[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 93 (Friday, June 21, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6662-S6665]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. DODD:
S. 1896. A bill to amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to
apply the act to a greater percentage of the U.S. work force and to
allow employees to take parental involvement leave to participate in or
attend their children's educational and extracurricular activities and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
the family medical and parental involvement leave act of 1996
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, in my nearly 16 years as a U.S.
Senator few accomplishments have given me as much pride as the day in
February 1993 when President Clinton signed into law the Family and
Medical Leave Act.
Passage of this legislation was an exhausting, lengthy, and sometimes
exasperating process. But in the end, through the hard and courageous
work of Senators from both sides of the political aisle, the vast
opportunities for family and medical leave were made available to
millions of Americans.
In an era when the American people bemoan the lack of bipartisanship
and compromise in Washington, when they decry the blatant and nasty
partnership, the Family and Medical Leave Act stands in sharp contrast.
Family and medical leave is an issue that truly goes beyond partisan
political differences. It is something that
[[Page S6663]]
every American, be they Democrat or Republican, can relate to and
understand.
Enactment of the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993 threw millions
of struggling Americans a lifeline. It made it easier for people to
balance the responsibilities of work with their responsibilities to
their family. And most important, it said to the American people: If
you or a loved one becomes ill, you won't be forced to choose between
your family and your job.
But, my involvement with the issue of family and medical leave did
not end with its enactment. There is more work to be done.
Across America, working families, teachers, and school boards
continue to lament the lack of parental involvement in their children's
lives. With more and more families working outside the home, with
mothers and fathers too busy and too stressed from working long hours,
children are losing the guiding hand they need from their parents.
The Family and Medical Leave Act performed a genuine need among
America's working families to allow them take leave in times of medical
and family emergency. This legislation would continue that process by
providing parents with the time they need to make a difference in their
children's education.
For that reason, I am today introducing legislation that would build
on our earlier successes while at the same time offering greater leave
opportunities and flexibility to our Nation's families.
First, it would lower the threshold of coverage to include worksites
with 25 or more employees. Today, 40 percent of private sector
employees remain unprotected by the Family and Medical Leave Act
because their worksite does not meet the current 50-or-more employee
threshold.
Second, the bill would grant eligible parents 24 hours of unpaid
leave per year to participate in their children's school or community
group activities. Parents would provide their employers with at least 2
weeks notice and could take only 4 hours per month, unless otherwise
agreed to by the employer.
These are commonsense reforms that build on the successes of the
Family and Medical Leave Act while providing expanded opportunities for
American families.
For those of my colleagues who doubt the success of the Family and
Medical Leave Act, I urge them to examine a recent bipartisan report,
which indicates that the success of the Family and Medical Leave Act is
clear cut.
When this legislation passed in 1933, provisions of the bill
established a commission to examine the impact of the act on workers
and businesses. The commission's analysis spanned 2\1/2\ years,
including independent research and field hearings across the country to
hear first hand about the act's impact from individuals and businesses.
Additionally, through the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we commissioned
two major research surveys to gauge the impact of family leave policies
on employees and employers. These surveys provided us with the first
statistically valid, nationally representative data on the impact on
the legislation.
And, the overall findings of this commission are quite clear--family
and medical leave is an overwhelming success. What's more, according to
the commission's final report, the law represents ``A significant step
in helping a larger cross-section of working Americans meet their
medical and family caregiving needs while still maintaining their jobs
and economic security.''
Due to this legislation, Americans have significantly greater
opportunities to keep their health benefits, maintain job security, and
take leave for longer and for greater reasons.
While the American people have seen expanded opportunities under this
legislation, there is plenty of good news for America's businesses as
well.
The conclusions of the bipartisan report are a far cry from the
concerns that were voiced when this law was being considered in
Congress. The vast majority of businesses--over 93 percent--report
little to no additional costs associated with the Family and Medical
Leave Act. More than 92 percent reported no noticeable effect on
profitability. And nearly 96 percent reported no noticeable effect on
growth.
