[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 102 (Thursday, July 17, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7710-S7732]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Domenici, and Mr.
Hatch):
S. 1027. A bill to extend the native American veteran direct housing
loan pilot program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs.
NATIVE AMERICAN VETERANS HOUSING LOAN IMPROVEMENTS LEGISLATION
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce
legislation to extend and improve the native American veteran direct
loan pilot program. I am pleased to add Senators Johnson, Domenici, and
Hatch as cosponsors of this legislation.
America's most important resource has always been the individuals
willing to lay down their lives for their country. Throughout our
history we have been blessed with men and women willing to put
themselves at risk for the greater good.
Native Americans have been proud to be a part of this Nation's
defense. From the revolutionary era to our ongoing peacekeeping
missions around the globe, native Americans have served and continue to
serve the United States honorably. It may surprise some members to know
that native Americans served, suffered, and died in service to this
Nation even though they were not allowed to be citizens until 1924.
As a veteran I feel a special kinship with all those men and women
who served this Nation in peacetime and in war. As an Indian veteran I
am keenly aware of the dedicated service Indians, Alaskans, and
Hawaiians have given--often without recognition of their sacrifice.
How can we compensate these men and women for making the greatest
sacrifice they could? There is no dollar value we can place on a life.
At the very least, we must provide the basic benefits of health care,
housing, and education to those that laid down their lives for America.
Since 1992, the Department of Veterans Affairs has operated a direct
housing loan program to help native America veterans build decent
homes. I was amazed to find out that in the last 5 years, that program
had provided eight Indian veterans with loans.
That is not an indication that all Indian veterans have no housing
needs. During a hearing on veterans issues, members of the Indian
Affairs Committee saw videotape of the houses used by Navajo veterans.
They looked like something you would see in a Third World nation, not
America. Houses had holes in their roofs and walls and plastic sheets
for windows. Many houses do not have working plumbing and water has to
be carried from miles away. This is certainly not the appreciation and
respect war veterans deserve.
Native Americans seeking home loans face many obstacles unique to
Indian country, including poor economic conditions and the fact that
the land cannot be used as collateral. But the most surprising
revelation at the committee's hearing was that the majority of Indian
veterans seem to have little or no knowledge that the VA's direct loan
program exists. If they do, many do not know how or where to apply. The
Government has no problem finding these men and women when it is time
to draft them to fight in a war. But when it is time to pay them back
for their sacrifice, the effort just is not there.
That is why the bill I introduce today does more than extend the
direct loan program for 3 years. It includes measures to boost the
Department of Veterans Affairs' efforts to implement the direct loan
program for native American veterans. The bill places new requirements
on the Department to consult with tribal organizations, native veterans
organizations, and other groups prior to making decisions under the
act. It also expresses Congress's desire that the Department carry out
vigorous outreach and education efforts to inform potential
beneficiaries of the housing assistance benefits under the
[[Page S7711]]
act. The bill requires the Department to submit annual reports to the
Committee on Indian Affairs, the House Resources Committee, and the
Veterans' Committees of both Chambers containing a description of the
outreach activities undertaken by the VA on a regional basis, with a
second mandate that the VA conduct an assessment of how effective these
efforts have been in encouraging greater use of the loan program.
We must honor the service and sacrifice of our warriors. We must
recognize the sacrifice they have made for all of us. The direct loan
program is an ambitious idea designed to help our veterans with the
most basic human need: a roof over their heads. It should not sit
unused because of bureaucratic complacency. It is my hope that this
reauthorization, with the appropriate changes, will jumpstart the
Department's efforts to make the program available to native veterans
and help them use it. I believe it is the least we can do. I urge my
colleagues to join me in supporting this critical legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and
a section-by-section analysis be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 1027
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Native Americans across the United States have a long,
proud, and distinguished tradition of service in the Armed
Forces of the United States.
(2) Native Americans have historically served in the Armed
Forces in numbers which far exceed their representation in
the population of the United States.
(3) Native Americans have lost their lives in the service
of the United States and in the cause of peace.
(4) The demand for safe, decent, and affordable housing
among the 210,000 Native American veterans in the United
States is acute.
