687), 
     is hereby reenacted and, as so reenacted, is amended by 
     striking out ``September 30, 1992'' in subsection (c) and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 1996''.
       (b) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 55 of 
     such title is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     item:

``5505. Limitation on compensation payments for certain incompetent 
              veterans.''.

       Sec. 108. Chapter 19 of title 38, United States Code, is 
     amended as follows:
       (1) Section 1920 is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), by inserting ``, and for the 
     reimbursement of administrative costs under subsection (c)'' 
     before the period at the end of the second sentence; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c)(1) For each fiscal year for which this subsection is 
     in effect, the Secretary shall, from the National Service 
     Life Insurance Fund, reimburse the `General operating 
     expenses' account of the Department for the amount of 
     administrative costs determined under paragraph (2) for that 
     fiscal year. Such reimbursement shall be made from any 
     surplus earnings for that fiscal year that are available for 
     dividends on such insurance after claims have been paid and 
     actuarially determined reserves have been set aside. However, 
     if the amount of such administrative costs exceeds the amount 
     of such surplus earnings, such reimbursement shall be made 
     only to the extent of such surplus earnings.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall determine the administrative 
     costs to the Department for a fiscal year for which this 
     subsection is in effect which, in the judgment of the 
     Secretary, are properly allocable to the provision of 
     National Service Life Insurance (and to the provision of any 
     total disability income insurance added to the provision of 
     such insurance).
       ``(3) This subsection shall be in effect only with respect 
     to fiscal year 1996.''.
       (2) Section 1923 is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), by inserting ``, and for the 
     reimbursement of administrative costs under subsection (d)'' 
     before the period at the end of the last sentence; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d)(1) For each fiscal year for which this subsection is 
     in effect, the Secretary shall, from the Veterans' Special 
     Life Insurance Fund, reimburse the `General operating 
     expenses' account of the Department for the amount of 
     administrative costs determined under paragraph (2) for that 
     fiscal year. Such reimbursement shall be made from any 
     surplus earnings for that fiscal year that are available for 
     dividends on such insurance after claims have been paid and 
     actuarially determined reserves have been set aside. However, 
     if the amount of such administrative costs exceeds the amount 
     of such surplus earnings, such reimbursement shall be made 
     only to the extent of such surplus earnings.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall determine the administrative 
     costs to the Department for a fiscal year for which this 
     subsection is in effect which, in the judgment of the 
     Secretary, are properly allocable to the provision of 
     Veterans' Special Life Insurance (and to the provision of any 
     total disability income insurance added to the provision of 
     such insurance).
       ``(3) This subsection shall be in effect only with respect 
     to fiscal year 1996.''.
       (3) Section 1955 is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), by inserting ``, and for the 
     reimbursement of administrative costs under subsection (c)'' 
     before the period at the end of the first sentence; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c)(1) For each fiscal year for which this subsection is 
     in effect, the Secretary shall, from the United States 
     Government Life Insurance Fund, reimburse the `General 
     operating expenses' account of the Department for the amount 
     of administrative costs determined under paragraph (2) for 
     that fiscal year. Such reimbursement shall be made from any 
     surplus earnings for that fiscal year that are available for 
     dividends on such insurance after claims have been paid and 
     actuarially determined reserves have been set aside. However, 
     if the amount of such administrative costs exceeds the amount 
     of such surplus earnings, such reimbursement shall be made 
     only to the extent of such surplus earnings.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall determine the administrative 
     costs to the Department for a fiscal year for which this 
     subsection is in effect which, in the judgment of the 
     Secretary, are properly allocable to the provision of United 
     States Government Life Insurance (and to the provision of any 
     total disability income insurance added to the provision of 
     such insurance).
       ``(3) This subsection shall be in effect only with respect 
     to fiscal year 1996.''.
       (4) Section 1982 is amended by striking out ``The United 
     States'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``Except as provided 
     in sections 1920(c), 1923(d), and 1955(c) of this title, the 
     United States''.
       Sec. 109. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary of Veterans Affairs is authorized to transfer, 
     without compensation or reimbursement, the jurisdiction and 
     control of a parcel of land consisting of approximately 6.3 
     acres, located on the south edge of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs Medical and Regional Office Center, Wichita, 
     Kansas, including buildings Nos. 8 and 30 and other 
     improvements thereon, to the Secretary of Transportation for 
     the purpose of expanding and modernizing United States 
     Highway 54: Provided, That if necessary, the exact acreage 
     and legal description of the real property transferred shall 
     be determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary of 
     Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Transportation shall 
     bear the cost of such survey: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary of Transportation shall be responsible for all 
     costs associated with the transferred land and improvements 
     thereon, and compliance with all existing statutes and 
     regulations: Provided further, That the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs and the Secretary of Transportation may require such 
     additional terms and conditions as each Secretary considers 
     appropriate to effectuate this transfer of land.
       Sec. 110. Funds available to the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs Revolving Supply Fund shall be available until 
     September 30, 1997, for expenses necessary to establish a 
     Department wide program to develop and implement a Federal 
     acquisition computer network required by section 9001 of the 
     Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-
     355).

                                TITLE II

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                            Housing Programs


               annual contributions for assisted housing

       [For assistance under the United States Housing Act of 
     1937, as amended (``the Act'' herein) (42 U.S.C. 1437), not 
     otherwise provided for, $10,182,359,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That none of the funds made 
     available under the head ``Annual contributions for assisted 
     housing'' in this Act or any prior Act shall be expended if 
     such expenditure would cause total fiscal year 1996 
     expenditures to exceed $19,939,311,000: Provided further, 
     That the Secretary shall report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations every 90 days on the implementation of the 
     spending limitation in the preceding proviso: Provided 
     further, That of the total amount provided under this head, 
     $100,000,000 shall be for the development or acquisition cost 
     of public housing for Indian families, including amounts for 
     housing under the mutual help homeownership opportunity 
     program under section 202 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1437bb): 
     Provided further, That 

[[Page S 14159]]
     of the total amount provided under this head, $2,500,000,000 shall be 
     for modernization of existing public housing projects 
     pursuant to section 14 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1437l): Provided 
     further, That during fiscal year 1996, the Secretary may 
     direct any public housing agency that receives any part of 
     the foregoing amount, to use such amount, or any other amount 
     that has been made available in this or any other prior Act 
     for public housing under this head or for the HOPE VI/Urban 
     Revitalization Demonstration Program, and that has not been 
     obligated by the agency, to demolish, reconfigure, or reduce 
     the density of any public housing project owned by the 
     agency: Provided further, That of the amounts earmarked under 
     this head for modernization of existing public housing 
     projects, $15,000,000 shall be used for the Tenant 
     Opportunity Program: Provided further, That of the total 
     amount provided under this head, $862,125,000 shall be 
     available for non-incremental rental assistance under the 
     section 8 housing voucher program under section 8(o) of the 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)): Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, voucher 
     assistance provided under the preceding proviso may be used 
     in connection with legislation enacted after the effective 
     date of this Act that authorizes assistance for such purpose, 
     as determined by the Secretary: Provided further, That of the 
     total amount provided under this head, $1,440,770,000 shall 
     be for special needs housing: Provided further, That the 
     amount earmarked under the preceding proviso shall be for 
     capital advances, including amendments to capital advance 
     contracts, for housing for the elderly, as authorized by 
     section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended, and for 
     project rental assistance, and amendments to contracts for 
     project rental assistance, for supportive housing for the 
     elderly under section 202(c)(2) of the Housing Act of 1959, 
     as amended; capital advances, including amendments to capital 
     advance contracts, and project rental assistance, including 
     amendments to contracts for project rental assistance, for 
     supportive housing for persons with disabilities, as 
     authorized by section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act; and housing opportunities for persons 
     with AIDS under title VIII, subtitle D of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act: Provided further, 
     That of the funds earmarked in this appropriations Act for 
     special needs housing, the Secretary may waive any provision 
     of section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 and section 811 of 
     the National Affordable Housing Act (including the provisions 
     governing the terms and conditions of project rental 
     assistance) that the Secretary determines is not necessary to 
     achieve the objectives of these programs, or that otherwise 
     impedes the ability to develop, operate or administer 
     projects assisted under these programs, and may make 
     provision for alternative conditions or terms where 
     appropriate: Provided further, That the Secretary may use up 
     to $200,000,000 from unobligated carryover balances under 
     this heading as of September 30, 1995, for assistance for 
     State or local units of government, tenant and nonprofit 
     organizations to purchase projects where owners have 
     indicated an intention to prepay mortgages and for assistance 
     to be used as an incentive to prevent prepayment or for 
     vouchers to aid eligible tenants adversely affected by 
     mortgage prepayment, as authorized under preservation 
     legislation enacted subsequent to this Act: Provided further, 
     That of the total amount provided under this head, 
     $10,000,000 shall be for the lead-based paint hazard 
     reduction program as authorized under section 1053 of the 
     Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992: 
     Provided further, That of the total amount provided under 
     this head, $17,300,000 shall be available for fees for 
     coordinators under section 23(h)(1) for the Family Self-
     sufficiency Program (42 U.S.C. 1437u): Provided further, That 
     of the total amount provided under this head, $4,641,589,000 
     shall be for assistance under the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437) for use in connection with expiring 
     or terminating section 8 subsidy contracts: Provided further, 
     That such amounts shall be merged with funds referenced in 
     section 204 of this title: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may reserve 
     amounts available for the renewal of assistance under section 
     8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 and may use such 
     amounts, upon the termination or expiration of a contract for 
     assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (other than a contract for tenant-based assistance 
     and notwithstanding section 8(v) of such Act for loan 
     management assistance), to provide voucher assistance under 
     section 8(o) of such Act in the market area for a number of 
     eligible families equal to the number of units covered by the 
     terminated or expired contract, which assistance shall be in 
     accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the 
     Secretary: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, assistance reserved under the preceding 
     proviso may be used in connection with any provision of 
     Federal law enacted after the enactment of this Act that 
     authorizes the use of rental assistance amounts in connection 
     with such terminated or expired contracts: Provided further, 
     That of the total amount provided under this head, 
     $610,575,000 shall be for amendments to section 8 contracts 
     other than contracts for projects developed under section 202 
     of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended.]
       For assistance under the United States Housing Act of 1937, 
     as amended (``the Act'' herein) (42 U.S.C. 1437), not 
     otherwise provided for, $5,594,358,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That of the total amount provided 
     under this head, $200,000,000 shall be for the development or 
     acquisition cost of public housing for Indian families, 
     including amounts for housing under the mutual help 
     homeownership opportunity program under section 202 of the 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1437bb): Provided further, That of the total 
     amount provided under this head, $2,510,000,000 shall be for 
     modernization of existing public housing projects pursuant to 
     section 14 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1437l), including up to 
     $30,000,000 for the inspection of public housing units, 
     contract expertise, and training and technical assistance, 
     directly or indirectly, under grants, contracts, or 
     cooperative agreements, to assist in the oversight and 
     management of public and Indian housing (whether or not the 
     housing is being modernized with assistance under this 
     proviso) or tenant-based assistance, including, but not 
     limited to, an annual resident survey, data collection and 
     analysis training and technical assistance by or to officials 
     and employees of the Department and of public housing 
     agencies and to residents in connection with the public and 
     Indian housing program and support of a public housing 
     institution to provide such training, technical assistance, 
     and education, and training and technical assistance to 
     assist public housing agencies in avoiding designation as 
     troubled agencies and in qualifying for removal of such 
     designation: Provided further, That of the total amount 
     provided under this head, $240,000,000 shall be for new 
     incremental rental subsidy contracts under the section 8 
     existing housing certificate program and the housing voucher 
     program under section 8 of the Act, except that such amounts 
     shall be used only for units necessary to provide housing 
     assistance for residents to be relocated from existing 
     federally subsidized or assisted housing, for replacement 
     housing for units demolished or disposed of (including units 
     to be disposed of pursuant to a homeownership program under 
     section 5(h) or title III of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937) from the public housing inventory, for funds related to 
     litigation settlements or court orders, for the conversion of 
     section 23 projects to assistance under section 8, and for 
     public housing agencies to implement allocation plans 
     approved by the Secretary for designated housing, and for 
     funds to carry out the family unification program: Provided 
     further, That of the total amount provided under this head, 
     $500,000,000 shall be for amendments to section 8 contracts 
     other than contracts for projects developed under section 202 
     of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended; $261,000,000 shall be 
     for section 8 assistance and rehabilitation grants for 
     property disposition; and $624,000,000 shall be for 
     assistance for State or local units of government (including 
     public housing authorities), tenant and nonprofit 
     organizations to purchase projects where owners have 
     indicated an intention to prepay mortgages and for assistance 
     to be used as an incentive to prevent prepayment or for 
     vouchers (not to exceed $74,000,000) to aid eligible tenants 
     adversely affected by mortgage prepayment, as authorized in 
     the Emergency Low-Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987, as 
     amended: Provided further, That of the foregoing amount, up 
     to $20,000,000 shall be available for preservation technical 
     assistance grants pursuant to section 253 of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1987, as amended, and that the 
     Secretary may designate funding to carry out plan of actions 
     approved prior to October 1, 1995, to permit purchases of 
     projects by non-profit organizations or tenant organizations, 
     which are awaiting funding, and which, to the Secretary's 
     satisfaction, will be unable to be closed without immediate 
     obligation of funding heretofore applied for and approved: 
     Provided further, That with respect to the $624,000,000 
     appropriated in the preceding proviso, if the Secretary 
     determines that the demand for funding may exceed amounts 
     available for such funding, the Secretary (1) may determine 
     priorities for distributing available funds, including the 
     discretion to give priority funding to tenants displaced due 
     to mortgage prepayment and to projects that have not yet been 
     funded but to which funding has been committed; and (2) may 
     impose a temporary moratorium on applications by potential 
     recipients of such funding: Provided further, That during 
     fiscal year 1996, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development may manage and dispose of multifamily properties 
     owned by the Secretary and multifamily mortgages held by the 
     Secretary as of October 1, 1995 without regard to any other 
     proviso of law: Provided further, That 50 per centum of the 
     amounts of budget authority, or in lieu thereof 50 per centum 
     of the cash amounts associated with such budget authority, 
     that are recaptured from projects described in section 
     1012(a) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance 
     Amendments Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-628, 102 Stat. 3224, 
     3268) shall be rescinded, or in the case of cash, shall be 
     remitted to the Treasury, and such amounts of budget 
     authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or remitted to 
     the Treasury shall be used by State housing finance agencies 
     or local governments or local housing agencies with projects 
     approved by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     for which settlement occurred after January 1, 1992, in 
     accordance with such section: Provided further, That of the 
     total amount provided under this head, $171,000,000 shall be 
     for housing opportunities for persons with AIDS under title 
     VIII, subtitle D of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act; and $75,000,000 shall be for the lead-based 
     paint hazard reduction program as authorized under sections 
     1011 and 1053 of the Residential Lead-Based Hazard Reduction 
     Act of 1992.

[[Page S 14160]]

       Of the total amount provided under this head, $780,190,000 
     shall be for capital advances, including amendments to 
     capital advance contracts, for housing for the elderly, as 
     authorized by section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, as 
     amended, and for project rental assistance, and amendments to 
     contracts for project rental assistance, for supportive 
     housing for the elderly under section 202(c)(2) of the 
     Housing Act of 1959; and $233,168,000 shall be for capital 
     advances, including amendments to capital advance contracts, 
     for supportive housing for persons with disabilities, as 
     authorized by section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act; and for project rental assistance, 
     and amendments to contracts for project rental assistance, 
     for supportive housing for persons with disabilities as 
     authorized by section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act: Provided, That the Secretary may 
     waive any provision of section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 
     and section 811 of the National Affordable Housing Act 
     (including the provisions governing the terms and conditions 
     of project rental assistance) that the Secretary determines 
     is not necessary to achieve the objectives of these programs, 
     or that otherwise impedes the ability to develop, operate or 
     administer projects assisted under these programs, and may 
     make provision for alternative conditions or terms where 
     appropriate.


public housing demolition, site revitalization, and replacement housing 
                                 grants

       For grants to public housing agencies for the purpose of 
     enabling the demolition of obsolete public housing projects 
     or portions thereof, the revitalization (where appropriate) 
     of sites (including remaining public housing units) on which 
     such projects are located, replacement housing which will 
     avoid or lessen concentrations of very low-income families, 
     and tenant-based assistance in accordance with section 8 of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937 for the purpose of 
     providing replacement housing and assisting tenants to be 
     displaced by the demolition, $500,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That the Secretary shall 
     award such funds to public housing agencies by a competition 
     which includes among other relevant criteria the local and 
     national impact of the proposed demolition and revitalization 
     activities and the extent to which the public housing agency 
     could undertake such activities without the additional 
     assistance to be provided hereunder: Provided further, That 
     eligible expenditures hereunder shall be those expenditures 
     eligible under section 8 and section 14 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f and l): Provided 
     further, That the Secretary may impose such conditions and 
     requirements as the Secretary deems appropriate to effectuate 
     the purpose of this paragraph: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary may require an agency selected to receive funding 
     to make arrangements satisfactory to the Secretary for use of 
     an entity other than the agency to carry out this program 
     where the Secretary determined that such action will help to 
     effectuate the purpose of this paragraph: Provided further, 
     That in the event an agency selected to receive funding does 
     not proceed expeditiously as determined by the Secretary, the 
     Secretary shall withdraw any unobligated balances of funding 
     made available pursuant to this paragraph and distribute such 
     funds to one or more other eligible agencies: Provided 
     further, That of the foregoing $500,000,000, the Secretary 
     may use up to .67 per centum for technical assistance, to be 
     provided directly or indirectly by grants, contracts or 
     cooperative agreements, including training and cost of 
     necessary travel for participants in such training, by or to 
     officials and employees of the Department and of public 
     housing agencies and residents: Provided further, That any 
     replacement housing provided with assistance under this head 
     shall be subject to section 18(f) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as amended by section 201(b)(2) of this 
     Act.


   assistance for the renewal of expiring section 8 subsidy contracts

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For assistance under the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437) not otherwise provided for, for use in 
     connection with expiring section 8 subsidy contracts, 
     $4,350,862,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That to the extent the amount in this appropriation is 
     insufficient to fund all expiring section 8 contracts, the 
     Secretary may transfer to and merge with this appropriation 
     such amounts from the ``Annual contributions for assisted 
     housing'' appropriation as the Secretary shall determine, and 
     amounts earmarked in the foregoing account may be reduced 
     accordingly, at the Secretary's discretion: Provided further, 
     That the Secretary may maintain consolidated accounting data 
     for funds disbursed at the public housing agency or Indian 
     housing authority or project level for subsidy assistance 
     regardless of the source of the disbursement so as to 
     minimize the administrative burden of multiple accounts: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary may determine not to 
     apply section 8(o)(6)(B) of the Act to renewals of housing 
     vouchers during fiscal year 1996.


                         flexible subsidy fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       From the fund established by section 236(g) of the National 
     Housing Act, as amended, all uncommitted balances of excess 
     rental charges as of September 30, 1995, and any collections 
     during fiscal year 1996 shall be transferred, as authorized 
     under such section, to the fund authorized under section 201 
     (j) of the Housing and Community Development Amendments of 
     1978, as amended.


                       rental housing assistance

                              (rescission)

       The limitation otherwise applicable to the maximum payments 
     that may be required in any fiscal year by all contracts 
     entered into under section 236 of the National Housing Act 
     (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1) is reduced in fiscal year 1996 by not 
     more than $2,000,000 in uncommitted balances of 
     authorizations provided for this purpose in appropriations 
     Acts: Provided, That up to $163,000,000 of recaptured section 
     236 budget authority resulting from the prepayment of 
     mortgages subsidized under section 236 of the National 
     Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1) shall be rescinded in fiscal 
     year 1996.


         payments for operation of low-income housing projects

       For payments to public housing agencies and Indian housing 
     authorities for operating subsidies for low-income housing 
     projects as authorized by section 9 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1437g), 
     [$2,500,000,000] $2,800,000,000.


             drug elimination grants for low-income housing

       For grants to public and Indian housing agencies for use in 
     eliminating crime in public housing projects authorized by 42 
     U.S.C. 11901-11908, and for drug information clearinghouse 
     services authorized by 42 U.S.C. 11921-11925, $290,000,000, 
     to remain available until expended, of which $10,000,000 
     shall be for grants, technical assistance, contracts and 
     other assistance training, program assessment, and execution 
     for or on behalf of public housing agencies and resident 
     organizations (including the cost of necessary travel for 
     participants in such training): Provided, That after setting 
     aside amounts in 42 U.S.C. 11909(b) for grants for federally 
     assisted low-income housing, the Secretary, notwithstanding 
     42 U.S.C. 11904, may provide grants through a formula taking 
     into account the needs of public housing agencies for anti-
     crime funding, and the amount of funding public housing 
     agencies have received under this heading during fiscal years 
     1993, 1994, and 1995, but which does not exclude an eligible 
     agency that has not received funding during that period: 
     Provided further, That the term ``drug-related crime'', as 
     defined in 42 U.S.C. 11905(2), shall also include other types 
     of crime as determined by the Secretary.


                  home investment partnerships program

       For the HOME investment partnerships program, as authorized 
     under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act (Public Law 101-625), as amended, $1,400,000,000, 
     to remain available until expended.


                     [Housing Counseling Assistance

       [For contracts, grants, and other assistance, other than 
     loans, not otherwise provided for, for providing counseling 
     and advice to tenants and homeowners--both current and 
     prospective--with respect to property maintenance, financial 
     management, and such other matters as may be appropriate to 
     assist them in improving their housing conditions and meeting 
     the responsibilities of tenancy or homeownership, including 
     provisions for training and for support of voluntary agencies 
     and services as authorized by section 106 of the Housing and 
     Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, $12,000,000, 
     notwithstanding section 106(c)(9) and section 106(d)(13), of 
     such Act.]


           Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, $3,000,000, as authorized 
     by section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act 
     of 1992 (106 Stat. 3739): Provided, That such costs, 
     including the costs of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended: Provided further, That these funds are 
     available to subsidize total loan principal, any part of 
     which is to be guaranteed, not to exceed $36,900,000.

                          Homeless Assistance


                       Homeless Assistance Grants

       For grants awarded or allocated by the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development, through a competition or by formula, 
     for the purpose of providing housing and services for 
     homeless individuals and families to be delivered by entities 
     eligible to receive assistance under, and to fund eligible 
     activities described in, the emergency shelter grants program 
     (as authorized under subtitle B of title IV of the Stewart B. 
     McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (Public Law 100-77), as 
     amended); the supportive housing program (as authorized under 
     subtitle C of title IV of such Act); the section 8 moderate 
     rehabilitation single room occupancy program (as authorized 
     under the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended) to 
     assist homeless individuals pursuant to section 441 of the 
     Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act; and the shelter 
     plus care program (as authorized under subtitle F of title IV 
     of such Act)[; and the innovative homeless initiatives 
     demonstration program (as described in sections 2(a)-2(f) of 
     the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (Public Law 103-120)), 
     $676,000,000] $760,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended. To the extent the Secretary determines to use a 
     formula under this heading, the Secretary shall use the 
     existing formula as provided under the Emergency Shelter 
     Grants program under section 413 of the Stewart B. McKinney 
     Homeless Assistance Act and promulgate any rules under the 
     rulemaking procedures under section 553 of title 5, United 
     States Code. The Secretary shall report, within one year of 
     the date of enactment, on ways to merge the homeless 
     assistance programs under the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
     Assistance Act with the 

[[Page S 14161]]
     HOME program under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act.

                   Community Planning and Development


                      community development grants

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For grants to States and units of general local government 
     and for related expenses, not otherwise provided for, 
     necessary for carrying out a community development grants 
     program as authorized by title I of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5301), 
     $4,600,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 1998: 
     Provided, That [$46,000,000] $60,000,000 shall be available 
     for grants to Indian tribes pursuant to section 106(a)(1) of 
     the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended 
     (42 U.S.C. 5301), $2,000,000 shall be available as a grant to 
     the Housing Assistance Council, $1,000,000 shall be available 
     as a grant to the National American Indian Housing Council, 
     and [$19,500,000] $27,000,000 shall be available for 
     ``special purpose grants'' pursuant to section 107 of such 
     Act: Provided further, That not to exceed 20 per centum of 
     any grant made with funds appropriated herein (other than a 
     grant using funds under section 107(b)(3) of such Act shall 
     be expended for ``Planning and Management Development'' and 
     ``Administration'' as defined in regulations promulgated by 
     the Department of Housing and Urban Development: Provided 
     further, That section 105(a)(25) of such Act, as added by 
     section 907(b)(1) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act, shall continue to be effective after 
     September 30, 1995, notwithstanding section 907(b)(2) of such 
     Act.
       Of the amount provided under this heading, the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development may use up to $80,000,000 for 
     grants to public and Indian housing agencies for a supportive 
     services program to assist residents of public and assisted 
     housing and former residents of such housing receiving 
     tenant-based assistance under section 8 of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1437f) become self-sufficient: Provided, That the 
     program shall provide supportive services to the elderly and 
     the disabled and to families with children where the head of 
     household would benefit from the receipt of supportive 
     services and is working, seeking work, or is preparing for 
     work by participating in job training or educational 
     programs: Provided, That the supportive services shall 
     include coordinated educational, training, and other 
     supportive services, including academic skills training, job 
     search assistance, assistance related to retaining 
     employment, vocational and entrepreneurship development and 
     support programs, transportation, and child care: Provided 
     further, That the Secretary shall require applicants to 
     demonstrate firm commitments of funding or services from 
     other sources: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
     select public and Indian housing agencies to receive 
     assistance under this head on a competitive basis, taking 
     into account the quality of the proposed program (including 
     any innovative approaches), the extent of the proposed 
     coordination of supportive services, the extent of 
     commitments of funding or services from other sources, the 
     extent to which the proposed program includes reasonably 
     achievable, quantifiable goals for measuring performance 
     under the program over a three-year program, the extent of 
     success an agency has had in carrying out other comparable 
     initiatives, and other appropriate criteria established by 
     the Secretary: Provided further, That of the amount made 
     available under this paragraph, $12,000,000 shall be 
     available for contracts, grants, and other assistance, other 
     than loans, not otherwise provided for, for providing 
     counseling and advice to tenants and homeowners both current 
     and prospective, with respect to property maintenance, 
     financial management, and such other matters as may be 
     appropriate to assist them in improving their housing 
     conditions and meeting the responsibilities of tenancy or 
     homeownership, including provisions for training and for 
     support of voluntary agencies and services as authorized by 
     section 106 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, 
     as amended, notwithstanding section 106(c)(9) and section 
     106(d)(13) of such Act. Of the amount provided under this 
     heading, notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     $40,000,000 shall be available for youthbuild program 
     activities authorized by subtitle D of title IV of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, as 
     amended, and shall be an eligible activity with respect to 
     any funds made available under this heading. Of the amount 
     provided under this heading, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, $80,000,000 shall be available for Economic 
     Development Initiative grants as authorized by section 232 of 
     the Multifamily Housing Property Disposition Reform Act of 
     1994, Public Law 103-233, on a competitive basis as required 
     by section 102 of the HUD Reform Act.
       For the cost of guaranteed loans, [$10,500,000] 
     $15,750,000, as authorized by section 108 of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1974: Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, as amended: Provided further, That these funds are 
     available to subsidize total loan principal, any part of 
     which is to be guaranteed, not to exceed [$1,000,000,000] 
     $1,500,000,000. In addition, for administrative expenses to 
     carry out the guaranteed loan program, [$225,000] $675,000 
     which shall be transferred to and merged with the 
     appropriation for departmental salaries and expenses.

                    Policy Development and Research


                        research and technology

       For contracts, grants, and necessary expenses of programs 
     of research and studies relating to housing and urban 
     problems, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by title 
     V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970, as 
     amended (12 U.S.C. 1701z-1 et seq.), including carrying out 
     the functions of the Secretary under section 1(a)(1)(i) of 
     Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1968, $34,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 1997.

                  [Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity


                        fair housing activities

       [For contracts, grants, and other assistance, not otherwise 
     provided for, as authorized by title VIII of the Civil Rights 
     Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 
     1988, $30,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     1997.]

                     Management and Administration


                         Salaries and Expenses

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For necessary administrative and nonadministrative expenses 
     of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, not 
     otherwise provided for, including not to exceed $7,000 for 
     official reception and representation expenses, 
     [$951,988,000] $980,777,000, of which [$505,745,000] 
     $532,782,000 shall be provided from the various funds of the 
     Federal Housing Administration, and [$8,824,000] $9,101,000 
     shall be provided from funds of the Government National 
     Mortgage Association, and [$225,000] $675,000 shall be 
     provided from the Community Development Grants Program 
     account.


                      Office of Inspector General

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, [$47,388,000] $48,251,000, of which 
     [$10,961,000] $11,283,000 shall be transferred from the 
     various funds of the Federal Housing Administration.

            [Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight


                         [salaries and expenses

                     [(including transfer of funds)

       [For carrying out the Federal Housing Enterprise Financial 
     Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, $14,895,000, to remain 
     available until expended, from the Federal Housing Enterprise 
     Oversight Fund: Provided, That such amounts shall be 
     collected by the Director as authorized by section 1316 (a) 
     and (b) of such Act, and deposited in the Fund under section 
     1316(f) of such Act.]

                     Federal Housing Administration


             fha--mutual mortgage insurance program account

                     (including transfers of funds)

       During fiscal year 1996, commitments to guarantee loans to 
     carry out the purposes of section 203(b) of the National 
     Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed a loan principal of 
     $110,000,000,000: Provided, That during fiscal year 1996, the 
     Secretary shall sell assigned mortgage notes having an unpaid 
     principal balance of up to $4,000,000,000, which notes were 
     orginally insured under section 203(b) of the National 
     Housing Act: Provided further, That an amount equal to any 
     negative subsidies resulting from the sale of such assigned 
     mortgage notes during fiscal year 1996 may be added to and 
     merged with funds otherwise provided relating to the 
     disposition of properties or notes under this heading, as may 
     be allocated by the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development.
       During fiscal year 1996, obligations to make direct loans 
     to carry out the purposes of section 204(g) of the National 
     Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed $200,000,000: 
     Provided, That the foregoing amount shall be for loans to 
     nonprofit and governmental entities in connection with sales 
     of single family real properties owned by the Secretary and 
     formerly insured under section 203 of such Act.
       For administrative expenses necessary to carry out the 
     guaranteed and direct loan program, [$308,846,000] 
     $341,595,000, to be derived from the FHA-mutual mortgage 
     insurance guaranteed loans receipt account, of which not to 
     exceed [$308,290,000] $334,483,000 shall be transferred to 
     the appropriation for departmental salaries and expenses; and 
     of which not to exceed [$6,790,000] $7,112,000 shall be 
     transferred to the appropriation for the Office of Inspector 
     General.

             fha--general and special risk program account


                     (including transfers of funds)

       [Total] For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by 
     sections 238 and 519 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1715z-3 and 1735c), including the cost of modifying such 
     loans, $100,000,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That such costs shall be as defined in section 502 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, 
     That these funds are available to subsidize total loan 
     principal any part of which is to be guaranteed [shall not] 
     of not to exceed [$15,000,000,000] $17,400,000,000: 
     [Provided,] Provided further, That during fiscal year 1996, 
     the Secretary shall sell assigned notes having an unpaid 
     principal balance of up to $4,000,000,000, which notes were 
     originally obligations of the funds established under 
     sections 238 and 519 of the National Housing Act: Provided 
     further, That an amount equal to any negative subsidies 
     resulting from the sale of such assigned notes during fiscal 
     year 1996 may be added to and merged with funds otherwise 
     provided relating to the disposition of properties or notes 
     under this heading, including the credit subsidies associated 
     with the sale of such properties or notes with loan 
     guarantees and amounts otherwise available for credit 
     subsidies under this heading, as may be 

[[Page S 14162]]

     allocated by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development: 
     Provided further, That any amounts made available in any 
     prior appropriation Act for the cost (as such term is defined 
     in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974) of 
     guaranteed loans that are obligations of the funds 
     established under section 238 or 519 of the National Housing 
     Act that have not been [made available for obligation] 
     obligated or that are deobligated shall be available to the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in connection with 
     the making of such guarantees and shall remain available 
     until expended, notwithstanding the expiration of any period 
     of availability otherwise applicable to such amounts[: 
     Provided further, That any amounts of negative subsidy 
     resulting in fiscal year 1996 from the sales of assigned 
     mortgage notes or insurance actions that exceed the amounts 
     of negative subsidy determined to be generated during such 
     fiscal year, based on the assumptions specified in the 
     President's Budget for such fiscal year, shall be available 
     to the Secretary for the costs of any note sales or insurance 
     actions, without regard to whether the source of the negative 
     subsidy amount is a note sale or insurance action, and the 
     last proviso of this paragraph shall not apply to such 
     amounts so used in connection with insurance actions: 
     Provided further, That during fiscal year 1996, the Secretary 
     shall sell assigned mortgage notes having an unpaid principal 
     balance of up to $2,600,000,000, which notes were originally 
     obligations of the funds established under sections 238 and 
     519 of the National Housing Act: Provided further, That of 
     the amount appropriated herein, an amount equal to the lesser 
     of $52,000,000 or the excess of net proceeds above the value 
     of holding the loans to maturity, such value established 
     using assumptions specified in the President's fiscal year 
     1996 Budget adjusted for interest rates at the time of the 
     sale, shall become available only after such sale has been 
     completed.]
       [In addition, for the cost of guarantees for loans, as 
     authorized by sections 238 and 519 of the National Housing 
     Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-3 and 1735c), $69,620,000, Provided, 
     That such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, 
     shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974.]
       Gross obligations for the principal amount of direct loans, 
     as authorized by sections 204(g), 207(l), 238(a), and 519(a) 
     of the National Housing Act, shall not exceed $120,000,000; 
     of which not to exceed $100,000,000 shall be for bridge 
     financing in connection with the sale of multifamily real 
     properties owned by the Secretary and formerly insured under 
     such Act; and of which not to exceed $20,000,000 shall be for 
     loans to nonprofit and governmental entities in connection 
     with the sale of single-family real properties owned by the 
     Secretary and formerly insured under such Act.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the guaranteed and direct loan programs, [$197,470,000] 
     $202,470,000, of which [$197,455,000] $198,299,000 shall be 
     transferred to the appropriation for departmental salaries 
     and expenses; and of which $4,171,000 shall be transferred to 
     the appropriation for the Office of Inspector General.

                Government National Mortgage Association


guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account

                      (includes transfer of funds)

       During fiscal year 1996, new commitments to issue 
     guarantees to carry out the purposes of section 306 of the 
     National Housing Act, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1721(g)), shall 
     not exceed $110,000,000,000.
       For administrative expenses necessary to carry out the 
     guaranteed mortgage-backed securities program, [$8,824,000] 
     $9,101,000, to be derived from the GNMA--guarantees of 
     mortgage-backed securities guaranteed loan receipt account, 
     of which not to exceed [$8,824,000] $9,101,000 shall be 
     transferred to the appropriation for departmental salaries 
     and expenses.


                       administrative provisions

                     (including trensfer of funds)

       [Sec. 201. Public Housing. (a) Ceiling Rents.--
     Notwithstanding section 3(a) of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937, as amended, public housing agencies shall provide 
     that the amount of rent paid by a family occupying a dwelling 
     unit in public housing during fiscal year 1996 does not 
     exceed the maximum monthly rental amount, which shall be 
     established for the dwelling unit by the public housing 
     agency that owns or administers the unit and may not exceed 
     an amount determined by the agency based upon--
       [(1) the average, for dwelling units of similar size in 
     public housing developments owned and operated by such 
     agency, of any monthly amount of debt service and operating 
     expenses attributable to such units;
       [(2) the reasonable rental value of the unit; or
       [(3) the local market rent for comparable units of similar 
     size.
       [(b) Demolition and Disposition.--
       [(1) Inapplicability of replacement rule.--With respect to 
     any application under section 18 of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937, as amended, for the demolition or disposition of 
     public housing, including an application submitted under 
     paragraph (3), that is approved during fiscal year 1996, the 
     provisions of subsection (b)(3) of such section shall not 
     apply with respect to--
       [(A) the approval of such application; or
       [(B) the demolition or disposition of any public housing 
     pursuant to such application.
       [(2) Conforming provision.--The requirement under section 
     18(d) of such Act that a public housing agency satisfy the 
     conditions specified in section 18(b)(3) of such Act as a 
     condition of taking action to demolish or dispose of public 
     housing shall not apply with respect to any application under 
     such section 18 approved during such fiscal year.
       [(3) Authority to resubmit applications.--Any public 
     housing agency that, before fiscal year 1996, submitted to 
     the Secretary an application under section 18 of such Act for 
     demolition or disposition of public housing may (regardless 
     of whether such application has been approved) at any time 
     during fiscal year 1996 submit an application subject to the 
     provisions of this subsection that covers some or all of the 
     property covered by such previous application and, to the 
     extent the same property is covered by both applications, the 
     Secretary shall treat the latter application as replacing the 
     previous application.
       [(c) Applicability.--In accordance with section 201(b)(2) 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, the 
     provisions of this section shall apply to public housing 
     developed or oterated pursuant to a contract between the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and an Indian 
     housing authority.
       [Sec. 202. Rental Assistance Under Section 8 of United 
     States Housing Act of 1937. (a) Increase of Family Rental 
     Payment.--Notwithstanding sections 3(a) and 8(o)(2) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, effective for 
     fiscal year 1996--
       [(1) public housing agencies shall increase to 32 percent 
     the percentage of the family's monthly adjusted income used 
     in determining--
       [(A) the amount of monthly rent required to be paid by each 
     family who is assisted under the certificate or moderate 
     rehabilitation program under section 8 of such Act; and
       [(B) the amount of the monthly assistance payment for each 
     family who is assisted under the voucher program under 
     section 8 of such Act; and
       [(2) owners of housing assisted under other programs for 
     rental assistance under section 8 of such Act shall increase 
     to 32 percent the percentage of a family's adjusted monthly 
     income used in determining the rent required to be paid by 
     each family assisted under any such program.
       [(b) Minimum Rents.--Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this 
     section or sections 3(a) and 8(o)(2) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as amended, effective for fiscal year 
     1996 and no later than October 30, 1995--
       [(1) public housing agencies shall require each family who 
     is assisted under the certificate or moderate rehabilitation 
     program under section 8 of such Act to pay for monthly rent 
     an amount that is not less than the sum of $50 for the unit;
       [(2) public housing agencies shall reduce the monthly 
     assistance payment on behalf of each family who is assisted 
     under the voucher program under section 8 of such Act so that 
     the family pays for monthly rent an amount that is not less 
     than the sum of $50 for the unit; and
       [(3) owners of housing assisted under other programs for 
     rental assistance under section 8 of such Act shall require 
     each family who is assisted under such program to pay for 
     monthly rent an amount that is not less than the sum of $50 
     for the unit.
       [(c) Fair Market Rentals.--The Secretary shall establish 
     fair market rentals for purposes of section 8(c)(1) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, that shall be 
     effective for fiscal year 1996 and shall be based on the 40th 
     percentile rent of rental distributions of standard quality 
     rental housing units. In establishing such fair market 
     rentals, the Secretary shall consider only the rents for 
     dwelling units occupied by recent movers and may not consider 
     the rents for public housing dwelling units or newly 
     constructed rental dwelling units.
       [(d) Annual Adjustments.--Section 8(c)(2)(A) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 
     q437f(c)(2)(A))!is further amended--
       [(1) in the third sentence by inserting ``and fiscal year 
     1996'' after ``1995''; and
       [(2) in the last sentence by inserting ``and fiscal year 
     1996'' after ``1995''.
       [(e) Administrative Fees.--Notwithstanding the second 
     sentence of section 8(q)(1) of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937, as amended, for fiscal year 1996, the portions of 
     the fees for costs incurred by public housing agencies in 
     administering the certificate, voucher, and moderate 
     rehabilitation programs under section 8 shall not exceed 7.0 
     percent of the fair market rental estaflished for a 2-bedroom 
     existing rental dwelling unit in the market area of the 
     public housing agency.
       [(f) Delay of Issuance and Reissuance of Vouchers and 
     Certificates.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a 
     public housing agency administering certificate or voucher 
     assistance provided under subsection (b) or (o) of section 8 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, shall 
     delay--
       [(1) until October 1, 1996, the initial issuance of any 
     such tenant-based assistance representing incremental 
     assistance allocated in fiscal year 1996; and
       [(2) for 6 months, the use of any amounts of such 
     assistance (or the certificate or voucher representing 
     assistance amounts) made available by the termination during 
     fiscal year 1996 of such assistance on behalf of any family 
     for any reason, but not later than October 1, 1996.