Additionally, 83 percent of employers reported no noticeable impact
on employee productivity. And of those that have seen an effect nearly
as many are as likely to note a positive effect as a negative one. In
fact, 12.6 percent actually report a positive effect on employee
productivity from the Family and Medical Leave Act.
While the benefits of family leave have been clear, millions of
Americans continue to face painful choices involving their competing
responsibilities to family and work. Those not covered by FMLA are
still often told that they must choose between sick family members and
their jobs. And parents, who want to participate in their children's
school and community activities, even to attend parent-teacher
conferences, find their employment responsibilities are forcing them to
make impossible choices.
More and more parents are simply too busy to take the time necessary
to play an active role in their children's education. This comes at a
time when not only is a strong education so important to our Nation's
youth, but ample evidence indicates that parental involvement in school
activities has a dramatic impact on academic performance.
Studies have shown that academic achievement is much higher at
schools when parents are strongly involved. In fact, a recent study by
the Department of Education found that parental involvement is a key
factor in the development of children's reading skills. And a Carnegie
Corp. study released this spring found that, ``Parents who want their
children to do well in school must remain involved in their education
through the middle and high school years.''
So many parents, however, simply don't have the time to participate
in school and community activities while balancing responsibilities to
their job. A survey of 30,000 PTA leaders found that 89 percent of
parents do not get involved in their children's education because they
do not have enough time. Yet another study indicates that 66 percent of
employed parents report that they don't have enough time for their
children. And as the number of single-parent families, and families
where both parents have to work, continues to rise the constraints
placed on parents are only going to increase.
The bill that I introduce today represents a genuine and commonsense
effort to tackle these problems. It would take a giant step toward
widening the opportunities provided under the Family and Medical Leave
Act while giving parents the chance to play a greater role in their
children's education.
While I'm fully aware this is an election year, I introduce this
legislation with the hope and expectation that we can put aside our
political differences and build on the success of the Family and
Medical Leave Act.
It's common sense that hard working people should not only be able to
play a role in their children's lives, but face family crises without
losing their jobs. The American people understand the need for these
provisions and I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this
critically important legislation for our Nation's working families.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1896
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. COVERAGE OF EMPLOYEES.
Paragraphs (2)(B)(ii) and (4)(A)(i) of section 101 of the
Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611
(2)(B)(ii) and (4)(A)(i) are amended by striking ``50'' each
place it appears and inserting ``25''.
SEC 2. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT LEAVE.
(a) Leave Requirement.--Section 102(a) of the Family and
Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2612(a)) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(3) Entitlement to parental involvement leave.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to section 103(f), an eligible
employee shall be entitled to a total of 4 hours of leave
during any 30-day period, and a total of 24 hours of leave
during any 12-month period, in addition to leave available
under paragraph (1), to participate in or attend an activity
that--
``(i) is sponsored by a school or community organization;
and
``(ii) relates to a program of the school or organization
that is attended by a son or daughter of the employee,
including foster children.
[[Page S6664]]
``(B) Definitions.--As used in this paragraph:
``(i) Community organization.--The term `community
organization' means a private nonprofit organization that is
representative of a community or a significant segment of a
community and provides activities for individuals described
in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 101(12), such as a
scouting or sports organization.
``(ii) School.--The term `school' means an elementary
school or secondary school (as such terms are defined in
section 14101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801)), a Head Start program assisted
under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.), and a
child care facility licensed under State law.''.
(b) Schedule.--Section 102(b)(1) of such Act (29 U.S.C.
2612(b)(1)) is amended by inserting after the second sentence
the following: ``Leave under subsection (a)(3) may be taken
intermittently or on a reduced leave schedule.''
(c) Substitution of Paid Leave.--Section 102(d)(2)(A) of
such Act (29 U.S.C. 2612(d)(2)(A)) is amended by inserting
before the period the following: ``, or for leave provided
under subsection (a)(3) for any part of the 24-hour period of
such leave under such subsection''.