(5) Native American veterans face unique impediments to the
use of traditional housing programs to benefit veterans such
as poor economic conditions, the legal status of Indian trust
lands, and the lack of incentives for lenders to make loans
on trust lands.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF DIRECT HOUSING LOAN PILOT PROGRAM.
Section 3761(c) of title 38, United States Code, is amended
by striking out ``September 30, 1997'' and inserting in lieu
thereof ``September 30, 2000''.
SEC. 3. OUTREACH.
Section 3762(i) of title 38, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``, in consultation with tribal
organizations and Native American veterans organizations,''
after ``The Secretary shall''; and
(2) by striking out ``tribal organizations and''.
SEC. 4. CONSULTATION WITH NATIVE AMERICAN VETERANS
ORGANIZATIONS.
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall consult with Native
American veterans organizations in carrying out the Native
American veterans direct housing loan program under
subchapter V of chapter 37 of title 38, United States Code.
SEC. 5. ANNUAL REPORTS.
Section 8(d) of the Veterans Home Loan Program Amendments
of 1992 (Public Law 102-547; 106 Stat. 3640; 38 U.S.C. 3761
note) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking out ``1998,'' and inserting in lieu thereof
``2001,''; and
(B) by inserting ``, the Committee on Indian Affairs of the
Senate, and the Committee on Resources of the House of
Representatives'' after ``the House of Representatives'';
(2) by striking out ``and'' at the end of paragraph (3);
(3) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new
paragraph (4):
``(4) a description of the outreach activities undertaken
by the Secretary under section 3762(i) of such title (as so
added) which--
``(A) specifies such activities on a region-by-region
basis; and
``(B) assesses the effectiveness of such activities in
encouraging the participation of Native American veterans in
the pilot program; and''.
____
Veterans Direct Housing Loan Pilot Program--Section-by-Section Analysis
Background. Begun in 1992, the Native American Veterans
Housing Program is due to be reauthorized. The account
retains some $3.5 million of an original $5 million
appropriation. Since 1992, the performance of the Veterans
Administration in distributing this money to Indians is poor,
especially compared with the experience of the Native
Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders. The goal of the amendments
is to get the VA to do its job better in Indian country. The
reasons adduced by the VA for the poor performance are not
convincing.
Section 1. New Findings Section. This section recognizes
Indians' long and historic contributions made to the Armed
Forces and defense of the United States. This section also
recognizes the acute need for housing among the more than
200,000 native veterans, and the unique impediments native
veterans face due to poor economic conditions on the
reservation, and the inability to securitize Indian trust
lands.
Section 2. Extension of Program. The bill would extend the
authority for the program for 3 years, to September 30, 2000.
Section 3. Outreach. Most of the discernible problems in
the implementation of this program involve a lack of
knowledge about the program by Indians and lack of proactive
endeavors by the VA to disseminate information about the
program through Indian country. The bill would place new
requirements on the VA to consult with tribal organizations,
native veterans organizations, and other groups prior to
making decisions under the act.
Section 4. Consultation with Native American Veterans
Organizations. This new section requires the VA to consult
with native veterans organizations in implementing the act.
Section 5. Annual Reports. The VA is required to submit
annual reports to the Committee on Indian Affairs, the House
Resources Committee, and the veterans committees of both
Chambers containing a description of the outreach activities
undertaken by the VA on a regional basis, with a second
mandate that the VA conduct an assessment of the efficacy of
such activities in encouraging greater use of the program.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. Boxer):
S. 1028. A bill to direct the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct a
pilot project on designated lands within Plumas, Lassen, and Tahoe
National Forests in the State of California to demonstrate the
effectiveness of the resource management activities proposed by the
Quincy Library Group and to amend current land and resource management;
to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
The Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery and Economic Stability Act of
1997
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today Senator Barbara Boxer and I are
introducing the Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery and Economic
Stability Act of 1997. This legislation is nearly identical to H.R. 858
sponsored in the House of Representatives by Congressman Wally Herger
and passed by the House last week on a vote of 429 to 1.
The House vote is remarkable for two reasons:
First, any legislation involving a controversial issue--particularly
on one as contentious as forest management --that receives 429 votes is
remarkable in and of itself.