[[Page S 14163]]

       [Sec. 203. Preferences for Housing Assistance. (a) Public 
     Housing.--
       [(1) In general.--During fiscal year 1996, dwelling units 
     in public housing that are available for occupancy shall be 
     made available--
       [(A) without regard to the requirements regarding 
     preferences set forth in section 6(c)(4)(A) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, as amended; and
       [(B) subject to a system of preferences that the public 
     housing agency for the public housing may establish, which 
     shall be based upon local housing needs and priorities, as 
     determined by the agency.
       [(2) Applicability.--Paragraph (1)(B) shall not apply to 
     projects or portions of projects designated for occupancy 
     pursuant to section 7(a) of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937, as amended, for which the Secretary has determined that 
     application of such paragraph would result in excessive 
     delays in meeting the housing need of such families. In 
     accordance with section 201(b)(2) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as amended, the provisions of this 
     subsection shall apply to public housing developed or 
     operated pursuant to a contract between the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development and an Indian housing 
     authority.
       [(b) Section 8 Assistance.--During fiscal year 1996, the 
     selection of families for assistance under section 8 of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended--
       [(1) shall not be subject to the requirements regarding 
     preferences set forth in sections 8(d)(1)(A) and 8(o)(3)(B) 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended; and
       [(2) shall be subject to a system of preferences that may 
     be established by the public housing agency administering 
     such assistance, which shall be based upon local housing 
     needs and priorities, as determined by the agency.
       [(c) Conforming Provisions.--Each reference in sections 
     6(o), 7(a)(2), 7(a)(3), 8(d)(2)(A), 8(d)(2)(H), 16(c), and 
     24(e)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
     amended, sections 212(a)(3), 217(c)(2)(B), 225(d)(3), 
     455(a)(2)(D)(iii), 522(f)(6)(B), and 522(j)(2)(A) of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, section 
     226(b)(6)(B) of the Low-Income Housing Preservation and 
     Resident Homeownership Act of 1990, section r03(g)(2) of the 
     Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978, and 
     section 655 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1992, to the preferences under section 6(c)(4)(A), 
     8(d)(1)(A), or 8(o)(3)(B) of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937, as amended, shall be considered, during fiscal year 
     1996, to refer to the applicable preferences established (if 
     any) under the subsections (a)(1)(B) and (b)(2).
       [(d) New Construction/Substantial Rehabilitation Housing.--
     During fiscal year 1996, dwelling units in housing 
     constructed or substantially rehabilitated pursuant to 
     assistance provided under section 8(b)(2) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, as amended (as such section 
     existed before October 1, 1983) and projects financed under 
     section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (as such section 
     existed before the enactment of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
     National Affordable Housing Act) shall be made available for 
     occupancy without regard to section 545(c) of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act and no other 
     provision of law relating to Federal tenant selection 
     preferences shall apply to such housing.
       [(e) Rent Supplements.--During fiscal year 1996, section 
     101(k) of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 shall 
     not be effective.
       [Sec. 204. Merger Language for Assistance for the Renewal 
     of Expiring Section 8 of Subsidy Contracts and Annual 
     Contributions for Assisted Housing.--All remaining obligated 
     and unobligated balances in the Renewal of Expiring Section 8 
     Subsidy Contracts account on September 30, 1995, shall 
     immediately thereafter be transferred to and merged with the 
     obligated and unobligated balances, respectively, of the 
     Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing account.
       [Sec. 205. Extension of Home Equity Conversion Mortgage 
     Program.--Section 255(g) of the National Housing Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1715z-20(g)) is amended--
       [(1) in the first sentence, by striking ``September 30, 
     1995'' and inserting ``September 30, 1996''; and
       [(2) in the second sentence, by striking ``25,000'' and 
     inserting ``30,000''.
       [Sec. 206. Debt Forgiveness.--(a) The Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development shall cancel the indebtedness of the 
     Hubbard Hospital Authority of Hubbard, Texas, relating to the 
     public facilities loan for Project Number PFL-TEX-215, issued 
     under title II of the Housing Amendments of 1955. Such 
     hospital authority is relieved of all liability to the 
     Government for the outstanding principal balance on such 
     loan, for the amount of accrued interest on such loan, and 
     for any fees and charges payable in connection with such 
     loan.
       [(b) The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall 
     cancel the indebtedness of the Groveton Texas Hospital 
     Authority relating to the public facilities loan for Project 
     Number TEX-41-PFL0162, issued under title II of the Housing 
     Amendments of 1955. Such hospital authority is relieved of 
     all liability to the Government for the outstanding principal 
     balance on such loan, for the amount of accrued interest on 
     such loan, and for any fees and charges payable in connection 
     with such loan.
       [Sec. 207. Delaying Outlays for Public Housing 
     Development.--During fiscal year 1996, a public housing 
     agency or Indian housing authority may slow the rate at which 
     it develops a project that the Secretary has approved under 
     24 C.F.R. Part 941 in order to slow the rate at which such 
     agency or authority takes actions resulting in outlays of 
     amounts appropriated under the head ``Annual contributions 
     for assisted housing'' in this title or any prior 
     appropriation Act, and the Secretary may allow such agency or 
     authority to develop a project at such a slow rate, 
     notwithstanding 24 C.F.R. Sec. 941.405(d).
       [Sec. 208. Assessment Collection Dates for Office of 
     Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.--Section 1316(b) of the 
     Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 
     4516(b)) is amended by striking paragraph (2) and inserting 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Timing of payment.--The annual assessment shall be 
     payable semiannually for each fiscal year, on October 1st and 
     April 1st.''.
       [Sec. 209. Spending Limitations.--(a) None of the funds 
     provided in this Act may be used during fiscal year 1996 to 
     sign, promulgate, implement, or enforce any requirement or 
     regulation relating to the application of the Fair Housing 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 3601, et seq.) to the business of property 
     insurance, or for any activity pertaining to property 
     insurance.
       [(b) None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 
     expended by the Department for the purpose of finalizing the 
     Department's proposed rule dated July 21, 1994 regarding 
     amendments to Regulation X, the Real Estate Settlement 
     Procedures Regulation, or for the purpose of developing or 
     issuing any interpretive rule with respect to any of the four 
     issues denominated in the preamble to the proposed rule.
       [(c) None of the funds provided in this Act may be used in 
     fiscal year 1996 for the remuneration of more than seven 
     Assistant Secretaries at the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development, notwithstanding section 4(a) of the Department 
     of Housing and Urban Development Act.
       [(d) None of the funds provided in this Act may be used in 
     fiscal year 1996 for the remuneration of more than 94 
     schedule C and non-career senior executive service employees 
     at the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
       [(e) None of the funds made available in this Act may be 
     used by the Secretary to take, impose, or enforce, or to 
     investigate taking, imposing, or enforcing any action, 
     sanction, or penalty against any State or unit of general 
     local government (or any entity or agency thereof) because of 
     the enactment, enforcement, or effectiveness of any State or 
     local law or regulation requiring the spoken or written use 
     of the English language or declaring English as the official 
     language.
       [(f) No part of any appropriation contained in this Act 
     shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not 
     authorized by the Congress.
       [Sec. 210. Clarifications.--For purposes of Federal law, 
     the Paul Mirabile Center in San Diego, California, including 
     areas within such Center that are devoted to the delivery of 
     supportive services, has been determined to satisfy the 
     ``continuum of care'' requirements of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development, and shall be treated as:
       [(a) consisting solely of residential units that (i) 
     contain sleeping accommodations and kitchen and bathroom 
     facilities, (ii) are located in a building that is used 
     exclusively to facilitate the transition of homeless 
     individuals (within the meaning of section 103 of the Stewart 
     B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.W.C. 11302)) to 
     independent living within 24 months, (iii) are suitable for 
     occutancy, with each cubicle constituting a separate bedroom 
     and residential unit, (iv) are used on other than a transient 
     basis, and (v) shall be originally placed in service on 
     August 1, 1995; and
       [(b) property that is entirely residential rental property, 
     namely, a project for residential rental property.
       [Sec. 211. Extension of Multifamily Housing Finance 
     Programs.--(a) Section 542(b)(5) of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1707 note) is amended by 
     striking ``on not more than 15,000 units over fiscal years 
     1993 and 1994'' and inserting ``on not more than 7,500 units 
     during fiscal year 1996''.
       [(b) Section 542(c)(4) of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1707 note) is amended by 
     striking ``on not to exceed 30,000 units over fiscal years 
     1993, 1994, and 1995'' and inserting ``on not more than 
     10,000 units during fiscal year 1996''.
       [Sec. 212. Documentation of Multifamily Refinancings.--
     Notwithstanding the 16th paragraph under the item relating to 
     ``ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS'' in title II of the Departments 
     of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and 
     Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1995 (Public Law 
     103-327; 108 Stat. 2316), the amendments to section 223(a)(7) 
     of the National Housing Act made by the 15th paragraph of 
     such Act shall be effective during fiscal years 1996 and 
     thereafter.]

     SEC. 201. EXTEND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS FROM THE 
                   RESCISSION ACT.

       (a) Public and Indian Housing Modernization.--
       (1) Expansion of use of modernization funding.--Subsection 
     14(q) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(q)(1) In addition to the purposes enumerated in sections 
     14(a), 14(b), and 5(a), a public 

[[Page S 14164]]
     housing agency may use modernization assistance provided under section 
     14, and development assistance provided under section 5(a), 
     for any eligible activity authorized by either of those 
     sections or by applicable Appropriations Acts, including the 
     demolition, rehabilitation, revitalization, and replacement 
     of existing units and projects and, for up to 10 percent of 
     its allocation of such funds in any fiscal year, for any 
     operating subsidy purpose authorized in section 9. Units and 
     projects assisted hereunder shall be for low-income families 
     and shall be eligible for operating subsidies subject to the 
     availability of appropriated funds.
       ``(2) A public housing agency may provide assistance to 
     developments that include units for other than low-income 
     families, hereinafter called ``mixed income developments'', 
     in the form of a grant, loan, or other form of investment 
     which may be made to: (A) the public housing agency or an 
     affiliate controlled by it; (B) a partnership, a limited 
     liability company, or other legal entity in which the public 
     housing agency or its affiliate is a general partner, 
     managing member, or otherwise significantly directs the 
     activities of such entity; or (C) any entity which grants to 
     the public housing agency the option to purchase the 
     development within 20 years after initial occupancy in 
     accordance with section 42(l)(7) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986, as amended: Provided, That units shall be made 
     available in such developments for periods of not less than 
     20 years, by master contract or by individual lease, for 
     occupancy by low-income families referred from time to time 
     by the public housing agency; the number of such units shall 
     be either: (i) in the same proportion to the total number of 
     units in such development that the financial assistance 
     provided by the public housing agency bears to the total 
     equity investment in the development, or (ii) not be less 
     than the number of units that could have been developed under 
     the conventional public housing program with the assistance 
     involved, or (iii) as may otherwise be approved by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(3) A mixed income development may elect to have all 
     units subject only to the applicable local real estate taxes, 
     notwithstanding that the low-income units assisted by public 
     housing funds would otherwise be subject to section 6(d) of 
     the Housing Act of 1937.''.
       (2) Extension of authority.--Section 1001(b) of the 
     Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Additional Disaster 
     Assistance, for Antiterrorism Initiatives, for Assistance in 
     the Recovery from the Tragedy that Occurred at Oklahoma City, 
     and Rescissions Act, 1995 (109 Stat. 235), is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(b) Applicability.--Section 14(q) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as added by subsection (a) of this 
     section, shall be effective only with respect to assistance 
     provided from funds made available for fiscal year 1996 or 
     any preceding fiscal year.''.
       (3) Applicability.--In accordance with section 201(b)(2) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937, the amendment made by 
     subsection (a) shall apply to public housing developed or 
     operated pursuant to a contract between the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development and an Indian housing 
     authority.''.
       (b) One-for-One Replacement of Public and Indian Housing.--
       (1) Permanent authority.--Section 1002 of Public Law 104-19 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Subsections (a), (b), and (c) shall be effective for 
     applications for the demolition, disposition, or conversion 
     to homeownership of public housing approved by the Secretary, 
     and other consolidation and relocation activities of public 
     housing agencies undertaken on, before, or after September 
     30, 1995 and before September 30, 1996.''.
       (2) Section 18(f) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new sentence: 
     ``No one may rely on the preceding sentence as the basis for 
     reconsidering a final order of a court issued, or a 
     settlement approved by, a court.''.
       (3) Applicability.--In accordance with section 201(b)(2) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937, the amendments made by 
     this section and by sections 1002 (a), (b), and (c) of Public 
     Law 104-19 shall apply to public housing developed or 
     operated pursuant to a contract between the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development and an Indian housing 
     authority.

     SEC. 202. PUBLIC HOUSING RENTS AND INCOME TARGETING.

       (a) Minimum Rents.--Section 3(a)(1) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 is amended by inserting at the end the 
     following new sentence: ``Notwithstanding the previous 
     sentence, the Secretary shall permit a public housing agency 
     to charge a family residing in public housing up to $25 as 
     rent.''.
       (b) Establishment of Ceiling Rents.--Section 3(a)(2) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a public housing 
     agency may--
       ``(A) adopt ceiling rents that reflect the reasonable 
     market value of the housing, but that are not less than the 
     monthly costs--
       ``(i) to operate the housing of the agency; and
       ``(ii) to make a deposit to a replacement reserve (in the 
     sole discretion of the public housing agency); and
       ``(B) allow families to pay ceiling rents referred to in 
     subparagraph (A), unless, with respect to any family, the 
     ceiling rent established under this paragraph would exceed 
     the amount payable as rent by that family under paragraph 
     (1).''.
       (c) Definition of Adjusted Income.--Section 3(b)(5) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 is amended--
       (1) at the end of subparagraph (F), by striking ``and'';
       (2) at the end of subparagraph (G), by striking the period 
     and inserting ``; and ''; and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (G) the following:
       ``(H) for public housing, and other adjustments to earned 
     income established by the public housing agency.
     If a public housing agency adopts other adjustments to income 
     pursuant to subparagraph (H), the Secretary (i) shall not 
     take into account any reduction of or increase in the public 
     housing agency's per unit dwelling rental income resulting 
     from those adjustments when calculating the contributions 
     under section 9 for the public housing agency for the 
     operation of the public housing.''.
       (d) Repeal of Federal Preferences.--
       (1) Public housing.--
       (A) In general.--Section 6(c)(4)(A) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d(c)(4)(A)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(A) the establishment, after public notice and an 
     opportunity for public comment, of written system of 
     preferences for admission to public housing, if any, that is 
     not inconsistent with the comprehensive housing affordability 
     strategy under title I of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act;''.
       (B) Applicability.--In accordance with section 201(b)(2) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937, section 6(c)(4)(A) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended by 
     paragraph (1), shall apply to public housing developed or 
     operated pursuant to a contract between the Secretary and an 
     Indian housing authority.
       (2) Section 8 existing and moderate rehabilitation.--
     Section 8(d)(1)(A) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437f(d)(1)(A)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(A) the selection of tenants shall be the function of the 
     owner, subject to the provisions of the annual contributions 
     contract between the Secretary and the agency, except that 
     for the certificate and moderate rehabilitation programs 
     only, for the purpose of selecting families to be assisted, 
     the public housing agency may establish, after public notice 
     and an opportunity for public comment, written system of 
     preferences for selection that are not inconsistent with the 
     comprehensive housing affordability strategy under title I of 
     the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act;''.
       (3) Section 8 voucher program.--Section 8(o)(3)(B) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(3)(B)) 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(B) For the purpose of selecting families to be assisted 
     under this subsection, the public housing agency may 
     establish, after public notice and an opportunity for public 
     comment, written system of preferences for selection that are 
     not inconsistent with the comprehensive housing affordability 
     strategy under title I of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act.''.
       (4) Section 8 new construction and substantial 
     rehabilitation.--
       (A) Repeal.--Section 545(c) of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
     National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f note) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) [Reserved.]''.
       (B) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, no Federal tenant selection preferences shall apply with 
     respect to--
       (i) housing constructed or substantially rehabilitated 
     pursuant to assistance provided under section 8(b)(2) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (as such section existed on 
     the day before October 1, 1983); or
       (ii) projects financed under section 202 of the Housing Act 
     of 1959 (as such section existed on the day before the date 
     of enactment of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act).
       (5) Rent supplements.--Section 101(k) of the Housing and 
     Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s(k)) is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(k) [Reserved.]''.
       (6) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) United states housing act of 1937.--The United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is amended--
       (i) in section 6(o), by striking ``preference rules 
     specified in'' and inserting ``written selection criteria 
     established pursuant to'';
       (ii) in section 7(a)(2), by striking ``according to the 
     preferences for occupancy under'' and inserting ``in 
     accordance with the written selection criteria established 
     pursuant to'';
       (iii) in section 7(a)(3), by striking ``who qualify for 
     preferences for occupancy under'' and inserting ``who meet 
     the written selection criteria established pursuant to'';
       (iv) in section 8(d)(2)(A), by striking the last sentence;
       (v) in section 8(d)(2)(H), by striking ``notwithstanding 
     subsection (d)(1)(A)(i), an'' and inserting ``An'';
       (vi) in section 16(c), in the second sentence, by striking 
     ``the system of preferences established by the agency 
     pursuant to section 6(c)(4)(A)(ii)'' and inserting ``the 
     written selection criteria established by the public housing 
     agency pursuant to section 6(c)(4)(A)''; and
       (vii) in section 24(e)--

       (I) by striking ``(e) Exceptions.'' and all that follows 
     through ``The Secretary may'' and inserting the following:

       ``(e) Exception to General Program Requirements.--The 
     Secretary may''; and

       (II) by striking paragraph (2).

       (B) Cranston-gonzalez national affordable housing act.--The 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 
     12704 et seq.) is amended--
       (i) in section 455(a)(2)(D)(iii), by striking ``would 
     qualify for a preference under'' and inserting ``meet the 
     written selection criteria established pursuant to'';
       (ii) in section 522(f)(6)(B), by striking ``any preferences 
     for such assistance under section 8(d)(1)(A)(i)'' and 
     inserting ``the written selection criteria established 
     pursuant to section 8(d)(1)(A)''; and

[[Page S 14165]]

       (C) Low-income housing preservation and resident 
     homeownership act of 1990.--The second sentence of section 
     226(b)(6)(B) of the Low-Income Housing Preservation and 
     Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (12 U.S.C. 4116(b)(6)(B)) 
     is amended by striking ``requirement for giving preferences 
     to certain categories of eligible families under'' and 
     inserting ``written selection criteria established pursuant 
     to''.
       (D) Housing and community development act of 1992.--Section 
     655 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42 
     U.S.C. 13615) is amended by striking ``preferences for 
     occupancy'' and all that follows through the period at the 
     end and inserting ``selection criteria established by the 
     owner to elderly families according to such written selection 
     criteria, and to near-elderly families according to such 
     written selection criteria, respectively.''.
       (E) References in other law.--Any reference in any Federal 
     law other than any provision of any law amended by paragraphs 
     (1) through (5) of this subsection to the preferences for 
     assistance under section 6(c)(4)(A)(i), 8(d)(1)(A)(i), or 
     8(o)(3)(B) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (as such 
     sections existed on the day before the date of enactment of 
     this Act) shall be considered to refer to the written 
     selection criteria established pursuant to section 
     6(c)(4)(A), 8(d)(1)(A), or 8(o)(3)(B), respectively, of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended by this 
     section.
       (e) Applicability.--In accordance with section 201(b)(2) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937, the amendments made by 
     subsections (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this section shall also 
     apply to public housing developed or operated pursuant to a 
     contract between the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development and an Indian housing authority.

     SEC. 203. CONVERSION OF CERTAIN PUBLIC HOUSING TO VOUCHERS.

       (a) Identification of Units.--
       (1) Each public housing agency shall identify any public 
     housing developments--
       (A) that are on the same or contiguous sites;
       (B) that total more than--
       (i) 600 dwelling units; or
       (ii) in the case of high-rise family buildings or 
     substantially vacant buildings, 300 dwelling units;
       (C) that have a vacancy rate of at least 10 percent for 
     dwelling units not in funded on-schedule modernization 
     programs;
       (D) identified as distressed housing that the public 
     housing agency cannot assure the long-term viability as 
     public housing through revitalization, density reduction, or 
     achievement of a broader range of household income; and
       (E) for which the estimated cost of continued operation and 
     modernization of the developments as public housing exceeds 
     the cost of providing tenant-based assistance under section 8 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937 for all families in 
     occupancy, based on appropriate indicators of cost (such as 
     the percentage of total development cost required for 
     modernization).
       (b) Implementation and Enforcement.--
       (1) Standards for implementation.--The Secretary shall 
     establish standards to permit implementation of this section 
     in fiscal year 1996.
       (2) Consultation.--Each public housing agency shall consult 
     with the applicable public housing tenants and the unit of 
     general local government in identifying any public housing 
     developments under subsection (a).
       (3) Failure of phas to comply with subsection (a).--Where 
     the Secretary determines that--
       (A) a public housing agency has failed under subsection (a) 
     to identify public housing developments for removal from the 
     inventory of the agency in a timely manner;
       (B) a public housing agency has failed to identify one or 
     more public housing developments which the Secretary 
     determines should have been identified under subsection (a); 
     or
       (C) one or more of the developments identified by the 
     public housing agency pursuant to subsection (a) should not, 
     in the determination of the Secretary, have been identified 
     under that subsection;
     the Secretary may designate the developments to be removed 
     from the inventory of the public housing agency pursuant to 
     this section.
       (c) Removal of Units From the Inventories of Public Housing 
     Agencies.--
       (1) Each public housing agency shall develop and carry out 
     a plan in conjunction with the Secretary for the removal of 
     public housing units identified under subsection (a) or 
     subsection (b)(3), over a period of up to five years, from 
     the inventory of the public housing agency and the annual 
     contributions contract. The plan shall be approved by the 
     relevant local official as consistent with the Comprehensive 
     Housing Affordability Strategy under title I of the Housing 
     and Community Development Act of 1992, including a 
     description of any disposition and demolition plan for the 
     public housing units.
       (2) The Secretary may extend the deadline in paragraph (1) 
     for up to an additional five years where the Secretary makes 
     a determination that the deadline is impracticable.
       (3) The Secretary shall take appropriate actions to ensure 
     removal of developments identified under subsection (a) from 
     the inventory of a public housing agency, if the public 
     housing agency fails to adequately develop a plan under 
     paragraph (1), or fails to adequately implement such plan in 
     accordance with the terms of the plan.
       (4) To the extent approved in appropriations, the Secretary 
     may establish requirements and provide funding under the 
     Urban Revitalization Demonstration program for demolition and 
     disposition of public housing under this section.
       (5) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if a 
     development is removed from the inventory of a public housing 
     agency and the annual contributions contract pursuant to 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary may authorize or direct the 
     transfer of--
       (A) in the case of an agency receiving assistance under the 
     comprehensive improvement assistance program, any amounts 
     obligated by the Secretary for the modernization of such 
     development pursuant to section 14 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937;
       (B) in the case of an agency receiving public and Indian 
     housing modernization assistance by formula pursuant to 
     section 14 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, any 
     amounts provided to the agency which are attributable 
     pursuant to the formula for allocating such assistance to the 
     development removed from the inventory of that agency; and
       (C) in the case of an agency receiving assistance for the 
     major reconstruction of obsolete projects, any amounts 
     obligated by the Secretary for the major reconstruction of 
     the development pursuant to section 5 of such Act,
     to the tenant-based assistance program of such agency.
       (d) Conversion to Tenant-Based Assistance.--
       (1) The Secretary shall make authority available to a 
     public housing agency to provide tenant-based assistance 
     pursuant to section 8 to families residing in any development 
     that is removed from the inventory of the public housing 
     agency and the annual contributions contract pursuant to 
     subsection (b).
       (2) Each conversion plan under subsection (c) shall--
       (A) require the agency to notify families residing in the 
     development, consistent with any guidelines issued by the 
     Secretary governing such notifications, that the development 
     shall be removed from the inventory of the public housing 
     agency and the families shall receive tenant-based or 
     project-based assistance, and to provide any necessary 
     counseling for families; and
       (B) ensure that all tenants affected by a determination 
     under this section that a development shall be removed from 
     the inventory of a public housing agency shall be offered 
     tenant-based or project-based assistance and shall be 
     relocated, as necessary, to other decent, safe, sanitary, and 
     affordable housing which is, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, housing of their choice.
       (e) In General.--
       (1) The Secretary may require a public housing agency to 
     provide such information as the Secretary considers necessary 
     for the administration of this section.
       (2) As used in this section, the term ``development'' shall 
     refer to a project or projects, or to portions of a project 
     or projects, as appropriate.
       (3) Section 18 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     shall not apply to the demolition of developments removed 
     from the inventory of the public housing agency under this 
     section.

     SEC. 204. STREAMLINING SECTION 8 TENANT-BASED ASSISTANCE.

       (a) ``Take-One, Take-All''.--Section 8(t) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 is hereby repealed.
       (b) Exemption From Notice Requirements for the Certificate 
     and Voucher Programs.--Section 8(c) of such Act is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (8), by inserting after ``section'' the 
     following: ``(other than a contract for assistance under the 
     certificate or voucher program)''; and
       (2) in the first sentence of paragraph (9), by striking 
     ``(but not less than 90 days in the case of housing 
     certificates or vouchers under subsection (b) or (o))'' and 
     inserting '', other than a contract under the certificate or 
     voucher program''.
       (c) Endless Lease.--Section 8(d)(1)(B) of such Act is 
     amended--
       (1) in clause (ii), by inserting ``during the term of the 
     lease,'' after ``(ii)''; and
       (2) in clause (iii), by striking ``provide that'' and 
     inserting ``during the term of the lease,''.
       Sec. 205. (a) Fair Market Rentals.--The Secretary shall 
     establish fair market rentals for purposes of section 8(c)(1) 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, that 
     shall be effective for fiscal year 1996 and shall be based on 
     the 40th percentile rent of rental distributions of standard 
     quality rental housing units. In establishing such fair 
     market rentals, the Secretary shall consider only the rents 
     for dwelling units occupied by recent movers and may not 
     consider the rents for public housing dwelling units or newly 
     constructed rental dwelling units.
       (b) Annual Adjustments.--Section 8(c)(2)(A) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 
     1437f(c)(2)(A)) is further amended--
       (1) in the third sentence by inserting ``and fiscal year 
     1996'' after ``1995'';
       (2) in the fourth sentence, strike ``For'' and insert: 
     ``Except for assistance under the certificate program, for'';
       (3) after the fourth sentence, insert:
     ``In the case of assistance under the certificate program, 
     0.01 shall be subtracted from the amount of the annual 
     adjustment factor (except that the factor shall not be 
     reduced to less than 1.0), and the adjusted rent shall not 
     exceed the rent for a comparable unassisted unit of similar 
     quality, type, and age in the same market area.''; and
       (4) in the last sentence, by
       (A) striking ``sentence'' and inserting ``two sentences'' 
     and
       (B) inserting ``and fiscal year 1996'' after ``1995''.
       (c) Administrative Fees.--Notwithstanding the second 
     sentence of section 8(q)(1) of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937, as amended, for fiscal year 1996, the portions of 
     the fees for costs incurred by public housing agencies in 
     administering the certificate, voucher, and moderate 
     rehabilitation programs under section 8 shall not exceed 7.0 
     percent of the fair market rental established for a 2-bedroom 
     existing rental dwelling unit in the market area of the 
     public housing agency.

[[Page S 14166]]

       (d) Delay of Issuance and Reissuance of Vouchers and 
     Certificates.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a 
     public housing agency administering certificate or voucher 
     assistance provided under subsection (b) or (o) of section 8 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, shall 
     delay for 6 months, the use of any amounts of such assistance 
     (or the certificate or voucher representing assistance 
     amounts) made available by the termination during fiscal year 
     1996 of such assistance on behalf of any family for any 
     reason, but not later than October 1, 1996; with the 
     exception of any certificates assigned or committed to 
     project based assistance as permitted otherwise by the Act, 
     accomplished prior to the effective date of this Act.

     SEC. 206. PUBLIC HOUSING/SECTION 8 MOVING TO WORK 
                   DEMONSTRATION.

       (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this demonstration is to give 
     public housing agencies and the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development the flexibility to design and test various 
     approaches for providing and administering housing assistance 
     that: reduce cost and achieve greater cost effectiveness in 
     Federal expenditures; give incentives to families with 
     children where the head of household is working, seeking 
     work, or is preparing for work by participating in job 
     training, educational programs, or programs that assist 
     people to obtain employment and become economically self-
     sufficient; and increase housing choices for lower-income 
     families.
       (b) Program Authority.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall conduct a demonstration program under this 
     section beginning in fiscal year 1996 under which up to 30 
     public housing agencies (including Indian housing 
     authorities) administering the public or Indian housing 
     program and the section 8 housing assistance payments program 
     may be selected by the Secretary to participate. The 
     Secretary shall provide training and technical assistance 
     during the demonstration and conduct detailed evaluations of 
     such agencies in an effort to identify replicable program 
     models promoting the purpose of the demonstration. Under the 
     demonstration, notwithstanding any provision of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 except as provided in subsection 
     (d), an agency may combine operating assistance provided 
     under section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, 
     modernization assistance provided under section 14 of such 
     Act, and assistance provided under section 8 of such Act for 
     the certificate and voucher programs, to provide housing 
     assistance for low-income families, as defined in section 
     3(b)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, and 
     services to facilitate the transition to work on such terms 
     and conditions as the agency may propose and the Secretary 
     may approve.
       (c) Application.--An application to participate in the 
     demonstration--
       (1) shall request authority to combine assistance under 
     sections 8, 9, and 14 of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937;
       (2) shall be submitted only after the public housing agency 
     provides for citizen participation through a public hearing 
     and, if appropriate, other means;
       (3) shall include a plan developed by the agency that takes 
     into account comments from the public hearing and any other 
     public comments on the proposed program, and comments from 
     current and prospective residents who would be affected, and 
     that includes criteria for--
       (A) selecting families to be assisted, which shall require 
     that at least 75 percent of the families selected to 
     participate in the demonstration shall be very low-income 
     families, as defined in section 3(b)(2) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, and at least 50 percent of the families 
     selected shall have incomes that do not exceed 30 percent of 
     the median family income for the area, as determined by the 
     Secretary with adjustments for smaller and larger families, 
     except that the Secretary may establish income ceilings 
     higher or lower than 30 percent of the median for the area on 
     the basis of the Secretary's findings that such variations 
     are necessary because of unusually high or low family income;
       (B) setting reasonable rents payable by families, which 
     shall be designed to encourage employment and self-
     sufficiency by participating families, consistent with the 
     purpose of this demonstration, such as by excluding some or 
     all of a family's earned income for purposes of determining 
     rent;
       (C) continuing to assist substantially the same total 
     number of eligible low-income families as would have been 
     served had the amounts not been combined;
       (D) maintaining a comparable mix of families (by family 
     size) as would have been provided had the amounts not been 
     used under the demonstration;
       (E) assuring that housing assisted under the demonstration 
     program meets housing quality standards established or 
     approved by the Secretary; and
       (F) other program design features required by the 
     Secretary.
       (4) may request assistance for training and technical 
     assistance to assist with design of the demonstration and to 
     agree to cooperate with detailed evaluation.
       (d) Selection.--In selecting among applications, the 
     Secretary shall take into account the potential of each 
     agency to plan and carry out a program under the 
     demonstration, the relative performance by an agency under 
     the public housing management assessment program under 
     section 6(j) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, and 
     other appropriate factors as determined by the Secretary.
       (e) Applicability of 1937 Act Provisions.--
       (1) Section 18 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     shall continue to apply to public housing notwithstanding any 
     use of the housing under this demonstration.
       (2) Section 12 of such Act shall apply to housing assisted 
     under the demonstration, other than housing occupied by 
     families receiving tenant-based assistance.
       (f) Effect on Section 8, Operating Subsidies, and 
     Comprehensive Grant Program Allocations.--The amount of 
     assistance received under section 8, section 9, or pursuant 
     to section 14 by a public housing agency participating in the 
     demonstration under this part shall not be affected by its 
     participation.
       (g) Records, Reports, and Audits.--
       (1) Keeping of records.--Each agency shall keep such 
     records as the Secretary may prescribe as reasonably 
     necessary to disclose the amounts and the disposition of 
     amounts under this demonstration, to ensure compliance with 
     the requirements of this section, and to measure performance.
       (2) Reports.--Each agency shall submit to the Secretary a 
     report, or series of reports, in a form and at a time 
     specified by the Secretary. Each report shall--
       (A) document the use of funds made available under this 
     section;
       (B) provide such data as the Secretary may request to 
     assist the Secretary in assessing the demonstration; and
       (C) describe and analyze the effect of assisted activities 
     in addressing the objectives of this part.
       (3) Access to documents by the secretary.--The Secretary 
     shall have access for the purpose of audit and examination to 
     any books, documents, papers, and records that are pertinent 
     to assistance in connection with, and the requirements of, 
     this section.
       (4) Access to documents by the comptroller general.--The 
     Comptroller General of the United States, or any of the duly 
     authorizedrepresentatives of the Comptroller General, shall 
     have access for the purpose of audit and examination to any 
     books, documents, papers, and records that are pertinent to 
     assistance in connection with, and the requirements of, this 
     section.
       (h) Evaluation and Report.--
       (1) Consultation with pha and family representatives.--In 
     making assessments throughout the demonstration, the 
     Secretary shall consult with representatives of public 
     housing agencies and residents.
       (2) Report to congress.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     end of the third year of the demonstration, the Secretary 
     shall submit to the Congress a final report evaluating the 
     programs carried out under the demonstration. The report 
     shall also include findings and recommendations for any 
     appropriate legislative action.
       (i) Funding for Technical Assistance and Evaluation.--From 
     amounts appropriated for assistance under section 14 of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 for fiscal years 1996, 
     1997, and 1998, the Secretary may use up to a total of 
     $5,000,000--
       (1) to provide, directly or by contract, training and 
     technical assistance--
       (A) to public housing agencies that express an interest to 
     apply for training and technical assistance pursuant to 
     subsection (c)(4), to assist them in designing programs to be 
     proposed for the demonstration; and
       (B) to up to 10 agencies selected to receive training and 
     technical assistance pursuant to subsection (c)(4), to assist 
     them in implementing the approved program; and
       (2) to conduct detailed evaluations of the activities of 
     the public housing agencies under paragraph (1)(B), directly 
     or by contract.

     SEC. 207. REPEAL OF PROVISIONS REGARDING INCOME DISREGARDS.

       (a) Maximum Annual Limitation on Rent Increases Resulting 
     From Employment.--Section 957 of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
     National Affordable Housing Act is hereby repealed, 
     retroactive to November 28, 1990, and shall be of no effect.
       (b) Economic Independence.--Section 923 of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1992 is hereby repealed, 
     retroactive to October 28, 1992, and shall be of no effect.

     SEC. 208. EXTENSION OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING FINANCE PROGRAMS.

       (a) The first sentence of section 542(b)(5) of the Housing 
     and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1707 note) 
     is amended by striking ``on not more than 15,000 units over 
     fiscal years 1993 and 1994'' and inserting ``on not more than 
     7,500 units during fiscal year 1996''.
       (b) The first sentence of section 542(c)(4) of the Housing 
     and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1707 note) 
     is amended by striking ``on not to exceed 30,000 units over 
     fiscal years 1993, 1994, and 1995'' and inserting ``on not 
     more than 10,000 units during fiscal year 1996''.

     SEC. 209. FORECLOSURE OF HUD-HELD MORTGAGES THROUGH THIRD 
                   PARTIES.

       During fiscal year 1996, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development may delegate to one or more entities the 
     authority to carry out some or all of the functions and 
     responsibilities of the Secretary in connection with the 
     foreclosure of mortgages held by the Secretary under the 
     National Housing Act.

     SEC. 210. RESTRUCTURING OF THE HUD MULTIFAMILY MORTGAGE 
                   PORTFOLIO THROUGH STATE HOUSING FINANCE 
                   AGENCIES.

       During fiscal year 1996, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development may sell or otherwise transfer multifamily 
     mortgages held by the Secretary under the National Housing 
     Act to a State housing finance agency without regard to the 
     unit limitations in section 542(b)(5) or 542(c)(4) of the 
     Housing and Community Development Act of 1992.

     SEC. 211. TRANSFER OF SECTION 8 AUTHORITY.

       (a) Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 is 
     amended by adding the following new subsection at the end:

[[Page S 14167]]

       ``(bb) Transfer of Budget Authority.--If a project-based 
     assistance contract under this section is terminated or is 
     not renewed, or if the contract expires, the Secretary shall, 
     in order to provide continued assistance to eligible 
     families, including eligible families receiving the benefit 
     of the project-based assistance at the time of the 
     termination, transfer any budget authority remaining in the 
     contract to another contract. The transfer shall be under 
     such terms as the Secretary may prescribe.''.

     SEC. 212. DOCUMENTATION OF MULTIFAMILY REFINANCINGS.

       Notwithstanding the 16th paragraph under the item relating 
     to ``administrative provisions'' in title II of the 
     Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
     Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     1995 (Public Law 103-327; 108 Stat. 2316), the amendments to 
     section 223(a)(7) of the National Housing Act made by the 
     15th paragraph of such Act shall be effective during fiscal 
     years 1996 and thereafter.

     SEC. 213. DEMONSTRATION AUTHORITY.