(d) Notice.--Section 102(e)(1) of such Act (29 U.S.C.
2612(e)(1) is amended by adding at the end of the following:
``In any case in which an employee requests leave under
subsection (a)(3), the employee shall provide the employer
with not less than 7 day's notice, before the date the
leave is to begin, of the employee's intention to take
leave under such subsection.''.
(e) Certification.--Section 103 of such Act (29 U.S.C.
2613) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Certification for Parental Involvement Leave.--An
employer may require that a request for leave under section
102(a)(3) be supported by a certification issued at such time
and in such manner as the Secretary may by regulation
prescribe.''.
SEC. 3. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT LEAVE FOR CIVIL SERVANTS.
(a) Leave Requirements.--Section 6382(a) of title 5, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(3)(A) Subject to section 6383(f), an employee shall be
entitled to a total of 4 hours of leave during any 30-day
period, and a total of 24 hours of leave during any 12-month
period, in addition to leave available under paragraph (1),
to participate in or attend an activity that--
``(i) is sponsored by a school or community organization;
and
``(ii) relates to a program of the school or organization
that is attended by a son or daughter of the employee,
including foster children.
``(B) As used in this paragraph:
``(i) The term `community organization' means a private
nonprofit organization that is representative of a community
or a significant segment of a community and provides
activities for individuals described in subparagraph (A) or
(B) of section 6381(6), such as a scouting or sports
organization.
``(ii) The term `school' means an elementary school or
secondary school (as such terms are defined in section 14101
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 8801)), a Head Start program assisted under the Head
Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.) and a child care facility
licensed under State law.''.
(b) Schedule.--Section 6382(b)(1) of such title is amended
by inserting after the second sentence the following: ``Leave
under subsection (a)(3) may be taken intermittently or on a
reduced leave schedule.''
(c) Substitution of Paid Leave.--Section 6382(d) of such
title is amended by inserting before ``, except'' the
following: ``, or for leave provided under subsection (a)(3)
any of the employee's accrued or accumulated annual leave
under subchapter I for any part of the 24-hour period of such
leave under such subsection''.
(d) Notice.--Section 6382(e)(1) of such title is amended by
adding at the end the following: ``In any case in which an
employee requests leave under subsection (a)(3), the employee
shall provide the employing agency with not less than 7 day's
notice, before the date the leave is to begin, of the
employee's intention to take leave under such subsection.''.
(e) Certification.--Section 6383 of such title is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(f) An employing agency may require that a request for
leave under section 6382(a)(3) be supported by a
certification issued at such time and in such manner as the
Office of Personnel Management may by regulation
prescribe.''.
______
By Mrs. KASSEBAUM (for herself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Jeffords, Mr.
Pell, and Mr. Hatfield):
S. 1897. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to revise and
extend certain programs relating to the National Institutes of Health,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
THE NIH REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1996
Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation
which supports the important work of the National Institutes of Health.
This bill, the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of
1996, will reauthorize the ongoing work of this outstanding Federal
research institution.
We all can take great pride in the exceptional contributions that the
NIH has made to the improvement of the health of our citizens.
NIH grants constitute the bulk of support for biomedical research
throughout this country--almost $10 billion every year, distributed in
nearly 25,000 separate grants. This unique investment of talent and
dollars has one simple, overriding goal--the advancement of the health
of Americans.
This agency is, indeed, an extraordinary success story. To cite just
one illustration: An NIH grant made possible the discovery of the BRCA-
1 gene, a genetic marker for an important form of breast cancer. Such a
discovery offers great promise for new strategies for diagnosis and
treatment of breast cancer and other serious illnesses.
As long term commitment to further support of research into the
mysteries of the human genetic code, this bill authorizes the creation
of the National Human Genome Research Institute. The elevation of the
National Center for Genome Research to institute status, while budget
neutral, will ensure a continued focus of NIH resources for this
important work.