Second, the process by which this legislation evolved is really, I
think, groundbreaking, and it deserves to be recognized.
I first met the Quincy Library Group back in 1992 when I was running
for the Senate, and was then very impressed with what they were trying
to do.
The overwhelming House vote is a real victory for local communities
like Quincy which seek to avoid the polarizing--and often paralyzing--
battles that have characterized forest management issues for the last
decade.
The Quincy Library Group is a local coalition of timber industry
representatives, environmentalists, citizens, and elected officials in
Plumas, Lassen, and Sierra Counties, CA, who came together to resolve
their long-standing conflicts over timber management on the national
forest lands in their area.
They had seen first hand the seemingly ever present conflict between
timber harvesting and jobs, environmental laws and protection of their
communities and forests, and the devastation of massive forest fires.
They also saw that a practical solution to the conflict between timber
interests and environmental interests were both going to be wiped out
one day by uncontrollable wildfires. And so they tried to get together
and talk things out.
They decided to meet in a quiet, non-confrontational environment--the
main room of the Quincy Public Library. Hence, they became known as the
Quincy Library Group.
They began their dialog in the recognition that they shared the
common goal of fostering forest health, ecological integrity, an
adequate timber supply for area mills, and economic stability for their
community.
So, after a year-and-a-half of negotiation, the Quincy Library Group
developed an alternative management
[[Page S7712]]
plan for the Lassen National Forest, Plumas National Forest, and
Sierraville Ranger District of the Tahoe National Forest.
This legislation is the result. The bill we introduce today
implements the Quincy Library Group's plan.
I know that some environmental organizations had concerns about
aspects of this legislation, and some may still oppose it.
But let me make something very clear: As I stated when I met with the
Quincy Library Group, in order to have my support, the legislation had
to explicitly state that all activities would be carried out consistent
with all applicable Federal environmental laws, both substantive and
procedural. The administration made this requirement clear as well.
The House bill and this legislation do so.
Another condition for my support, and that of the administration, was
that the legislation must authorize sufficient funds to carry out the
plan, so that funds will not be diverted from other important programs
like wildlife protection, grazing and recreation.
The House bill and this legislation authorize appropriations to do
so.
With these key provisions in place, I believe this legislation
deserves strong support and swift passage.
Specifically, this legislation:
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to implement the Quincy Library
Group's forest management proposal on designated lands in the Plumas,
Lassen, and Tahoe National Forests for 5 years as a demonstration
of community-based consensus forest management;
Protects the California spotted owl and riparian areas by excluding
all spotted owl habitat in the pilot project area from logging and
other resource management activities during the 5-year pilot project,
and requiring the Forest Service to follow the scientific analysis team
guidelines for riparian system protection;
Calls for the construction of fuel breaks on 40,000 to 60,000 acres a
year;
Provides for group selection on 0.57 percent of the project area
annually as well as individual tree selection uneven-aged forest
management;
Limits the total acreage subject to forest management activities to
70,000 acres annually;
Requires a program of riparian management, including wide protection
zones and riparian restoration projects;
Requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement prior
to the commencement of the pilot project;
Authorizes the appropriation of funds to carry out the Quincy Library
Group pilot project;
Directs the Forest Service to amend the land and resource management
plans for the Plumas, Lassen, and Tahoe National Forests to consider
adoption of the Quincy Library Group plan in the forest management
plans;
Requires an annual report to Congress on the status of the pilot
project, including the source and use of funds, the acres treated and
description of the results, economic benefits to the local communities,
and activities planned for the following year; and finally,
Requires a scientific assessment of the Quincy Library Group project
to be commenced at the midpoint of the project and submitted to
Congress by July 1, 2002.
At the suggestion of the environmental community, and with the
concurrence of the Quincy Library Group, I have added language to the
House version of the bill to provide additional environmental
safeguards. These additions will ensure that there will be no road
building or timber harvesting on the lands the Quincy Library Group
plan designated as off base, plan designates certain lands as deferred,
and require the annual reports and the final report on the Quincy
Library Group project to include a report on any adverse environmental
impacts of the pilot project. Finally, it is our intention that areas
of late successional emphasis identified in the Sierra Nevada ecosystem
project report also be protected from resource management activities
during the pilot project, and I will seek committee report language on
this issue.