       (a) On and after October 1, 1995, the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development shall carry out a demonstration program 
     with respect to multifamily projects whose mortgages are 
     insured under the National Housing Act and that are assisted 
     under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 and 
     whose present section 8 rents are, in the aggregate, in 
     excess of 110 percent of the fair market rent of the locality 
     in which the project is located, including projects whose 
     section 8 contracts expire on or after October 1, 1996. These 
     programs shall be designed to test the feasibility and 
     desirability of the goal of ensuring, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, that the debt service and operating expenses, 
     including adequate reserves, attributable to such multifamily 
     projects whose mortgages are insured under the National 
     Housing Act and that are assisted under section 8 of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 and whose present section 8 
     contract rents are in excess of the fair market rent of the 
     locality in which the project is located can be supported 
     with and without mortgage insurance under the National 
     Housing Act and with and without above-market rents and 
     utilizing project based assistance or, with the consent of 
     the property owner and the residents, tenant based 
     assistance, while taking into account the need for assistance 
     of low and very low income families in such projects. In 
     carrying out this demonstration, the Secretary may use 
     arrangements with third parties, under which the Secretary 
     may provide for the assumption by the third parties (by 
     delegation, contract, or otherwise) of some or all of the 
     functions, obligations, and benefits of the Secretary.
       (1) Goals.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall carry out the demonstration programs under this section 
     in a manner that--
       (A) will protect the financial interests of the Federal 
     Government;
       (B) will result in significant discretionary cost savings 
     through debt restructuring and subsidy reduction; and
       (C) will, in the least costly fashion, address the goals 
     of--
       (i) maintaining existing housing stock in a decent, safe, 
     and sanitary condition;
       (ii) minimizing the involuntary displacement of tenants;
       (iii) restructuring the mortgages of such projects in a 
     manner that is consistent with local housing market 
     conditions;
       (iv) supporting fair housing strategies;
       (v) minimizing any adverse income tax impact on property 
     owners; and
       (vi) minimizing any adverse impact on residential 
     neighborhoods.
     In determining the manner in which a mortgage is to be 
     restructured or the subsidy reduced, the Secretary may 
     balance competing goals relating to individual projects in a 
     manner that will further the purposes of this section.
       (2) Demonstration approaches.--In carrying out the 
     demonstration programs, the Secretary may use one or more of 
     the following approaches:
       (A) Joint venture arrangements with third parties, under 
     which the Secretary may provide for the assumption by the 
     third parties (by delegation, contract, or otherwise) of some 
     or all of the functions, obligations, and benefits of the 
     Secretary.
       (B) Subsidization of the debt service of the project to a 
     level that can be paid by an owner receiving an unsubsidized 
     market rent.
       (C) Renewal of existing project-based assistance contracts 
     where the Secretary shall approve proposed initial rent 
     levels that do not exceed the greater of 120 percent of fair 
     market rents or comparable market rents for the relevant 
     metropolitan market area or at rent levels under a budget-
     based approach.
       (D) Nonrenewal of expiring existing project-based 
     assistance contracts and providing tenant-based assistance to 
     previously assisted households.
       (b) For purposes of carrying out demonstration programs 
     under subsection (a)--
       (1) the Secretary may manage and dispose of multifamily 
     properties owned by the Secretary as of October 1, 1995 and 
     multifamily mortgages held by the Secretary as of October 1, 
     1995 for properties assisted under section 8 with rents above 
     110 percent of fair market rents without regard to any other 
     provision of law; and
       (2) the Secretary may delegate to one or more entities the 
     authority to carry out some or all of the functions and 
     responsibilities of the Secretary in connection with the 
     foreclosure of mortgages held by the Secretary under the 
     National Housing Act.
       (c) For purposes of carrying out demonstration programs 
     under subsection (a), subject to such third party consents 
     (if any) as are necessary including but not limited to (i) 
     consent by the Government National Mortgage Association where 
     it owns a mortgage insured by the Secretary; (ii) consent by 
     an issuer under the mortgage-backed securities program of the 
     Association, subject to the responsibilities of the issuer to 
     its security holders and the Association under such program; 
     and (iii) parties to any contractual agreement which the 
     Secretary proposes to modify or discontinue, the Secretary or 
     one or more third parties designated by the Secretary may 
     take the following actions:
       (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary or third party may remove, relinquish, extinguish, 
     modify, or agree to the removal of any mortgage, regulatory 
     agreement, project-based assistance contract, use agreement, 
     or restriction that had been imposed or required by the 
     Secretary, including restrictions on distributions of income 
     which the Secretary or third party determines would interfere 
     with the ability of the project to operate without above 
     market rents. The Secretary or third party may require an 
     owner of a property assisted under the section 8 new 
     construction/substantial rehabilitation program to apply any 
     accumulated residual receipts toward effecting the purposes 
     of this section.
       (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may enter into 
     contracts to purchase reinsurance, or enter into 
     participations or otherwise transfer economic interest in 
     contracts of insurance or in the premiums paid, or due to be 
     paid, on such insurance to third parties, on such terms and 
     conditions as the Secretary may determine.
       (3) The Secretary may offer project-based assistance with 
     rents at or below fair market rents for the locality in which 
     the project is located and may negotiate such other terms as 
     are acceptable to the Secretary and the project owner.
       (4) If, after reducing rents as provided in subsection (3) 
     hereof, the project would be unable to pay full operating 
     costs (including normal operating expenses, reasonable 
     reserves, full debt service, and reasonable allowances for 
     vacancy losses and debt service coverage/owner return), the 
     Secretary may offer to pay all or a portion of the project's 
     debt service, and shall restrict the portion of debt service, 
     if any, to be paid by the project to the amount consistent 
     with payment of such full operating costs. The Secretary may 
     offer to make such payments monthly from the appropriate 
     Insurance Fund, for the full remaining term of the insured 
     mortgage.
       (5) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary may forgive and cancel any FHA-insured mortgage 
     debt that a demonstration program property cannot carry at 
     market rents while bearing full operating costs.
       (6) For demonstration program properties that cannot carry 
     full operating costs (excluding debt service) at market 
     rents, the Secretary shall approve project-based rents 
     sufficient to carry such full operating costs and shall offer 
     to pay the full debt service in the manner provided in 
     section 216(c)(4) hereof.
       (d) Selection.--The Secretary shall select multifamily 
     projects whose mortgages are insured that are from different 
     geographic areas of the nation, from States and localities of 
     varying sizes, of different occupancy profiles by income, 
     race, and age, of different financial and physical 
     conditions, and other factors as determined by the Secretary.
       (e) Community and Tenant Input.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Secretary shall develop procedures to obtain 
     appropriate and timely input from officials of the unit of 
     general local government affected, the community in which the 
     project is situated, and the tenant of the project.
       (f) Limitation on Demonstration Authority.--The Secretary 
     may carry out demonstration programs under this section with 
     respect to mortgages not to exceed 30,000 units over fiscal 
     years 1996 and 1997: Provided, That not less than fifty 
     percent of the units participating in the demonstration shall 
     be in projects that are assisted under section 8 new 
     construction/substantial rehabilitation contracts which 
     expire after September 30, 1997. The demonstration authorized 
     under this section shall not be expanded until the reports 
     required under subsection (g) are submitted to the Congress.
       (g) Report to Congress.--The Secretary shall submit to the 
     Congress every three months after the date of enactment of 
     this Act a report describing and assessing the programs 
     carried out under the demonstrations. The Secretary shall 
     also submit a final report to the Congress not later than six 
     months after the end of the demonstrations. The final report 
     shall include findings and recommendations for any 
     legislative action appropriate to establish a permanent 
     program based on the findings under the demonstrations. The 
     final report shall also include a description of the status 
     of each multifamily housing project selected for the 
     demonstrations under this section. The final report shall 
     include--
       (1) the size of the projects;
       (2) the geographic locations of the projects, by State and 
     region;
       (3) the physical and financial condition of the projects;
       (4) the occupancy profile of the projects, including the 
     income, family size, race, and ethnic origin of current 
     tenants, and the rents paid by such tenants;
       (5) a description of actions undertaken pursuant to this 
     section, including a description of the effectiveness of such 
     actions and any impediments to the transfer or sale of 
     multifamily housing projects;
       (6) a description of the extent to which the demonstrations 
     under this section have displaced tenants of multifamily 
     housings projects;
       (7) a description of any of the functions performed in 
     connection with this section that are transferred or 
     contracted out to public or private entities or to States;
       (8) a description of the impact to which the demonstrations 
     under this section have affected 

[[Page S 14168]]
     the localities and communities where the selected multifamily housing 
     projects are located; and
       (9) a description of the extent to which the demonstrations 
     under this section have affected the owners of multifamily 
     housing projects.
       (g) Effective Date.--The provisions of this section shall 
     become effective on October 1, 1996.
       Sec. 214. Contract Renewal.--With respect to contracts for 
     project based rental assistance under section 8 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 which contracts expire during 
     fiscal year 1996, the Secretary shall take the following 
     actions to renew such contracts:
       (a) Contract term.--All renewal contracts under this 
     section shall have terms of one year.
       (b) Tenant-based assistance optional.--Notwithstanding 
     section 8(v) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, the 
     Secretary may, with the consent of the owner, agree to 
     provide tenant-based rental assistance under section 8(b) or 
     8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 in lieu of 
     providing project-based rental assistance under this section. 
     The Secretary may offer incentives to project owners to 
     accept tenant-based assistance.
       (c) Demonstration program.--If such expiring contracts are 
     eligible for the demonstration program under section 213 
     hereof, such contracts shall be addressed under the terms of 
     section 213.
       (d) Loan management set-aside.--The Secretary shall offer 
     to renew all Loan Management Set-Aside contracts expiring 
     during fiscal year 1996 that are not subject to the 
     demonstration program under section 213 hereof, on existing 
     conditions and for the term provided in subsection (a) 
     hereof.
       (e) Expiring contracts for fha-insured projects.--For 
     multifamily projects whose mortgages are insured under the 
     National Housing Act, that are assisted under (Sec. 8 NC/SR), 
     and that are not subject to the demonstration program under 
     section 213 hereof, the Secretary shall make two offers to 
     renew such expiring contracts:
       (1) Renewal of the current contract, with rents equal to 
     the fair market rent of the locality in which the project is 
     located.
       (2) Under the Loan Management Set-Aside Program.
       (f) Other expiring contracts.--The Secretary shall offer to 
     renew all remaining expiring project-based contracts, with 
     rents equal to the fair market rent of the locality in which 
     the project is located.
       (g) Effective Date.--The provisions of this section shall 
     become effective on October 1, 1996.

                          Preservation Reform

       Sec. 217. Subtitle B of the Low-Income Housing Preservation 
     and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990, is amended as 
     follows:
       (a) After section 201, insert the following new section:

     ``SEC. 202. APPLICABILITY.

       ``This subtitle shall be applicable to all eligible low-
     income housing which has not received funding for a plan of 
     action before October 1, 1995. Eligible projects which have 
     received funding before such effective date shall be governed 
     by the Low Income Housing Preservation and Resident 
     Homeownership Act of 1990 as was in effect before such 
     effective date.''.
       (b) Section 211 is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 211. PERMISSIBLE PREPAYMENT OR INCENTIVES NOT TO 
                   PREPAY.

       ``(a) Prepayment and Termination.--An owner of eligible low 
     income housing may prepay, and a mortgagee may accept 
     prepayment, in accordance with the terms of the mortgage 
     note, and regulations in effect when said note was signed.
       ``(b) Plan of Action.--An owner of eligible housing who 
     does not exercise the right to prepay the mortgage may file a 
     plan of action to receive incentives to extend low income use 
     pursuant to section 219(b) or incentives for transfers to 
     qualified purchasers pursuant to section 220.''.
       (c) Section 212(a) is amended by striking the words ``as in 
     accordance with section 218''.
       (d) Striking out section 214.
       (e) Section 215 is amended as follows:
       (1) Subsection (a) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) Determination of Relation to Federal Cost Limits.--
     For each eligible low-income housing project appraised under 
     section 213(a), the Secretary shall make an initial 
     determination as to whether the estimated allowable equity 
     loan pursuant to section 219(b)(8) or the estimated allowable 
     grant pursuant to section 220(d)(3)(A) exceeds the amount 
     equal to 60 times the most recently published fair market 
     rent for the area in which the project is located and the 
     appropriate unit size for all of the units in the eligible 
     housing. The initial determination shall be used solely for 
     the purpose of providing information to owners pursuant to 
     section 216. Actual incentives available to an owner (or a 
     qualified purchaser) shall be determined pursuant to an 
     approved plan of action; provided however, that the Secretary 
     may not approve incentives in an amount exceeding the federal 
     cost limits as defined in this section, unless the Secretary 
     determines that preservation for the eligible low income 
     housing project is appropriate.''.
       (2) Subsection (b) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Housing Exceeding Federal Cost Limits.--If the 
     estimated allowable equity loan or grant for an eligible low 
     income housing project exceeds the federal cost limit, the 
     owner may:
       ``(1) file a plan of action under section 217 to receive 
     incentives under section 219;
       ``(2) file a second notice of intent under section 216(d) 
     indicating an intention to transfer the housing under section 
     220 and take actions pursuant to such section;
       ``(3) file a second notice under section 216(d) indicating 
     an intention to transfer the housing under section 220 so 
     long as a qualified purchaser provides non-preservation 
     resources sufficient to accommodate the difference between 
     the incentives approved under the applicable plan of action 
     and the actual purchase price; or
       ``(4) file a second notice of intent under section 216(d) 
     indicating an intention to prepay the mortgage or voluntarily 
     terminate the insurance.''.
       (f) Section 216 is amended as follows:
       (1) Strike subsection (a).
       (2) Subsection (b)(2) is amended to read as follows: ``A 
     statement of the required repairs and initial reserve 
     deposits required by the Secretary, based on a capital needs 
     assessment of the property.''.
       (3) Subsection (b)(4) is amended by striking the phrase, 
     ``aggregate preservation rents'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof, ``estimated allowable equity loan or grant, as 
     applicable.''.
       (4) Subsection (d)(1) is amended by deleting the second and 
     third sentences thereof.
       (g) Section 217 is amended as follows:
       (1) Subsection (a)(1) is amended by--
       (A) striking out ``terminate the low-income affordability 
     restrictions through prepayment of the mortgage or voluntary 
     termination under section 218, or to'';
       (B) striking out ``or 221''; and
       (C) striking the matter following ``section 220(b)''.
       (2) Subsection (b) is amended by--
       (A) striking out paragraph (1); and
       (B) in paragraph (2) striking out ``If the plan of action 
     proposes to extend the low income affordability restrictions 
     of the housing in accordance with section 219 or transfer the 
     housing to a qualified purchaser in accordance with section 
     220, the plan'' and inserting in lieu thereof, ``The plan of 
     action shall include--''.
       (f) Strike out section 218.
       (g) Section 219 is amended as follows:
       (1) Subsection (a) is amended by deleting from ``for each 
     year'' to the end of the subsection and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``the incentives provided in subsection (b) hereof.''
       (2) Subsection (b) is amended by--
       (A) striking out subparagraphs 2 and 3, and renumbering the 
     remaining subsections;
       (B) amending paragraph 3 by deleting all that follows 
     ``improvements'' and inserting in lieu thereof, ``as provided 
     in paragraph 8 hereof'';
       (C) amending paragraph 5 to read as follows: ``Access by 
     the owner to a portion of preservation equity in the housing 
     as provided in paragraph (6) hereof.'';
       (D) by adding a new paragraph (8) as follows:
       ``(8) A non-interest-bearing direct loan by the Secretary 
     equal in amount to the cost of rehabilitation approved in the 
     plan of action plus 70 percent of the preservation equity.
       ``(i) Repayment of the loan provided under this paragraph 
     shall commence when the first mortgage loan on the eligible 
     low income housing is paid in full. The Secretary shall 
     require the owner to make payments thereafter in an amount 
     not greater than the amount that the owner had been paying on 
     said first mortgage taking into account any interest 
     reduction payments made pursuant to section 236 of the 
     National Housing Act.
       (ii) The Secretary shall permit an owner return equal to 8 
     percent of 30 percent of the preservation equity and shall 
     permit the inclusion thereof in the budget for the eligible 
     housing instead of the return permitted on the original 
     equity of the eligible housing.''; and
       (E) by adding a new subsection (b)(9) as follows:
       ``(9) retention of rental income in excess of the basic 
     rental charge in projects assisted under section 236 of the 
     National Housing Act, to be used for the purposes of 
     preserving the low/moderate income character of the eligible 
     low income housing.''.
       (3) In final unnumbered paragraph, strike out the words 
     ``but the owner shall pay to the Secretary all rental charges 
     in excess of the basic rental charges''.
       (h) Section 220 is amended as follows:
       (1) Subsection (a) is amended by deleting the final 
     sentence thereof.
       (2) Subsection (b)(1) is amended by deleting the first 
     sentence thereof and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
       ``(1) For the 6 month period beginning on the date of 
     receipt by the Secretary of a second notice of intent under 
     section 216(d) with respect to such housing, the owner may 
     offer to sell and/or negotiate a sale of the housing only 
     with--
       ``(i) a resident council or mutual housing association 
     intending to purchase the project under section 226, which 
     has the support of tenants representing at least 75 percent 
     of the occupied units in the project and at least 50 percent 
     of all of the units in the project.
       ``(ii) a resident council intending to purchase the project 
     and retain it as rental housing, which has the support of the 
     majority of the tenant households; or
       ``(iii) a community based nonprofit housing organization, 
     which has the support of the majority of the tenant 
     households.
       ``(2) If no bona fide offer to purchase the project is made 
     and accepted during or at the end of the 6-month period 
     specified in subparagraph (b)(1) of this section, the owner 
     may offer to sell the project during the succeeding 6 months 
     to any priority purchaser.''.
       (2) Subsections (d)(2) and (d)(3) are amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(d)(2) Amount.--Subject to the availability of amounts 
     approved in appropriations Acts, the Secretary shall, for 
     approvable plans of action, provide assistance sufficient to 
     enable qualified purchasers to--
       ``(A) acquire the eligible low-income housing from the 
     current owner for a purchase price not greater than the 
     preservation value of the housing. Such purchase price does 
     not include the residual receipts account which shall be 
     released 

[[Page S 14169]]
     to the owner, but shall include the replacement reserve account which 
     shall be transferred to the purchaser;
       ``(B) rehabilitate the housing;
       ``(C) meet project operating expenses and establish 
     adequate reserves for the housing, and in the case of a 
     Priority Purchaser, meet project oversight costs;
       ``(D) receive a distribution equal to 8 percent annual 
     return on any actual cash investment (from sources other than 
     assistance provided under this title) made to acquire or 
     rehabilitate the project;
       ``(E) in the case of a priority purchaser, receive a 
     reimbursement of all reasonable transaction expenses 
     associated with the acquisition, loan closing, and 
     implementation of an approved plan of action; and
       ``(F) in the case of an approved resident homeownership 
     program, cover the costs of training for the resident 
     council, homeownership counseling and training, the fees for 
     the nonprofit entity or public agency working with the 
     resident council and costs related to relocation of tenants 
     who elect to move.
       ``(d)(3) Incentives.--
       ``(A) In general.--For all qualified purchasers of housing 
     under this subjection, the Secretary may provide assistance 
     for an approved Plan of Action in the form of 1 or more of 
     the incentives authorized under section 219(b), except in 
     lieu of the incentives under section 219(b)(7) and 219(b)(8), 
     the Secretary shall provide a grant equal in amount to 100 
     percent of the transfer preservation equity determined for 
     the property plus the amount of rehabilitation costs required 
     by the plan of action: Provided, That the grant may include, 
     if the qualified purchaser is a priority purchaser, any 
     expenses associated with the acquisition, loan closing and 
     implementation of the plan of action, subject to approval by 
     the Secretary. Expenses associated with implementation of the 
     plan of action may include capital reserves, operating 
     reserves, and escrows established to mitigate the burden of 
     initial rent increases on tenants. At the purchaser's 
     election, the grant shall be provided in the form of a loan 
     in the same amount. If the purchaser makes such election, the 
     interest rate on the loan shall be no less than the 
     applicable Federal rate and repayment shall be deferred until 
     sale of the housing or refinancing or repayment of the 
     federally-assisted mortgage, whichever is earlier, or such 
     later date as may be required to maintain low-income 
     affordability restrictions for the remaining useful life of 
     the housing.''.
       (i) Strike out section 221.
       (j) Section 222 is amended as follows:
       (1) Strike out subparagraphs (a)(2) (D), (E) and (F) and 
     renumbering the remaining subsections.
       (2) Amend subparagraph (a)(2)(G) to read as follows:
       ``(G) future rent adjustments shall be governed by the 
     provisions of the regulatory agreement concerning rent 
     adjustments now in effect for the eligible low-income housing 
     except that priority purchasers shall receive project 
     oversight costs. The Secretary shall process requests for 
     rent adjustments during the pendency of the processing under 
     this title.''.
       (3) Subsection (d)(2)(A)(i) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(i) declining to authorize the release of any escrowed 
     loan proceeds and requiring that such amounts be used for 
     repairs.''.
       (4) Subsection (d)(2)(C)(ii) is amended by striking out 
     ``an equity take-out loan has been made under section 241(f) 
     of the National Housing Act'' and inserting in lieu thereof, 
     ``a loan has been insured under the National Housing Act or 
     made pursuant to section 219(b)(8) or 220(d)(3)''.
       (5) Strike out subsection (d)(2)(C)(iii).
       (6) Insert a new subsection (e) as follows:
       ``(e) Mixed Income Communities.--To the extent that federal 
     assistance is provided for economic feasibility, units 
     available to new tenants will be available and affordable to 
     the same proportions of very-low income families or persons, 
     low income families or persons, and moderate income families 
     or persons (including families or persons whose incomes are 
     95 percent or more of area median income) as of the date of 
     approval of the plan of action.''.
       (k) Section 223 is amended as follows:
       (1) Subsection (a) is amended by striking out in the first 
     sentence ``low-income'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``very 
     low-income''.
       (2) Strike out the last sentence of subsection (b), and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``The Secretary shall pay the 
     relocation expenses of each such low-income family--
       ``(i) that does not receive section 8 assistance pursuant 
     to subsection (a);
       ``(ii) that is displaced within 180 days after such 
     prepayment; and
       ``(iii) whose rent and utility cost immediately prior to 
     displacement exceeded 30 percent of adjusted income. 
     Provided, however, that such relocation payment shall not 
     exceed $1,500 per family.''.
       (3) Strike out subsections (c), (d) and (e).
       (l) Strike out section 224.
       (m) Section 225(c) is amended by--
       (1) striking out in the first sentence all that follows 
     ``shall'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``provide the 
     incentives, and, in addition, shall pay the owner of the 
     eligible housing a return equal to 8 percent of the 
     preservation equity from the date that the Secretary should 
     have complied with such time limitation''; and
       (2) striking out, in the last sentence thereof, 
     ``district''.
       (n) Section 226(b)(2) is amended by inserting ``mutual 
     housing association'' between ``limited equity cooperative 
     ownership)'' and ``and fee simple ownership.''
       (o) Section 229 is amended as follows:
       (1) Subsection (1)(B) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(B) that, under regulation or contract in effect before 
     February 5, 1988, would have become eligible for prepayment 
     without prior approval of the Secretary:
       ``(i) on or before December 31, 1996, and the owner of such 
     housing filed a notice of intent on or before February 28, 
     1995 under title VI of the Low Income Housing Preservation 
     and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 or under title II of 
     the Emergency Low Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987; or
       ``(ii) after December 31, 1996, and the owner of such 
     housing files a notice of intent under this title on or 
     before March 1, 1996.''.
       (2) Subsection (8) is amended by deleting in subparagraph 
     (A) the words ``determining the authorized return under 
     section 219(b)(6)(ii)'' and subparagraph (B) by deleting 
     ``and 221'' and deleting the words ``acquisition loans under 
     the provisions of section 241(f)(3) of the National Housing 
     Act and inserting in lieu thereof, ``acquisition grant under 
     the provisions of section 220(d)(2)''.
       (3) Subsection (11) is amended by inserting after 
     ``association'': ``(including such an organization or its 
     affiliate that is a general partner in a limited 
     partnership)''.
       (4) Insert a new definition (12) as follows:
       ``(12) The term `Community Based Non-Profit Organization' 
     is defined as set forth in 24 C.F.R. 248.101, except that a 
     private nonprofit organization shall be deemed to include an 
     organization or its affiliate that is a general partner in a 
     limited partnership.''.
       (5) Insert a new definition (13) as follows:
       ``(13) Mutual Housing Association. A private entity 
     organized under State law that has been determined to be a 
     tax-exempt entity under section 501c of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (including such an entity or its affiliate that 
     is a general partner in a limited partnership), and that 
     owns, manages, and continuously develops affordable housing 
     by providing long-term housing for low and moderate income 
     individuals and families. The residents of mutual housing 
     participate in the ongoing management of the housing, and 
     through the purchase of membership interests in the 
     associations have the right to continue residing in the 
     housing as long as they own memberships in the 
     associations.''.
       (6) Subsection (1) is amended by inserting new subparagraph 
     (C) after subparagraph (B):
       ``(C) that has been determined to have preservation equity 
     equivalent to the lesser of $5,000/unit or $500,000 per 
     project or the equivalent of 8 times the most recently 
     published fair market rent for the area in which the project 
     is located and the appropriate unit size for all of the units 
     in the eligible project.''.
       (p) Subsection 231(a) is amended by inserting before the 
     period the following: ``; and (C) any resident council, 
     community-based non-profit organization, mutual housing 
     association, or their affiliate that acts as a general 
     partner in a limited partnership and agrees to maintain low-
     income affordability restrictions for the remaining useful 
     life of the housing as determined under section 222(c).''.
       (q) Subsection 232(a)(2) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) restricts or inhibits an owner of such housing from 
     receiving any benefit provided under this Act;''.
       (r) Inserting after section 235, the following new section:

     ``SEC. 236. IMPLEMENTING PROVISIONS FOR CAPITAL LOANS AND 
                   GRANTS.

       ``(a) Self-Implementation.--The Secretary shall implement 
     the incentives of capital loans or grants pursuant to section 
     219(b)(8) or 220(d)(2) upon the enactment of an 
     appropriations Act for fiscal year 1996 providing funds for 
     this purpose without issuing regulations and the processing 
     of an eligible project and any approvals rendered by the 
     Secretary under title VI of the Low Income Housing 
     Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 or title 
     II of the Emergency Low Income Housing Preservation Act of 
     1987 shall be effective under this title and the Secretary 
     shall not repeat any such processing.
       ``(b) Payment of Equity Loan.--The Secretary shall fund the 
     loan pursuant to section 219(b)(6) within 180 days after the 
     approval of the plan of action, but shall pay an 8 percent 
     return on preservation equity from 60 days after approval of 
     the plan of action. The Secretary may provide funding for the 
     capital loan provided under section 219(b)(8) equally over a 
     five-year period, except that the rehabilitation portion of 
     the loan shall be funded in the first installment. The 
     Secretary shall pay the owner of the eligible housing 
     interest on the unpaid portion of the loan at the applicable 
     federal rate at the time that the plan of action is approved. 
     If the Secretary fails to make the second or subsequent 
     installment payments on said loan within 60 days of its due 
     date, the owner may prepay the mortgage pursuant to section 
     211 and retain the amount of any installment previously paid.
       ``(c) Payment of Grant or Loan.--The Secretary shall 
     provide full funding for the capital grant or loan as 
     provided under section 220(d)(3) within 180 days of approval 
     of the plan of action. If the Secretary fails to make such 
     payment, the owner may prepay the existing mortgage pursuant 
     to section 224.
       ``(d) ELIHPA Eligibility.--An owner of eligible housing who 
     is processing an application under title II of the Emergency 
     Low Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 on the effective 
     date of this title may apply for the incentives provided in 
     this title or exercise its right of prepayment pursuant to 
     section 211.''.
       (s) Effective Date.--The provisions of this section shall 
     become effective on October 1, 1996.
       Sec. 216. Extension of Home Equity Conversion Mortgage 
     Program.--Section 255(g) of the National Housing Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1715z-20(g)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``September 30, 
     1995'' and inserting ``September 30, 1996''; and

[[Page S 14170]]

       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``25,000'' and 
     inserting ``30,000''.
       Sec. 217. Assessment Collection Dates for Office of Federal 
     Housing Enterprise Oversight.--Section 1316(b) of the Housing 
     and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4516(b)) is 
     amended by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(2) Timing of payment.--The annual assessment shall be 
     payable semiannually for each fiscal year, on October 1st and 
     April 1st.''.
       Sec. 218. Spending Limitations.--None of the funds provided 
     in this Act may be used during fiscal year 1996 to sign, 
     promulgate, implement, or enforce any requirement or 
     regulation relating to the application of the Fair Housing 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 3601, et seq.) to the business of property 
     insurance.
       Sec. 219. During fiscal year 1996, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, the number of individuals employed by 
     the Department of Housing and Urban Development in other than 
     ``career appointee'' positions in the Senior Executive 
     Service shall not exceed 20.
       Sec. 220. Of the $93,400,000 earmarked in Public Law 101-
     144 (103 Stat 850), as amended by Public Law 101-302 (104 
     Stat 237), for special projects and purposes, any amounts 
     remaining of the $500,000 made available to Bethlehem House 
     in Highland, California, for site planning and land 
     acquisition shall instead be made available to the County of 
     San Bernardino in California to assist with the expansion of 
     the Los Padrinos Gang Intervention Program and the Unity Home 
     Domestic Violence Shelter.
       Sec. 221. Permissible Adjustment to Modernization 
     Formula.--Section 14(k) of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2)(B)--
       (A) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting ``Except as 
     otherwise provided in this subparagraph, the Secretary''; and
       (B) by inserting after the first sentence the following: 
     ``The Secretary may adjust the amount allocated under this 
     subparagraph as necessary to provide additional weight for 
     backlog needs.'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)(C), by striking ``other half'' and 
     inserting ``remainder''; and
       (3) in paragraph (8)--
       (A) by striking ``half'' the first time it appears and 
     inserting ``half, or such other amount as the Secretary 
     determines to be necessary pursuant to paragraph (2)(B),''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``half'' the second time it appears, and 
     inserting ``the remainder''.
       Sec. 222. (a) Section 1011 of Title X--Residential Lead-
     Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 is amended as 
     follows: Strike ``priority housing'' wherever it appears in 
     said section and insert ``housing''.
       (b) Section 1011(a) shall be amended as follows: At the end 
     of the subsection after the period, insert ``Grants shall 
     only be made under this section to provide assistance for 
     housing which meets the following criteria--
       ``(1) for grants made to assist rental housing, at least 50 
     percent of the units must be occupied by or made available to 
     families with incomes at or below 50 percent of the area 
     median income level and the remaining units shall be occupied 
     or made available to families with incomes at or below 80 
     percent of the area median income level, and in all cases the 
     landlord shall give priority in renting units assisted under 
     this section, for not less than 3 years following the 
     completion of lead abatement activities, to families with a 
     child under the age of six years--
       ``(A) except that buildings with five or more units may 
     have 20 percent of the units occupied by families with 
     incomes above 80 percent of area median income level;
       ``(2) for grants made to assist housing owned by owner-
     occupants, all units assisted with grants under this section 
     shall be the principal residence of families with incomes at 
     or below 80 percent of the area median income level, and not 
     less than 90 percent of the units assisted with grants under 
     this section shall be occupied by a child under age of six 
     years or shall be units where a child under the age of six 
     years spends a significant amount of time visiting; and
       ``(3) notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), Round II 
     grantees who receive assistance under this section may use 
     such assistance for priority housing.''.
       Sec. 223. Extension Period for Sharing Utility Cost Savings 
     With PHAS.--Section 9(a)(3)(B)(i) is amended by striking 
     ``for a period not to exceed 6 years''.
       Sec. 224. The first sentence of section 221(g)(4)(C)(viii) 
     of the National Housing Act is amended by striking 
     ``September 30, 1995'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 1996''.

                               TITLE III

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                  American Battle Monuments Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the 
     American Battle Monuments Commission, including the 
     acquisition of land or interest in land in foreign countries; 
     purchases and repair of uniforms for caretakers of national 
     cemeteries and monuments outside of the United States and its 
     territories and possessions; rent of office and garage space 
     in foreign countries; purchase (one for replacement only) and 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; and insurance of official 
     motor vehicles in foreign countries, when required by law of 
     such countries; $20,265,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That where station allowance has been 
     authorized by the Department of the Army for officers of the 
     Army serving the Army at certain foreign stations, the same 
     allowance shall be authorized for officers of the Armed 
     Forces assigned to the Commission while serving at the same 
     foreign stations, and this appropriation is hereby made 
     available for the payment of such allowance: Provided 
     further, That when traveling on business of the Commission, 
     officers of the Armed Forces serving as members or as 
     Secretary of the Commission may be reimbursed for expenses as 
     provided for civilian members of the Commission: Provided 
     further, That the Commission shall reimburse other Government 
     agencies, including the Armed Forces, for salary, pay, and 
     allowances of personnel assigned to it.

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Consumer Product Safety 
     Commission, including hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the 
     rate for GS-18, purchase of nominal awards to recognize non-
     Federal officials' contributions to Commission activities, 
     and not to exceed $500 for official reception and 
     representation expenses, $40,000,000.

             Corporation for National and Community Service


       national and community service programs operating expenses

       Of the funds appropriated under this heading in Public Law 
     103-327, the Corporation for National and Community Service 
     shall use such amounts of such funds as may be necessary to 
     carry out the orderly termination of (1) the programs, 
     activities, and initiatives under the National and Community 
     Service Act of 1990 (Public Law 103-82); (2) the Corporation; 
     and (3) the Corporation's Office of Inspector General.

                       Court of Veterans Appeals


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses for the operation of the United 
     States Court of Veterans Appeals as authorized by 38 U.S.C. 
     sections 7251-7292, $9,000,000, of which not to exceed 
     $678,000, to remain available until September 30, 1997, shall 
     be available for the purpose of providing financial 
     assistance as described, and in accordance with the process 
     and reporting procedures set forth, under this head in Public 
     Law 102-229.

                      Department of Defense--Civil

                       Cemeterial Expenses, Army


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses, as authorized by law, for 
     maintenance, operation, and improvement of Arlington National 
     Cemetery and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery, 
     and not to exceed $1,000 for official reception and 
     representation expenses; [$11,296,000] $11,946,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

                    Environmental Protection Agency


                       [research and development

       [For research and development activities, including 
     procurement of laboratory equipment and supplies; other 
     operating expenses in support of research and development; 
     and construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation and 
     renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project; 
     $384,052,000, to remain available until September 30, 1997.]


                         science and technology

       For science and technology, including research and 
     development activities; necessary expenses for personnel and 
     related costs and travel expenses, including uniforms, or 
     allowances therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the 
     rate for GS-18; procurement of laboratory equipment and 
     supplies; other operating expenses in support of research and 
     development; construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation 
     and renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per 
     project; $500,000,000, which shall remain available until 
     September 30, 1997.


                 [environmental programs and compliance

       [For environmental programs and compliance activities, 
     including hire of passenger motor vehicles; hire, 
     maintenance, and operation of aircraft; purchases of 
     reprints; library memberships in societies or associations 
     which issue publications to members only or at a price to 
     members lower than to subscribers who are not members; 
     construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and 
     renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project; 
     and not to exceed $6,000 for official reception and 
     representation expenses; and for necessary expenses, not 
     otherwise provided for, for personnel and related costs and 
     for travel expenses, including uniforms, or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; and for 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the 
     rate for GS-18; $1,881,614,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated under 
     this heading shall be available to the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration pursuant to section 118(h)(3) of 
     the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended: Provided 
     further, That from funds appropriated under this heading, the 
     Administrator may make grants to federally recognized Indian 
     governments for the development of multimedia environmental 
     programs: Provided further, That for this fiscal year and 
     thereafter, any industrial discharger to the Kalamazoo Water 
     Reclamation Plant is exempt from categorical pretreatment 
     standards under section 307(b) of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act, as amended, if the following conditions are met: 
     (1) the Kalamazoo Water Reclamation Plant applies to the 
     State of Michigan for an 

[[Page S 14171]]
     exemption for its industry and (2) the State or the Administrator, as 
     applicable, approves such exemption request based upon a 
     determination that there exists an operative financial 
     contract between the City of Kalamazoo and the industrial 
     user and an approved local pretreatment program, including a 
     joint monitoring program and local controls to prevent 
     against interference and pass through: Provided further, That 
     none of the funds appropriated under this heading shall be 
     obligated or expended to implement or enforce section 
     118(c)(2)(C) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as 
     amended: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading may be made available for the 
     implementation or enforcement of the stormwater permitting 
     program under section 402(p) of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act, as amended: Provided further, That none of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading shall be made available 
     for the enforcement of permit limits or compliance schedules 
     for combined sewer overflows or sanitary sewer overflows 
     under section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 
     as amended: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading may be used to implement or 
     enforce section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
     Act, as amended: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading may be made available for the 
     development and implementation of new or revised effluent 
     limitation guidelines and standards, pretreatment standards, 
     or new source performance standards under the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act, as amended: Provided further, That the 
     limitations on the use of funds set forth in the previous 
     five provisos shall have no force and effect upon enactment 
     of legislation which further amends the named sections of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, in each of 
     the previous four provisos: Provided further, That none of 
     the funds appropriated under this heading may be used by the 
     Environmental Protection Agency to impose or enforce any 
     requirement that a State implement trip reduction measures to 
     reduce vehicular emissions. Section 304 of the Clean Air Act, 
     as amended, shall not apply with respect to any such 
     requirement: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading may be used to assign less 
     than full credit for automobile emissions inspections 
     programs required under section 182 (c), (d), or (e) of the 
     Clean Air Act, as amended, on the basis of network design 
     equipment unless the Administrator determines, based on data 
     collected from at least two full cycles of the program, that 
     less than full credit is appropriate: Provided further, That 
     beginning in fiscal year 1996 and each fiscal year 
     thereafter, and notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Administrator is authorized to make grants annually from 
     funds appropriated under this heading, subject to such terms 
     and conditions as the Administrator shall establish, to any 
     State or federally recognized Indian tribe for multimedia or 
     single media pollution prevention, control and abatement and 
     related environmental activities at the request of the 
     Governor or other appropriate State official or the tribe: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated under 
     this heading may be used to develop, propose, promulgate, 
     issue, enforce, or to set or enforce compliance deadlines or 
     issuance schedules for maximum achievable control technology 
     standards pursuant to section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act, as 
     amended, for the category proposed to be regulated at Vol. 
     59, Federal Register, No. 135, page 36130, dated July 15, 
     1994, and for purposes of this provision, section 304 of the 
     Clean Air Act shall not apply: Provided further, That none of 
     the funds appropriated under this heading shall be obligated 
     or expended to take any action to extend the risk management 
     plan requirements under section 112(r) of the Clean Air 
     Act, as amended, to the domestic oil and gas exploration 
     and production and natural gas processing industry: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated 
     under this heading may be used by the Administrator or the 
     Administrator's designee for signing and publishing a 
     national primary drinking water regulation for radon and 
     other radionuclei: Provided further, That none of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading may be used by the 
     Administrator or the Administrator's designee for signing 
     and publishing any proposed national primary drinking 
     water regulation for arsenic: Provided further, That none 
     of the funds appropriated under this heading may be used 
     to issue or enforce any requirement not otherwise 
     authorized under existing law or regulation with respect 
     to combustion of hazardous waste prior to promulgation of 
     final regulations pursuant to a rulemaking proceeding 
     under the Administrative Procedure Act or to impose or 
     enforce any requirement or condition of a permit, 
     including the use of an indirect risk assessment, or to 
     deny a permit pursuant to section 3005(c)(3) of the 
     Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended, unless 
     the Environmental Protection Agency follows the procedures 
     governing the use of authority under such section which it 
     has set forth at 56 Fed. Reg. 7145, note 8, February 21, 
     1991: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading may be used to issue or 
     enforce any regulatory standard for maximum achievable 
     control technology (MACT) for hazardous waste combustion 
     under any statute other than the Clean Air Act, as 
     amended, issue any such standard without first determining 
     that in calculating the MACT floor emission levels for 
     existing sources under section 112(d)(3) of the Clean Air 
     Act, as amended, one-half of the currently operating 
     facilities in the group of sources that make up the floor 
     pool for that category or subcategory actually achieve the 
     MACT floor levels for all of the hazardous air pollutants 
     to be regulated: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading may be used to promulgate, 
     implement, or enforce sections 502(d)(2), 502(d)(3), or 
     502(i)(4) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, against a 
     State which is involved in litigation regarding provisions 
     of title V of the Clean Air Act, as amended: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds appropriated under this 
     heading may be obligated or expended to require facilities 
     to submit any data pursuant to section 313(a) of the 
     Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act or 
     section 8 of the Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended, 
     that is not specifically enumerated in said sections, 
     including mass balance, materials accounting, or other 
     chemical use data: Provided further, That none of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading may be used to 
     revoke, or require the issuance of, a food additive 
     regulation under section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug and 
     Cosmetic Act for a pesticide in processed food where there 
     is a tolerance established under section 408 of said Act 
     for the pesticide on the raw commodity from which the 
     processed food was made, and may not be used to revoke, or 
     deny the issuance of, a section 408 tolerance for a 
     pesticide on a raw agricultural commodity solely on the 
     basis that a food additive regulation cannot be issued or 
     maintained under section 409 of said Act for the pesticide 
     in a processed form of the commodity: Provided further, 
     That none of the funds appropriated under this heading may 
     be used to exclusively regulate whole agricultural plants 
     subject to regulation by another federal agency: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds appropriated under this 
     heading may be used to obtain a voluntary environmental 
     audit report or to assess an administrative, civil or 
     criminal negligence penalty, in any matter subject to a 
     state law providing a privilege for voluntary 
     environmental audit reports or protections or immunities 
     for the voluntary disclosure of environmental concerns.]


                 program administration and management

       For program administration and management activities, 
     including necessary expenses for personnel and related costs 
     and travel expenses, including uniforms, or allowances 
     therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals not 
     to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the rate for GS-18; 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; hire, maintenance, and 
     operation of aircraft; purchase of reprints; library 
     memberships in societies or associations which issue 
     publications to members only or at a price to members lower 
     than to subscribers who are not members; construction, 
     alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and renovation of 
     facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project; and not to 
     exceed $6,000 for official reception and representation 
     expenses; $1,670,000,000, which shall remain available until 
     September 30, 1997.