Mr. President, in addition to reauthorizing the lifesaving work of
the two largest institutes, the National Cancer Institute and the
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the bill authorizes a number
of other important institutes and initiatives. Among them is research
into new and resistant infections such as tuberculosis; and an Office
of Rare Diseases to support research on over 2,000 uncommon diseases
that, together, afflict thousands of Americans.
Another critical area that this bill addresses is the education and
training of the next generation of clinical researchers, the biomedical
scientists who perform research that directly involves patients. This
bill provides for greater support for expert training of young
biomedical scientists who have elected the difficult, and increasingly
competitive, careers in scientific inquiry. In addition, it provides
important resources for the 75 general clinical research centers that
exist in academic medical centers throughout the country.
The role of NIH in clinical research is critical, since academic
health centers in the 21st century will be posed with an unprecedented
challenge: how to maintain their research mission in the face of a
fundamentally changed health care system. These changes are the
consequence of dramatic market shifts that are taking place in health
care in this country. They have a potentially deleterious effect on the
irreplaceable work of this country's academic health centers. Cost
competition has made it particularly difficult for the continuation of
many of these established institutions that frequently care for the
sickest, as well as the poorest, citizens of our communities.
This bill also makes substantial efforts to reduce administrative
excess and duplicative infrastructure at NIH. It reduces redundant
committees and reports. Every dollar saved from unnecessary
administrative burdens is another dollar freed up for support of
biomedical research.
By its very nature, ever-expanding scientific knowledge places
pressure on the limited resources for biomedical research support.
Accordingly, this bill provides for a Biomedical Research Trust Fund
within the Treasury. This trust fund is a first small step toward
affording additional funds for the indispensable research mission in
this era of shrinking Federal resources.
In conclusion, Mr. President, reauthorization of the important work
of the National Institutes of Health represents for the American people
an investment beyond compare or valuation. I am pleased to welcome
Senators Kennedy, Jeffords, Pell, and Hatfield as original cosponsors
of this legislation. I urge my colleagues to support the adoption of
the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of 1996.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I strongly support the NIH Revitalization
Act of 1996. The National Institutes of Health is the premier health
care research center in this country and the world. Reauthorizing a
strong NIH should be a bipartisan goal.
[[Page S6665]]
This bill reauthorizes the present Institutes, and provides a
framework for the NIH to respond more effectively to the health issues
of today and the future.
Clinical research is addressed by incorporating many of the
provisions of the Hatfield-Kennedy clinical research enhancement bill.
General Clinical Research Centers, which serve as an infrastructure for
clinical research and training, are authorized. Clinical Research
Career Enhancement Awards and Innovative Medical Science Awards are
created to support individual careers and research projects in clinical
research. In addition, existing research assistance, training and loan
repayment programs are expanded to include those involved in clinical
investigations.
The human genome project which has been so productive becomes the
National Human Genome Research Institute. The Office of Rare Diseases
is formally established. A national fund for health research is created
to provide additional financial resources. A number of other changes
are made to streamline the administrative processes at NIH.
All of us recognize that a number of concerns require further
discussion. NIH's desires for maximum flexibility have been addressed.
We must also meet the research and treatment needs of particular
diseases. I look forward to working together to find ways to address
Parkinson's disease, the pediatric research initiative, and diabetes.
We must also find ways to deal with the impact of managed care on
medical training, education, and research. That problem that was the
topic of our final NIH hearing this year.
Investment in health care research is one of the soundest investments
we can make in the Nation's future. The NIH Revitalization Act of 1996
is designed to maintain and strengthen our return on this investment,
and I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle to secure its enactment.
Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, I am honored to join my friend and
colleague from Kansas, Senator Kassebaum, in sponsoring legislation to
revitalize the crown jewel of medical science in this country, the
National Institutes of Health. Senator Kassebaum deserves the Nation's
gratitude for her commitment to biomedical research and her efforts to
ensure that the wealth of this country is measured by the health of its
citizens.