What all this means is that as a result of the Quincy Library Group
pilot project:
The threat of catastrophic forest fires will be reduced, through the
clearing of underbrush and thinning of the smaller trees;
Enough jobs in the forests will be provided to keep the local mills
in operation and the communities in existence; and
Forest health will be improved, riparian areas will be restored, and
biological diversity maintained.
Mr. President, I believe the Quincy Library Group deserves a great
deal of credit and respect for approaching a tough issue with the goal
of finding common ground.
There is a lot of common ground. They all live in the area. They all
work there. They raise their children there. They all care about both
the environment and the industry that provides jobs to the region. They
wanted to work out a solution instead of continuing the take-no-
prisoners-approach of endless litigation and standoff.
I believe the solution-based approach demonstrated by the Quincy
Library Group should be supported by the Congress, and that is why I
committed months ago to introduce legislation based on this group's
efforts.
On an issue like forest management and timber harvesting, many local
variables are involved and must be considered to find workable
solutions:
For example, the wildfire threat in Tennessee is not the same as it
is in California.
And the economic impact of the timber industry may be different in
Hayfork, CA than it is in Juneau, AK.
The bottom line is that, as long as certain basic standards of
environmental law are met, this pilot project will demonstrate whether
a local initiative can be successful in developing a forest management
plan that works to protect the old growth trees, endangered species,
and jobs for the community.
And based on that belief I am pleased to support their efforts by
sponsoring this legislation in the U.S. Senate.
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. 1028
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Quincy Library Group Forest
Recovery and Economic Stability Act of 1997''.
SEC. 2. PILOT PROJECT FOR PLUMAS, LASSEN, AND TAHOE NATIONAL
FORESTS TO IMPLEMENT QUINCY LIBRARY GROUP
PROPOSAL.
(a) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
``Quincy Library Group-Community Stability Proposal'' means
the agreement by a coalition of representatives of fisheries,
timber, environmental, county government, citizen groups, and
local communities that formed in northern California to
develop a resource management program that promotes ecologic
and economic health for certain Federal lands and communities
in the Sierra Nevada area. Such proposal includes the map
entitled ``QUINCY LIBRARY GROUP Community Stability
Proposal'', dated June 1993, and prepared by VESTRA Resources
of Redding, California.
(b) Pilot Project Required.--
(1) Pilot project and purpose.--The Secretary of
Agriculture (in this section referred to as the
``Secretary''), acting through the Forest Service and after
completion of an environmental impact statement (a record of
decision for which shall be adopted within 200 days), shall
conduct a pilot project on the Federal lands described in
paragraph (2) to implement and demonstrate the effectiveness
of the resource management activities described in subsection
(d) and the other requirements of this section, as
recommended in the Quincy Library Group-Community Stability
Proposal.
(2) Pilot project area.--The Secretary shall conduct the
pilot project on the Federal lands within Plumas National
Forest, Lassen National Forest, and the Sierraville Ranger
District of Tahoe National Forest in the State of California
designated as ``Available for Group Selection'' on the map
entitled ``QUINCY LIBRARY GROUP Community Stability
Proposal'', dated June 1993 (in this section referred to as
the ``pilot project area''). Such map shall be on file and
available for inspection in the appropriate offices of the
Forest Service.
(c) Exclusion of Certain Lands, Riparian Protection and
Compliance.--
(1) Exclusion.--All spotted owl habitat areas and protected
activity centers located within the pilot project area
designated under subsection (b)(2) will be deferred from
resource management activities required under subsection (d)
and timber harvesting during the term of the pilot project.
(2) In general.--The Regional Forester for Region 5 shall
direct that during the term of the pilot project any resource
management
[[Page S7713]]
activity required by subsection (d), all road building, and
all timber harvesting activities shall not be conducted on
the Federal lands within the Plumas National Forest, Lassen
National Forest, and Sierraville Ranger District of the Tahoe
National Forest in the State of California that designated as
either ``Off Base'' or ``Deferred'' on the map referred to in
subsection (a).