                      Office of Inspector General


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, and for construction, alteration, 
     repair, rehabilitation, and renovation of facilities, not to 
     exceed $75,000 per project, [$28,542,000] $27,700,000.


                        Buildings and Facilities

       For construction, repair, improvement, extension, 
     alteration, and purchase of fixed equipment or facilities of, 
     or use by, the Environmental Protection Agency, [$28,820,000] 
     $60,000,000, to remain available until expended.


                     Hazardous Substance Superfund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 
     1980 (CERCLA), as amended, including sections 111 (c)(3), 
     (c)(5), (c)(6), and (e)(4) (42 U.S.C. 9611), and for 
     construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and 
     renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project; 
     not to exceed $1,003,400,000 to remain available until 
     expended, [to be derived from general revenues] consisting of 
     $753,400,000 as authorized by section 517(a) of the Superfund 
     Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), as amended 
     by Public Law 101-508, and $250,000,000 as a payment from 
     general revenues to the Hazardous Substance Superfund as 
     authorized by section 517(b) of SARA, as amended by Public 
     Law 101-508: Provided, That funds appropriated under this 
     heading may be allocated to other Federal agencies in 
     accordance with section 111(a) of CERCLA: Provided further, 
     That [$5,000,000] $11,700,000 of the funds appropriated under 
     this heading shall be transferred to the Office of Inspector 
     General appropriation to remain available until September 30, 
     1996: Provided further, That notwithstanding section 111(m) 
     of CERCLA or any other provision of law, not to exceed 
     [$62,000,000] $55,000,000 of the funds appropriated under 
     this heading shall be available to the Agency for Toxic 
     Substances and Disease Registry to carry out activities 
     described in sections 104(i), 111(c)(4), and 111(c)(14) of 
     CERCLA and section 118(f) of the Superfund Amendments and 
     Reauthorization Act of 1986: Provided further, That none of 
     the funds appropriated under this heading shall be available 
     for the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry to 
     issue in excess of 40 toxicological profiles pursuant to 

[[Page S 14172]]
     section 104(i) of CERCLA during fiscal year 1996[: Provided further, 
     That no part of any appropriation made under this heading 
     shall remain available for obligation beyond December 31, 
     1995, unless the Comprehensive Environmental Response 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 has been 
     reauthorized]: Provided further, That none of the funds made 
     available under this heading may be used by the Environmental 
     Protection Agency to propose for listing or to list any 
     additional facilities on the National Priorities List 
     established by section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended 
     (42 U.S.C. 9605), unless the Administrator receives a written 
     request to propose for listing or to list a facility from the 
     Governor of the State in which the facility is located, or 
     appropriate tribal leader, or unless legislation to 
     reauthorize CERCLA is enacted.


              leaking underground storage tank trust fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out leaking underground 
     storage tank cleanup activities authorized by section 205 of 
     the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and 
     for construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and 
     renovation of facilities, not to exceed $75,000 per project, 
     $45,827,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That no more than [$5,285,000] $8,000,000 shall be available 
     for administrative expenses: Provided further, That 
     [$426,000] $600,000 shall be transferred to the Office of 
     Inspector General appropriation to remain available until 
     September 30, 1996.


                           oil spill response

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For expenses necessary to carry out the Environmental 
     Protection Agency's responsibilities under the Oil Pollution 
     Act of 1990, [$20,000,000] $15,000,000, to be derived from 
     the Oil Spill Liability trust fund, and to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That not more than [$8,420,000] 
     $8,000,000 of these funds shall be available for 
     administrative expenses.


              [water infrastructure/state revolving funds

       [For necessary expenses for capitalization grants for State 
     Revolving Funds to support wastewater infrastructure 
     financing, and to carry out the purposes of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act, as amended, the Water Quality Act of 
     1987, and section 1443(a) of the Public Health Service Act, 
     $1,500,175,000, to remain available until expended, of which 
     $1,000,000,000 shall be for capitalization grants for Clean 
     Water State Revolving Funds under title VI of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act, as amended; $100,000,000 for 
     architectural, engineering, design, construction, and related 
     activities in connection with the construction of high 
     priority wastewater facilities in the area of the United 
     States-Mexico Border, after consultation with the appropriate 
     border commissions; $50,000,000 for grants to the State of 
     Texas, which shall be matched by an equal amount of State 
     funds from State sources, for the purpose of improving 
     wastewater treatment for colonias; $15,000,000 for grants to 
     the State of Alaska, subject to an appropriate cost share as 
     determined by the Administrator, to address wastewater 
     infrastructure needs of rural and Alaska Native Villages; 
     $22,500,000 for making grants under section 104(b)(3) of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended; $100,000,000 
     for making grants under section 319 of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act, as amended; $75,000,000 for making 
     grants under section 1443(a) of the Public Health Service 
     Act; and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     $137,675,000 for making grants for the construction of 
     wastewater treatment facilities and the development of 
     groundwater in accordance with the terms and conditions set 
     forth in the House Report accompanying this Act: Provided, 
     That of the funds made available under this heading in Public 
     Law 103-327 and in Public Law 103-124 for capitalization 
     grants for State Revolving Funds to support water 
     infrastructure financing, $225,000,000 shall be made 
     available for capitalization grants for State Revolving Funds 
     under title VI of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as 
     amended: Provided further, That of the funds made available 
     under this heading for capitalization grants for State 
     Revolving Funds under title VI of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act, as amended, $50,000,000 shall be for wastewater 
     treatment in impoverished communities pursuant to section 
     102(d) of H.R. 961 as approved by the United States House of 
     Representatives on May 16, 1995: Provided further, That 
     except for grants made under section 1443(a) of the Public 
     Health Service Act, appropriations for programs and projects 
     pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act made 
     available under this heading shall be available only upon 
     enactment of legislation reauthorizing such Act, and 
     appropriations for programs and projects pursuant to other 
     Acts made available under this heading shall be available 
     only upon enactment of legislation specifically authorizing 
     such appropriations.]


                 program and infrastructure assistance

       For environmental programs and infrastructure assistance, 
     including capitalization grants for state revolving funds and 
     performance partnership grants, $2,340,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended, of which $1,500,000,000 shall be 
     for making capitalization grants for State revolving funds to 
     support water infrastructure financing; $100,000,000 for 
     architectural, engineering, design, construction and related 
     activities in connection with the construction of high 
     priority water and wastewater facilities in the area of the 
     United States-Mexico Border, after consultation with the 
     appropriate border commission; $50,000,000 for grants to the 
     State of Texas, which shall be matched by an equal amount of 
     State funds from State resources, for the purpose of 
     improving wastewater treatment for colonias; and $15,000,000 
     for grants to the State of Alaska, subject to an appropriate 
     cost share as determined by the Administrator, to address 
     wastewater infrastructure needs of Alaska Native villages: 
     Provided, That beginning in fiscal year 1996 and each fiscal 
     year thereafter, and notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Administrator is authorized to make grants annually 
     from funds appropriated under this heading, subject to such 
     terms and conditions as the Administrator shall establish, to 
     any State or federally recognized Indian tribe for multimedia 
     or single media pollution prevention, control and abatement 
     and related environmental activities at the request of the 
     Governor or other appropriate State official or the tribe: 
     Provided further, That from funds appropriated under this 
     heading, the Administrator may make grants to federally 
     recognized Indian governments for the development of 
     multimedia environmental programs: Provided further, That of 
     the $1,500,000,000 for capitalization grants for State 
     revolving funds to support water infrastructure financing, 
     $500,000,000 shall be for drinking water State revolving 
     funds, but if no drinking water State revolving fund 
     legislation is enacted by December 31, 1995, these funds 
     shall immediately be available for making capitalization 
     grants under title VI of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
     Act, as amended: Provided further, That of the funds made 
     available under this heading in Public Law 103-327 and in 
     Public Law 103-124 for capitalization grants for State 
     revolving funds to support water infrastructure financing, 
     $225,000,000 shall be made available for capitalization 
     grants for State revolving funds under title VI of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, if no 
     drinking water State revolving fund legislation is enacted by 
     December 31, 1995.


                       administrative provisions

     SEC. 301. MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN EMISSIONS TESTING 
                   REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Moratorium.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency (referred to in this subsection as the 
     ``Administrator'') shall not require adoption or 
     implementation by a State of a test-only or I/M240 enhanced 
     vehicle inspection and maintenance program as a means of 
     compliance with section 182 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 
     7511a), but the Administrator may approve such a program if a 
     State chooses to adopt the program as a means of compliance.
       (2) Repeal.--Paragraph (1) is repealed effective as of the 
     date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Plan Approval.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency (referred to in this subsection as the 
     ``Administrator'') shall not disapprove a State 
     implementation plan revision under section 182 of the Clean 
     Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7511a) on the basis of a regulation 
     providing for a 50-percent discount for alternative test-and-
     repair inspection and maintenance programs.
       (2) Credit.--If a State provides data for a proposed 
     inspection and maintenance system for which credits are 
     appropriate under section 182 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 
     7511a), the Administrator shall allow the full amount of 
     credit for the system that is appropriate without regard to 
     any regulation that implements that section by requiring 
     centralized emissions testing.
       (3) Deadline.--The Administrator shall complete and present 
     a technical assessment of data for a proposed inspection and 
     maintenance system submitted by a State not later than 45 
     days after the date of submission.
       Sec. 302. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Environmental Protection Agency to impose or 
     enforce any requirement that a State implement trip reduction 
     measures to reduce vehicular emissions. Section 304 of the 
     Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7604) shall not apply with respect 
     to any such requirement during the period beginning on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act and ending September 30, 
     1996.
       Sec. 303. None of the funds provided in this Act may be 
     used within the Environmental Protection Agency for any final 
     action by the Administrator or her delegate for signing and 
     publishing for promulgation a rule concerning any new 
     standard for arsenic, sulfates, radon, ground water 
     disinfection, or the contaminants in phase IV B in drinking 
     water, unless the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1986 has been 
     reauthorized.
       Sec. 304. None of the funds provided in this Act may be 
     used during fiscal year 1996 to sign, promulgate, implement 
     or enforce the requirement proposed as ``Regulation of Fuels 
     and Fuel Additives: Individual Foreign Refinery Baseline 
     Requirements for Reformulated Gasoline'' at volume 59 of the 
     Federal Register at pages 22800 through 22814.
       Sec. 305. None of the funds appropriated to the 
     Environmental Protection Agency for fiscal year 1996 may be 
     used to implement section 404(c) of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act, as amended. No pending action by the 
     Environmental Protection Agency to implement section 404(c) 
     with respect to an individual permit shall remain in effect 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.
       Sec. 306. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for 
     this fiscal year and hereafter, an industrial discharger to 
     the Kalamazoo Water 

[[Page S 14173]]
     Reclamation Plant, an advanced wastewater treatment plant with 
     activated carbon, may be exempted from categorical 
     pretreatment standards under section 307(b) of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, if the following 
     conditions are met: (1) the Kalamazoo Water Reclamation Plant 
     applies to the State of Michigan for an exemption for such 
     industrial discharger and (2) the State or the Administrator, 
     as applicable, approves such exemption request based upon a 
     determination that the Kalamazoo Water Reclamation Plant will 
     provide treatment consistent with or better than treatment 
     requirements set forth by the EPA, and there exists an 
     operative financial contract between the City of Kalamazoo 
     and the industrial user and an approved local pretreatment 
     program, including a joint monitoring program and local 
     controls to prevent against interference and pass through.
       Sec. 307. No funds appropriated by this Act may be used 
     during fiscal year 1996 to enforce the requirements of 
     section 211(m)(2) of the Clean Air Act that require fuel 
     refiners, marketers, or persons who sell or dispense fuel to 
     ultimate consumers in any carbon monoxide nonattainment area 
     in Alaska to use methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) to meet 
     the oxygen requirements of that section.

                   Executive Office of the President


                office of science and technology policy

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Science and 
     Technology Policy, in carrying out the purposes of the 
     National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and 
     Priorities Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6601 and 6671), hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles, services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     3109, not to exceed $2,500 for official reception and 
     representation expenses, and rental of conference rooms in 
     the District of Columbia, $4,981,000: Provided, That the 
     Office of Science and Technology Policy shall reimburse other 
     agencies for not less than one-half of the personnel 
     compensation costs of individuals detailed to it.


  council on environmental quality and office of environmental quality

       [To carry out the orderly termination of the programs and 
     activities authorized by] For necessary expenses to continue 
     functions assigned to the Council on Environmental Quality 
     and Office of Environmental Quality pursuant to the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Environmental 
     Improvement Act of 1970 and Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 
     1977, $1,000,000.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency


                            [DISASTER RELIEF

       [For necessary expenses in carrying out the functions of 
     the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), $235,500,000, to 
     remain available until expended.]


            disaster assistance direct loan program account

       For the cost of direct loans, $2,155,000, as authorized by 
     section 319 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.): Provided, 
     That such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, 
     shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided further, That these 
     funds are available to subsidize gross obligations for the 
     principal amount of direct loans not to exceed $25,000,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct loan program, $95,000.


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, 
     including hire and purchase of motor vehicles (31 U.S.C. 
     1343); uniforms, or allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
     but at rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate 
     equivalent to the rate for GS-18; expenses of attendance of 
     cooperating officials and individuals at meetings concerned 
     with the work of emergency preparedness; transportation in 
     connection with the continuity of Government programs to the 
     same extent and in the same manner as permitted the Secretary 
     of a Military Department under 10 U.S.C. 2632; and not to 
     exceed $2,500 for official reception and representation 
     expenses; [$162,000,000] $166,000,000.


                    office of the inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Inspector 
     General in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector 
     General Act of 1978, as amended, $4,400,000.


              emergency management planning and assistance

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, to 
     carry out activities under the National Flood Insurance Act 
     of 1968, as amended, and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 
     1973, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
     1977, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the Federal Fire 
     Prevention and Control Act of 1974, as amended (15 U.S.C. 
     2201 et seq.), [the Federal Civil Defense Act of 1950, as 
     amended (50 U.S.C. App. 2251 et seq.),] the Defense 
     Production Act of 1950, as amended (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et 
     seq.), sections 107 and 303 of the National Security Act of 
     1947, as amended (50 U.S.C. 404-405), and Reorganization Plan 
     No. 3 of 1978, $203,044,000.


                   emergency food and shelter program

       There is hereby appropriated $100,000,000 to the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency to carry out an emergency food 
     and shelter program pursuant to title III of Public Law 100-
     77, as amended: Provided, That total administrative costs 
     shall not exceed three and one-half per centum of the total 
     appropriation.


                     National Flood Insurance Fund

       For activities under the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968, the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, and the 
     National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994, not to exceed 
     $20,562,000 for salaries and expenses associated with flood 
     mitigation and flood insurance operations, and not to exceed 
     $70,464,000 for flood mitigation, including up to $12,000,000 
     for expenses under section 1366 of the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, which amount shall be 
     available until September 30, 1997. In fiscal year 1996, no 
     funds in excess of (1) $47,000,000 for operating expenses, 
     (2) $292,526,000 for agents' commissions and taxes, and (3) 
     $3,500,000 for interest on Treasury borrowings shall be 
     available from the National Flood Insurance Fund without 
     prior notice to the Committees on Appropriations[: Provided, 
     That none of the funds appropriated in this Act for the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) shall be available 
     for any further work on effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps 
     for the City of Stockton and San Joaquin County, California 
     based on FEMA's restudy of flood hazards on South Paddy 
     Creek, Middle Paddy Creek, Paddy Creek, Bear Creek, Mosher 
     Slough, Calaveras River, Potter A Slough, Potter B Slough, 
     Mormon Slough, and the Diversion Channel].


                        Administrative Provision

       The Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     shall promulgate through rulemaking a methodology for 
     assessment and collection of fees to be assessed and 
     collected beginning in fiscal year 1996 applicable to persons 
     subject to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's 
     radiological emergency preparedness regulations. The 
     aggregate charges assessed pursuant to this section during 
     fiscal year 1996 shall approximate, but not be less than, 100 
     per centum of the amounts anticipated by the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency to be obligated for its 
     radiological emergency preparedness program for such fiscal 
     year. The methodology for assessment and collection of fees 
     shall be fair and equitable, and shall reflect the full 
     amount of costs of providing radiological emergency planning, 
     preparedness, response and associated services. Such fees 
     will be assessed in a manner that reflects the use of agency 
     resources for classes of regulated persons and the 
     administrative costs of collecting such fees. Fees received 
     pursuant to this section shall be deposited in the general 
     fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts. Assessment and 
     collection of such fees are only authorized during fiscal 
     year 1996.

                    General Services Administration


                      Consumer Information Center

       For necessary expenses of the Consumer Information Center, 
     including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $2,061,000, 
     to be deposited into the Consumer Information Center Fund: 
     Provided, That the appropriations, revenues and collections 
     deposited into the fund shall be available for necessary 
     expenses of Consumer Information Center activities in the 
     aggregate amount of $7,500,000. Administrative expenses of 
     the Consumer Information Center in fiscal year 1996 shall not 
     exceed [$2,502,000] $2,602,000. Appropriations, revenues, and 
     collections accruing to this fund during fiscal year 1996 in 
     excess of $7,500,000 shall remain in the fund and shall not 
     be available for expenditure except as authorized in 
     appropriations Acts.

                [Department of Health and Human Services


                      [office of consumer affairs

       [For necessary expenses of the Office of Consumer Affairs, 
     including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $1,811,000: 
     Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     that Office may accept and deposit to this account, during 
     fiscal year 1996, gifts for the purpose of defraying its 
     costs of printing, publishing, and distributing consumer 
     information and educational materials; may expend up to 
     $1,110,000 of those gifts for those purposes, in addition to 
     amounts otherwise appropriated; and the balance shall remain 
     available for expenditure for such purposes to the extent 
     authorized in subsequent appropriations Acts: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds provided under this heading 
     may be made available for any other activities within the 
     Department of Health and Human Services.]

             National Aeronautics and Space Administration


                           Human Space Flight

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, in the 
     conduct and support of human space flight research and 
     development activities, including research; development; 
     operations; services; maintenance; construction of facilities 
     including repair, rehabilitation, and modification of real 
     and personal property, and acquisition or condemnation of 
     real property, as authorized by law; space flight, spacecraft 
     control and communications activities including operations, 
     production, and services; and purchase, lease, charter, 
     maintenance, and operation of mission and administrative 
     aircraft; [$5,449,600,000] $5,337,600,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 1997[: Provided, That of the 
     funds made available under this heading, $390,000,000 of 
     funds provided for Space Station shall not become available 
     for 

[[Page S 14174]]
     obligation until August 1, 1996 and shall remain available for 
     obligation until September 30, 1997].


                  Science, Aeronautics and Technology

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for the 
     conduct and support of science, aeronautics, and technology 
     research and development activities, including research; 
     development; operations; services; maintenance; construction 
     of facilities including repair, rehabilitation and 
     modification of real and personal property, and acquisition 
     or condemnation of real property, as authorized by law; space 
     flight, spacecraft control and communications activities 
     including operations, production, and services; and purchase, 
     lease, charter, maintenance, and operation of mission and 
     administrative aircraft; [$5,588,000,000] $5,960,700,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 1997.


                            mission support

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, in 
     carrying out mission support for human space flight programs 
     and science, aeronautical, and technology programs, including 
     research operations and support; space communications 
     activities including operations, production, and services; 
     maintenance; construction of facilities including repair, 
     rehabilitation, and modification of facilities, minor 
     construction of new facilities and additions to existing 
     facilities, facility planning and design, environmental 
     compliance and restoration, and acquisition or condemnation 
     of real property, as authorized by law; program management; 
     personnel and related costs, including uniforms or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902); travel 
     expenses; purchase, lease, charter, maintenance, and 
     operation of mission and administrative aircraft; not to 
     exceed $35,000 for official reception and representation 
     expenses; and purchase (not to exceed thirty-three for 
     replacement only) and hire of passenger motor vehicles; 
     [$2,618,200,000] $2,484,200,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 1997.


                      Office of Inspector General

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Inspector 
     General in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector 
     General Act of 1978, as amended, $16,000,000.


                       Administrative Provisions

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Notwithstanding the limitation on the availability of funds 
     appropriated for ``Human space flight'', ``Science, 
     aeronautics and technology'', or ``Mission support'' by this 
     appropriations Act, when any activity has been initiated by 
     the incurrence of obligations for construction of facilities 
     as authorized by law, the amount available for such activity 
     shall remain available until expended. This provision does 
     not apply to the amounts appropriated in ``Mission support'' 
     pursuant to the authorization for repair, rehabilitation and 
     modification of facilities, minor construction of new 
     facilities and additions to existing facilities, and facility 
     planning and design.
       Notwithstanding the limitation on the availability of funds 
     appropriated for ``Human space flight'', ``Science, 
     aeronautics and technology'', or ``Mission support'' by this 
     appropriations Act, the amounts appropriated for construction 
     of facilities shall remain available until September 30, 
     1998.
       Notwithstanding the limitation on the availability of funds 
     appropriated for ``Mission support'' and ``Office of 
     Inspector General'', amounts made available by this Act for 
     personnel and related costs and travel expenses of the 
     National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall remain 
     available until September 30, 1996 and may be used to enter 
     into contracts for training, investigations, cost associated 
     with personnel relocation, and for other services, to be 
     provided during the next fiscal year.
       [No amount appropriated pursuant to this or any other Act 
     may be used for the lease or construction of a new contractor 
     funded facility for exclusive use in support of a contract or 
     contracts with the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration under which the Administration would be 
     required to substantially amortize through payment or 
     reimbursement such contractor in vestment, unless an 
     appropirations Act specifies the lease or contract pursuant 
     to which such facilities are to be constructed or leased or 
     such facility is otherwise identified in such Act. The 
     Administrator may authorize such facility lease or 
     construction, if he determines, in consultation with the 
     Committees on Appropriations, that deferral of such action 
     until the enactment of the next appropriations Act would be 
     inconsistent with the interest of the Nation in aeronautical 
     and space activities.]
       The unexpired balances of prior appropriations to NASA for 
     activities for which funds are provided under this Act may be 
     transferred to the new account established for the 
     appropriation that provides funds for such activity under 
     this Act. Balances so transferred may be merged with funds in 
     the newly established account and thereafter may be accounted 
     for as one fund to be available for the same purposes and 
     under the same terms and conditions.
       Notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation, 
     the National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall 
     convey, without reimbursement, to the State of Mississippi, 
     all rights, title and interest of the United States in the 
     property known as the Yellow Creek Facility and consisting of 
     approximately 1,200 acres near the city of Iuka, Mississippi, 
     including all improvements thereon and also including any 
     personal property owned by NASA that is currently located on-
     site and which the State of Mississippi requires to 
     facilitate the transfer: Provided, That appropriated funds 
     shall be used to effect this conveyance: Provided further, 
     That $10,000,000 in appropriated funds otherwise available to 
     the National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall be 
     transferred to the State of Mississippi to be used in the 
     transition of the facility: Provided further, That each 
     Federal agency with prior contact to the site shall remain 
     responsible for any and all environmental remediation made 
     necessary as a result of its activities on the site: Provided 
     further, That in consideration of this conveyance, the 
     National Aeronautics and Space Administration may require 
     such other terms and conditions as the Administrator deems 
     appropriate to protect the interests of the United States: 
     Provided further, That the conveyance of the site and the 
     transfer of the funds to the State of Mississippi shall occur 
     not later than thirty days from the date of enactment of this 
     Act.
       [The Administrator of the National Aeronauties and Space 
     Administration shall conduct a study of the closing or re-
     structuring of Space Flight Centers and Research Centers. The 
     study shall include an analysis of functions currently being 
     performed at each Center, the cost of performing each 
     function at its current location and at logical alternative 
     Centers, the schedule for transitioning functions to 
     alternative Centers, and the overall cost savings which will 
     be derived from the closing or re-structuring of each Center. 
     The findings of the study, including a detailed schedule for 
     completion of the re-structuring, shall be submitted to the 
     Congress no later than March 31, 1996. Closure or re-
     structuring of these Centers shall be completed no later than 
     October 1, 1998.]
       Of the funds made available by this Act under the heading 
     ``Human Space Flight'', $390,000,000 of funds provided for 
     Space Station shall not become available for obligation until 
     August 1, 1996 and shall remain available for obligation 
     until September 30, 1997.

                  National Credit Union Administration


                       central liquidity facility

       During fiscal year 1996, gross obligations of the Central 
     Liquidity Facility for the principal amount of new direct 
     loans to member credit unions as authorized by the National 
     Credit Union Central Liquidity Facility Act (12 U.S.C. 1795) 
     shall not exceed $600,000,000: Provided, That administrative 
     expenses of the Central Liquidity Facility in fiscal year 
     1996 shall not exceed $560,000.

                      National Science Foundation


                    research and related activities

       For necessary expenses in carrying out the purposes of the 
     National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 
     U.S.C. 1861-1875), and the Act to establish a National Medal 
     of Science (42 U.S.C. 1880-1881); services as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109; maintenance and operation of aircraft and 
     purchase of flight services for research support; acquisition 
     of aircraft; $2,294,000,000, of which not to exceed 
     $235,000,000 shall remain available until expended for Polar 
     research and operations support, and for reimbursement to 
     other Federal agencies for operational and science support 
     and logistical and other related activities for the United 
     States Antarctic program; the balance to remain available 
     until September 30, 1997: Provided, That receipts for 
     scientific support services and materials furnished by the 
     National Research Centers and other National Science 
     Foundation supported research facilities may be credited to 
     this appropriation: Provided further, That to the extent that 
     the amount appropriated is less than the total amount 
     authorized to be appropriated for included program 
     activities, all amounts, including floors and ceilings, 
     specified in the authorizing Act for those program activities 
     or their subactivities shall be reduced proportionally.


                        major research equipment

       For necessary expenses in carrying out major construction 
     projects, and related expenses, pursuant to the purposes of 
     the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 
     U.S.C. 1861-1875), $70,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended.


                    Academic Research Infrastructure

       For necessary expenses in carrying out an academic research 
     infrastructure program pursuant to the purposes of the 
     National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 
     U.S.C. 1861-1875), including services as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109 and rental of conference rooms in the District of 
     Columbia, $100,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 1997.


                     education and human resources

       For necessary expenses in carrying out science and 
     engineering education and human resources programs and 
     activities pursuant to the purposes of the National Science 
     Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1861-1875), 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and rental 
     of conference rooms in the District of Columbia, 
     $599,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 1997: 
     Provided, That to the extent that the amount of this 
     appropriation is less than the total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated for included program activities, all amounts, 
     including floors and ceilings, specified in the authorizing 
     Act for those program activities or their subactivities shall 
     be reduced proportionally.


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary salaries and expenses in carrying out the 
     purposes of the National 

[[Page S 14175]]
     Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1861-1875); 
     services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; not to exceed $9,000 for official reception and 
     representation expenses; uniforms or allowances therefor, as 
     authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902); rental of conference 
     rooms in the District of Columbia; reimbursement of the 
     General Services Administration for security guard services; 
     $127,310,000: Provided, That contracts may be entered into 
     under salaries and expenses in fiscal year 1996 for 
     maintenance and operation of facilities, and for other 
     services, to be provided during the next fiscal year.


                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, $4,490,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 1997.


          national science foundation headquarters relocation

       For necessary support of the relocation of the National 
     Science Foundation, $5,200,000: Provided, That these funds 
     shall be used to reimburse the General Services 
     Administration for services and related acquisitions in 
     support of relocating the National Science Foundation.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation


          payment to the neighborhood reinvestment corporation

       For payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation 
     for use in neighborhood reinvestment activities, as 
     authorized by the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 8101-8107), $38,667,000.

                        Selective Service System


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Selective Service System, 
     including expenses of attendance at meetings and of training 
     for uniformed personnel assigned to the Selective Service 
     System, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 4101-4118) for 
     civilian employees; and not to exceed $1,000 for official 
     reception and representation expenses; $22,930,000: Provided, 
     That during the current fiscal year, the President may exempt 
     this appropriation from the provisions of 31 U.S.C. 1341, 
     whenever he deems such action to be necessary in the interest 
     of national defense: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated by the Act may be expended for or in connection 
     with the induction of any person into the Armed Forces of the 
     United States.

                         DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity


                        fair housing activities

       For contracts, grants, and other assistance, not otherwise 
     provided for, as authorized by title VIII of the Civil Rights 
     Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 
     1988, and for contracts with qualified fair housing 
     enforcement organizations, as authorized by section 561 of 
     the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987, as amended 
     by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, 
     $30,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 1997.
       All functions, activities and responsibilities of the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development relating to title 
     VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair 
     Housing Amendments Act of 1988, and the Fair Housing Act, 
     including any rights guaranteed under the Fair Housing Act 
     (including any functions relating to the Fair Housing 
     Initiatives program under section 561 of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1987), are hereby transferred to 
     the Attorney General of the United States.

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

             Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight

       For carrying out the Federal Housing Enterprise Financial 
     Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, $14,895,000, to remain 
     available until expended, for the Federal Housing Enterprise 
     Oversight Fund: Provided, That such funds shall be collected 
     as authorized by sections 1316(a) and (b) of such Act, and 
     deposited in the Fund under section 1316(f) of such Act: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Secretary of the Treasury shall have all powers and 
     rights of the Director and the Fund shall be within the 
     Department of the Treasury.

                                TITLE IV

                              CORPORATIONS

       Corporations and agencies of the Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development which are subject to the Government 
     Corporation Control Act, as amended, are hereby authorized to 
     make such expenditures, within the limits of funds and 
     borrowing authority available to each such corporation or 
     agency and in accord with law, and to make such contracts and 
     commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as 
     provided by section 104 of the Act as may be necessary in 
     carrying out the programs set forth in the budget for 1996 
     for such corporation or agency except as hereinafter 
     provided: Provided, That collections of these corporations 
     and agencies may be used for new loan or mortgage purchase 
     commitments only to the extent expressly provided for in this 
     Act (unless such loans are in support of other forms of 
     assistance provided for in this or prior appropriations 
     Acts), except that this proviso shall not apply to the 
     mortgage insurance or guaranty operations of these 
     corporations, or where loans or mortgage purchases are 
     necessary to protect the financial interest of the United 
     States Government.

                      Resolution Trust Corporation


                      Office of Inspector General

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, $11,400,000.

                                TITLE V

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Section 501. Where appropriations in titles I, II, and III 
     of this Act are expendable for travel expenses and no 
     specific limitation has been placed thereon, the expenditures 
     for such travel expenses may not exceed the amounts set forth 
     therefor in the budget estimates submitted for the 
     appropriations: Provided, That this section shall not apply 
     to travel performed by uncompensated officials of local 
     boards and appeal boards of the Selective Service System; to 
     travel performed directly in connection with care and 
     treatment of medical beneficiaries of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs; to travel performed in connection with 
     major disasters or emergencies declared or determined by the 
     President under the provisions of the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; to travel 
     performed by the Offices of Inspector General in connection 
     with audits and investigations; or to payments to interagency 
     motor pools where separately set forth in the budget 
     schedules: Provided further, That if appropriations in titles 
     I, II, and III exceed the amounts set forth in budget 
     estimates initially submitted for such appropriations, the 
     expenditures for travel may correspondingly exceed the 
     amounts therefor set forth in the estimates in the same 
     proportion.
       Sec. 502. Appropriations and funds available for the 
     administrative expenses of the Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development and the Selective Service System shall be 
     available in the current fiscal year for purchase of 
     uniforms, or allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 
     U.S.C. 5901-5902); hire of passenger motor vehicles; and 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
       Sec. 503. Funds of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development subject to the Government Corporation Control Act 
     or section 402 of the Housing Act of 1950 shall be available, 
     without regard to the limitations on administrative expenses, 
     for legal services on a contract or fee basis, and for 
     utilizing and making payment for services and facilities of 
     Federal National Mortgage Association, Government National 
     Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, 
     Federal Financing Bank, Resolution Trust Corporation, Federal 
     Reserve banks or any member thereof, Federal Home Loan banks, 
     and any insured bank within the meaning of the Federal 
     Deposit Insurance Corporation Act, as amended (12 U.S.C. 
     1811-1831).
       Sec. 504. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 505. No funds appropriated by this Act may be 
     expended--
       (1) pursuant to a certification of an officer or employee 
     of the United States unless--
       (A) such certification is accompanied by, or is part of, a 
     voucher or abstract which describes the payee or payees and 
     the items or services for which such expenditure is being 
     made, or
       (B) the expenditure of funds pursuant to such 
     certification, and without such a voucher or abstract, is 
     specifically authorized by law; and
       (2) unless such expenditure is subject to audit by the 
     General Accounting Office or is specifically exempt by law 
     from such audit.
       Sec. 506. None of the funds provided in this Act to any 
     department or agency may be expended for the transportation 
     of any officer or employee of such department or agency 
     between his domicile and his place of employment, with the 
     exception of any officer or employee authorized such 
     transportation under title 31, United States Code, section 
     1344.
       Sec. 507. None of the funds provided in this Act may be 
     used for payment, through grants or contracts, to recipients 
     that do not share in the cost of conducting research 
     resulting from proposals not specifically solicited by the 
     Government: Provided, That the extent of cost sharing by the 
     recipient shall reflect the mutuality of interest of the 
     grantee or contractor and the Government in the research.
       Sec. 508. None of the funds provided in this Act may be 
     used, directly or through grants, to pay or to provide 
     reimbursement for payment of the salary of a consultant 
     (whether retained by the Federal Government or a grantee) at 
     more than the daily equivalent of the rate paid for Level IV 
     of the Executive Schedule, unless specifically authorized by 
     law.
       Sec. 509. None of the funds in this Act shall be used to 
     pay the expenses of, or otherwise compensate, non-Federal 
     parties intervening in regulatory or adjudicatory 
     proceedings. Nothing herein affects the authority of the 
     Consumer Product Safety Commission pursuant to section 7 of 
     the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2056 et seq.).
       Sec. 510. Except as otherwise provided under existing law 
     or under an existing Executive order issued pursuant to an 
     existing law, the obligation or expenditure of any 
     appropriation under this Act for contracts for any consulting 
     service shall be limited to contracts which are (1) a matter 
     of public record and available for public inspection, 

[[Page S 14176]]
     and (2) thereafter included in a publicly available list of all 
     contracts entered into within twenty-four months prior to the 
     date on which the list is made available to the public and of 
     all contracts on which performance has not been completed by 
     such date. The list required by the preceding sentence shall 
     be updated quarterly and shall include a narrative 
     description of the work to be performed under each such 
     contract.
       Sec. 511. Except as otherwise provided by law, no part of 
     any appropriation contained in this Act shall be obligated or 
     expended by any executive agency, as referred to in the 
     Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 401 et 
     seq.) for a contract for services unless such executive 
     agency (1) has awarded and entered into such contract in full 
     compliance with such Act and the regulations promulgated 
     thereunder, and (2) requires any report prepared pursuant to 
     such contract, including plans, evaluations, studies, 
     analyses and manuals, and any report prepared by the agency 
     which is substantially derived from or substantially includes 
     any report prepared pursuant to such contract, to contain 
     information concerning (A) the contract pursuant to which the 
     report was prepared, and (B) the contractor who prepared the 
     report pursuant to such contract.
       Sec. 512. Except as otherwise provided in section 506, none 
     of the funds provided in this Act to any department or agency 
     shall be obligated or expended to provide a personal cook, 
     chauffeur, or other personal servants to any officer or 
     employee of such department or agency.
       Sec. 513. None of the funds provided in this Act to any 
     department or agency shall be obligated or expended to 
     procure passenger automobiles as defined in 15 U.S.C. 2001 
     with an EPA estimated miles per gallon average of less than 
     22 miles per gallon.
       Sec. 514. Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 
     1996 pay raises for programs funded by this Act shall be 
     absorbed within the levels appropriated in this Act.
       Sec. 515. None of the funds appropriated in title I of this 
     Act shall be used to enter into any new lease of real 
     property if the estimated annual rental is more than $300,000 
     unless the Secretary submits, in writing, a report to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Congress and a period of 
     30 days has expired following the date on which the report is 
     received by the Committees on Appropriations.
       Sec. 516. (a) Purchase of American-Made Equipment and 
     Products.--It is the sense of the Congress that, to the 
     greatest extent practicable, all equipment and products 
     purchased with funds made available in this Act should be 
     American-made.
       (b) Notice Requirement.--In providing financial assistance 
     to, or entering into any contract with, any entity using 
     funds made available in this Act, the head of each Federal 
     agency, to the greatest extent practicable, shall provide to 
     such entity a notice describing the statement made in 
     subsection (a) by the Congress.
       Sec. 517. None of the funds appropriated in this Act may be 
     used to implement any cap on reimbursements to grantees for 
     indirect costs, except as published in Office of Management 
     and Budget Circular A-21.
       Sec. 518. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used for any program, project, or activity, when it is 
     made known to the Federal entity or official to which the 
     funds are made available that the program, project, or 
     activity is not in compliance with any Federal law relating 
     to risk assessment, the protection of private property 
     rights, or unfunded mandates.
       [Sec. 519. (a) Contractor Conversion.--The Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency shall cease any further 
     hiring in the Agency's Office of Research and Development.
       [(b) Report.--Not later than January 1, 1996, the head of 
     the Office of Research and Development of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall submit to the Congress a report on 
     all staffing plans including the use of Federal and contract 
     employees.]
       Sec. 520. Such funds as may be necessary to carry out the 
     orderly termination of the Office of Consumer Affairs shall 
     be made available from funds appropriated to the Department 
     of Health and Human Services for fiscal year 1996.
       This Act may be cited as the ``Departments of Veterans 
     Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the Chair.
  The Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development 
and independent agencies appropriations bill for fiscal year 1996 
embodies a comprehensive and systematic restructuring of Federal 
programs and activities within its jurisdiction.
  Critical activities are refocused and supported.
  Reforms to begin the difficult process of restoring fiscal reality 
and improving efficiency are initiated.
  Over $1 billion of obsolete and failed activities are terminated.
  The proliferation of small, burdensome, categorical programs is 
cleared away and delegated in block grants to States and local 
governments.
  Unsustainable policy mandates are repealed.
  Now, Mr. President, there is no longer any dispute over the critical 
need to reduce excessive Federal spending and to bring the budget back 
into balance. It has been nearly 30 years since the Federal Government 
curbed its appetite for spending to match its income. Since that time, 
Federal outlays have increased from $184 billion to nearly $1.6 
trillion. The gross Federal debt has soared from less than $370 billion 
to nearly $5 trillion. Interest on the Federal debt now exceeds the 
$260 billion annual expenditure for all domestic discretionary programs 
by over $100 billion.
  Unless these alarming budgetary trends are reversed, resources 
available for discretionary programs such as those funded in this 
appropriations bill will soon shrink to negligible levels. The 
committee accepts measured reductions in discretionary spending as a 
necessary component of the multiyear budgetary plan to balance the 
Federal budget by the year 2002, if only because the consequences of 
failing to make such prudent reductions will be devastating, not only 
for ourselves, but our children, and their children. In addition, a 
balanced Federal budget will fuel new vitality in our Nation's economy 
which will provide the revenue necessary to sustain the priority 
programs which we propose to continue.
  The artificial stimulus of runaway deficit spending has failed. It is 
collapsing under the weight of a massive Federal debt, and is being 
crowded out by the pressure to meet interest payments on the debt and 
other mandatory costs. The bitter medicine of the congressional budget 
resolution is the only antidote to this poisoning of our Nation's 
economic health. If we stay the course, and cure our addiction to 
deficit spending, we have our best chance of sustaining the truly 
critical programs included in this appropriations bill.
  Finally, the budget crisis has created a rare opportunity to address 
long-festering problems and reexamining long-entrenched social dogma 
underpinning many failed governmental programs.
  Welfare reform, in part, is being implemented in the restructuring of 
low-income housing assistance programs funded in this appropriations 
bill. The 1960's era strategy of building high-rise public housing for 
families has failed. There is broad acceptance that these drug-
infested, crime-breeding blights must be demolished. This bill provides 
a targeted focus on such efforts, but it also examines the root causes 
of such horrendously expensive failures and recommends comprehensive 
reform proposals to prevent such conditions from reoccurring, including 
efforts to encourage employment by recipients.
  The committee recommendation provides for the termination or 
consolidation of scores of duplicative, wasteful or otherwise 
unnecessary programs and activities. The bill terminates five 
agencies--the Corporation for National and Community Service, 
AmeriCorps, the Office of Consumer Affairs, the Chemical Safety and 
Hazard Board, the Community Development Financial Institutions Board, 
and the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, whose functions 
are transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury. In addition, the bill 
reflects the previously mandated termination of the Resolution Trust 
Corporation.
  Another aspect of this bill is the assessment of the value of 
services provided by agencies, such as the Department of Veterans 
Affairs. In some cases, existing delivery schemes and organizational 
structures have been found deficient. For example, while most veterans 
medical facilities deliver top quality health services, many instances 
of systemic inefficiencies and a number of cases of substandard care 
have been painfully documented.
  The committee is recommending accelerated adoption of modern medical 
practices for health care delivery in the VA system. In addition, the 
committee has targeted budgetary reductions in the Washington, DC, 
headquarters bureaucracy which impede, rather than facilitate, 
innovation and initiative at the local hospital and clinic level.
  Mr. President, in the short time since I have assumed the 
chairmanship of this subcommittee, I have appealed and appealed again 
to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for his help and assistance. 
During consideration of the budget resolution, I expressed my concern 