The NIH has enhanced the health of our Nation immeasurably, and
through the efforts of its scientists and staff continues to place us
on the cutting edge of biomedical research. Yet, as all of us in this
body know so well, all institutions must evolve if they are to continue
to thrive. The legislation introduced today provides the elements
necessary for the NIH to evolve successfully in the years to come.
Every year, medical researchers uncover more mysteries of the human
body. Because of their efforts, today we have therapies, drugs and
technologies that were unimaginable just a decade ago. Of great
importance to all Americans is the outcome of our investment in
biomedical research. We want to know, what has been cured lately? How
have the billions we invest in NIH each year reached Americans and
eased their suffering? How has the chasm between the scientist in the
laboratory and the physician administering treatment been bridged? To
address that gulf, I believe we must heighten our support for
translational--or clinical--research. To that end, I introduced S. 1534
this year, the Clinical Research Enhancement Act of 1996. This bill
will increase funding for clinical research, improve training for
persons planning clinical research careers, and modify the focus of the
NIH to make it more receptive to clinical research proposals.
I am very pleased that Senator Kassebaum has included components of
S. 1534 in her legislation. The bill authorizes the General Clinical
Research Centers which are the frontline troops not only in the
training of clinical researchers but in performing many of the clinical
studies in our academic medical centers. The 75 current centers have
never been authorized despite their continued congressional support
since 1965.
The bill also establishes two new award programs: the Clinical
Research Career Enhancement Awards and the Innovative Medical Science
Awards. These awards will provide both young and established
investigators with the resources needed to bridge unfunded periods
while promoting continued clinical research and training. At present
training opportunities for persons considering clinical research
careers are few and fragmented.
The bill also expands loan repayment opportunities for young
physician scientists to pursue research careers. Currently the average
medical school graduate has a debt of $63,000. This burden has resulted
in a decline of physician researchers to just 2.2 percent of the
physician population of the United States.
Last year, Congress acknowledged the importance of biomedical
research when it restored proposed cuts to the NIH budget for 1996. As
a result, we are now enjoying a 5.7-percent increase in funding for the
NIH. However, we have far to go in stabilizing funding for medical
research, and we must now turn our attention toward insuring
sustainable growth in the coming years.
I am pleased that Senator Kassebaum's legislation also includes my
bill, S. 1251, to establish a national fund for health research. This
fund will supplement annual appropriations to the NIH by contributing
public and private donations to enhance research grants. While the
language in this bill does not specify a funding source, I am hopeful
that when the bill comes to the floor we will have several options to
consider to secure its financial future. I have proposed a 25-cent
increase in the tobacco tax, as well as a voluntary Federal income tax
checkoff in the past, and would be willing to look at other options in
the future such as some sort of managed care set-aside. I believe this
proposal marks the beginning of a longer-term strategy for biomedical
research funding and I am gratified by its inclusion in this bill.
Senator Tom Harkin has been my long-time partner in this matter and I
know he is as pleased as I am that the foundation for the fund has
today been further advanced.
Finally, Senator Kassebaum has included one additional piece of my
legislative portfolio, S. 184, a bill to establish an Office for Rare
Disease Research at the NIH to assist our citizens who have the
misfortune of suffering from uncommon diseases. This legislation has
already passed the Senate this year, only to languish in the House. I
am hopeful that this vehicle will carry it through to enactment.
This legislation, Mr. President, is essential for the continued
effective functioning of the National Institutes of Health, and for the
continued health of our citizens. I believe this legislation deserves
our strong support and I urge my colleagues to endorse its contents. At
this time, I would like to publicly commend Senator Kassebaum's staff,
David Stevens, Kent Bradley, and Ann Rufo, for their work in crafting
this revitalization package. They have been mentors to my staff and
have represented Senator Kassebaum with great dedication and commitment
in putting this vital piece of legislation together.
____________________