(3) Riparian protection.--
(A) In general.--The Scientific Analysis Team guidelines
for riparian system protection described in subparagraph (B)
shall apply to all resource management activities conducted
under subsection (d) and all timber harvesting activities
that occur in the pilot project area during the term of the
pilot project.
(B) Guidelines described.--The guidelines referred to in
subparagraph (A) are those in the document entitled
``Viability Assessments and Management Considerations for
Species Associated with Late-Successional and Old-Growth
Forests of the Pacific Northwest'', a Forest Service research
document dated March 1993 and co-authored by the Scientific
Analysis Team, including Dr. Jack Ward Thomas.
(4) Compliance.--All resource management activities
required by subsection (d) shall be implemented to the extent
consistent with applicable Federal law and the standards and
guidelines for the conservation of the California spotted owl
as set forth in the California Spotted Owl Sierran Provence
Interim Guidelines, or the subsequently issued final
guidelines whichever is in effect.
(d) Resource Management Activities.--During the term of the
pilot project, the Secretary shall implement and carry out
the following resource management activities on an acreage
basis on the Federal lands included within the pilot project
area designated under subsection (b)(2):
(1) Fuelbreak construction.--Construction of a strategic
system of defensible fuel profile zones, including shaded
fuelbreaks, utilizing thinning, individual tree selection,
and other methods of vegetation management consistent with
the Quincy Library Group-Community Stability Proposal, on not
less than 40,000, but not more than 60,000, acres per year.
(2) Group selection and individual tree selection.--
Utilization of group selection and individual tree selection
uneven-aged forest management prescriptions described in the
Quincy Library Group-Community Stability Proposal to achieve
a desired future condition of all-age, multistory, fire
resilient forests as follows:
(A) Group selection.--Group selection on an average acreage
of .57 percent of the pilot project area land each year of
the pilot project.
(B) Individual tree selection.--Individual tree selection
may also be utilized within the pilot project area.
(3) Total acreage.--The total acreage on which resource
management activities are implemented under this subsection
shall not exceed 70,000 acres each year.
(4) Riparian management.--A program of riparian management,
including wide protection zones and riparian restoration
projects, consistent with riparian protection guidelines in
subsection (c)(2)(B).
(e) Cost-Effectiveness.--In conducting the pilot project,
Secretary shall use the most cost-effective means available,
as determined by the Secretary, to implement resource
management activities described in subsection (d).
(f) Funding.--
(1) Source of funds.--In conducting the pilot project, the
Secretary shall use, subject to the relevant reprogramming
guidelines of the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations--
(A) those funds specifically provided to the Forest Service
by the Secretary to implement resource management activities
according to the Quincy Library Group-Community Stability
Proposal; and
(B) excess funds that are allocated for the administration
and management of Plumas National Forest, Lassen National
Forest, and the Sierraville Ranger District of Tahoe National
Forest.
(2) Prohibition on use of certain funds.--The Secretary may
not conduct the pilot project using funds appropriated for
any other unit of the National Forest System.
(3) Flexibility.--Subject to normal reprogramming
guidelines, during the term of the pilot project, the forest
supervisors of Plumas National Forest, Lassen National
Forest, and Tahoe National Forest may allocate and use all
accounts that contain excess funds and all available excess
funds for the administration and management of Plumas
National Forest, Lassen National Forest, and the Sierraville
Ranger District of Tahoe National Forest to perform the
resource management activities described in subsection (d).
(4) Restriction.--The Secretary or the forest supervisors,
as the case may be, shall not utilize authority provided
under paragraphs (1)(B) and (3) if, in their judgment, doing
so will limit other nontimber related multiple use activities
for which such funds were available.
(5) Overhead.--Of amounts available to carry out this
section--
(A) not more than 12 percent may be used or allocated for
general administration or other overhead; and
(B) at least 88 percent shall be used to implement and
carry out activities required by this section.
(6) Authorized supplemental funds.--There are authorized to
be appropriated to implement and carry out the pilot project
such sums as are necessary.