[[Page S 14177]]
over the potential impact of discretionary budget reductions on the 
Department of Veterans Affairs, and I specifically requested the advice 
and recommendations of the Secretary on how we could minimize the 
adverse effects of the constrained resources.
  I wrote to the Secretary again after the House passed its 
appropriations bill in July and again in August. In each instance, the 
Secretary has not only failed to be responsive but has embarked instead 
on an concerted campaign to whip up opposition by veterans 
organizations and members of his own Department against any reforms or 
changes or improvements in the way the Department does business.
  We can admire the Secretary for his tenacious advocacy of veterans 
service and benefits, but as the chief administrator of a $37 billion 
agency, he must also accept responsibility for working with the rest of 
the administration and the Congress in improving management of his 
Department to meet the challenges of a declining discretionary Federal 
budget.
  Despite the $9 billion overall reduction in the bill for 
discretionary appropriations, we are recommending an increase of $235 
million for VA medical care. In a few instances, the committee was able 
to recommend modest increases in other VA accounts over the levels 
contained in the House-passed bill, such as $5 million for medical 
research and $59 million to accelerate veterans claims processing. 
There should be no doubt our goal is to improve services and benefits 
for our Nation's veterans. What is more important, during these times 
of budgetary constraint, our goal can be accomplished with overall 
reductions in the rate of increase of funding for the Department if we 
insist that the VA modernize its operations and reduce administrative 
overhead.
  With the cooperation and help of the veterans, their service 
organizations and the Secretary, we could achieve this goal that we all 
share.
  Mr. President, the committee has also seized this opportunity to 
probe deeply into the structure and management of the Environmental 
Protection Agency. The critical mission served by the EPA requires 
substantial direct funding and, through its regulatory authorities, 
imposes a tremendous financial burden on the economy and on all 
Americans.
  The committee has recommended a new focus in the agency on improving 
the quality of the scientific basis for its regulatory decisionmaking.
  In addition, the committee reviewed the internal resource allocation 
management structure of EPA and is recommending a number of 
improvements to assure better cooperation with other levels of 
Government and to focus Federal expenditures on activities of greater 
environmental benefit.
  The amount provided for EPA is $5.66 billion. While this represents a 
reduction of about $1 billion below the fiscal year 1995 level, it is 
an increase of $769 million, 16 percent over the House.
  The cuts below last year come primarily from Superfund and sewer 
treatment earmarks. As to Superfund, it is my strong view that there is 
no need to throw more money at a program which does not work and which 
badly needs to be reauthorized, revamped, and modernized. There is 
overwhelming documentation of how lawyers and other administrative cost 
burdens are milking the lion's share of these funds. This allocation of 
resources serves neither the environment nor the taxpayers, nor those 
who are being assessed charges for these activities.
  While the authorizing committee is preparing reform legislation, we 
propose a moratorium on low-priority Superfund work.
  Last year's bill also included about $800 million in sewer 
construction earmarks for specific cities. All of that is eliminated in 
this year's bill. By eliminating these earmarks, the committee was able 
to increase to $1.5 billion the appropriation for the State revolving 
funds which are distributed on an equitable formula basis to finance 
wastewater treatment facilities across the Nation. This is a 21 percent 
increase in a critical form of assistance to States and localities in 
meeting Federal clean water mandates and safe drinking water mandates 
if the measure is authorized.
  The recommendation provides close to current funding levels for EPA's 
core operating programs--research, standard setting, technical 
assistance activities--while eliminating programs which are not crucial 
to the agency's core mission or which duplicate private sector or other 
agencies or State activities.
  The committee recommends providing full funding to the States for 
their critical environmental programs which they run. More than 40 
percent of the appropriations, $2.34 billion, goes directly to the 
States for grants to meet environmental mandates. This is an increase 
of $310 million over last year, and by providing those funds in a 
separate account for the first time, we can be sure that EPA will not 
be dipping into State funds to fund its own activities.
  A great deal of attention has been focused on the so-called 
legislative riders included in the House-passed bill. Although House 
floor action concerned 17 of these provisions, the House bill, as it 
was finally passed, contained a total of 23 of these riders.
  As cochairman of the regulatory reform task force, as a member of the 
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, I am well aware of the 
need to restructure and redirect many of the regulatory policies of 
EPA. Furthermore, many of us are concerned over how current 
environmental statutes have been broadly interpreted, indeed in some 
instances we could say misinterpreted, by some courts to mandate 
actions never contemplated by the Congress.
  I have been working, in those capacities in which I serve, to seek 
the fundamental changes in our environmental laws which are long 
overdue and necessary to reduce regulatory burdens while protecting our 
citizens and the environment and ensuring that the vitally important 
work of improving the environment continues and that we not step 
backward. These are, however, very complex issues which demand close 
examination and careful consideration. That is why in formulating our 
recommendations, rather than using the House bill as a base, we did an 
independent assessment of those issues that could and should be 
addressed in this appropriations bill.
  In drafting this bill, we set forth the standard that we would limit 
the so-called ``riders,'' administrative provisions or legislative 
provisions, as they might be called, to matters which have previously 
been enacted into law in appropriations acts, or passed the Senate in 
other current legislation, are needed to eliminate duplication or 
unnecessary spending, or were narrowly drafted to meet a specific 
misapplication of law or policy.
  Only one of the 23 House riders met this test: A limitation against 
EPA mandated car pooling. Two were modified to limit their application 
or clarify their intent--car inspection and maintenance and wetlands 
overfiling by EPA--and two others relating to drinking water were 
combined. The rest have been stricken.
  The committee is recommending three additional provisions: One 
relating to MTBE use in Alaska, foreign refineries, and Superfund 
listings, all of which have been previously enacted. These are eight 
provisions that the committee believes are appropriate and necessary to 
warrant consideration. A list of these provisions are included in the 
agency summary attached to my statement.
  Mr. President, one aspect of this bill which deserves special 
attention, however, is the committee's recommendations for the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
  The committee's report contains an extensive analysis of the 
management and budgetary morass afflicting this Department along with 
an explanation of our proposed reforms. The committee's recommendations 
reflect many months of work on a focused and detailed examination of 
HUD and its housing programs. Beginning with a series of special 
hearings in January, and drawing upon the previous work of the HUD 
inspector general, the General Accounting Office, and the National 
Academy of Public Administration, the committee probed deeply into 
these complex issues. The committee's preliminary recommendations were 
reflected in the rescission bill enacted earlier this year which cut 
HUD funding by $6.3 billion and redirected housing budgetary resources 
towards the 

[[Page S 14178]]
more critical concerns of demolishing failed and obsolete projects.
  At that time the committee urged prompt action by the authorizing 
committees on urgently needed legislative reforms. These statutory 
changes are needed to curb the cost of these discretionary programs. 
Unfortunately, since this legislation has not yet moved, we have been 
compelled to include these reforms in the appropriations bill, because 
without these changes, the funds we appropriated would be wasted in 
perpetuating many of the inefficient, ineffective, counter-productive 
policies which created this mess in the first place. Our only 
alternative would have been to terminate funding, which would result in 
the displacement of thousands of families which depend on this 
assistance, and loss of desperately needed affordable housing 
opportunities.
  Mr. President, that is the crux of the issues confronting us. We 
either take on this enormous task, not only of finding the substantial 
budgetary resources necessary to sustain these programs, but also of 
restructuring a host of very complex housing laws and programs, or, 
abdicate our responsibilities for providing housing assistance to needy 
families. We chose the more difficult and burdensome course.
  Reforming these housing programs will take time, it will take 
discipline, it will take concerted effort, and it will entail 
sacrifice. If we fail, the consequences for families currently 
receiving or seeking assistance could be catastrophic, especially if we 
permit the current inventory of public and assisted housing stock to 
deteriorate further. The repercussions for our cities will be equally 
dire if these housing developments, rather than slowing or halting the 
decline of inner-city neighborhoods, merely become examples of further 
disinvestment.
  Mr. President, I am pleased that this bill does stand for a 
commitment to the important goals of the Federal assisted housing 
program. It not only provides the funding necessary, but together with 
needed program reforms, it represents a coherent strategy for cleaning 
up the mess at HUD, and enabling us to place these programs on a sound 
footing to survive the further rounds of budget cuts which will follow 
over the next several years.
  During Committee markup of this bill, concern was expressed over the 
potential cost of the legislative provisions associated with the HUD 
multi-family inventory. The three provisions in question were proposed 
to reduce the ongoing subsidy cost of maintaining these 1.6 million 
units of privately owned apartments which are covered by an assistance 
contract or by a FHA mortgage guarantee. The first would permit HUD to 
conduct a limited demonstration of its mark-to-market initiative along 
with other multi-family project workout strategies. The second provides 
authority to maintain project-based assistance for expiring contracts 
under limited circumstances. The third reforms the Low-Income Housing 
Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act [LIHPRHA] by replacing 
expensive section 8 subsidies with one-time capital grants and loans as 
a lower cost incentive to preserve existing affordable housing stock.
  The HUD multifamily portfolio costs taxpayers about $8 billion each 
year to subsidize, maintain, and pay-off loan losses, and these costs 
are rising because of inflationary factors and deterioration in this 
aging inventory of apartment buildings. The administrative provisions 
proposed by the committee are intended to enable HUD to reduce these 
costs by terminating subsidies for substandard or non-viable projects, 
and to squeeze out excessive subsidies from others. While these steps 
are necessary to substantially reduce the long-term cost of this 
inventory, when compared to the existing budgetary baseline, the 
measures recommended would cause a temporary increase in outlays. These 
costs in fiscal year 1996 result from recognition of mortgage guarantee 
losses, capital costs of preserving older assisted projects, and 
providing alternative subsidies to replace more costly section 8 
contracts.
  Unfortunately these costs cannot be accommodated within the 
subcommittee's very constrained budget allocation, even though they 
save money over the longer term.
  I might add that we have worked with the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development, Office of Management Budget and Congressional Budget 
Office, and staffs on both sides of the aisle, to come to agreement on 
these very difficult problems. We have found that the solution to these 
problems is in no way simple and its complexities has forced us to 
postpone the implementation of these actions. We hope to continue to 
work with the Members on both sides, as well as the agency, OMB, and 
CBO, as we seek to unravel some very, very difficult problems which are 
facing us here.
  The Committee, therefore, was forced to insert language which would 
have the effect of delaying the effective date of these provisions 
until fiscal year 1997. This does not lessen the need to take immediate 
action on these issues, nor the Committee's intent to seek alternatives 
which can be accommodated within this year's budget allocation.
  I hope as this bill progresses, we will be able to come to better 
solutions which can begin the process of unraveling these difficult and 
costly problems earlier rather than later.
  Failure by Congress to address this issue during this session will 
only exacerbate the budgetary shortfall threatening this large and 
critical inventory of assisted housing, and will lead to needless 
displacement of tens of thousands of low-income families, including the 
elderly and disabled, in fiscal year 1996 and beyond.
  Mr. President, this appropriations bill reflects two principal 
concerns, both budgetary in nature. The first is the reversal in trend 
of annual increases in budgetary outlays for discretionary activities.
  Over the past decade, discretionary outlays for programs funded in 
this bill have increased at an average annual rate approaching 15 
percent per year, primarily driven by the cumulative growth in low-
income housing assistance programs and inflationary costs related to 
veterans medical care. The congressional budget resolution for fiscal 
year 1996, H. Con. Res. 67, however, abruptly reverses this trend, 
halting further continued expenditure growth in these programs. To 
comply with this dramatic shift in spending policies, the recently 
enacted Rescission Act for fiscal year 1995, Public Law 104-19, 
canceled a total of $8,500,000,000 in previously appropriated funds for 
programs included in this bill.
  The second, and perhaps more significant budgetary concern is the 
future year constraints reflected in the budget resolution 7-year 
projection toward eliminating the Federal deficit by the year 2002. 
While overall nondefense discretionary expenditures are required to 
drop by 2.9 percent in fiscal year 1996, the reduction proposed for 
fiscal year 1997 totals 4.4 percent, and approximately 2 percent per 
year thereafter.
  The committee, therefore, is confronting a profound shift from year-
to-year budgetary increases to a multi-year period of substantial 
declines in aggregate funding support, in addition to the erosion in 
program levels resulting from inflationary factors. This reversal in 
funding trends is especially substantial for activities and programs 
sustained by funding in this appropriations bill.
  The bill as recommended appropriates a discretionary total of $61.6 
billion in budget authority. While this is $1.3 billion more than the 
House-passed measure, it is nearly $9 billion less than the President's 
budget request and the originally enacted fiscal year 1995 level.
  The White House, and some of my colleagues, have protested the 
overall size of these reductions. Frankly, when the committee 
originally established its subcommittee budget allocations, I also felt 
that programs funded in this bill should receive greater budgetary 
support. But to oppose this measure on the basis of its aggregate 
funding level fails to account for the necessary improvements and 
reforms we are proposing, and ignores the crisis of deficit spending 
which requires much more sacrifice and budgetary reductions in the 
years to come.
  Mr. President, this is only a first step in long difficult march 
toward a balanced budget.
  The change in direction from the growing budgets of the past to this 
declining one was abrupt, and could be moderated to avoid some 
temporary 

[[Page S 14179]]
disruption. There should be no confusion or doubt, however, that these 
reduction must be made, and will be made either in fiscal year 1996, or 
soon thereafter.
  Mr. President, for the reasons I have set forth, I believe this is a 
responsible and necessary bill, one which the Senate should support and 
pass. It addresses our urgent need to rein in Federal spending. It does 
so in a manner that limits and targets these resources to the highest 
priority needs, and aggressively pursues improvements in program 
management to require increased effectiveness from these expenditures. 
Finally, where appropriate and necessary, the committee has recommended 
program and policy reforms which correct well documented deficiencies 
in current activities.
  I urge all my colleagues will support this bill, and I hope it will 
be enacted into law soon.
  I truly hope that my colleagues will support this bill and I hope 
that it will be enacted into law in the very near future.
  Mr. President, before turning to my distinguished ranking member, I 
ask unanimous consent that a bill summary of H.R. 2099 be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                        Bill Summary--H.R. 2099


                         appropriations summary

       F.Y. 1995 enacted--$89,920,161,061.
       F.Y. 1996 request--89,899,762,093.
       F.Y. 1996 House--79,697,360,000.
       F.Y. 1996 Senate--80,983,986,000.
       (Includes VA mandatory items).


                             agency summary

     Department of Housing and Urban Development
       F.Y. 1995 enated--$25,453,518,000.
       F.Y. 1996 request--24,340,032,000.
       F.Y. 1996 House--19,391,383,000.
       F.Y. 1996 Senate--20,329,167,000.
       The Committee is proposing landmark changes in the 
     structure and nature of housing policies to enable local 
     housing agencies, community organizations, and the private 
     housing industry to adjust to declining Federal subsidy 
     levels which have sustained and expanded this enterprise over 
     the past 30 years. These program and policy changes cannot be 
     implemented without some hardships and dislocations. However, 
     unless this process is immediately undertaken with focused 
     deliberation and determination, the potential for devastating 
     loss of affordable housing stock and homelessness will 
     greatly increase.
       In addition to these policy changes, the Committee is 
     recommending major restructuring of the Department's programs 
     to eliminate an unwieldy number of proliferating categorical 
     activities, in favor of broad, multi-purpose, financial 
     assistance grants to States and local units of government. 
     This effort is designed to reduce the crushing weight of 
     Federal administrative and regulatory burdens on local 
     program managers, and to reduce sharply an agency which 
     widely has been cited as among the most dysfunctional in the 
     Government.
       The Committee concurs with much of the criticism voiced of 
     this Department, and agrees that this organization must be 
     completely transformed if it is to survive under the 
     budgetary pressures and popular demands for greater program 
     accountability. It is clear, however, that irrespective of 
     whether this Department continues to exist, there remains a 
     substantial and growing need for housing and urban 
     development in the Nation. Previous commitments by Congress 
     to meet these housing needs make it incumbent on the Federal 
     Government to continue a major role in this area. Moreover, 
     the magnitude of previous appropriated budgetary commitments 
     and financial obligations of the Department demand a 
     substantial and effective entity to administer them. Fiscal 
     prudence alone demands aggressive efforts to protect these 
     financial interests.
       The bill consolidates or eliminates a number of the 240 HUD 
     categorical grants into block grants. This bill eliminates 
     funding for the following separate HUD appropriations:
       1. Flexible Subsidy Program.
       2. HOPE I, II, III, and VI.
       3. Congregate Services.*
       4. Homeownership Trust.
       5. Sec. 235 Homeownership Refinancing.
       6. Housing Counseling Assistance.*
       7. Service Coordinators.*
       8. Public Housing development.
       9. Public Housing amendments.
       10. Tenant opportunity program.*
       11. Pension Fund program.
       12. New Initiatives.
       13. Family Investment Centers.*
       14. Family self-sufficiency coordinators.*
       15. Loan Management.
       16. Section 23 Conversions.
       17. Foster child care.*
       18. Special Purpose Grants.
       *May be funded under supportive services block grant.
     Department of Veterans Affairs
       F.Y. 1995 enacted, $18,244,869,061.
       F.Y. 1996 request, 19,245,000,093.
       F.Y. 1996 House, 18,361,637,000.
       F.Y. 1996 Senate, 17,976,943,000.
       (Discretionary only).
       The cost growth in medical services provided to veterans 
     cannot be continued during this period of declining 
     discretionary budgetary resources. It is imperative that the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs aggressively pursue reforms in 
     management and service delivery to utilize available funds 
     more efficiently, to prevent reductions in assistance levels 
     to eligible veterans.
       The veteran population is declining, and its needs are 
     changing as it ages. While the Veterans Health Administration 
     historically has been a hospital-based health care delivery 
     system primarily serving acute care needs, its population is 
     demanding community-based, outpatient and preventive health 
     care services. Far less is being demanded in the way of 
     inpatient services.
       It is clear that VA can do more with less--and can become a 
     more efficient, customer-oriented, high-quality health-care 
     delivery system. Numerous inefficiencies have been identified 
     in the VA medical system, including an over-reliance on 
     hospitalization rather than ambulatory care, excessive 
     payments related to its affiliations with medical schools, 
     poor management of its pharmaceutical procurement and 
     delivery systems, its bureaucratic administration of 
     ascertaining veterans eligibility for care, and its 
     insistence on maintaining services in under utilized areas.
       VA must become a more agile, efficient, and modern health 
     care delivery system, transitioning away from the hospital-
     based health care delivery system of the past. While less 
     than the amount requested, the Committee recommendation for 
     VA medical care represents the largest dollar increase over 
     current funding levels in the VA, HUD, and Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations bill, and will enable the Department 
     to begin to implement major, systemic changes to its health 
     care delivery system to enable it to become a leaner, more 
     efficient system.
       In view of the pending reoganization of the Veterans Health 
     Administration, and potential changes which may result, the 
     Committee has put a moratorium on new major construction 
     spending. However, the Department is to ensure that all 
     critical code deficiencies and accreditation requirements are 
     met through minor construction spending.
     National Aeronautics and Space Administration
       F.Y. 1995 enacted--$14,376,684,000.
       F.Y. 1996 request--14,260,000,000.
       F.Y. 1996 House--13,671,800,000.
       F.Y. 1996 Senate--13,798,500,000.
       NASA has been engaged in a comprehensive redirection of 
     basic operating principles to promote greater efficiency and 
     flexibility in pursuing major scientific and engineering 
     development programs. The Committee recommendation leaves 
     intact the Nation's commitment to deploy the International 
     Space Station, while making significant reductions in lower 
     priority activities of the agency.
       Also included in the bill are funds to continue critical 
     investments in aeronautical technologies which underpin the 
     future competitiveness of our Nation's commercial aircraft 
     manufacturing industry. These high value, high technology 
     products are crucial to maintaining one of our most 
     significant sources of export sales and domestic 
     manufacturing employment.
       The Committee also maintains adequate funding to pursue an 
     effective global-climate-change research program, and to 
     follow through on other on-going scientific mission 
     developments.
     Environmental Protection Agency
       F.Y. 1995 enacted--$7,240,887,000.
       F.Y. 1996 request--7,359,409,000.
       F.Y. 1996 House--4,892,430,000.
       F.Y. 1996 Senate--5,661,927,000.
       The Committee of the Nation to securing improvements in the 
     environment and to protect vital natural resources is 
     reflected in the Committee's recommendation to continue 
     substantial funding for this agency despite the overall 
     constraints of discretionary budgetary limitations. The 
     future year reduction in these funding levels will erode our 
     ability to maintain current levels of environmental 
     protection unless reforms are undertaken now to focus these 
     resources on the most significant threats to our air, water, 
     and land resources.
       The Committee held a hearing earlier this year on the need 
     to reform the Environmental Protection Agency, with a 
     particular focus on a report compiled by the National Academy 
     of Public Administration at this Committee's request. NAPA 
     recommended major systemic changes to EPA, and identified 
     numerous areas in which EPA is unnecessarily duplicating or 
     micromanaging state and private sector environmental 
     protection activities. NAPA recommended management and 
     structural changes which could bring about significant 
     efficiencies and improvements in the way EPA operates. In 
     addition, NAPA agreed that EPA is not adequately prioritizing 
     activities and resources based on risk to human health and 
     the environment.
       The Committee believes the NAPA recommendations should 
     provide the basis for change at EPA. The Committee's 
     recommendation for EPA is intended to begin to implement the 
     NAPA's suggestions, streamline EPA activities, and focus its 
     resources on high-risk areas.
       The Subcommittee recommendation includes eight legislative 
     provisions within EPA. All but one of the so-called riders in 
     the House bill have been eliminated or modified. The 
     Subcommittee limited most of the 

[[Page S 14180]]
     provisions to ones that have been included in previous VA-HUD bills or 
     other legislation, or eliminate duplication or unnecessary 
     spending. The provisions included are:
       1. Prohibiting EPA from requiring centralized inspection/
     maintenance facilities in FY96. This is the same language as 
     was included by the Senate in the National Highway System 
     bill.
       2. Prohibiting EPA from requiring employers to adopt car-
     pooling plans in FY96. This language is one of the House 
     ``riders'' and is the same language as was included in the 
     FY95 rescission bill.
       3. Prohibiting EPA from regulating radon and several other 
     drinking water contaminants in FY96 unless the drinking water 
     law is reauthorized. This provision is fully consistent with 
     EPA's own attempts to negotiate extensions to the Court-
     ordered deadlines for these low-priority contaminants. For 
     each of the contaminants in question, the relative risk is 
     low or the science is not fully developed to support science-
     based rulemakings.
       4. Prohibiting EPA from requiring in FY96 the use of MTBE 
     in Alaska where there have been health concerns raised 
     associated with the use of MTBE in FY96. This provision was 
     carried in the FY94 VA-HUD bill, and does not exempt Alaska 
     from Clean Air requirements.
       5. Prohibiting EPA from vetoing decisions made by the Corps 
     of Engineers regarding wetlands permits in FY96. This 
     provision is intended to prevent EPA from overfiling on the 
     Corps, and will streamline the Corps permitting process.
       6. Prohibiting EPA from adding any new sites to the 
     Superfund National Priorities list in FY96 unless requested 
     by the Governor or tribal leader, unless the Superfund law is 
     reauthorized. This is the same language included in the FY95 
     rescissions bill, and is consistent with the Subcommittee's 
     decision to limit Superfund spending to current health risks 
     pending reauthorization.
       7. Authorizing an exemption from water pretreatment 
     standards for industrial dischargers to the Kalamazoo water 
     plant if environmental standards are met through a local 
     pretreatment program. This provision is narrowly crafted and 
     will not result in any environmental degradation; it will 
     prevent duplicative and unnecessary wastewater treatment 
     construction.
       8. Foreign refiner baseline: Prohibiting EPA from enforcing 
     the foreign refiner baseline for reformulated gasoline. This 
     same provision was included in the FY95 VA-HUD bill, and 
     ensures that foreign refiners are held to the same 
     environmental standards as domestic refiners.
     National Science Foundation
       F.Y. 1995 enacted--$3,360,520,000.
       F.Y. 1996 request--3,360,000,000.
       F.Y. 1996 House--3,160,000,000.
       F.Y. 1996 Senate--3,200,000,000.
       The Committee's recommendation continues current funding 
     levels for the NSF which is responsible for most of the basic 
     research grant funding provided by the Federal Government. 
     Basic research, which seeks to improve our understanding of 
     fundamental scientific principles and processes, provides the 
     knowledge base which enriches our society and from which 
     spring the development of applied technologies which drive 
     our economy. Moreover, the Foundation is responsible for 
     model educational and human resource developmental activities 
     which seek to stimulate improvements in science and 
     mathematics education. These goals of the agency remain a 
     critical national priority which hopefully will be sustained 
     despite the impending reductions in discretionary budgets.
     Federal Emergency Management Agency
       F.Y. 1995 enacted--$821,907,000.
       F.Y. 1996 request--806,119,000.
       F.Y. 1996 House--694,937,000.
       F.Y. 1996 Senate--463,437,000.
       The Committee's recommendation for the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency ensures an adequate level of resources for 
     retaining a strong and capable national disaster management 
     system. While no funds are provided for the disaster relief 
     fund (a reduction of $320 million from the request and the 
     F.Y. 95 level), approximately $7 billion currently is 
     available for disaster relief owing to the recent 
     supplemental appropriation in Public Law 104-19.


                        Privileges of the Floor

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Steve 
Isakowitz, a staff member on temporary assignment to the committee, be 
permitted privileges of the floor during consideration of H.R. 2099.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Andrew Wheeler, 
legislative fellow for Senator Inhofe, be permitted privileges of the 
floor for the duration of the VA-HUD bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the Chair.
  Before yielding to my distinguished ranking member, I say to this 
body and to my colleague that it is a great honor and pleasure to be 
working with the Senator from Maryland on this bill.
  I had the pleasure of serving in the minority when she chaired this 
committee, and I found that she has tremendous knowledge, 
understanding, and insight into these programs.
  I have addressed in my remarks the need to begin to make some very 
significant reforms in the funding and in the operations of the 
agencies included within this appropriations bill.
  For the most part, the reforms we are advocating are ones that she 
initiated when she chaired this committee. They understand the vitally 
important work of all the agencies. Yet, she is also dedicated to the 
necessary reforms to assure that they provide the services that they 
are expected to provide in the most efficient and effective manner.
  While we do not agree on all issues in this bill, I say that it is 
with great appreciation that I have been able to work with my 
distinguished ranking member and her staff. I believe she has continued 
to supply very useful and helpful changes and recommendations.
  I look forward to working with her on this and other measures, 
particularly as we seek to achieve a final product that will be signed 
into law by the budget and will carry on the funding of the agencies 
funded by this VA-HUD bill.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I wish to thank the chairman of the VA-
HUD Subcommittee for his very cordial remarks to me. I must say I feel 
the same about him.
  I think we have worked very hard on this bill. I thank both him and 
his staff for what we have been able to do. We worked hard under very 
difficult conditions to get this bill to the floor.
  Mr. President, this is the toughest year that I have ever faced as a 
member of the Appropriations Committee. What made this year so tough? 
Our allocation, both the allocation to the full committee and then the 
allocation to this particular subcommittee.
  The allocation, as the President knows, is the sum total that we have 
to fund over 25 different Federal agencies, 7 of which are Cabinet 
level.
  Quite frankly, Mr. President, the VA-HUD Subcommittee's fiscal year 
1996 allocation is, indeed, skimpy. It is $5 billion below the Budget 
Committee's assumption in budget authority and $500 million below the 
assumption in outlays.
  What does that mean? It means that the bill before the Senate 
appropriates a total of $61 billion in discretionary budget authority 
which is, yes, $1.3 billion above the House, but almost $9 billion 
below President Clinton's fiscal year 1996 request and last year's 
funding level.
  Our allocation gave us little to work with in dealing with a bill 
that came from the House of Representatives. Under these conditions, 
Senator Bond has done a commendable job.
  I chaired this committee for 6 years. I brought six bills to the 
floor, so I know how much work it actually takes to do this. I want to 
thank Senator Bond for working so hard to maintain our cooperative 
working relationship.
  I am particularly grateful to Senator Bond's efforts to continue many 
of the initiatives for reform developed by this subcommittee over the 
past several years. His efforts are clear. He has clearly left 
footprints in the sand in trying to move a reform agenda both in the 
areas of HUD and EPA. I want to thank him for this.
  For example, this bill in reforming HUD puts into action the 
recommendations of the National Academy of Public Administration to 
reform the structure of HUD and consolidate its maze of programs.
  When I chaired the committee, I saw that HUD had over 200 programs, 
some a line item, a lot of them not really getting a dollar's worth of 
services for home ownership for the poor, as it was, for a dollar's 
worth of taxes.
  I know how it goes in Washington. If you propose any idea to change 
anything, somebody is going to come up with 12 ideas on why you will 
keep it.
  That is why I turned to an independent group called the National 
Association of Public Administrators to really scrub down both HUD and 
EPA so that we would know from a management standpoint what we needed 
to do to get our hands on both of those agencies to make sure that we 
are getting a dollar's worth of service for a dollar's worth of taxes.
  I believe in this legislation this bill does streamline EPA. It 
follows the 

[[Page S 14181]]
NAPA recommendations to streamline EPA's management and it gets started 
on a strategy to put EPA's resources where they are needed most. We 
want EPA to be a risk-based agency in which they focus on risk to human 
health and the environment as their highest priorities.
  Now, NAPA studied the need to reform both HUD and EPA. The studies 
were commissioned by this subcommittee more than 2 years ago in an 
effort to give the agencies what I call a navigational chart. 
Navigational charts are strategic plans to help the agencies do what 
they are most needed to do and in the most efficient way. This is where 
we have embarked upon reform, and I believe we have embarked upon it in 
HUD and EPA.
  There are other things about this bill that I like, one of which is 
in the area of the space program, the fact that Mission to Planet Earth 
funding is almost fully restored. A House bill cut much of this crucial 
space science program and the House language to close NASA space 
centers has been removed from this bill. This is very important to 
helping NASA as it goes through budget cuts yet needs to keep America's 
space program flying high.
  Because of the initiatives and framework put forth by Senator Bond, I 
believe we will be able to sustain what was badly being devastated.
  Second, another area that is very much appreciated is that veterans 
medical research is fully funded at the President's request of $257 
million.
  VA medical research is absolutely crucial, not only to America's 
veterans, but it provides hands-on specific clinical research 
associated with patient care, and much of what comes out of VA medical 
research goes immediately into the civilian population. It is an 
excellent program. I am pleased it is funded at $257 million.
  Third, this bill also will help those who want to help themselves. In 
the area of housing, it contains a moving to work demonstration for 
public housing residents, and Republican ceilings and income disregards 
to help support the working poor.
  In other words, in HUD we want to focus on giving help to those who 
practice self-help, and to have coordination with welfare reform. Now, 
if you work, you are actually penalized and unable to get into public 
housing; and also in the area of rent.
  I believe this reform begins to reward work which, Mr. President, is 
what we have to start doing in our public policy--rewarding work, 
promoting family stability, and particularly two-parent households.
  Another thing that this bill does is removes something called Federal 
housing preference. I believe that these preferences that look only at 
rewarding the pathology involved with people are creating zip codes of 
poverty--and zip codes of pathology.
  What we need in public housing is a mix among the poor--those who do 
not want to be poor and are working to get out of poverty and off of 
welfare, and also those who are now the working poor but whose incomes 
are so modest that a public housing subsidy actually would reward work; 
and I believe that is what we are going to do.
  I am also pleased that in the area of the National Science Foundation 
the committee's recommendation continues to current funding levels for 
the National Science Foundation which is responsible for most of the 
basic research funding and research grant funding provided by the 
Federal Government, basic research which seems to improve our 
understanding of the fundamental scientific principles and processes, 
and provides the knowledge base which enriches our society. It also 
continues to look at the strategic interests of the United States and 
how we can promote those.
  Moreover, the foundation is responsible also for model education and 
human resource development activities which seeks to stimulate 
improvement in science and math education. Boy, do we need it. I am 
glad that the funding will be there to continue to help the science 
foundation do that.
  These goals of the agency remain of critical national priority, which 
hopefully will be sustained despite the impending reductions in 
discretionary budgets.
  For FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, I ask unanimous 
consent that the figures related thereto be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency

Fiscal year:
    1995 enacted...........................................$821,907,000
    1996 request............................................806,119,000
    1996 House..............................................694,937,000
    1996 Senate.............................................463,437,000
  Let me say the committee's recommendation for FEMA ensures that 
adequate level of resources for retaining a strong and capable national 
disaster management system.
  This is absolutely crucial as we see hurricanes, earthquakes, and 
other natural disasters affecting the American people. I am glad that 
FEMA--and which is now funding--is moving to a risk-based strategy 
which, of course, enables us to meet those concerns that will most 
likely affect American communities.
  While no funds are provided for the disaster relief fund, 
approximately $7 billion is currently available, owing to the recent 
supplemental appropriations and Public Law 104-19.
  However, Mr. President, this bill also has several warning lights for 
me. One is an absolute red light. That is the fact that this bill 
contains no funding for national service. National service creates an 
opportunity structure. It enables young people to earn credit for 
higher education while serving in their communities. What does that 
credit mean? It means that, if you work in a national service program, 
like AmeriCorps, you will earn a voucher that you can use to reduce 
your student debt. It gives help to those who practice self-help. It 
gives middle-class young people access to the American dream like their 
parents have, and it gives poor kids an access to the American dream by 
also working and working toward that.
  This is very important because national service is exactly what we 
need. It fosters voluntarism. It rekindles the habits of heart. But it 
actually provides help to our young people with the biggest debt that 
they face when they graduate--their student loan debt which is their 
first mortgage. Without national service in this legislation, I cannot 
support the bill.
  Also, another flashing light is in the area of veterans' medical 
care. This bill reduces veterans' medical care to $511 million below 
the President's request, and $327 million below the House level. This 
is another area that I cannot support.
  This bill would also deny benefits to vets who become mentally and 
physically incapacitated. They served us during the wars, they served 
us unconditionally, and I oppose placing conditions on their earned 
benefits.
  Our veterans did not hesitate to risk their lives for our freedom and 
independence. There should be no hesitation to fund their health. When 
they went to war we told them we would provide health care, and I 
believe promises made should be promises kept.
  Another flashing light concerns EPA and the funding in this bill. EPA 
must be funded to protect environmental health and human safety. This 
bill funds EPA at $1.7 billion below the President's request. I believe 
it will hinder EPA's ability to do its job even though management 
reforms will be adopted and streamlined.
  Finally, this bill removes HUD's authority to enforce the Fair 
Housing Act as it applies to the property insurance industry. This bill 
means that HUD will have difficulty in enforcing, investigating, and 
even hearing and referring complaints about property insurance 
discrimination.
  I am opposed to this because removing this authority from HUD is 
really a step backward.
  I will be offering amendments to address these concerns that I have 
just raised, and so will some of my colleagues.
  In closing, I want to thank Senator Bond again for his hard work and 
his willingness. He wrestled with policy issues, and a very skimpy 
allocation. I again thank him for his cordiality in working with me, 
but also for his resourcefulness in trying to grapple with these fiscal 
and policy juggernauts that we are facing.
  Mr. President, I look forward to the debate. I know that there will 
be debate this afternoon on some of the top issues facing us. 

[[Page S 14182]]

  I now yield the floor.
  Mr. BOND addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.


         Committee Amendments Agreed To En Bloc With Exceptions

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee 
amendments be considered and agreed to en bloc with the following 
exceptions, which I believe have been cleared on the other side. The 
exceptions are the amendments on page 8, lines 9 and 10, VA medical 
care; page 12, line 9, VA major construction; page 21, line 1 through 
page 22, line 4, VA administrative provisions relating to parcel of 
land in Wichita, KS, and VA supply fund; page 22, line 10 through page 
34, line 24, HUD assisted housing, public housing demolition, and 
renewal accounts; page 38, line 24 through page 39, line 2, homeless 
assistance; page 44, lines 1-7 fair housing; page 45, lines 4-13, 
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight; page 51, line 3 through 
page 128, line 20, HUD administrative provisions; page 141, lines 5-12, 
Superfund general revenues; page 141, line 15 Superfund inspector 
general; page 141, line 20, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
Registry; page 143, line 17 through page 151, line 10, water 
infrastructure/SRF; program and infrastructure assistance; and EPA 
administrative provisions; page 158, lines 13-14, human space flight 
and delayed availability of funding; page 168, line 12 through page 169 
line 19, fair housing transfer to Department of Justice and Office of 
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight transfer to Treasury; page 177, 
line 16 through page 178, line 5, EPA contractor conversion; Office of 
Consumer Affairs termination; and that the bill, as thus amended, be 
regarded for the purpose of amendment as original text, provided that 
no points of order shall be considered to have been waived with respect 
to the committee amendments adopted by this motion.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  So the committee amendments, with the noted exceptions, were agreed 
to.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I gather that Members seeking to amend those 
provisions which are excepted will have to seek the guidance of the 
Parliamentarian on asking that the other amendments be set aside. I 
leave that to their ingenuity, and yield the floor.
  Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BUMPERS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Craig). The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


   Amendment No. 2776 To Committee Amendment On Page 158, Lines 13-14

  (Purpose: To reduce the appropriation for the implementation of the 
   space station program for the purpose of terminating the program)

  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending 
amendment be set aside in order for me to offer an amendment dealing 
with the space station.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, there is no agreement on time. I 
discussed this with Senator Mikulski, and at some point, perhaps this 
afternoon, with the consent of the majority leader, we will be able to 
reach a unanimous-consent agreement. My preference would be to go for 
an hour or so this afternoon, but most of my colleagues who wish to 
speak on this side of this issue are out of town and will not return 
until the morning.
  So I had hoped we could get an agreement to debate for 1 hour before 
the vote. I understand the majority leader wanted the vote immediately 
after the party caucuses tomorrow, and I have no objection to that. I 
would prefer the hour of debate take place after the caucuses, but I 
want to be cooperative with the majority leader, and I do not want to 
complicate his problem in scheduling the Senate.
  Now, Mr. President, I call up my amendment on the space station.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Bumpers], for himself and 
     Mr. Warner, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Bryan, Mr. Bradley, Mr. 
     Feingold, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Wellstone, and Mr. Simon, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 2776 to committee amendment on 
     page 158, lines 13-14.

  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       Strike lines 14 through 15 on page 158 and insert in lieu 
     thereof the following: ``$3,504,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 1996: Provided, That of the funds made 
     available under this heading, no funds shall be expended on 
     the Space Station program, except for termination costs.''

  Mr. BUMPERS. Now, just for opening, Mr. President, this amendment 
cuts $1,833,000,000 from the human space flight portion of the NASA 
budget, and it terminates the space station program.
  Now, Mr. President, I guess this is about the sixth consecutive year 
I have stood here in an effort to kill this program. I do not do this 
every year because I enjoy it; I do it because I have a deep and 
abiding feeling, a passionate feeling that there is not anything wrong 
with this country except the priorities Congress has set for the 
Nation. When it comes to the space station, let me just begin by making 
a simple proposition for my colleagues.
  If you think going to Mars is a highly desirable thing to do, even 
though in today's dollars it would cost $500 billion, then you should 
vote against this amendment. If you think determining how well the 
human body copes with long periods in space and that that is a 
sufficient justification for the space station, vote against our 
amendment. If you think the United States ought to equivalent of $25 
million a day for the entire 10-year period the space station will be 
deployed--let me repeat that--if you think the benefits from the space 
station justify taking $25 million of taxpayers' money every single day 
for 10 years, vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  If you think it is a wise use of the taxpayers' money to build 
something which indeed will be an engineering feat--not a scientific 
feat; please distinguish between the two; there is not any question, 
Mr. President, about our ability to throw this space station into 
space; we can do that; we may have a few calamities along the way, but 
we can do that--but if you think it is a wise use of the taxpayers' 
money to build something--you have heard that old expression, my mother 
used to say, ``It is worth its weight in gold''? If you think that the 
space station is worth 25 times its weight in gold, vote ``no'' on our 
amendment.
  If you think it is worth it to put this engineering feat in space 
with some idea of going to Mars and beyond--which I will prove to you 
categorically in a moment is the only justification for it--and that it 
is worth $12,880 of the taxpayers' money for every pound of water, 
chicken breast, supplies, or anything else we send up there--that is 
right. You can buy chicken at Giant for 59 to 69 cents a pound. For the 
space station, it is $12,880 per pound. If you believe all that, vote 
``no'' on this amendment.
  Now, Mr. President, Carl Sagan, is a well-known physicist and author, 
and I want to quote some of the things he says in a new book he has 
written.
  Let me say at the outset that Carl Sagan favors the space station. I 
can understand why somebody of his stature and in his position would 
favor the space station. But a moment ago I told you the only 
justification for the space station is to explore Mars and beyond. And 
from Carl Sagan's new book, let me give you a few quotes:

       I would argue that if we are not eventually going to send 
     people to worlds as far away as Mars, we have lost the chief 
     reason for the space station.

  If you want to argue with that, be my guest.

       A permanently occupied human outpost in Earth orbit, a 
     space station, is far from an optimum platform for doing 
     science, either looking down at the Earth or looking out into 
     space or for utilizing microgravity. The very presence of 
     astronauts messes things up.

  Almost every physicist in the country, Mr. President, will tell you 
that 

[[Page S 14183]]
doing research in microgravity with human beings on board is an 
oxymoron. You bump your head against the bulkhead, you take a step, you 
jar the space station and your experiment is lost.
  Continuing to quote Dr. Sagan:

       A space station is also unnecessary for human exploration 
     of the Moon. Apollo got there very well with no space station 
     at all. . . . But the only substantive function of a space 
     station, as far as I can see, is for long duration 
     spaceflight.

  Now, if this were country lawyer Dale Bumpers, Charleston, AR, 
telling you this thing, I would not expect you to pay any attention to 
it. And Carl Sagan is not the only person I am going to quote. I am 
going to quote some of the most outstanding experts in America who 
agree with me.
  Carl Sagan goes on:

       The only tangible and coherent goal of a space station is 
     eventual human missions to near-Earth asteroids, Mars, and 
     beyond.

  And listen to this, I say to my colleagues:

       Historically, NASA has been cautious about stating this 
     fact clearly, probably for fear that Members of Congress will 
     throw up their hands in disgust, denounce the space station 
     as the thin edge of an extremely expensive wedge and declare 
     the country unready to commit to launching people to Mars.

  Well, I would certainly hope Congress would do that.
  In the past, the authorities at NASA have been very reluctant to talk 
about Mars, because when you talk about Mars, you have to talk about 
$500 billion in today's dollars. Is it not amazing our priorities 
around here? I do not want to get ahead of myself. I will come back to 
that in a moment.
  Carl Sagan goes on, and I agree with him totally on this one and I 
think most people will, but they will not vote that way:

       There are other matters, clear crying national needs, that 
     cannot be addressed without major expenditures; at the same 
     time the Federal discretionary budget has become painfully 
     constrained. Disposal of chemical and radioactive poisons, 
     energy efficiency, alternatives to fossil fuels, declining 
     rates of technological innovation, the collapsing urban 
     infrastructure, the AIDS epidemic, a witches brew of cancer, 
     homelessness, malnutrition, infant mortality, education, 
     jobs, health care--there is a painfully long list. Ignoring 
     them will endanger the well-being of the Nation.

  I do not see how anybody could say that any better.
  Mr. President, if you are one of these poor, innocent souls that has 
been deluded into believing that somehow or another we are going to do 
medical research in space, let me give you some more. This is Dr. Allan 
Bromley, Presidential science adviser, in a letter to the Vice 
President:

       The space station is needed to find means of maintaining 
     human life during long space flights. This is the only 
     scientific justification, in our view, and all future design 
     efforts should be focused on this one purpose.

  Further,

       The Federation of American Societies for Experimental 
     Biology opposes using biological research as a major 
     justification for the space station.

  A quote from the American College of Physicians:

       We agree that much, if not all, of the money slated for the 
     space station, the superconducting super collider--

  This is before we killed that thing--

       SDI, defense intelligence, could be better spent on 
     improving the health of our citizens, stimulating economic 
     growth and reducing the deficit.

  I could not have said it better.
  And here is a statement by the American Physical Society from July 
1994. The American Physical Society is 40,000 physicists. Virtually 
every physicist in America belongs to it:

       The principal scientific mission of the station is to study 
     the effects on humans of prolonged exposure to a space 
     environment. Medical researchers scoff at claims that these 
     studies might lead to cures for diseases on Earth.

  Dr. Rosenthal, Harvard Medical School, testifying for the American 
Cancer Society in 1994:

       Statements have been made and published to the effect that 
     vital cancer research would be done in space, and that is 
     cited as a reason for supporting space station funding. We 
     cannot find valid scientific justification for these claims 
     and believe it is unrealistic to base a decision on funding 
     the space station on that information. Based on the 
     information we have seen thus far, we do not agree that a 
     strong case has been made for choosing to do cancer research 
     in space over other critically needed research here on Earth.

  Dr. Sean Rudy, Arthritis Foundation, before the Budget Committee of 
the House:

       Space station proponents have indicated that the space 
     station will provide a first-class laboratory. We used to 
     have first-class laboratories in universities and medical 
     schools across this country. Reports by the NIH and National 
     Science Foundation have indicated that over 51 percent of the 
     biological laboratory research space is deemed inadequate for 
     the conduct of research. Furthermore, the National Science 
     Foundation report estimated that the capital construction 
     backlog for laboratories on Earth is $12 billion. Should our 
     priorities now be a first-class laboratory in space or 
     correction of a longstanding deficiency in laboratories 
     throughout the country?

  James Van Allen, world-famous astrophysicist and discoverer of the 
Van Allen radiation belt around the Earth:

       There's been nothing that resulted from the manned space 
     program, essentially nothing in the way of extraordinary 
     pharmaceuticals or cures for disease or any extraordinary 
     crystals which have revolutionized electronics. It's all 
     false, it's not true.

  That is not Dale Bumpers talking, but Dr. James Van Allen, one of the 
premier astrophysicists of this century.
  Mr. President, so much for life sciences. And then there is that 
thing about microgravity. Dr. Bloembergen of Harvard summed up, 
``microgravity is of microimportance.'' I am reluctant to continue 
reading what scientists say, but repeating Carl Sagan, ``The very 
presence of astronauts messes things up.'' Dr. Allan Bromley again, 
Presidential science adviser, said,

       The human habitation of the space station is fundamentally 
     incompatible with the requirement that microgravity 
     experiments be unperturbed.

  The Space Studies Board of the National Research Council:

       The Board believes specifically that more microgravity 
     research progress could be achieved in a shorter period of 
     time and at a fraction of the cost through an expanded 
     program of Spacelab missions and of free flier experiments.

  In short, you do not have to have a manned space craft to do 
microgravity research.
  Mr. President, let us go to spinoffs. Everybody is always talking 
about what the spinoffs are going to be. I have yet to find anybody who 
says that the spinoffs are more than negligible. We have developed a 
space suit. There is no great demand for space suits in our Nation. 
There is, however, a great need to reduce crime, to feed the hungry, to 
educate our children, to house our people. But there is no demand for 
space suits.
  As Carl Sagan said, ``The spinoff justifications constitute an 
admission that the program cannot stand on its own two feet and cannot 
be justified by the purpose for which it was originally sold.''
  And listen to this one from the Wall Street Journal. I want all my 
opponents to scratch this subject out of their comments. They always 
make this point, and I want to kill it before it gets off the ground:

       Many widely believed origins of consumer products in the 
     Apollo program are simply untrue. Tang, hyped by General 
     Foods Corporation as a drink of astronauts, was first 
     marketed in 1957. Velcro . . . was developed in the 1940's. 
     And teflon . . . emerged from company labs in 1938, long 
     before rockets cleared the Earth's atmosphere. So too, 
     Corning Ware cookery hit the market several years before man 
     reached space.

  Now, Mr. President, there is an argument that we can grow protein 
crystals in space, or that we can do valuable research in physics by 
growing gallium arsenide metal crystals that could be used in 
manufacturing semiconductors. I am not going to continue reading to 
you, but I have quote after quote after quote saying: Totally false.
  Just use your common sense, colleagues. I want you to get up in 
opposition to this amendment and tell me about all the medical advances 
we have gotten out of the billions and billions we have spent on the 
space program. Tell me what it has done for cancer, AIDS, multiple 
sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, arthritis. Tell me what 
single advance made in the last 30 years came out of space. The 
Russians have had space stations since the mid 1970's. They are lucky 
that one has not been knocked out of the sky by a piece of debris. 
Something could happen one of these days. We can only hope that, after 
spending $90 billion to deploy this thing, it will not be knocked out 
of the sky by a baseball-size piece of space debris.
  When I talk about $94 billion for the cost of this thing, that is 
just this 

[[Page S 14184]]
year's estimate. Last year, the estimate was $72 billion. It goes up 
monumentally every year. Do you know what it does not include? It does 
not include that 1 to 2 percent chance that one of the shuttles is 
going to meet with a major catastrophe. Do you know what else it does 
not include? It does not include the risk, as I said, of a baseball-
size piece of debris hitting the space station, which is goodbye, 
adios, adieu, space station. No, the $94 billion figure assumes that 
everything is going to go perfectly. Who here believes that?
  Carl Sagan wrote me a letter and told me--I think perhaps you all got 
the same letter--how excited the people were about ``Apollo 13.'' I 
have not seen it. I understand it is a great movie, and I intend to see 
it. They were very brave men, but no braver than the one sitting near 
me right now, the first American to orbit the Earth. I consider John 
Glenn one of the dearest friends I ever had, but he just happens to be 
wrong on this issue. Everybody is entitled to their own positions.
  I will tell you all an interesting little anecdote. I was down at the 
Smithsonian one day and I saw that capsule John Glenn orbited the Earth 
in, and I came back and I said to him, ``John, weren't you terrified? I 
would be scared to death to get in that thing.'' He said, ``Well, to 
tell you the truth, I was sitting up their whistling. They had already 
scrubbed the flight a couple of times and I expected they would scrub 
it again. And then they said, `You have 60 seconds,' and I did not have 
time to get scared.''
  I looked at that capsule with new admiration for my colleague, one of 
my dearest friends. When I saw those people retrieve the Hubble 
telescope, I was glued to my television set just as you were. And last 
week, the astronauts were out on the arm of the totem pole retrieving 
another satellite that had gone awry. These are magnificent, brave 
people. But, colleagues, that is not what this debate is about. We have 
a lot of brave people in the country who cannot find jobs.
  But back to what you get out of it, I am just simply saying the 
American people have a right to expect us to do what is right for the 
future. The 1994 revolution, in my opinion, said: We do not believe 
your priorities are right. I can tell you, a lot of people who are on 
Medicare would not have voted the way they did if they had known 
Medicare was going to take a whopping $270 billion trouncing.
  Carl Sagan said in his letter to me that he was for the space station 
because he believed in the exploration of space. So do I. He said he 
believed in it because it was a case of international cooperation with 
the Europeans, Russians, Canadians, and the Japanese. He thinks that is 
healthy. I think it is healthy for there to be international 
cooperation on anything, whether it is space, medicine, you name it. 
Let me tell you something, colleagues. In a perfect world, I would be 
for this. If we did not have a nearly $5 trillion debt and the threat 
of certain people in the U.S. Congress saying we are going to bring 
this country down--can you imagine somebody saying that? If the 
President does not do what we tell him to, this country is coming to a 
screeching halt.

  Words should be measured very carefully because people pay attention 
and get justifiably frightened. It scares me to think that people in 
this body have the power to do that.
  But let's look at the international cooperation on the space station: 
The Canadians and the Italians are cutting back; the Germans and the 
French are negotiating on what they want to do. The Russians, who 
intend to do a lot, will only do it if we give them the money. Russia 
does not have enough bread to feed its people so they are not going to 
be able to participate unless we give them the money.
  I am not all that opposed to helping Russia. I want to do everything 
I can to help democracy work in Russia, and one of the best ways to 
make democracy work is to give people jobs and bread and something to 
eat. The reason they have the revolution is they did not have bread or 
food or anything to eat. I want to help them make it work.
  Where is the Russian launch going to take place? It will take place 
in Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan is no longer a part of Russia. That is where 
their cosmodrome is. That is where their launch site is. It is not even 
in Russia. So talk about things that can go wrong, this one can go 
wrong.
  I think about the problems here, and those that I mentioned a moment 
ago. It drives me crazy that Public Broadcasting is being cut 
dramatically. It drives me crazy that the National Endowment for the 
Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities are being virtually 
eliminated, cut in half. Those are things that have a civilizing 
influence on our society, that would make us a little more cultured and 
therefore a little less likely to kill each other because somebody 
dented your fender at the stoplight.
  The New York Times last week said that the demand for student loans 
is skyrocketing. Do you know why? Because tuition is skyrocketing. 
Everybody is saying how are these college kids who are getting out of 
school, how are they going to pay this debt back? They are loaded with 
big debt. So our answer is to cut student loans and that way they will 
not accumulate the debt in the in the first place. However, they will 
not get an education either.
  Every one of the things I mentioned--from crime, to medical research, 
to education, to infant mortality rate, cutting health care for the 
elderly, cutting health care dramatically for the poorest of the poor, 
cutting money for the Environmental Protection Agency because they 
regulate things so we can drink clean water and breathe clean air--we 
are cutting. But we fund the space station.
  Six Senators took a trip overseas about a month ago. We did not dare 
drink the water. We brushed our teeth with bottled water that we took 
with us. Fortunately, in this country we have made some progress in 
cleaning up our drinking water.
  So what is our solution to the progress we have made? Two-thirds of 
the water is now swimmable, two-thirds of the water in the country is 
now fishable, whereas in 1971 only one-third was. So now the idea is to 
cut back on the regulation. So we, too, will have the opportunity to 
brush our teeth in bottled water until it runs out.
  Just last Friday the House said we are going to cut the earned-income 
tax credit that poor working people use to stay off welfare, something 
the majority leader, President Bush, President Reagan, almost 
everybody, has applauded as the greatest program we have ever invented 
to keep people off welfare. What are they going to do with it? Whack it 
in half.
  I talked to a woman the other day who works hard and does not make 
very much money. She told me how much money she made. I said, ``How 
much do you pay for child care?'' She said, ``I pay $50 a week for one 
child,'' she is a single mother, ``$50 for one child and $43 for one 
child.'' That is $93 a week. If you knew what she made, you would 
wonder how on Earth she is doing it.
  Let me digress another moment to say we are not providing enough 
child care in the welfare bill to allow the people to go to work that 
we say have to go to work--50 percent by the year 2000. No woman is 
going to go to work and leave her children at home alone.
  If you do not have child care, she will not go to work. She will sit 
home and starve. But the other thing, this woman gets no help. She 
works. She works 8 hours a day and sometimes longer and she works hard. 
She gets at the end of the year that earned-income tax credit which is 
oftentimes the difference between eating and not eating for families.
  So what are we doing? We are dropping that program from a program 
that covers 20 million people to a program that covers 9 million in the 
House of Representatives and 11 million in the Senate. We will probably 
compromise at 10 million.
  When it comes to cutting around here, if you are poor, it is easy to 
cut you because you do not have a PAC. You do not make campaign 
contributions and you do not provide jobs in your State. So it is easy 
to cut poor folks.
  It is easy to cut the Environmental Protection Agency. It is 
obviously easy to cut student loans, though I thought that program was 
sacred. But we are cutting it.
  We are cutting title 1, which is the program that is a remedial 
education program to give first graders a start in life--teaching them 
to read. We are cutting that.

[[Page S 14185]]

  But we are not cutting the Seawolf. We are not cutting the B-2 
bomber. We are not cutting the space station. I know the Presiding 
Officer would be disappointed if I did not point out we are not going 
to stop giving away billions of dollars worth of gold underneath 
Federal land--the rankest form of corporate welfare.
  I can say if you do not want to be cut around here, just make 
something that explodes and we will give you all the money that you 
want.
  I give NASA credit for one thing. They took a leaf out of the 
Pentagon's book. They spread the contracts for the space station among 
36 States. A person does not have to be a rocket scientist to know all 
you have to have around here are 26 States that have as many as 10 
jobs, and you cannot kill it, because that is 52 votes.
  So we have 36 States with a piece of the action. Do you know what is 
interesting? Eighty-three percent of this $94 billion goes to 
California, Alabama, Texas, and Florida. All the other 32 States are 
fighting for 17 percent of the money. But if there is $1 million in 
your State, that means you probably have 50 jobs.
  People will come up on the floor and say, ``I do not like the space 
station, and I would like to vote with you, but we have a few little 
jobs down in my State.''
  Mr. President, 44 States contribute more as a percentage of the tax 
burden for the space station--listen to this--44 States contribute more 
than they get back.
  The thing that drove me nuts about the B-1 and the B-2 is they 
changed missions. When the cold war ended and we found out the B-2 was 
not as stealthy as we thought, we just said, ``Well, we will make it a 
conventional bomber.'' All you have to do is change the mission to keep 
the money flowing. We also have now made a conventional bomber out of 
the B-1.
  The space station had eight missions. Here they are. This is what we 
started out to do with the space station. Over a period of 10 years, we 
scrubbed it as a staging base; we scrubbed it as a manufacturing 
facility; we scrubbed it as a space-based observatory; we scrubbed it 
as a transportation node; we scrubbed making it a servicing facility; 
we scrubbed making it an assembly facility; we scrubbed making it a 
storage facility; and we are now down to the last possible mission, a 
research laboratory. And I just got through telling you that almost 
every physicist and physician in the country says that is palpable 
nonsense.
  Let me show you some figures. Bear in mind that when Ronald Reagan 
made his great speech about how we were going to go build the space 
station, that was in 1984. Mr. President, just to remind you--and I 
know I do not need to; you were there. You heard President Reagan say 
we are going to build this space station, and it is going to cost $8 
billion; 10, 11 years ago it was going to cost $8 billion. By 1994, we 
had already spent $11.2 billion. The construction of the project will 
cost $17.4 billion between 1995 and the year 2002, the magic year that 
we are going to balance the budget. But the money we have spent, the 
money we are going to spend in building it, you add to that the shuttle 
flights needed to launch it, service and use the station, $50 billion. 
And just to operate it for 10 years is $13 billion and station-related 
costs is $1.9 billion, for the total paltry sum of $94 billion.
  What you get out of the eight missions is a space laboratory. The 
other seven are gone.
  It is all a question of priorities and where your heart is, 
colleagues.
  Here is what it is going to cost us over the next 7 years to build 
the space station and deploy it--$32 billion. Here is the tax cut we 
are going to give people who make $100,000 and more, $245 billion. A 
vast majority of these people are ``them what has.'' We used to have an 
old expression in Charleston, AR: ``Them that has gets.'' Two-hundred 
and forty-five billion dollars for that, and then a $58 billion 
increase over the next 7 years for defense.
  What are we doing to accommodate all of this? We are going to cut 
Medicare by $270 billion and Medicaid by $182 billion. I promise you 
that I intend to vote against both, if those are the final figures.
  We are cutting student loans by $10 billion at a time when the need 
for loans is soaring because tuition is soaring.
  The earned income tax credit, which I mentioned a moment ago, we are 
cutting by $23 billion; other domestic programs by $188 billion, so 
that we can increase defense by $58 billion and fund the space station.
  When are we going to learn that our national security does not just 
depend on how many tanks, planes and guns we have? It has nothing to do 
with the space station.
  As an aside, I stood on this floor a few weeks ago and debated 
creating yet one more method of financing foreign arms sales. In the 
1980's, Mr. President, we sold about 20 to 25 percent of all the arms 
sold in international commerce. In the 1990's, we have gotten up over 
50 percent.
  We already have four methods of financing foreign arms sales. And the 
Defense appropriations bill comes in here and approves yet a fifth 
method of financing foreign arms sales to some of the countries that 
are most likely to default. And, if that happens, the taxpayers will 
pick up the tab.
  Mr. President, what does it take to kill a program? I do not know. I 
believed when I came here that one Senator could make a difference. 
There have been a few times that I have been able to make a difference. 
It was a very difficult thing for me coming from the Governor's mansion 
to the U.S. Senate where you have to introduce bills, hold hearings, 
finally get it passed through a subcommittee, get it passed through the 
full committee, and hope to get it on the floor and send it over to the 
House where it goes through the same procedure, and then the President 
may veto it. That takes about a year. But when you are a Governor, you 
can just sign your name occasionally and make something happen. I used 
to go home at night about 50 percent of the time immensely gratified 
for something which I had signed my name to that day that I knew was 
going to happen. Here it is totally different.
  I am not going to belabor this any further. I have said about all I 
can say. There are a lot more quotes that I could use.
  But I am asking you to search your own conscience. If you were 
debating this on national television, how do you think it would come 
out? If you were debating mining land reform on national television, 
how do you think it would come out? Everybody knows how it would come 
out--about 90-10 to fix mining law. The space station would be a little 
bit closer. But, you see, there will not be a national television 
debate. We will all go home and tell the chamber of commerce that the 
hardships they are enduring and all the cuts we had to make in their 
health care and education programs was to balance the budget by the 
year 2002. And they will never really know why their lives grow more 
precarious and why they are more unsettled, and why they think 
affirmative action, or gays in the military, or prayer in school, or 
term limits, or desecration of the flag are really their problems. As 
long as you can keep them talking about those things and divert their 
attention from the real problems in the country, you have a winner. So 
far it has worked magnificently.
  The reason is because they work for a living. They do not have time 
to keep up with what we are doing.
  So when you say, ``We had to do this for you, we had to liberate you 
from welfare, we had to do all of these things to balance the budget,'' 
you have no choice but to believe it.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nickles). The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, probably about 90 or maybe even 95 percent 
of the time around here the Senator from Arkansas and I agree and agree 
wholeheartedly. He stated that correctly. We are friends. We are close 
friends. I do not know anyone here I consider more a friend than the 
Senator from Arkansas. If the Senate of the United States has anyone 
who deserves the title of being an accomplished orator, it certainly is 
the Senator from Arkansas.
  So we do normally agree on things and we are close friends, but every 
year we seem to lock horns on this particular issue and we go at it on 
this because I am profoundly in disagreement with him on the amendment 
that he has put forward today.
  I rose in the Senate in early August, and I made a statement that 
covered 

[[Page S 14186]]
some of the benefits of NASA-funded research including the space 
station. I talked about the need for curiosity. All advancement in 
humankind, wherever it is, comes because someone is curious, someone is 
curious about how you can do things differently, how you can do things 
better. Can I invent something? Can I make an improvement in medical 
science? Can I do something in engineering? Can I do something in 
agriculture?
  That curiosity is at the heart of all progress and at the heart of 
what makes this country great, because we throughout our history have 
invested more in basic research and technology than any nation. Out of 
that has come the technological leadership of the whole world.
  In my August 1, 1995, statement I talked about advances in 
agriculture. When I was a kid back in Ohio, 48 to 50 bushels was a good 
corn crop. We had the record corn crop in Ohio, 239 bushels, last year 
in part because our country invested in basic research.
  I talked then about metals and about aerodynamics. The Federal 
Government funded basic research in these areas which permitted the 
growth of the aviation industry in this country and our leadership in 
the world. And I spoke about research in medicine as well as research 
in space and telecommunications.
  Mr. President, we have a very basic question, it seems to me, and 
that is, who is going to be responsible for the class of 2015 or 2025 
or 2050? Any great nation invests in the future for its children. One 
organization we have in Government that is setting out to do the 10-, 
the 15-, the 25-year research more than any other agency really is 
NASA.
  Twenty years ago, we invested in a number of different things--
digital technology, a number of things that some people thought were 
foolish to put money into, but we went ahead with it. And now we have a 
number of advances relating directly from that investment, including 
better imaging for medicine. Let me explain. We were able to apply some 
of that digital technology to the Hubble telescope. Some digital 
technology was developed especially for the Hubble, to enable 
astronomers to distinguish very minute points of light. We applied this 
technology, and some associated computer enhancements to medical 
imaging. And it turns out that we are now able to detect breast cancer 
tumors five times better than we used to be able to do. This was an 
unexpected benefit from the much-maligned Hubble telescope. This shows 
the potential payoff from long-term research--from preliminary Federal 
investment in basic research on digital technology to application on 
the Hubble to application in breast cancer detection.
  In this country, we have been fortunate to have a balance in research 
up until recent years. And that balance was between Government and 
private investment, where major American corporations put forward, 
sponsored their own research laboratories, and did fundamental basic 
research, the 8-, the 10-, the 12-, the 15-year projects that they did 
not expect to get immediate market-oriented payoffs from.
  Now we find that going down. Businesses are not making as much 
investment in basic research. And the Federal Government too, if some 
have their way, will reduce its investment in basic research. The 
balance we had with private and Government basic research, where the 
Government would take on the more risky projects, those that were less 
guaranteed of immediate success that would benefit the marketplace, is 
now going down. In the past, the Government took on such things as the 
Manhattan project, things that moved us ahead in nuclear weaponry and 
our nuclear knowledge in general in this country. But there was that 
kind of balance back and forth between private and Government research 
projects. And now that has gone down.
  I would like to quote liberally from a Wall Street Journal article 
written by Gautam Naik, a staff reporter to the Wall Street Journal, an 
article that was published in May of this year. He talks about:

       In the late 1980's, Bob Lucky had what he calls ``a great 
     fantasy.'' As a researcher at AT&T Corp.'s celebrated Bell 
     Labs, he was designing a silicone robot the size of a grain 
     of sand. Injected into the human body, it would act as a 
     microsurgeon, traveling to specific locations to fix 
     problems.

  He goes on to say he was proud of that. ``The benefits to society 
could be tremendous,'' but they scrapped that project ``because it had 
no bearing on its main business.'' Mr. Lucky, who was a 31-year 
veteran, is now at a different company.
  ``Chasing far-out notions,'' the Journal goes on to say, ``has been a 
hallmark of industrial research in America. But some of the biggest 
U.S. corporations have cut back sharply on research into `basic 
science'--the exploration of how nature works at a fundamental level.'' 
And now they are pursuing ``short-term goals to commercialize products 
more quickly.''
  The following quote from the article startled me: ``Corporate labs, 
home to 75 percent of the Nation's scientists and researchers, are 
replacing a cherished culture of independence with a results-oriented 
approach.''
  ``In past decades, the devotion of basic research without regard to 
boosting the bottom line spawned a steady stream of breakthroughs, 
including the transistor, the solar cell and the forerunner to today's 
laser--all at Bell Labs.'' Now they are cutting back. Cutbacks have 
taken a toll. ``Some disillusioned scientists have fled to academia,'' 
and so on. And ``already, U.S. companies are falling behind in advanced 
data-storage devices and technology for oil exploration,'' as one 
example. The short-term response, he says, has to keep the stockholders 
happy.
  ``The National Science Foundation,'' the article continues, 
``calculates that U.S. spending on basic research declined slightly to 
$9.7 billion in 1993 and didn't rise last year.
  ``In a survey by R&D Magazine, half of all companies with `research 
and development' budgets of $50 million or more plan to cut spending 
this year, for a 3.5 percent decline overall. (About 10 percent of the 
R&D budget is typically devoted to basic research.)''
  These are startling figures because the United States, instead of 
going ahead with the goose that has laid the golden egg in this 
country, basic research, that has given us the new handle on the 
future, is cutting back, cutting back in a tremendous way.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this entire article be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

              [From the Wall Street Journal, May 22, 1995]

         Technology--Corporate Research: How Much Is It Worth?

                            (By Gautam Naik)

       In the late 1980s, Bob Lucky had what he calls ``a great 
     fantasy.''
       As a researcher at AT&T Corp.'s celebrated Bell 
     Laboratories, he was designing a silicon robot the size of a 
     grain of sand. Injected into the human body, it would act as 
     a microsurgeon, traveling to specific locations to fix 
     problems.
       ``I was damn proud of the stuff we did. The benefits to 
     society could be tremendous,'' Mr. Lucky says. But AT&T 
     scrapped the RESEARCH because it had no bearing on its main 
     business. Mr. Lucky, a 31-year veteran of Bell Labs, is now 
     at Bellcore.
       Chasing far-out notions has long been a hallmark of 
     industrial RESEARCH in America. But some of the biggest U.S. 
     corporations have cut back sharply on RESEARCH into ``basic 
     science''--the exploration of how nature works at a 
     fundamental level--to pursue short-term goals and to 
     commercialize products more quickly. Corporate labs, home to 
     75% of the nation's scientists and researchers, are replacing 
     a cherished culture of independence with a results-oriented 
     approach.
       In past decades, the devotion to basic RESEARCH without 
     regard to boosting the bottom line spawned a steady stream of 
     breakthroughs, including the transistor, the solar cell and 
     the forerunner to today's laser--all at Bell Labs. Now, in 
     the 1990s, the cutbacks are taking a toll. Some disillusioned 
     scientists have fled to academia. Already, U.S. companies are 
     falling behind in advanced data-storage devices and 
     technology for oil exploration.
       Some experts worry the shift is an even greater threat to 
     the future. ``It's a shorterm response aimed at keeping 
     stockholders happy. Without question this will hurt American 
     competitiveness,'' warns Albert Link, an economics professor 
     at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
       Companies counter that as competition intensifies and 
     technology accelerates, they must push harder to get more 
     direct value out of their RESEARCH. ``We need to focus on 
     customers' needs,'' says Daniel Stanzione, who has 
     hammered at that doctrine since becoming president of Bell 
     Labs in March. A former president of AT&T's $6 billion 
     public network equipment division, he is the first hard-
     core business manager to run the famed RESEARCH arm.

[[Page S 14187]]

       The National Science Foundation calculates that U.S. 
     companies' spending on basic RESEARCH declined slightly to 
     $9.7 billion in 1993 and didn't rise last year. In a survey 
     by R&D magazine, half of all companies with ``RESEARCH and 
     development'' budgets of $50 million or more plan to cut 
     spending this year, for a 3.5% decline overall. (About 10% of 
     the R&D budget is typically devoted to basic RESEARCH.)
       Those figures mask far more significant cuts in some areas. 
     Among U.S. makers of communications gear and electronics, 
     spending on basic RESEARCH dropped 64% between 1988 and 1992 
     to $350 million. Even government-funded basic RESEARCH at 
     universities and colleges, which has risen in the last five 
     years, is expected to fall slightly in 1995, according to the 
     National Science Foundation.
       International Business Machines Corp. has chopped $1.7 
     billion from its annual R&D budget since 1992, a 33% 
     reduction to $3.38 billion by last year. In the science-
     oriented RESEARCH division, annual spending has fallen to 
     $450 million from $625 million in 1990. The staff of 
     scientists has been cut nearly 20% to 2,600; the number 
     pursuing basic RESEARCH is down by half to 200.
       In the 1980s, IBM labs explored the subatomic mysteries of 
     neutrino particles. In the 1990s, an IBM lab perfected the 
     collapsible ``butterfly'' keyboard in just a year; it might 
     have taken seven years in the old days. Impressive, but 
     keyboards are hardly the stuff of high science.
       Bernard Meyerson, an IBM fellow and senior manager at the 
     IBM lab in Yorktown Heights, N.Y., says that despite the 
     reductions, ``core RESEARCH was preserved.'' But he concedes 
     that cutting back is ``a dicey process'' because ``you won't 
     see the impact of funding cuts until it's too late.''
       Elsewhere the changes have been subtle but no less 
     significant. Xerox Corp.'s PARC lab, which invented laser 
     printing and on-screen icons, now gets detailed ``contracts'' 
     from the company's product divisions directing its RESEARCH. 
     At GENERAL Electric Co., the portion of R&D spending devoted 
     to long-term projects is down to 15% from 30% in the 1980s.
       Such changes are sweeping Bell Labs, perhaps the most 
     famous lab in the world. AT&T still devotes 10% of its annual 
     $3 billion R&D budget to basic RESEARCH, but ever bigger 
     chunks will be shifted away from physical science--the lab's 
     traditional strength--to information science, which is 
     closely tied to AT&T's core business. Bell Labs managers used 
     to be promoted solely on the basis of technical achievement. 
     Now they must also display business acumen.
       ``That wonderful culture at Bell Labs'' is disappearing, 
     laments Phillip Griffiths, director of the Institute for 
     Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., one of the last 
     strongholds of purely theoretical RESEARCH in the U.S.
       It is difficult to quantify what may be lost because of 
     such shifts. Fiber optics, for one, might have been delayed 
     for decades if not for fundamental discoveries made at Bell 
     Labs, GE and IBM. In the early 1960s, scientists stumbled on 
     a curious find: Gallium arsenide was a natural laser. When 
     they zapped an electrical current through it, it emitted an 
     intense beam of light, thus making practical the laser that 
     was first demonstrated by Hughes Aircraft in 1960. Scientists 
     realized this ``semiconductor injection laser'' could be 
     manipulated to transmit vast amounts of data at nearly the 
     speed of light.
       As many big U.S. companies are backing away, some foreign 
     concerns are pushing on. Major high-tech companies overseas 
     increased R&D spending 23% from 1988 to 1993, says Schonfeld 
     & Associates of Lincolnshire, Ill.
       At NEC Corp.'s RESEARCH Institute in Princeton, N.J., about 
     30 miles form Bell Labs' campus, scientists delve into 
     condensed matter physics, quantum mechanics and biology. 
     Joseph Giordmaine, a physicist, put in 28 years at Bell Labs 
     but bolted for Japan's NEC in 1988.
       Now, as a senior vice president, he presides over some 
     truly far-out projects. In one, a fly, its limbs affixed in 
     wax, is set before a TV screen flashing a series of images. A 
     delicate probe connects a single neuron in the fly's brain to 
     an instrument that measures how fast it registers the TV 
     images.
       The RESEARCH may one day yield insights into how to design 
     a super-fast computer. ``Basic RESEARCH means you have to be 
     able to take risks and accept failure,'' says Mr. Giordmaine.
       Greg Blonder, who invented the wristphone at Bell Labs, has 
     spent most of his career studying physical sciences and their 
     role in future technologies. In January, he switched to 
     ``human-centered engineering,'' aimed at making AT&T products 
     more ``customer friendly.''
       He admits to nostalgia for bygone days. ``There's no thrill 
     equivalent to the feeling when you discover something late at 
     night, and you know that no one else in the universe knows 
     it.'' he says. ``I miss that.''

  Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I will not go on to read all of this, but 
it goes on and gives examples of different companies, but it also 
indicates how foreign countries, foreign nations are putting more into 
research. And it indicates that NEC, a Japanese concern, has an 
institute now, an NEC Corp. research institute, in Princeton, NJ, about 
30 miles from where Bell Labs' campus is located, and there the 
scientists are delving into condensed matter physics, quantum 
mechanics, and biology. And some of these scientists from some of the 
other laboratories that used to be our standard bearers in this country 
are now over there working for a Japanese corporation to continue basic 
fundamental research.
  Well, I will not belabor the point any further except to say that I 
think it is a tragedy when we cut back in private investment also at 
the same time we hear proposals to cut back in what we spend on 
research at the Federal level. We have seen attacks in those areas all 
the way through the budget process this particular year.
  There is another article. I would ask unanimous consent that the 
article by Brenda Forman called ``High-Risk, Basic Research Is 
Critical'' be printed in the Record, Mr. President.
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                  [From Space News, July 17-23, 1995]

                 High Risk, Basic Research Is Critical

                           (By Brenda Forman)

       If Congress applied the same logic to families as it is 
     applying to federally funded university research, it would 
     decree that nobody have children.
       Children and basic research both represent large, up-front 
     investments over a protracted period of time with absolutely 
     no guarantee of any return--although the payoffs, when (and 
     if) they come, can be spectacular. A risky, dubious gamble, 
     right? Obviously one that any savvy investor or deficit-
     minded congressman set on an early return and a dependable 
     product should avoid at all costs.
       But without children, there is no future. And without high-
     risk, basic research unrelated to specific products or bottom 
     lines, the reservoir of technological advances on which the 
     country's current prosperity and power is based will run dry 
     in an alarmingly short time.
       It is both ignorant and self-deluding to think that the 
     United States can get better results from its research 
     investment by insisting that research be focused on specific, 
     practical, immediately identifiable applications. That is 
     simply not how the big break-throughs happen.
       As little as human conceit might wish to admit it, the 
     truly fundamental discoveries seldom occur where we have 
     decided to look. Instead, they have a curious habit of 
     turning up on accidental bypaths when researchers were 
     looking for something else entirely.
       A long list of this century's major technological advances 
     have been made this way and Americans are coasting on their 
     momentum to this day--penicillin, X-rays, the enabling 
     advances that made transistors and DNA fingerprinting 
     possible, not to mention the ubiquitous Post-It.
       Meanwhile, decades of research and uncounted millions of 
     dollars determinedly focused on a cancer cure have failed 
     utterly.
       Reviewing the history of technological prediction should 
     chasten those who would imagine that research can be 
     consciously directed to produce breakthroughs. In retrospect, 
     such predictions can border on the hilarious.
       Remember how World War I commanders insisted there could 
     never be a combat role for aircraft? Remember how IMB was 
     once told it could only expect to sell about 30 computers? 
     Remember how Arthur D. Little told the inventor of Xerox 
     there was only a market for about 500 of his machines? 
     Remember how the computer was going to create the paperless 
     office? Then tell me how we expect politicians--or anybody 
     for that matter--to predict where research should best be 
     focused.
       The hard truth is that major advances occur when somebody 
     gets both curious and lucky--and also has the resources to 
     pursue their hunch. Congress is now withdrawing that third 
     essential factor. The result will be a classic case of penny 
     wise, pound foolish: in return for a largely trivial budget 
     reduction, the country will forfeit much of its potential 
     future wealth.
       Of course, the damage probably will not be all that 
     apparent before the next re-election campaign and so possibly 
     few members of Congress will care. But they should. Such 
     effects are like termites: they undermine a structure for a 
     long time before the house begins to buckle, and by then the 
     damage is irreparable.
       It is equally illusory to decree that universities should 
     confine themselves to purely basic research, leaving such 
     things as engineering research to unidentified others. There 
     is no such thing as purely basic research--what is basic in 
     one context can turn into applied in another. Trying to draw 
     such artificial dividing lines between interrelated and 
     intimately interwoven research areas sounds rather like 
     establishing union-style rules and rigid job definitions for 
     scientific research. Industry is increasingly moving to 
     eliminate such obstacles to productivity and flexibility on 
     the factory floor. It seems oddly retrogressive to try to 
     institute them now in the world of research.
       It is also purest fantasy--if indeed not just plain 
     cynicism--to expect the private sector to fill the gap left 
     by Congress' gutting of government investment in basic 
     research. No corporation required to fulfill Wall Street's 
     merciless insistence on continuous quarterly growth can 
     afford to invest in such risky, 

[[Page S 14188]]
     speculative, long-term ventures with no immediate, identifiable 
     positive impact on its bottom line.
       When you get right down to it, this is the government's 
     job, and Congress is shirking it.
       Of course, Americans will probably persist in having 
     children (people are buying junk bonds again, too) but if we 
     pursue our present course in science and basic research, 
     those kids will not live as well and will occupy a weaker and 
     less confident position in the world of the coming century. 
     That looks to me like a remarkably odd example of the current 
     Congress' vaunted family values.

  Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, what she points out in this article is much 
the same as what was pointed out in the Wall Street Journal article. It 
is a recounting of what is happening in American industry.
  And she says in that, and starts off--I was rather taken by the 
analogy she makes. She says:

       If Congress applied the same logic to families as it is 
     applying to the federally funded university research, it 
     would decree that nobody have children.

  Who knows what the outcome of a child being born is? You do not 
really know for sure.

       But without children, there is no future. And without high-
     risk, basic research unrelated to specific products or bottom 
     lines, the reservoir of technological advances on which the 
     current country's prosperity and power is based will run dry 
     in an alarmingly short time . . . As little as human conceit 
     might wish to admit it, the truly fundamental discoveries 
     seldom occur where we decided to look. Instead, they have a 
     curious habit of turning up on accidental bypaths when 
     researchers were looking for something else entirely . . . 
     [Things like] penicillin, X-rays, the enabling advances that 
     made transistors and DNA fingerprinting possible.

  Those things occurred when people were looking for something else 
when they were doing basic research.
  Mr. President, at a time when both the private and Federal investment 
in science, research and development is declining, we truly do have to 
ask ourselves, Who is going to be responsible to the students 
graduating in the class of 2015? Quite simply, the international space 
station is the next logical step along with other efforts in our 
journey into space and our investment in the future, our investment in 
research for the future. Along with that, the station is also the 
largest international scientific cooperative effort ever undertaken.
  The space station is being built right now. We have over 25 tons, 
50,000 pounds of flight hardware has already been fabricated here in 
the United States. It is already built. The first launch is on 
schedule, still on schedule for late 1997, with the station permanently 
manned in 2002.
  I would add that in addition to those 50,000 pounds of American 
equipment already fabricated, already built, we have over 60,000 pounds 
by our international partners. So, with the space station weighing over 
400,000--just about 400,000 pounds--we have over one-fourth of the 
station already built, already prepared, more coming out every day.
  Contrary to what was said earlier, the space station will provide a 
world-class, permanently occupied laboratory in Earth orbit. Research 
will be conducted on the station in a whole range of scientific 
disciplines, including biotechnology and biomedicine, material science, 
combustion science, and other areas.
  This will truly be a science and technology institute in space. It is 
the promise of research on this international space station. The 
science and technology institute in space will have specialty areas of 
biotechnology, physiology, material science, combustion science, 
physics, and biology on the space station. And to carry that out there 
have been cooperative efforts between NASA and NIH. We have U.S. space 
station research facilities that will be used by other nations as well 
as ourselves.
  You know, control over gravity is something we have not been able to 
have throughout the whole history of the world. I remember when I was a 
boy back in New Concord, OH. It was great to get up in a big oak tree 
down on a little cliff. I thought it was great. You were sort of almost 
going out of this world at that point, it seemed to me, you were so 
high up. Little did I know I would be able to fly later on, get farther 
off the ground and farther up in space. It has been a whole progression 
ever since the Wright brothers of how high we can go and use our new 
capabilities to do basic research.
  But now, all at once, control over gravity will allow scientists to 
explore the natural world in unprecedented ways. All life on Earth, 
including human life, has evolved under the direct influence of 
gravity. The space station provides scientists the laboratory they need 
to explore the role that gravity plays in the cycle of life from 
conception through old age. On the space station scientists will 
explore the systems of the body ranging from muscle and bone to the 
immune system under low-gravity conditions that are unique, not only in 
the history of biomedical research, but also in the history of all life 
on Earth.
  On Earth, gravity limits our ability to explore and understand the 
fundamental principles that govern basic physical processes. Even such 
things as burning of fuel, the solidification of metals, the growth of 
crystals, space station research promises to expand our understanding 
and control over these processes that are vital to the economic health 
of our country. Using just the 7- to 14-day low-gravity opportunities 
that have been afforded by space shuttle flights, orbital researchers 
have already begun to deliver a steady stream of scientific and 
technological insights that are strengthening the U.S. economy and 
improving the quality of life on Earth for generations yet to come.
  The space station will allow researchers from the universities, 
industry, and Government to expand the promising research begun on the 
space shuttle by conducting high-quality science and technology 
experiments year round.
  Space station will support global environmental observation, high-
energy astrophysics research. The international space station 
represents only one-seventh of 1 percent of the Federal budget, about 
15 percent of the NASA budget, but one-seventh of 1 percent of our 
national budget. I think that is a good investment.
  Now, a little more detail. I mentioned biotechnology. By studying 
protein crystals and protein crystal growth, orbital research enhances 
our ability to accurately describe proteins and enzymes and viruses at 
the molecular level. This ability, coupled with research on these 
fundamental building blocks of life, will enable scientists to develop 
new drugs and vaccines more quickly and effectively.
  Space station researchers will study the processes that control the 
growth of human tissues outside the body called tissue culture. Future 
research may lead to an improved understanding of normal and abnormal 
tissue, cancerous tissue, with important implications for the 
development of new drug therapies and applications for transplant 
research in the physiology.
  Space research provides unique insights into how the heart and lungs 
function, the growth and maintenance of muscles and bone, perception, 
cognition, and balance in the neurosciences, and the regulation of the 
body's many systems in regulatory physiology.
  In combustion science, scientists use low gravity to simplify the 
study of complex combustion processes. Because combustion is used to 
produce 85 percent of Earth's energy, even small improvements in 
efficiency will have large environmental and economic benefits.
  In material science, researchers use low gravity to advance our 
understanding of the relationships among the structure, the processing, 
and properties of materials. Findings in material science have very 
broad applicability to industrial processes, including the production 
of semiconductors, glass, metals, alloys, polymers, and ceramics.
  Fluid physics: Researchers use low gravity to study the properties 
and behavior of fluids, liquids, gases and mixtures.
  Fundamental knowledge of fluid behavior is essential to industrial 
activities, ranging from energy production to materials engineering.
  Microgravity physics: Scientists use low gravity to test fundamental 
theories of physics with degrees of accuracy that far exceed the 
capacity of Earthbound science.
  Physics in low gravity expands our understanding of changes in the 
state 

[[Page S 14189]]
of matter, including those changes responsible for high-temperature 
superconductivity. If we make major breakthroughs in that area alone, 
it will likely be worth the expenditure on the space station in my 
opinion.
  Gravitational biology: Scientists study gravity's influence on the 
development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals. Their 
results expand fundamental knowledge that would benefit medical, 
agricultural, and other industries.
  I mentioned first in that list of things we are looking at 
biotechnology. Let me give more detail on that.
  Protein crystal growth data from space that can revolutionize 
pharmaceuticals in the 21st century. Rapid advances in biotechnology, 
combined with enhanced data from protein structures, promise to 
revolutionize the pharmaceutical industry.
  Researchers seek to design the structure of proteins and ultimately 
to design drugs that interact with them. Penicillin is a well-known 
example of a drug that works by blocking a protein's function. In order 
to define protein structure with precision, researchers analyze protein 
crystals. Unfortunately, many Earth-grown crystals have flaws that 
limit their usefulness as data sources, or they are just plain too 
small to provide adequate data.
  Orbital experiments provide researchers with superior protein 
crystals for analysis and also help scientists understand the 
fundamental concepts about the crystallization process. These are 
things that they cannot do the same on Earth. This information can be 
used to improve crystallization techniques on Earth, in fact.
  Researchers will soon use enhanced data on protein structure derived 
from space station research to design a new generation of drugs to 
target a long list of specific diseases. These drugs promise to 
revolutionize health care, and orbital research will feed this 
revolution with the protein structure data that it needs.
  NASA researchers have already used space shuttle missions to produce 
protein crystals for a variety of clinical conditions, including 
cancer, diabetes, emphysema, and immune system disorders. These space-
grown crystals were far superior to any crystals grown on Earth for 
revealing the structures of protein and supporting the development of 
drugs.
  Examples: Recombinant DNA human insulin. The Hauptman Institute in 
Buffalo, in collaboration with Eli Lilly & Co., has obtained an 
improved description of human drug concept based on space-grown 
crystals. To those who say nothing has come out of the program, that is 
just not true. They are currently working on a design of a nontoxic 
drug that will bind insulin, thereby improving the treatment of 
diabetic patients.
  Porcin elastase. Elastase is a protein which is involved in 
emphysema. The refined structure of this protein was obtained using 
space-grown crystals. Vertex Pharmaceuticals is designing drugs based 
on this data to improve treatment for emphysema.
  HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. NASA is supporting the microgravity 
crystallization of HIV reverse transcriptase, a critical enzyme for 
viral replication, and it is believed that this research will better 
define the enzyme structure so that effective pharmaceuticals can be 
developed to inhibit the HIV virus.
  The structural biology research group at Marshall Space Flight 
Center, NASA's center of excellence in biotechnology, was the first to 
publish the structure of a major human antibody that recognizes the 
AIDS virus.
  Human serum albumin, HSA, is a primary binding protein in the blood 
and is responsible for distributing drugs throughout the body. Eli 
Lilly & Co., again, is using this structural information from space-
grown crystals to design drugs that exhibit improved interactions with 
HSA, the human serum albumin. The potential impact of this HSA 
structure on drug design and delivery is enormous.
  Protein crystal growth promises a pharmaceutical revolution. 
Biotechnology is broadly defined as a set of techniques for rearranging 
and manufacturing biological molecules, tissues and living organisms.
  This field is one of the most dynamic segments of our high-technology 
economy. Armed with the advanced techniques of biotechnology and 
detailed data on the structure of key proteins, researchers are already 
creating new generations of drugs. Researchers use data on the 
structure of proteins to design drugs at the molecular level that will 
interact with specific proteins and treat specific diseases.
  This approach promises to produce superior drugs for a wide range of 
conditions and may replace the trial-and-error approach to drug 
development that has been the rule for centuries.
  The international space station will become one of the world's 
premier sources for critical data on protein structures needed for this 
new method of drug development. In addition, the space station will be 
used to study and understand the physics involved in protein crystals 
in order to overcome the difficulties which currently limit much of 
this research on Earth.
  Let me list the companies that are involved with this. These are 
companies that not only interested, they are cooperating, they are 
putting their own money into this kind of research: Schering-Plough of 
New Jersey; Eli Lilly in New Jersey; Upjohn in Michigan; Bristol-Myers 
Squibb in New Jersey; SmithKline Beecham in Pennsylvania; BioCryst in 
Alabama; Du Pont Merck in Delaware; Eastman Kodak in New York; and 
Vertex in Massachusetts are working with NASA's center for 
macromolecular chrystallography to produce high-quality protein 
crystals for new drug development.
  Researchers have already used space shuttle missions to produce 
superior protein crystals for research on clinical conditions including 
cancer, diabetes, emphysema and immune system disorders.
  Can I claim we have the answers in all those matters at this point? 
No, I cannot, but I certainly can claim that we are on the way with a 
whole new approach in research because of the protein crystal growth 
that has already occurred.
  In collaboration with Eli Lilly & Co., the Hauptman Institute of 
Buffalo, NY, is using data from space on human insulin to design a drug 
that will bind insulin, thereby improving the treatment of diabetic 
patients. NASA is supporting space research on an enzyme that the HIV, 
the virus that causes AIDS, needs to reproduce. This research seeks to 
better design the enzyme structure so that effective pharmaceuticals 
can be developed to inhibit the HIV virus.
  The pictures of some of the protein crystals that have been grown in 
space show that they come out several times larger than they do in 
similar growth attempted on Earth. It means they are easier to deal 
with, easier to define, easier to work with for the researchers on 
Earth.
  Another area in which work is going on: I was at Houston not long 
ago, just before the flight of STS-70, the so-called ``Ohio flight,'' 
where four out of the five members of the flight crew were from Ohio. 
One of the pieces of research equipment they were taking up was called 
a bioreactor. Let me talk about that for just a moment.
  Growing tissue samples, tissue culturing is one of the fundamental 
goals of biomedical research. Scientists use laboratory containers 
called bioreactors to grow or culture samples of body tissues. 
Scientists could use cancer tumors and other tissues that are 
successfully grown outside the body to test and study treatments, like 
chemotherapy, without risking harm to patients.
  These tissues from bioreactors will also offer important medical 
insights into how tissues grow and develop in the body. NASA engineers 
have already created breakthrough technologies for cell culture 
research on the ground and major breakthroughs can be expected once 
time on the space station becomes more available, and they have already 
done some of the first work on flights.
  NASA-developed bioreactors have already produced the first 80-day 
lung culture, the first normal human intestine culture, and major 
breakthroughs in the quality of cancer tumor cultures. Those superior 
tissues may be grown in Earthbound bioreactors when compared with 
traditional cell culturing techniques. There are still limits on Earth 
to the size and quality of the tissue. What the scientists are doing on 
the space program, they believe that far superior tissues can be grown 
in the 

[[Page S 14190]]
extended microgravity afforded on the space station, and preliminary 
tests on the space shuttle support this idea. They show that the 
theories appear to be correct.

  In the long term, tissues cultured outside the body then may be used 
directly for replacing damaged tissues or treating diseases or 
eventually replacing organs.
  Some of the highlights of recent research: Dr. Jeanne Becker of the 
University of South Florida has applied NASA technology to create a 
breakthrough in culturing ovarian cancer tumors for cancer research. 
Dr. Josh Zimmerberg of the NIH National Institute for Child Health and 
Development is using NASA developed bioreactors in NASA-funded resident 
technical staff to pursue the AIDS research goals under a 1994-98 NASA 
NIH joint venture.
  Dr. Lisa Freed of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is using 
a NASA bioreactor to grow cartilage cells on biodegradable scaffolds. 
Her work shows a clear prospect for using the space station to produce 
models and transplantable cartilage tissues that could revolutionize 
treatment for joint diseases and injuries.
  I mentioned the flight of STS-70. I was there with the crew when they 
were building up for this flight in July of this year. In July of this 
year, a NASA bioreactor flew to orbit aboard the space shuttle 
Discovery. The primary purpose of this experiment was to test the 
performance of the bioreactor, which worked successfully. Poorly 
differentiated human colon carcinoma cells were grown in a bioreactor 
aboard Discovery. Their growth was compared with that of similar cells 
in a bioreactor in normal gravity, as well as in conventional, two-
dimensional tissue cultures. The space-grown clusters of cells were 
approximately twice as large as the ground-based samples. But the 
significance of this must be determined by much study on the ground and 
many more data points from the space experiments. Ground-based analysis 
by Dr. J. Milburn Jessup of the Harvard Medical School will address the 
histology of the specimens and the production of specific protein such 
as CEA.
  NASA and NIH have signed agreements on biomedical research. NASA and 
NIH have recently signed an agreement that will combine the unique 
talents and experience of both agencies in biomedical research and 
exploit NASA's bioreactor technology to produce three-dimensional 
tissue cultures for laboratory research. This agreement will increase 
the capabilities of biomedical researchers throughout NASA by 
transferring NASA technology to NIH and establishing a center within 
the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
  The new center will teach this new technology to hundreds of 
neighboring NIH intramural laboratories that currently employ other 
tissue culture techniques as part of their ongoing research.
  The initial goal of the agreement is to engineer a human lymph node 
model for AIDS research and then to extend the use of this technology 
to a broad spectrum of tissues available at NIH. This collaborative 
effort will enable researchers to culture tissues previously deemed too 
complex for current tissue culturing technology.
  To accelerate the development of this critical tissue culturing, 
technology research grants were recently awarded under the NASA 
research announcement. Included in the selections are support for two 
research centers located at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology 
at Cambridge, and the Wooster Institute in Philadelphia, that will 
transfer the NASA bioreactor technology for culturing three-dimensional 
tissues to university researchers. These centers expand the pace of 
technology transfer in the biotechnology areas begun when NASA and NIH 
established a joint cooperative program within the NIH Institute for 
Child, Health and Human Development to exploit the NASA-developed 
bioreactor technology.
  Dr. Jeanne Becker has pointed out that it has a potential particular 
benefit for cell culture research and breast cancer research. 
Techniques developed for use in space have advanced the state of the 
art for growing ovarian and breast cancer samples in the laboratory, 
leading to progress in women's health. Why is it important to focus on 
ovarian and breast cancer? Well, as a result of better forms of 
treatment and improved means of early diagnose, overall survival rates 
from cancer have doubled since the early 1900's. However, breast cancer 
and ovarian cancer continue to be responsible for over one-third of all 
cancer in women.
  Recent statistics indicate that one in nine women will be diagnosed 
with breast cancer during her lifetime. Although screening mammography 
has contributed significantly to the early detection of breast cancer, 
survival rates for this disease have remained relatively unchanged for 
over a decade. Equally discouraging is the fact that current survival 
for ovarian cancer is nearly the same as it was over 30 years ago, with 
a 5-year survival rate of 39 percent. These statistics underscore the 
need for more research in these areas and the use of improved 
technologies to better study these diseases which destroy the lives of 
so many women.
  For more than three decades, humankind has benefited from new 
technologies derived from NASA-sponsored research, including studies 
focused on several areas pertinent to women's health. Now, through a 
joint collaboration between NASA and the University of South Florida, 
research focused on the development of three-dimensional tissue models 
of breast and ovarian cancer is being undertaken to gain a better 
understanding of breast and ovarian cancer.
  Using a specialized tissue culture chamber designed by NASA, the 
bioreactor, scientists are able to generate three-dimensional cellular 
growth that forms tissue-like structures that are similar to tissues 
found in the human body. Using conventional culture techniques, breast 
and ovarian cancer cells do not grow to form a tumor. In the NASA 
bioreactor, cancer cells have grown into masses that resemble the 
original tumor.
  So when opponents of the space station say what good has come out of 
it, I would suggest that new leads into ovarian and breast cancer may 
be worth the price that we pay. For the first time, these cancer cells 
have grown into masses that resemble the original tumor, and in their 
same three-dimensional orientation.
  Through the benefits of NASA-developed technology, medical science 
now has a means to culture cancer tissue samples in the laboratory so 
that they closely resemble structures found in the human body. The 
ability to grow these particular types of tumors is a real advantage 
because they are extremely difficult to culture outside the body. In 
particular, cancer researchers continually strive toward the 
development of improved tissue models of human disease, and the ability 
to produce reliable tissue models of breast and ovarian cancer is 
critical for furthering our understanding of the factors important in 
the growth and spread of these devastating diseases.
  The breast and ovarian cancer tissue samples cultured in NASA'S 
bioreactor will be evaluated for usefulness in testing sensitivity, 
chemotherapeutic, and biological agents, including hormonal therapy, 
particularly important as a treatment for breast and ovarian cancer.
  Because tumor cells can be grown in much the way they are arranged in 
the body, then a more authentic tumor specimen can be obtained to test 
the responsiveness of these cells to new types of agents.
  Finally, the models will be instrumental in studying alterations in 
cancer-associated genes that occurred during tumor progression. Breast 
and ovarian cancer studies being undertaken at the University of South 
Florida demonstrate the type of biomedical research that is a direct 
offshoot of NASA's bioreactor technology. National tissue research has 
given the medical community a powerful new tool to study how these 
cancerous tissues form.
  Mr. President, in particular, another example of this is cartilage 
development in NASA bioreactor. Cartilage is the material that makes up 
the joints in the skeleton. The bioreactor reproducibly enables the 
growth of cartilage from a small type of cell, and this level of 
maturity is rarely achieved by any other culture method. 

[[Page S 14191]]

  Mature cartilage is shown as the red-stained material here. Research 
conducted with Dr. Lisa Freed at MIT addresses the use of reactor 
technology and microgravity to engineer cartilage for replacement and 
transplantation.
  In simpler terms cartilage grown in the bioreactor--in the middle 
picture here--resembles normal cartilage--in the top picture--much more 
closely than cartilage grown by standard methods in the bottom picture.
  The same with colon cancer. Colon cancer manifests with polyp-like 
structures in the colon. The tumor-like structures are produced in the 
bioreactor by culturing normal fibroblast cells with colon cancer 
cells.
  Standard culture techniques do not provide 3-D models of cancer. It 
makes it very difficult. The bioreactor not only grows 3-D tumors, but 
induces specialized structures called glands, akin to that in native 
tissue.
  Dr. J.M. Jessup at Harvard University is molding human colon cancers 
for research, and therapeutic testing is facilitated by culturing the 
cancer cells in the NASA bioreactor. The explanation is that the 
ordinary culture on the far left is not developing a recognizable 
tumor-like structure. The two pictures on the right show the colon 
cancer cells in the NASA bioreactor do develop into tumor-like 
structures.
  Physiology on the space station: A new window on the human body. 
Virtually every system in the body--from bones and muscles to the 
immune system--is tied to and affected by the force of gravity. When 
human and animal research subjects travel to the low-gravity 
environment of Earth orbit, each system is affected and can be studied 
under conditions that are unique not only in the history of biomedical 
research but also in the history of life on Earth.
  The unique value of orbital research in physiology and biotechnology 
has led to a vigorous program of cooperation between NASA and the 
National Institutes of Health that includes 18 cooperative agreements 
and a series of flight experiments.
  Focus: Brain and nervous system research. Because of the profound 
effects that the lack of gravity has on the sense of balance and 
orientation, basic neurosensory research conducted in space offers a 
unique opportunity for insights into the ways in which the brain and 
body interact. This research has great potential for helping 
researchers understand the basis of learning and memory.
  Highlights of recent research: Space shuttle research on the body's 
balance system has resulted in new discoveries of sensory pathways and 
the nervous system's capacity to adapt. This fundamental advance in our 
understanding of the brain may aid in the development of improved 
treatments for nervous system disorders.
  NASA research has produced computer techniques for creating three-
dimensional maps of neurons within gravity-sensing tissues. This work 
has enormous potential both for advancing neuroscience and for 
enhancing rapid access to many other kinds of medical imaging data. 
Detailed information on the way neurons are organized in the nervous 
system (neural nets) may someday support the development of new 
computer architectures.
  Focus: Musculoskeletal research. Osteoporosis affects some 25 million 
Americans, and it is estimated that this disease leads to 1.3 million 
bone fractures annually. Unless new preventive measures and treatments 
are found, associated costs are expected to rise to $30-$60 billion per 
year by the year 2020.
  Exposure to low gravity causes otherwise healthy young astronauts to 
experience rapid loss of bone mass--bone demineralization--comparable 
to osteoporosis but progressing at a much faster rate. By studying bone 
and muscle mass reduction in astronauts, space station research may 
contribute to our understanding of the causes of osteoporosis and help 
researchers develop preventative or rehabilitative regimes for 
bedridden or elderly patients.
  Highlights of recent research: In cooperation with investigators at 
Genentech, Inc., NASA researchers have demonstrated that muscle atrophy 
can be prevented using a combination of exercise and growth hormone. 
This approach opens new therapeutic avenues for rehabilitation, as well 
as for preventing some of the changes that accompany aging.
  Orbital research has demonstrated that changes in hormones do not 
completely explain the rapid loss of bone calcium that accompanies 
spaceflight. These findings may lead to new developments in diagnosing 
and treating skeletal disorders such as osteoporisis.
  NASA researchers have developed a new theory of remodeling in bone. 
In addition to stimulating new avenues of basic research, this new 
model has been applied by others to evaluate artificial joints, to 
study the influence of exercise on bone density, and to study age-
associated bone loss.
  NASA and the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and 
Skin Diseases [NIAMS] are cooperating to take full advantage of low 
gravity as a research tool. The NIAMS Osteoporosis Centers are 
expanding their participation in research related to spaceflight, and 
proceedings of a joint workshop were recently published in the 
Federation of American Societies of Experimental Biology Journal.
  The bone loss observed in space crews bears strong similarities to 
osteoporosis associated with aging. Astronauts lose the same percentage 
of their bone mass over a period of 8 months in space as the average 
human loses between the ages of 50 and 60. Spaceflight offers an 
opportunity to study the process of bone loss (bone demineralization) 
at an accelerated rate and to evaluate strategies for treatment and 
prevention of osteoporosis in months instead of years.
  Materials science on the space station: The scientific foundation for 
21st century high-tech materials. The goal of materials science 
research is to study how materials form and how the forming process 
controls a material's properties. By carefully studying and controlling 
the processes by which materials are formed, materials scientists can 
design new alloys, ceramics, glasses, and polymers to improve the 
performance of products ranging from contact lenses to car engines.
  The production process for most materials includes steps that are 
very heavily influenced by the force of gravity. The chance to observe 
these processes in low gravity promises to increase our fundamental 
understanding of production processes and of the materials produced. 
Scientists will use these insights from space research to improve the 
properties of materials ranging from glass and steel to semiconductors 
and plastics.
  Highlights of recent research: The experiments of Dr. Martin 
Glicksman of the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute flown aboard the 
space shuttle have produced groundbreaking new insights into how the 
structure of metal forms. Results of his experiment will aid in the 
development of stronger or more corrosion-resistant metal alloys.
  Based on his orbital research, Dr. Julian Szekely of the 
Massachusetts Institute of Technology developed new mathematical 
techniques to model the behavior of molten metals. These techniques 
have been used by the metals and semiconductor industries to design 
assignment and to improve predictions of the behavior of metals during 
processing.
  Space shuttle experiments have demonstrated that when gravity's 
effects are substantially reduced, other forces (such as surface 
tension) can predominate. These experiments have shown that secondary 
forces are more significant than previously thought, affecting many 
ground-based materials production techniques in unexpected ways. 
Results of this research open the door for further study and improved 
processes and materials for the future.
  Combustion science on the space station: Fundamental research on the 
world's predominant source of energy. Combustion (burning) has been a 
subject of vigorous scientific research for over a century. By 
conducting research on the space station, scientists can study subtle 
aspects of combustion normally masked by fluid flows caused by Earth's 
gravity.
  Combustion accounts for approximately 85 percent of the world's 
energy production--as well as a significant fraction of the world's 
atmospheric pollution. Breakthroughs in combustion science will have 
far-reaching effects for the economy and the environment. For example, 
a 2-percent increase in 

[[Page S 14192]]
burner efficiency would save the United States $8 billion per year.
  Low-gravity research may also produce breakthroughs in combustion 
synthesis, the process by which valuable materials are created as the 
products of fire. Examples include carbon fibers for high-strength, 
lightweight composite materials and fullerenes, a novel form of carbon.
  Highlights of recent research: Combustion science researchers using 
NASA Lewis Research Center facilities have applied for a patent on a 
device that improves air quality by stabilizing fuel-lean flames and 
reducing NOX (oxides of nitrogen), a major source of air 
pollution.
  At the recent 25th International Symposium on Combustion, the most 
important meeting of combustion scientists in the world, nearly 10 
percent of the papers presented involved low-gravity combustion 
research.
  NASA investigators have used the space shuttle to obtain and analyze 
the first data on Burke-Schumann gas jet diffusion flames (a classical 
flame configuration treated in virtually all combustion textbooks). 
These data represent the first true verification of this theory 
available since its original development in 1928.
  The spherical shape of candle flames in low-gravity illustrates the 
new perspective scientists will use to pursue research into subtle 
aspects of combustion impossible to study accurately on Earth.
  By studying combustion on the space station, scientists can observe 
certain aspects of burning that are hidden by the effects of gravity on 
Earth and thus advance our fundamental understanding of this vitally 
important field. Combustion research could lead to enhanced energy 
efficiency, reduced pollution, and improved processes for producing 
high-technology materials such as carbon fibers.
  Physics and biology on the space station: Fundamental research laying 
the foundation for future applications.
  Fluid physics and transport phenomena: One of the most significant 
forces affecting fluids--liquids, gases and mixtures--on Earth is 
gravity. In orbiting spacecraft, where gravity's effects are reduced 
many times, scientists can observe aspects of fluid behavior that are 
difficult or impossible to see in normal gravity.
  A deeper understanding of fluid behavior has broad applicability. 
Fluid flows play important roles in the production processes of our 
most important industries. For example, the performance of a powerplant 
depends on the flow characteristics of vapor-liquid mixtures, and oil 
recovery from partially depleted reservoirs depends on how liquids flow 
through porous rocks.
  Low-gravity research has already played a central role in stimulating 
new understanding of the ways in which heat and materials are 
transported in semiconductor crystal growth, metals processing, 
separation of biological molecules, and protein crystal growth.
  Microgravity physics: Research called microgravity physics uses the 
unique properties of space to test physics theories at levels of 
accuracy that are impossible on Earth. This fundamental research will 
advance our understanding of theories relevant to everything from high-
temperature superconductivity to weather prediction. This research has 
the potential for redefining our most basic assumptions about the 
universe.
  In 1992, an orbital research experiment produced observations that 
tested renormalization group theory with a degree of precision five 
times greater than any experiment conducted on Earth. Renormalization 
group theory is a Nobel Prize-winning physics theory with broad 
applicability to particle physics and high-temperature 
superconductivity.
  Gravitational biology: The low-gravity conditions of spaceflight 
provide biologists with a unique research opportunity to answer 
fundamental questions about the basic functions of living organisms. 
Gravitational biologists study gravity's influence on the development, 
growth, and internal machinery of life, including individual cells as 
well as complete plants and animals. Expanding fundamental biological 
knowledge will provide broad long-term benefits in medicine, 
agriculture, and industry.
  Under normal Earth gravity, the gas occupies the top of the pipe 
because it is lighter--less dense--than the liquid. When gravity is 
reduced, the gas forms a core down the middle of the pipe. Under low-
gravity conditions, weight and density become less important and 
scientists can study other forces that dictate the behavior of the 
liquid-gas mixture.
  Gravity exerts a strong influence on the properties and behavior of 
fluids--liquids and gases. Aboard the space station, researchers will 
study aspects of fluid behavior that are hidden by gravity on Earth. 
Increased knowledge of fluid physics is broadly applicable to a variety 
of industrial processes.
  Technology development on the space station: Paving the way for 
humanity's future in space--and on Earth. The international space 
station will both foster the development of advanced commercial 
technologies and provide a test bed for engineering research on orbit.
  Electric power: Power generation and storage systems research will 
produce long-term data on advanced materials, components, and 
electrical power systems, including flexible thin-film solar arrays and 
advanced power converters that will improve electrical systems on 
Earth.
  Robotics and remote operations: Space station research will produce 
advanced, reliable robotic systems and systems for remote operations. 
These systems have enormous potential for improving productivity and 
safety in industry and agriculture.
  Advanced life support technology: Space station research will develop 
advanced life-support technologies that combine physical, chemical, and 
biological processes to create highly efficient recycling systems. 
These technologies will have numerous applications to improving the 
quality of life on Earth, including: advanced waste processing and 
recycling techniques to reduce pollution; crop growth research capable 
of improving the efficiency of Earth-based hydroponics and other 
controlled crop production systems; vastly improved air and water 
quality sensors and analyzers and air revitalization systems; and 
automatic systems for identifying microbes to provide diagnostic 
support to detect a broad range of infectious diseases.
  Telemedicine: Telemedicine is the ability to practice medicine 
through the exchange of data and images between geographically remote 
locations using telecommunications technologies. NASA is a pioneer in 
telemedicine techniques for maintaining the health of astronauts on 
orbit and will continue to develop telemedicine systems through space 
station development. Telemedicine has the potential to reduce health 
care costs while improving the quality of care, especially for 
underserved populations--such as rural America or inner-city areas--and 
the victims of disaster.
  NASA-NIH cooperation: Conducting the world's best biomedical 
research.
  As the world's premier organization in life and biomedical sciences, 
the National Institutes of Health [NIH] had access to the world's best 
biomedical scientists, who need a variety of laboratory resources. 
NASA's biomedical research program maintains and develops a rich supply 
of unique and specialized resources, including laboratories and access 
to the weightless environment of space. Thus, cooperation between the 
two agencies strengthens the performance of each and helps ensure the 
highest possible return on America's investment in biomedical research.
  Cooperation between NASA and NIH has expanded rapidly as the research 
community's understanding of the value of orbital research has grown. 
This cooperation expands access to NASA facilities and resources to a 
broader community of the world's finest research scientists. 
Cooperation between these two premier Federal science agencies 
leverages NASA's unique facilities, including orbital facilities, to 
produce the maximum return on America's investment in biomedical 
research.
  NASA and NIH have executed 18 cooperative agreements to date, and 
joint activities have included scientific workshops; ground-based and 
flight research; and other specialized activities, such as a 
``Spaceline'' reference system developed with the National Library of 
Medicine.
  Neurolab, NASA's next dedicated life sciences space shuttle mission, 
will 

[[Page S 14193]]
carry investigations funded by five different institutes of NIH. NIH's 
Division of Research Grants will manage the scientific peer review for 
all Neurolab proposals. Neurolab will be launched on the space shuttle 
in March 1998.
  NASA looks forward to an expanding level of cooperation with NIH as 
orbital research enters the space station era. NIH researchers are 
expected to use the space station's next generation life sciences 
facilities--including the Human Research Facility, the Gravitational 
Biology Facility, and the Centrifuge Facility--in pursuit of national 
biomedical research goals.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have a table printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the table was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

              NASA-NIH COOPERATION: COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      NIH       Date of 
              Field of cooperation                  partner    agreement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biomedical/Behavioral Studies...................        NIH   July 1992.
Animal Science Research.........................       NCRR   July 1992.
Research into Processes of Aging and Spaceflight        NIH   Sept.     
                                                               1992.    
Neurologic Functions............................      NINDS   Oct. 1992.
Vestibular Research.............................      NIDCD   Oct. 1992.
Medical Diagnostic Imaging......................        NCI   Dec. 1992.
Musculoskeletal Research........................      NIAMS   Dec. 1992.
Neurolab Review.................................    NIH-DRG   Feb. 1993.
Cardiovascular, Pulmonary Hematologic Studies...         NHLBISept.1993.
Human Brain Project.............................       NIMH   Sept.     
                                                               1993.    
Developmental Biology...........................     NICHHD   Jan. 1994.
Spaceline Bibliographic Database................          NLM Feb. 1994.
Human Brain Project.............................       NIMH   Mar. 1994.
Cancer Research.................................        NCI   July 1994.
Human Brain Project.............................       NIMH   July 1994.
Biomedical Research.............................       NCRR   Aug. 1994.
Biotechnology...................................     NICHHD   Aug. 1994.
Human and Animal Research Education and                NCRR   Sept.     
 Technology Development.                                       1994.    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DRG: Division of Research Grants.                                       
NCI: National Cancer Institute.                                         
NCRR: National Center for Research Resources.                           
NHLBI: National Heart, Lung, and Blood institute.                       
NIA: National Institute on Aging.                                       
NIAMS: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin     
  Diseases.                                                             
NIDCD: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders.
NIH: National Institutes of Health.                                     
NIMH: National Institute on Mental Health.                              
NINDS: National Institute on Neurological Disorders and Stroke.         
NICHHD: National Institute on Child Health and Human Development.       
NLM: National Library of Medicine.                                      

  Mr. GLENN. U.S. research facilities on the international space 
station--the United States and our international space station partners 
will equip the space station with state-of-the-art laboratory 
facilities. The space station will allow for continuous operation of 
multiple experiments. It will have highly advanced data down-link and 
up-link capabilities that will permit researchers to monitor and 
operate many aspects of space station experiments from terminals in 
laboratories on the ground.
  With the exception of the centrifuge, all laboratory facilities will 
be designed to fit into standard payload racks. This modular approach 
will allow facilities to be upgraded and modified as needed and will 
allow facilities developed by one partner to fit into rack space 
supplied by another. The United States is developing six major 
facilities.


                     The six major U.S. facilities

  Biotechnology facility: will fill one experiment rack and support 
investigations in protein crystal growth and cell culture research.
  Fluids and combustion facility: consists of multiple modules: 
Combustion module: includes a combustion chamber to support hardware 
designed for specific investigations and several viewing ports for a 
variety of imaging systems to record flame characteristics.
  Fluids module: includes several experiment-specific test chambers 
supplied with equipment such as laser optics, heaters, and etc.
  Space station furnace facility: multiple module facility for 
materials science research comprising controls, diagnostics, and 
experiment hardware designed for specific research areas.
  Gravitational biology facility: two-rack facility composed of modular 
specimen habitats for plants and animals, support systems, and 
equipment needed to conduct research in cell, and development biology.
  Centrifuge facility: includes centrifuge rotor, gloveboxs, Habitat 
Holding Units (two racks--for plants and/or rodents), and a service 
rack; the centrifuge rotor will employ force from zero to twice the 
force of gravity on Earth to support research in all life science 
disciplines.
  Human research facility: four-rack facility with equipment to assess 
crew health, conduct research on how the human body responds and adapts 
to weightlessness, develop countermeasures, and conduct basic human 
research aimed at advancing knowledge in areas relevant to human 
health. This facility supports the following disciplines: 
cardiopulmonary physiology, neuroscience, musculoskeletal research, 
regulatory physiology, environmental health, and human factors.
  Facts on Life and Microgravity Researchers--Statistics. There were 
654 total lead investigators in 1994. Investigators represent over 85 
institutions of higher learning and 35 laboratories and other 
institutions in 40 States and the District of Columbia. More than 780 
graduate students were supported through NASA research (1994). There 
were more than 820 journal articles (1994). There were more than 1,400 
new research proposals in 1993 and 1994.
  Background--Life and microgravity science research is solicited 
through an open, highly competitive, peer-review process to ensure that 
the most meritorious science gains access to orbit.
  Historically, NASA's resources have allowed the agency to accept only 
about the top fifth of proposals it receives for life and microgravity 
research. This level of selectivity is comparable to that of other 
major U.S. science funders, such as the National Institutes of Health 
and the National Science Foundation. Only 10-20 percent of these 
accepted proposals lead to flight experiments, so selection for flight 
is even more competitive.
  Because of the great demand for limited orbital research 
opportunities, NASA selects research for flight opportunities only if 
it cannot be conducted on Earth. Flight research is selected from and 
supported by a larger research effort on the ground.
  NASA is fully committed to its close working relationship with the 
scientific community and to full access to NASA facilities for the most 
meritorious scientific research. NASA works with the scientific 
community through its advisory committees and subcommittees, the 
National Research Council, and working groups of distinguished 
scientists.
  Mr. President, that is only some of the advantages. I just hit the 
highlights of some of these things today.
  The experiments that can be run in the space station are a whole new 
window on the human body.
  New work on the human body in some of the space research and the 
physiology of it applies to the body's balance system. New discoveries 
of the sensory pathways; nervous system capacity to adapt would have 
direct relationships here on Earth.
  We have new windows on the human body muscular skeletal research. 
Osteoporosis affects 25 million Americans, and the disease leads to 1.3 
million bone fractures annually. There is no place better to look into 
this type of thing because on the space station the astronauts' bodies 
immediately start adapting and throwing off calcium in the bones, which 
is basically what happens in osteoporosis.
  In cooperation with investigators at Genentech, NASA research 
demonstrated new investigative techniques along that line as well as 
working with the National Institute of Arthritis and the 
musculoskeletal and skin diseases groups. All of these are things 
coming out of the space shuttle today and can be done better on the 
long-term space station.
  I have page after page of different experiments being done by 
Rensselear Polytechnic Institute, MIT, and others in particular fields. 
I will not delay these into the evening here.
  Another area being looked into that has an area of great interest is 
fundamental research on the world's predominant source of energy, 
combustion science. Combustion science is a very special one, and, for 
example, just a 2 percent increase in burner efficiency would save the 
United States some $8 billion a year. Very basic research has already 
taken place on some of the shuttle flights, and we would be able to do 
a lot more lengthy research on the space station.
  I wanted to close with a remark about the future for the young people 
of our country. Traveling around this country as I do, I believe that 
there is no program that has given more to the young people of our 
country in the way of excitement about the future and encouragement to 
stay in math and science technology courses than have our activities in 
space. Space represents an exciting future for our young people.