(7) Baseline funds.--Amounts available for resource
management activities authorized under subsection (d) shall
at a minimum include existing baseline funding levels.
(g) Term of Pilot Project.--The Secretary shall conduct the
pilot project during the period beginning on the date of the
enactment of this Act and ending on the later of the
following:
(1) The date on which the Secretary completes amendment or
revision of the land and resource management plans for Plumas
National Forest, Lassen National Forest, and Tahoe National
Forest pursuant to subsection (i).
(2) The date that is five years after the date of the
commencement of the pilot project.
(h) Consultation.--(1) Each statement required by
subsection (b)(1) shall be prepared in consultation with the
Quincy Library Group.
(2) Contracting.--The Forest Service, subject to the
availability of appropriations, may carry out any (or all) of
the requirements of this section using private contracts.
(i) Corresponding Forest Plan Amendments.--Within 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Regional
Forester for Region 5 shall initiate the process to amend or
revise the land and resource management plans for Plumas
National Forest, Lassen National Forest, and Tahoe National
Forest. The process shall include preparation of at least one
alternative that--
(1) incorporates the pilot project and area designations
made by subsection (b), the resource management activities
described in subsection (d), and other aspects of the Quincy
Library Group Community Stability Proposal; and
(2) makes other changes warranted by the analyses conducted
in compliance with section 102(2) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)), section
6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning
Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604), and other applicable laws.
(j) Reporting Requirements.--
(1) In general.--Not later than February 28 of each year
during the term of the pilot project, the Secretary after
consultation with the Quincy Library Group, shall submit to
Congress a report on the status of the pilot project. The
report shall include at least the following:
(A) A complete accounting of the use of funds made
available under subsection (f)(1)(A) until such funds are
fully expended.
(B) A complete accounting of the use of funds and accounts
made available under subsection (f)(1) for the previous
fiscal year, including a schedule of the amounts drawn from
each account used to perform resource management activities
described in subsection (d).
(C) A description of total acres treated for each of the
resources management activities required under subsection
(d), forest health improvements, fire risk reductions, water
yield increases, and other natural resources-related benefits
achieved by the implementation of the resource management
activities described in subsection (d).
(D) A description of the economic benefits to communities
achieved by the implementation of the pilot project.
(E) A comparison of the revenues generated by, and costs
incurred in, the implementation of the resource management
activities described in subsection (d) of the Federal lands
included in the pilot project area with the revenues and
costs during each of the fiscal years 1992 through 1997 for
timber management of such lands before their inclusion in the
pilot project.
(F) A schedule for the resource management activities to be
undertaken in the pilot project area during the calendar
year.
(G) A description of any adverse environmental impacts.
(2) Limitation on expenditures.--The amount of Federal
funds expended on each annual report under this subsection
shall not exceed $50,000.
(k) Final Report.--
(1) In general.--Beginning after completion of 6 months of
second year of the pilot project, the Secretary shall compile
a science-based assessment of, and report on, the
effectiveness of the pilot project in meeting the stated
goals of this pilot project. Such assessment and report--
(A) shall include watershed monitoring of lands treated
under this section, that should address the following issues
on a priority basis: timing of water releases, water quality
changes, and water yield changes over the short long term in
the pilot project area;
(B) shall include an analysis of any adverse environmental
impacts;
(C) shall be compiled in consultation with the Quincy
Library Group; and
(D) shall be submitted to the Congress by July 1, 2002.
(2) Limitations on expenditures.--The amount of Federal
funds expended for the assessment and report under this
subsection, other than for watershed monitoring under
paragraph (1)(A), shall not exceed $150,000. The amount of
Federal funds for watershed monitoring under paragraph (1)(A)
shall not exceed $75,000 for each of fiscal years 2000, 2001,
and 2002.
(l) Relationship to Other Laws.--Nothing in this section
exempts the pilot project from any Federal environmental law.
[[Page S7714]]
Mrs. BOXER. The Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery and Economic
Stability Act is the result of many years of consensus building in an
effort to unite unlikely partners in a mutually beneficial project.