[[Page S 14194]]

  Mr. President, a number of these things were said awhile ago here on 
the floor about what some of the researchers and scientists are saying 
about the international space station. I ask unanimous consent to have 
printed in the Record a listing of what other scientists and 
researchers are saying in support of the station. People are supporting 
some of these activities and are very major supporters of the space 
station. It is a long list of people and scientific groups that do 
support the space station.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 What the Nation's Leading Researchers and Scientists Are Saying About 
                    the International Space Station

       Several years ago, Carl Sagan, Bruce Murray and I (the 
     officers of The Planetary Society) . . . opposed the then-
     space station plan as serving no national purpose. . .. The 
     present plan is serving national and international interests. 
     For Congress to cancel the space station now . . . would end 
     the rationale for America's manned space program, and with it 
     would die the spirit of a great nation bold enough to seek 
     great achievements.--Carl Sagan and Louis Friedman, The 
     Planetary Society.
       The program of protein crystal growth experiments sponsored 
     by NASA has been one of the real success stories in 
     microgravity sciences and applications. Protein crystal 
     growth research has made much progress, but must now move to 
     the next phase . . . which requires prolonged access to a 
     microgravity environment with potential for human 
     intervention on a continuing basis. This new phase will 
     require an orbiting platform such as that provided by the 
     International Space Station.--Howard M. Einspahr, Bristol-
     Myers-Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute.
       The AMA supports the continuation of the NASA and other 
     programs for conducting medical research and other research 
     with potential health care benefits on manned space flights, 
     including the continued development and subsequent operation 
     of the international space station.--Policy Adopted by the 
     American Medical Association.
       Through the NASA-NIH linkage, the Space Station has become 
     a vitally important and unique laboratory for biomedical 
     research. In addition to its central role in aerospace 
     engineering and space exploration, the Space Station is an 
     investment in the future of biomedical research.--John W. 
     Rowe, M.D., Mount Sinai Medical Center.
       A commitment to conduct continuous research for longer 
     periods of time in space is also essential. Ultimately, our 
     hope is to be able to crystallize proteins in microgravity, 
     conduct all x-ray data collection experiments in Space and 
     transmit the data to earth for processing. This can only be 
     done in a Space Station.--T.L. Nagabhushan, Ph.D., Schering-
     Plough Research Institute.
       AMWA supports the continuation of funding for NASA's 
     International Space Station because it provides one of the 
     most promising new vistas for medical research on diseases 
     that strike women and have unknown causes or cures.--Dianna 
     L. Dell, M.D., American Medical Women's Association.
       Space laboratories allow scientific experiments that simply 
     cannot be duplicated on Earth. The space station offers the 
     potential of long term studies that are expecially exciting 
     to the biomedical researchers seeking to understand how cells 
     grow, divide, and mutate to cause diseases such as cancer and 
     immune deficiencies.--William T. Butler, M.D., Baylor College 
     of Medicine.
       My institute has worked closely with the Center for 
     Macromolecular Crystallography at the University of Alabama 
     at Birmingham to perform two space shuttle crystal growth 
     experiments on the protein recombinant human insulin. It is 
     clear that the additional capabilities that the Space Station 
     will offer, * * * this type of research will progress at a 
     much more rapid rate. It is also evident to me that the Space 
     Station will offer similar advantages for the many other 
     areas of science that have been proposed for this unique 
     facility.--Herbert A. Hauptman, Ph.D., Nobel Laureate, Pres., 
     Hauptman-Woodward Medical Research Institute.
       NASA's ``cool suit'' literally has changed the lives of 
     some of those suffering from MS. The MSAA is hopeful, as new 
     findings continue to emerge from space-based research and the 
     possibilities that the International Space Station holds. 
     This research could be essential to MS patients.--John G. 
     Hodson, Sr., Multiple Sclerosis Association of America.

  Mr. GLENN. As I said, my good friend from Arkansas--Senator Bumpers 
and I are good friends. We disagree annually on this particular 
subject.
  Every year we see new and wonderful benefits derived from NASA 
research. The space station for the first time in the history of all 
mankind opens up our ability to truly make use of microgravity. For all 
these tens upon tens of thousands of years people have looked up and 
wondered what was up there and what we could do if we were up there. In 
our day, in our time, we finally can go up there and use this new 
research facility for the benefit of people all over this Earth.
  That is a very not-so-brief rundown on some of these things. When you 
get into the outcome of NASA research, I could go on literally for 
several hours here this evening and just touch the surface on all of 
this.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, first, I want to thank my friend from Ohio 
for his very informed and very compelling arguments. I have had the 
pleasure of traveling abroad with the Senator from Ohio, as my ranking 
member has. If there is one area where the exploits and the 
accomplishments of our colleague from Ohio is well known throughout 
this world, they know what he has done. They know of his leadership in 
space.
  I think he makes a very, very compelling argument based on his 
firsthand knowledge and experience, and his commitment is second to 
none. We thank him for his very compelling arguments in favor of it.
  I know the Senator from Texas, who also is an expert and has very 
strong views on the space station, is waiting to speak. But I do want 
to ask my colleagues if they could accommodate us by letting the 
ranking member or me know about any amendments that they have pending. 
There are so many issues in this bill that people would like to 
discuss, yet we have a very short timeline on which to work.
  I believe the majority leader and the Democratic leader were both 
very clear. They want to complete action on three appropriations 
bills--the prior remaining appropriations bills--prior to the end of 
the fiscal year. I think that is something that every Member in this 
body can appreciate. We want at least to complete action in this body 
before the end of the fiscal year. They have suggested that we should 
finish this bill by Tuesday. If we are looking at late Tuesday night, I 
hope it is not sometime early Wednesday morning. But in order to do 
this, we need to have the amendments, and we hope to be able to 
accommodate the schedules of all Senators giving them some time but 
keeping it in a regular procedure so that we can complete this in a 
timely fashion. I hope they will come forward. For tomorrow, 
particularly people who want to debate for 2 hours, I urge them to make 
a compelling 5-minute argument and submit the rest of their statements 
for the Record. Because I promise we will read them, particularly if 
they do not give them.
  I yield the floor.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I just want to echo the comments made by 
the chairman. We really need to know what amendments wish to be offered 
on the bill. We know of seven. We also need to know who would be 
available tomorrow morning to offer their amendments to the measure; 
people who are going to offer the amendments from the Finance Committee 
and the Labor Committee.
  So, please. If you have amendments, let us know. Be prepared to 
debate them. We are ready to listen, and to move the bill.
  I yield the floor.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I want to say how much I appreciate 
the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee and the ranking member 
for understanding the importance and the long-range importance of space 
research and NASA. They accompanied me to NASA in Houston. And we were 
able to sit in one of the modules. I am happy to say that we survived 
the distinguished chairman piloting the space module.
  It was a very important trip because we saw what is on the cutting 
edge of the space station research. We saw how you cannot do certain 
things with gravity in the research that you can do if you are out in 
space where you do not have the pull of gravity.
  So I appreciate the time and effort that Senator Bond and Senator 
Mikulski have put into understanding NASA, and the importance of this 
for those of us on Earth who are very committed to keeping the new 
technologies and the growth that are provided.
  This country's venture into space has represented America at its 
best--forward-looking and inventive, committed to the advancement of 
mankind and of science, creator of technologies, applying them to 
products that to make life 

[[Page S 14195]]
better, so much better that our grandparents and our great grandparents 
could never have really dreamed of; the differences that we have now 
because of the space research that we have done in the past 10 or 15 
years.
  The essence of what we are debating today when we take up funding for 
the space station is whether we will summon the vision to continue this 
quest in cooperation with other nations, or will we instead clip the 
wings of civilization and hunker down right here on Earth.
  Mr. President, let us come back to Earth for a minute. NASA and the 
space station have not been exempt from budget cuts. It is not like 
there is a massive spending program out there that has been unfettered.
  The space station has in fact offered up more than its fair share of 
budget reductions. In 1993, a reduction and redesign in the program 
resulted in the space station being $2 billion more cost efficient.
  Unlike a number of other Government agencies, budget reduction has 
been addressed head on by NASA which recently put itself through a 
vigorous analysis called the zero-based review under which every 
mission, every element of its operation, was scrutinized for savings 
and efficiency.
  I watched this process very closely and commend Dan Goldin for his 
bold approach. Every agency, including Congress, should benefit from 
the same kind of scorched-Earth review of its own operations. NASA was 
able to achieve a 35-percent budget reduction--saving the taxpayers a 
total of $40 billion over the future of NASA, and the space station--
and continue with its mission.
  Another important item to remember in this debate is that Congress 
and the administration in their long-term balanced budget plans both 
include the space station. In fact, the committees in both Houses of 
Congress have reported measures fully funding the space station for 
fiscal year 1996.
  In light of this, I can only conclude that opponents who are playing 
the budget card are really just engaging in another attempt to derail 
the space program--a program that, since the Kennedy administration, 
has paid back an incalculable return on the American investor.
  First among those returns are the advances in medicine that this 
program has brought right back here to Earth. As its predecessors did, 
the space station has the potential to provide us with powerful weapons 
in our ongoing battle against diseases, especially breast cancer and 
osteoporosis where we can only do the research in the nongravity 
situation.
  A permanently manned space laboratory is critical to providing 
researchers with more extensive facilities in a controlled, 
microgravity environment.
  Most significantly, extended human space flights will allow 
scientists to modify their experiments in orbit and take advantage of 
the unanticipated results. This is the kind of flexibility that has 
historically shown that we can get our greatest breakthroughs. The 
question we are asking today is, Are we going to pursue the knowledge?
  The space station will allow us to continue to benefit from the 
multiple economic benefits space exploration has provided us to date. 
America and American jobs have grown because of space-based advances in 
transportation, data processing, communications, and countless other 
high-technology advances that have made our standard of living the envy 
of the world.
  Laser surgery--if you have had the ability to have laser surgery, you 
know what a great benefit this has been in our medical development. 
Operations that used to take weeks to heal now are done in half a day 
in a doctor's office. That is because laser surgery has provided the 
opportunity to have safe, efficient surgery that heals almost 
instantly.
  If you have of used velcro--velcro closures, that came from space. If 
you have had the opportunity to have a hearing aid put in your ear, and 
if you remember what our grandparents used to use for hearing aids, 
they used to have big batteries in their pockets and wires that ran up 
to big ear plugs that you could see a mile away, and now you can put 
that device in your ear. And most people do not even know that you have 
a hearing aid.
  That kind of technology was made possible by space research and our 
commitment to space research. Not only is it a quality of life issue, 
but think of all the jobs that have been created making the lasers that 
do the surgery, making the hearing aids that fit into your ears, the 
velcro lining, from coats to tennis shoes, to everything else that has 
made life so much easier. It also has created jobs because people are 
making those products.
  I urge my colleagues to vote with me to keep fueling this kind of 
research. It benefits everyone on Earth, and it continues to bring 
those new technologies that create the new industries that keep our 
economy vibrant, that keep it growing, that allow us to continue to 
offer the people coming into our system the new jobs.
  While the specter of war hovers over Eastern Europe an other parts of 
the globe, the space station is poised to serve as a catalyst for 
global cooperation on a scale previously unimagined.
  As the largest most ambitious international scientific and 
technological development project ever undertaken, the space station 
brings together resources and some of the best scientists from the 
United States, Russia, Japan, member nations of the European Space 
Station Agency, Canada, and Italy.
  The Russians, who are old hands in space, have a wealth of experience 
and expertise to bring to the table in this cooperative endeavor. 
Having the Russians on board will provide the United States and our 
other partners a very valuable asset.
  As an indicator of the level of commitment that Russia has given the 
space station, this year the Russian space agency was granted an 
increase in its budget, including its science budget. This represents 
the strong support that the space program receives from the Russian 
Government. And the Russian space program, like ours, has been a 
constant source of pride to the Russian people. It enjoys the broadest 
spectrum of political support in Russia.
  Our venture into space is teaching us important lessons in how to 
live together through cooperation on Earth. However, our cooperative 
activities with Russia--encouraging democracy, supporting a market 
economy, nuclear arms dismantlement, scientific collaboration--also 
advance our own national interests. During this critical period of 
transformation in Russia, we should continue this cooperation, not 
undermine it.
  Failure to fund the space station would break our partnership with 
Europe, Japan, and Canada. These countries have expended over half of 
their $9 billion commitment to the $15 billion space station program. 
It would cause them to conclude that they can no longer count on a 
United States commitment to build, launch and operate the space 
station.
  Mr. President, it would be unthinkable for America to be a bad 
business partner. We have given our word to these other countries. They 
have invested based on our word. It is the word of Congress as well as 
past Presidents and the present President. We cannot walk away after 
they have relied on that. We cannot do that.
  Congress has voted in support of the space station more than 20 times 
since 1987. This program is a reality. If we were to stop the program 
now, the cost of terminating the station would take out all the savings 
that would be projected in the 1996 budget. Our investment of $14.5 
billion in the overall program would be thrown out the window. That 
would be a foolish thing for us to do.
  None of us want to be in a Congress that is remembered for displaying 
the failure of will--good will--that abandoning the space station 
project would signify. Grounding the space station would be the moral 
equivalent of grounding the American dream.
  The American people know and appreciate what the space station has 
done for the past 40 years to enhance our lives. They know the 
sacrifices that have been made by the early pioneers. Our national 
pride soared when our first manned spacecraft orbited the Earth. Who 
will ever forget watching the first man step on the Moon and plant the 
American flag in the Moon dust?
  Mr. President, we have led this space race, but in the big picture we 
have really only taken the first small step for man. The giant leap can 
only come 

[[Page S 14196]]
with the commitment over time. The giant leap of mankind must be 
pursued. We are the leaders, and we cannot let down our people who have 
invested so much, our partners who have invested so much. It would be 
unthinkable.
  I urge my colleagues to support the space station and NASA once 
again, just as we have 20 times before. This is not the time to walk 
away from a commitment. I hope that we will do the right thing and 
hopefully we will put this issue to rest so that there will never be a 
question of our commitment to the future and the future jobs for our 
country.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the Bumpers 
amendment and in support of the space station program.
  I am a longstanding supporter of NASA's space station program. 
Undertaking technological challenges like the space station in why we 
have a NASA. I also believe the space station is the next logical step 
in our quest to extend human presence in our solar system. Space 
station will provide invaluable information to scientists and engineers 
on humans' ability to live and work in space. That information and 
experience will be critical if we undertake any future missions to the 
Moon or Mars.
  The space station's greatest benefit may be in the area of spinoffs. 
Many technologies we take for granted today--such as microcomputers, 
pacemakers, artificial limbs, insulin pumps, and communications 
satellites--are byproducts of past space missions. If NASA's past is 
any indication, the space station will usher in a new generation of 
inventions and technological breakthroughs we cannot yet imagine.
  Earlier this year, I attended the Oshkosh Air Show with NASA 
Administrator Dan Goldin. I was amazed at the number of NASA-related 
spinoffs on display. Many, if not most, of the advanced aircraft, 
engines, and other technologies we saw owed their development in some 
way to NASA's research. In fact, it has been estimated that for every 
dollar invested in the space program, the Nation gets a return of $2 in 
the form of related spinoff benefits.
  In 1993, our trade surplus in aerospace technology was $39 billion--
our strongest export sector. Without question, that positive balance of 
trade is due in large measure to the U.S. space program and the related 
technology transfer to U.S. industry. If this pattern continues, 
taxpayers can expect enormous returns on their investment in the 
international space station program.
  It would be a sad waste of the time, effort, and money spent so far 
on the space station if we were to give up now. Since 1984, the United 
States has spent $12 billion on the space station. Equally important, 
13,000 Americans in 38 States in space station-related jobs have been 
working hard to make this great dream become a reality. Now NASA is 
ready to go. Facilities have been built. Hardware has been constructed. 
Plans have been finalized. We are now only 2 years away from the launch 
of the first element of the station. It is time to finish what we 
started.
  We also must not forget the United States is not the only investor in 
the space station. Indeed, the station is not only an international 
project, it is the largest international science project ever 
undertaken. Japan the European Space Agency are each developing a lab 
module for the space station and the Canadians are developing a robotic 
arm. Our newest partner, Russia, also is playing a key role by 
providing launches, a navigational system, and rescue vehicles. 
Together, our foreign space station partners have spent $4 billion on 
the project--with billions more budgeted. Increasingly, big science 
projects are becoming far too expensive and complex for any one country 
to undertake alone. If we do not honor our commitments to our foreign 
partners, we cannot expect them to participate in any future 
international space and science missions.
  Mr. President, these are some of the reasons I endorse the space 
station program. In that connection, in July, as chairman of the Senate 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, I introduced 
authorization legislation for NASA, which provides full funding for the 
space station, as well as for Mission to Planet Earth and other 
important space and aeronautics activities.
  Mr. President, while I support the space station, my support is not 
unqualified. I do have some serious reservations about the program. 
None are so serious as to lead me to support killing the program. 
However, the Commerce Committee will be keeping a close eye on each.
  First of all, I am concerned about the program's overreliance on the 
Russians. Until 1993, space station was largely a United States 
program, with substantial contributions by the European Space Agency, 
Japan, and Canada. However, late in 1993, the administration added 
Russia as a space station partner. Today, the program increasingly 
seems to be driven by the Russians, and not the United States. Under 
the current plan, 44 of the launches to assemble and supply the station 
are Russian launches compared to only 27 shuttle launches. Furthermore, 
Russian spacecraft will be used for both the navigation system for the 
space station and its crew rescue vehicles. If, for any reason, the 
Russians are forced to withdraw from the station, the program would be 
in peril.
  Second, I am troubled by the sheer complexity of the space station 
effort. For instance, the assembly of the space station will require 77 
launches over a 5-year period, each of which must occur within a tight 
window of time and in a proper sequence. Moreover, this assembly will 
require over 600 hours of space walking by astronaut crews. 
Traditionally, NASA has tried to minimize space walking because it 
places crews at risk, complicates the accomplishment of mission goals, 
and takes away from the astronauts' research time.
  Finally, my biggest concern about the space station is its enormous 
cost. When it was first proposed in 1984, the space station was 
estimated to cost $8 billion. However, in a June 1995 report, the 
General Accounting Office [GAO] estimated that the total cost of the 
design, launch, and operation of the space station will be $94 billion. 
That is about seven times the entire annual budget for NASA. My fear is 
that, if the space station suffers substantial cost overruns, its 
budget may eventually crowd out every other NASA program and leave the 
space station as NASA's only mission. This result is clearly not in the 
public interest.
  I am particularly concerned about the impact of space station funding 
on Mission to Planet Earth. I believe Mission to Planet Earth to be 
NASA's most important and relevant program. Using the latest satellite 
technology, Mission to Planet Earth will help scientists understand and 
predict the global climate trends that affect our lives. As a Senator 
representing a State whose economy is extremely dependent on 
agriculture, I have a keen interest in the program's potential to 
provide detailed data on soil conditions, topography, crops, and other 
information critical to the farming and ranching communities. I also 
take great pride in the important role the EROS Data Center in Sioux 
Falls, SD, will play in converting the huge volumes of satellite data 
into useful information for the entire Nation.
  Accordingly, as much as I appreciate the scientific and economic 
benefits of the space station, I could not have supported it at the 
expense of Mission to Planet Earth. I am pleased that the authors of 
the underlying bill--H.R. 2099--did not place us in that dilemma, but 
managed to find a way in this tight budget climate to fund both space 
station and Mission to Planet Earth. This could not have been easy and 
I commend the managers of the bill on their wisdom and good judgment in 
addressing this issue.
  Mr. President, let me be clear. The space station is a monumentally 
complex and costly undertaking. Some say it is an impossible dream. 
However, NASA's heritage and history is about doing the impossible. I 
am confident that, under Dan Goldin's leadership, NASA will bravely 
meet this challenge and finally build the orbital space laboratory we 
have been planning for two decades. In a world where economic growth 
increasingly depends on technological leadership, space station is the 
kind of bold step needed to increase our scientific knowledge and 
strengthen U.S. competitiveness.

[[Page S 14197]]

  So, Mr. President, despite my questions and reservations about the 
space station, I believe it is the Nation's interest to go forward and 
complete this important project. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to 
vote ``no'' on the Bumpers amendment and vote ``yes'' for space station 
and the future of our space program and the future of our Nation.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I am pleased to once again be an 
original co-sponsor of this effort to terminate funding for the space 
station, and I commend the senior Senator from Arkansas, Senator 
Bumpers, for his continuing efforts in this area.
  Every year, Mr. President, the Senator from Arkansas comes to the 
floor with amendment after amendment to cut Federal spending and to 
help us with our uphill efforts to balance the Federal budget. We need 
to closely scrutinize every program in the Federal budget, and quite 
simply, ask ourselves if, given our current financial constraints and 
given the immense sacrifices we have been asking Medicare recipients, 
college students, veterans, and many others to make, can we afford to 
continue this particular spending program?
  This is the third consecutive year I have joined with the Senator 
from Arkansas, the Senator from Virginia, Senator Warner, and others in 
this bipartisan effort to delete funding for the space station. Each 
year, the Senator from Arkansas has presented a number of strong 
arguments in support of terminating the space station. He has presented 
information about NASA's notorious cost-overruns. We have learned that 
a large part of the scientific community, including the American 
Physical Society and the American Cancer Society--two groups that have 
been alleged to potentially benefit from this space endeavor--actually 
oppose continued funding of this space station.
  We have learned about a recent General Accounting Office report that 
found that the total amount of funding that will be required to build 
this space station is $78 billion. And of course, that is $78 billion 
that we are going to have to borrow and pay interest on for many years 
to come.
  The construction of the space station is opposed by many of the 
leading groups supporting deficit reduction and a balanced budget, 
including the National Taxpayers Union, Citizens Against Government 
Waste, as well as Friends of the Earth.
  Yet the Congress continues to write a $2 billion check to NASA every 
year to continue the construction of a space station. Mr. President, I 
have said before that I do not support shutting down our space program. 
Clearly, many of our space programs have proven to justify their costs. 
And it is my hope that when our fiscal house is in order that we can 
continue and enhance our space exploration initiatives.
  But it is also clear that we cannot and will not become a financially 
responsible nation until every Federal program is put on the table, 
closely scrutinized, and determined to be either justified or not 
justified given our current fiscal constraints. Mr. President, the 
space station must be put on the table and we must have the political 
will and fiscal discipline to once and for all discontinue funding for 
this costly program.
  Once again, I thank the distinguished senior Senator from Arkansas, 
Senator Bumpers, and I yield the floor.
  Ms. MIKULSKI addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise this year in support of America's 
space program and in opposition to the Bumpers amendment which would 
strike funding for the space station.
  I have said this before and I will say it again: This amendment is a 
choice between the future and the past. What kind of nation will we be 
in the 21st century? Will we be the one that uses technology to help 
people with their day-to-day lives and keep people employed in the 
field of manufacturing, or are we going to let America's best days be 
behind it? Will we use American ingenuity and know-how through the 
unique environment of space to tackle our understanding of disease or 
development of new technologies that can be used at home on the planet 
Earth? These are the questions that are at the heart of why America 
needs a space station and why we should, once again, defeat the Bumpers 
amendment.
  Some will argue that science carried out on the space station can be 
accomplished more effectively on the planet Earth. This simply is not 
true. The science proposed for the station cannot be accomplished on 
Earth at any major price. Space station science requires sustained 
access to very low levels of gravitational force. It is technologically 
impossible to create a low-gravity environment for this type of 
research without going into orbit.
  Some might say, ``Well, if that's so, why not do this type of science 
on the space shuttle if you need to go into orbit?''
  I bring this point to their attention: The shuttle can stay in orbit 
only for 2 weeks. We do not limit cancer researchers to 2 weeks in the 
lab to find a cure for that devastating disease. Why should we limit 
space science to only 2 weeks up in the air? Much of the proposed 
research will take months, if not years, to complete.
  Another argument we hear every year is cost. Sure, the space station 
costs money. So does anything else worthwhile. We have heard that the 
GAO estimated that the station would cost $94 billion to fund over a 
period of years. This number is misleading. When tabulating the total 
cost, the Government Accounting Office included a large portion of 
NASA's human space flight budget in its analysis. The fact is that $51 
billion of the $94 billion is for shuttle missions that were going to 
fly regardless of the fate of the space station.
  The real cost of the station, which includes final development and 
construction and 10 years of operation is $26.2 billion. The remaining 
/balance of the erroneous $94 billion estimate is life science and 
microgravity research--life science and microgravity research--and that 
is the heart and soul of what is to be done on the space station--
microgravity research and life science research.
  We heard a few minutes ago a distinguished Senator and a former 
astronaut talk with eloquence in detail about the brilliant, needed 
research that is going on in the life science area and that it could 
only be done in space.
  I will not repeat the many examples there, but I can tell you as a 
woman who fought to establish the Office of Women's Health at NIH, who 
joined with my colleagues to make sure we had funding for breast cancer 
and ovarian cancer research, it is important to me that we continue 
this work. And it was through my efforts working with then Dr. 
Bernadine Healy at the National Institutes of Health and Dr. Dan Goldin 
that we forged this unique partnership between space and NIH to deal 
with key life science issues and to coordinate all of that research.
  This is what the U.S. Government is all about: Saving lives, saving 
jobs, saving communities and that is what the space station is all 
about. We go out there so that we can save lives, jobs in communities 
right here on the planet Earth.
  What is the cost to America if we do not continue the space station? 
Well, the Federal Government has already invested $14.5 billion. If we 
do not fund the space station, 15,000 highly skilled engineering and 
production contract jobs, along with about a thousand civil service 
jobs, will be lost; the jobs of 35,000 contract workers and 5,000 civil 
servants who work on the shuttle will be at risk.
  Long duration microgravity research in cell and developmental 
biology, human physiology, biotech, fluid physics--and if you think it 
is hard to say fluid physics, you ought to be out there trying to do 
it--fluid physics, combustion science, material science, benchmark 
physics, as well as the development of new pharmaceuticals and 
understanding of Earth-based diseases. We would lose that.
  We would also lose our credibility with our international partners if 
we shut down the space station. Russia, Japan, Europe, and Canada have 
already invested more than $9 billion. Finally, the U.S. 
competitiveness could be maintained by continuing the long-term cutting 
edge high-risk R&D research that is integral to the space station 
development.
  Japan, Europe, and Canada regard our agreement to pursue the space 
station as a treaty. To break this violates treaty-level negotiations.
  Finally, one of the benefits of the end of the cold war is that 
rather than 

[[Page S 14198]]
competing with the Russians in space, duplicating projects in science, 
we actually are working together to be best at what we each need in 
space station activity.
  Mr. President, we could argue these points all night, but I will not 
put my friends and colleagues through that. This bill is going to take 
long enough to debate. When we vote on the Bumpers amendment, I am 
going to ask every Senator to think long and hard about what this 
amendment means. This vote is not about money or cutting spending. 
Sure, we all want to cut spending. But this is about investing in the 
future, it is about our kids and the kind of world we will live in and 
the kind of jobs we have. It is about the American spirit of new 
frontiers, the human exploration. The American character has always 
been about progress, moving ahead, using science and technology to 
advance an American agenda, but a global one also.
  That is what I want to support. I want to see a bright new future 
with opportunities beyond our comprehension. I want to open doors that 
lead to new technologies and new challenges and new markets. This 
amendment leaves us standing in front of these new doors too paralyzed 
by fear with a green eyeshade clouding our vision of the future.
  So I hope my colleagues will join me in voting ``yes'' for the future 
and ``no'' on the Bumpers amendment.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. BOND addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, as usual, my colleague from Maryland is 
extremely eloquent as she states the case for the space station. She 
has done it very well. She and the Senators from Texas and Ohio have 
made the case.
  I ask unanimous consent to print in the Record some explanations and 
corrections for the committee report on this bill. Because of the time 
pressure, we did not have the chance to make all the corrections on the 
report. I ask they be printed in the Record for the information of 
those who may have questions about this report. It does not amend the 
report, but it will be in further explanation of the report.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

     VA-HUD, Independent Agencies Appropriations Bill (H.R. 2099)--
                  Corrections to Senate Report 104-140

       Page and Comment:
       P. 42--Starting with the last full paragraph on page 42 and 
     replacing the text through the first full paragraph on page 
     44:
       ``In addition, the Committee is recommending the creation 
     of a demonstration program for up to 30 PHAs to address the 
     problem of dependency in the public housing population by 
     encouraging employment and self-sufficiency for the very low 
     and extremely low-income families who now live in public 
     housing.
       ``Up to 30 PHAs would be permitted to use funding for 
     Section 8 and public housing in a much more flexible way than 
     under current program rules. Funding streams could be 
     combined, so long as the PHA continued to assist essentially 
     the same number of total families as would have been served 
     had the funding streams for Section 8 and the two public 
     housing formula-based programs remained separate. The amount 
     of funding available to the PHA from public housing operating 
     subsidies, modernization grants, and Section 8 annual 
     contributions contracts would not be affected by 
     participation in the demonstration.
       ``PHAs participating in the demonstration would have very 
     broad flexibility to set rents and conditions of occupancy in 
     ways that encourage work and upward mobility. These policies 
     could include exclusions of earned income for purposes of 
     determining rent, but they might also include more far-
     reaching changes that redefine the role of Federal housing 
     activities to provide supplementary assistance to families on 
     a temporary basis.
       ``In order to make sure that the models created by this 
     demonstration are tested and replicable and that their long-
     term effect is well understood, HUD will provide training and 
     technical assistance for the design and implementation of the 
     programs of up to 10 PHAs, and will conduct detailed 
     evaluations of those programs. The demonstration includes a 
     set-aside for this purpose of $5,000,000 from amounts 
     appropriated for the public housing modernization program.''
       P. 46--Second paragraph beginning with ``irrespective'' 
     should strike the parenthetical referring to the $10 billion 
     loss reserve, as this accounting figure is not related to the 
     budget estimate for claims discussed previously, and is not 
     ``in addition'' to them.
       P. 48--The Report states that the funding for preservation 
     includes $550 million for preservation incentives and $74 
     million for prepayment vouchers. It is clear that $74 million 
     is not sufficient to cover the prepayment voucher need. 
     Instead, as the Bill permits, the Department will have the 
     discretion to stop funding incentives where needed to ensure 
     that tenants will not be displaced by prepayment.
       P. 49--The language recognizes that there is significantly 
     less credit subsidy available for F.Y. 1996 than in past 
     years, and that the deficiency will need to be offset. 
     However, the report only refers to underwriting changes as 
     the way to offset that deficiency. In addition, the report 
     does not acknowledge that FHA will be allowed to use negative 
     credit subsidy from its revenue producing products as well as 
     other potential sources.
       Program Accounts:
       P. 55--Public Housing Demolition etc.--The description 
     really is for the severely distressed program (HOPE VI) which 
     is not continued under the Committee's recommendation. The 
     Committee has proposed a successor program to the HOPE VI/URD 
     program which targets funding to the actual demolition and 
     replacement of failed housing developments in a manner which 
     streamlines and facilitates such remedial activities.
       P. 56--Description of the Demo/Disp Committee 
     Recommendation should include use of the funds also for 
     tenant-based assistance under Section 8 at the end of the 
     first sentence. It should also say that this funding level is 
     the same as FY 1995 ``for the HOPE VI program''.
       P. 56--Drug Elimination: The Committee recommendation needs 
     to include the following: 1) that the program can be 
     distributed on a formula basis; 2) that there is a 6.25 
     percent setaside for drug elimination grants in connection 
     with assisted housing projects, and 3) that grants are 
     available to fight drug-related and other types of crime.
       P. 61--Program Description of CDBG: In the second 
     paragraph, the second sentence should be reordered to read as 
     follows: ``After deducting designated amounts for special 
     purpose grants and Indian tribes, seventy percent of 
     appropriated funds are distributed to entitlement communities 
     and 30 percent are distributed through States to 
     nonentitlement communities.''
       P. 62--Chart: Should reflect the Bill appropriation of $27 
     million (not 22.5) for special purpose grants under section 
     107. Should add Ntl. Am. Indian Council and HAC funds. The 
     report does not note the setaside of $12 million for housing 
     counseling services from the $80 million supportive services 
     program.
       P. 62--NAIHC should be written out as follows: ``National 
     American Indian Housing Council''. This should be added to 
     the Chart.
       P. 62--CDBG Supportive Services Demo: The report does not 
     track the legislative language which includes Indian housing 
     agencies and other housing assistance entities to provide 
     services to serve the elderly and the disabled as well as 
     residents of public housing.
       P. 63--CDBG setaside: There is no description of the 
     counseling program as a setaside (or earmark, as the report 
     describes Youthbuild) of the supportive services demo. The 
     Report should say that this is an earmark of $12 million from 
     the demo.
       P. 66--Sec. 201(a)--Describes the Rescissions Act provision 
     rather, but does not note modifications. The Report states 
     that the fungibility does not extend to use of Op Subs; 
     however, there is a 10 percent fungibility provision.
       P. 67--3d full paragraph--Second sentence describes an 
     amendment HUD proposed but was never accepted.
       P. 68-69--Mandatory conversion: This does not reference the 
     portion of this section which allows the Secretary to 
     recapture and reuse unused mod, CIAP, or MROP Budget 
     Authority.
       P. 69--Explains that the Secretary has powers to require 
     conversion only where a PHA has not expeditiously implemented 
     the plan. However, the Secretary's powers are triggered by 
     sheer ``inadequacy'' of plan or implementation, not just 
     untimeliness.
       P. 69-70--Section 204(b) [nondiscrimination] is not in the 
     reported bill. The other subsections of 204 need to be 
     redesignated, accordingly.
       P. 70--FMRs: Second paragraph refers to FY 1995, instead of 
     FY 1996.
       P. 70--This section should read as follows: ``Section 
     205(d) would delay reissuance of vouchers and certificates 
     for 6 months (but not later than 10/1/96), with the exception 
     of any certificates assigned or committed to project based 
     assistance as permitted otherwise by the Act, accomplished 
     prior to the effective date of this Act.''
       P. 71--Section 210: the last reference in this paragraph 
     should be to section 208, not 202.
       P. 71--Section 211, First paragraph, 4th line, strike 
     ``housing assistance''. (contracts are both HAP and ACC 
     contracts). First paragraph, second to last sentence, 
     reference should be to project-based assistance. Third 
     paragraph, last sentence, strike ``tenants'' and insert 
     ``eligible families, including those''.
       P. 72--First line, strike ``mortgage'' and insert 
     ``insurance contract''.
       P. 76--In the first sentence of the explanation of section 
     218, the word ``pertaining'' should be deleted. The bill 
     ``prohibits the use of any funds by HUD for any activity 
     related to the enforcement of the Fair Housing Act for 
     property insurance.'' The House provision barred not just 
     enforcement but all spending related to property insurance, 
     including research. The Senate bill does not.
       P. 76--Section 221, should be divided into 2 sentences. The 
     first should end with the 

[[Page S 14199]]
     word ``formula''. The second should read as follows: ``Changes would 
     continue to be subject to applicable rulemaking procedures.''
       P. 77--Heading should be ``Extension Period for Sharing 
     Utility Cost Savings with PHAs''. Sec. 224 should have a 
     separate heading.
       Department of Justice:
       The second paragraph of the Committee Recommendation says 
     it ``relocates all responsibilities for fair housing issues 
     currently housed in the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development''. This should be revised to ``relocates all 
     responsibilities of the Secretary under the Fair Housing 
     Act''. As written, the statement inaccurately describes the 
     bill. The bill only pertains to Title VIII (the Fair Housing 
     Act). The Secretary continues to have responsibility for fair 
     housing under Title VI, the Rehab Act, etc.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, in just a few minutes, I will be proposing a 
unanimous-consent request setting forth the time for debate on this 
tomorrow. We will have an opportunity to go through some of these 
debates and expand upon them.
  I am not going to take much time tonight other than to say the 
proponent of this amendment is very eloquent. He has raised quite a few 
concerns that he has. I believe there are good answers for all of them. 
I was reminded, as he spoke, about all the things that could 
potentially go wrong, of a cartoon character many years ago who used to 
walk around with a metal shield over his head so he would not be hit by 
a meteorite if one came from space. Some of the arguments presented 
against the space station seem to have about as much likelihood of 
occurring as being struck by a meteorite.
  I do want to point out that in this bill we do not, as the proponents 
suggest, cut back on regulation to endanger the drinking water of this 
country. In fact, we believe that with restructuring and refocusing the 
activities of the Environmental Protection Agency, we can continue to 
make the progress that we have made in these fields.
  But to address the particular terms of this amendment, the argument 
has been made that we do not really need to go to a space shuttle, 
because everything we can do on a space shuttle can be accomplished 
much more effectively on Earth. But I say the facts are that the 
science proposed for the station cannot be accomplished on Earth at any 
price.
  The space station science requires sustained access to very low 
levels of gravitational force. It is not technically feasible to create 
a low-gravity environment for research without going into orbit, and I 
believe the speakers opposing the amendment have made that point very 
well.
  The space shuttle program has produced a number of very important 
findings and helped scientists to explore the possibilities of orbital 
research, but the space shuttle can only stay in orbit for 16 days at a 
time. Dr. Michael DeBakey, chancellor and chairman of the department of 
surgery at Baylor College of Medicine has said:

       Present technology of the shuttle allows for stays in space 
     of only about 2 weeks. We do not limit medical researchers to 
     only a few hours in the laboratory and expect cures for 
     cancer. We need much longer missions in space, in months to 
     years to obtain research results that may lead to the 
     development of new knowledge and breakthroughs.

  I might also add that the National Research Council, an arm of the 
National Academy of Sciences just released a report on microresearch 
opportunities for 1990 which states:

       The need for an extended duration orbiting platform has 
     been identified as critical in many microgravity research 
     experiments because of the time required for experimentation, 
     the wide parametric ranges and the need to demonstrate the 
     reproductability of results.

  Another quote:

       The duration of experiments, the regime of parameters 
     available to experimenters and the ability to demonstrate 
     reproductability of results in microgravity experiments 
     create the need for extended duration orbiting platforms.

  There are many other authorities that we could cite for this 
proposition, but as my colleague from Maryland has said, this is a 
question of setting priorities. We have a tight budget, certainly, but 
we ought to be in the position where we make investments that are 
important for the future. I believe it would be a tragedy, a tremendous 
tragedy, were we tomorrow to vote to kill the space station. The space 
station is the most ambitious and exciting space program since the 
Apollo program of over 25 years ago.
  I think it is time that we called an end to the incessant attempts to 
kill the space station. Over the last 4 years, there have been 13 
attempts in the House and Senate to kill the program.
  And fortunately, because of the knowledge and what the space station 
can and will do, these amendments have failed.
  Last year, a resounding 64 Senators voted against this amendment. I 
was proud to be among them. The arguments used by station opponents 
this year are the same ones. We have seen the same charts. We have gone 
through the drill. These tired arguments have been used in the past. 
The claims were not true then; they are not true now.
  Let me tick off a very few. The space station is no longer a dream. 
It is a reality. It is working. It is providing results.
  Second, the space station is perfectly on schedule and on budget. As 
a matter of fact, through the leadership of the administration, the 
White House and NASA, we are going through the entire space budget and 
we have made significant savings. We can spend our scarce dollars on 
high-priority programs and that includes the space station.
  Third, a streamlined management team is in place. NASA has reduced 
its in-house work force by 1,000, almost one half, and the program is 
being better managed than ever before. They made rescissions and 
reforms in having a prime contractor. The system is working.
  Fourth, cooperation with Russia is working as planned. We are working 
with our former adversary and developing some very usable scientific 
information, and breaking new ground working with Russia.
  Fifth, the program is not a budget buster. It has been included in 
the budget resolution that has been adopted because it is an 
investment.
  Finally, the space station will not undermine the balance among NASA 
programs in human space flight, science, technology, and aeronautics. 
This is a program which deserves to stand on its own.
  I think the amendment to terminate the space station threatens the 
existence of the U.S. human space flight program, and I urge my 
colleagues not support the amendment when it comes up for a vote 
tomorrow.

                          ____________________