President Clinton spurred this consensus approach in April 1993, at
the Northwest Forest Summit, when he challenged Americans to stay in
the conference room and out of the courtroom. One local group put this
difficult challenge into action and began a series of meetings in the
only place they knew they could ensure civility, and some degree of
quiet--their local library. With that, the Quincy Library Group was
created.
This group of local citizens surrounding Quincy, CA, including timber
industry representatives, local environmental activists, and public
officials, have been meeting periodically since 1992 to develop a
timber management plan for the areas' surrounding national forests.
They did not have an easy task before them--promoting the local
economy, preserving jobs, and protecting the environment.
Several years ago I visited Quincy, CA, and had an opportunity to see
first hand the problems in the forests and the community at work. Since
that time, I have worked with the Quincy Library Group, U.S. Forest
Service, Senator Feinstein, Members of Congress, and the national
environmental community in an effort to reach a consensus.
I believe that is what we have before us today. This legislation will
implement the Quincy Library Group proposal for managing the Tahoe,
Lassen, and Sierraville Range of the Tahoe National Forests through
biological reserves, fire suppression, riparian restoration, watershed
protection, and monitoring.
The House passed a companion bill earlier this week by a near
unanimous vote. I believe the overwhelming success in the House was
largely due to the inclusion of provisions which ensure compliance with
all environmental laws, as well as interim and final California spotted
owl guidelines.
This proposal has gone through years of collaboration from many
dedicated people with many different interests. We now have legislation
to implement this consensus--legislation which can be fined tuned as it
moves through the legislative process.
The President's statement of administration policy on the House
companion bill suggests further refining the bill so that the pilot
project will end once the Forest Service completes the appropriate
forest plan amendments. I would be supportive of such a change to the
bill.
Some have suggested that the legislation increase the protection of
all old growth forests in the area and ensure that logging and road
building be prohibited in all roadless and sensitive areas. We should
consider that change.
I hope that these concerns can be addressed as this bill moves
through the legislative process. Nonetheless, many positive changes
have been made to the legislation over the last few months, and
although some outstanding concerns still remain, the legislation now
provides many of the safeguards necessary to protect the natural
environment while promoting the local economy.
I want to thank Senator Feinstein, Congressmen Fazio, Miller, Herger,
Young, and the Forest Service for their efforts on this legislation. It
has truly been a cooperative effort and I hope we are able to pass this
legislation quickly so that we will soon be able to see the proposal
implemented on the ground.
______
By Mr. DeWINE (for himself and Mr. Wellstone):
S. 1029. A bill to provide loan forgiveness for individuals who earn
a degree in early childhood education, and enter and remain employed in
the early child care profession, to provide loan cancellation for
certain child care providers, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Labor and Human Resources.
The Quality Child Care Loan Forgiveness Act
Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I send a bill to the desk now, a bill on
behalf of myself and Senator Wellstone.
Mr. President, this bill is the Quality Child Care Loan Forgiveness
Act and it is intended to, at least in part, deal with a very serious
problem in this country. That problem simply is that more and more
children, more and more of our children, are every day in child care.
There is a real concern about the quality of child care. This bill does
not solve every problem in regard to child care, but I think it is a
start and I think it would make a significant impact.
Today, more than 70 percent of mothers are in the labor force. Almost
75 percent of married couples with children have both spouses working.
All of these working parents, plus parents moving from welfare to work,
have to find someone to care for their children if they are going to go
out and support their families. Yet today, child care is often very
hard to find and quality child care is even harder to find. In just 20
years, the last 20 years, the percentage of children enrolled in some
form, in some manner, of child care has gone from 30 percent to 70
percent.
Quality child care is a concern to virtually every family in this
country. More and more parents are working. More and more children are
in child care. I think the very least we can do is to try to assure
those families that, while they are at work, their children will be
taken care of by qualified and by competent individuals. This,
unfortunately, is not always taking place today. There are many
qualified people in child care. There are very many dedicated people in
child care. But I think we can do better. This is what this bill
intends to address.
Scientists tell us that the largest indicator of a child's
intelligence is the mother's education level. While a mother is at
work, then it becomes the education level of the child care provider
that the child deals with for, sometimes, an extended period of time
during the day. With all the new research that we see on the brain and
early childhood development, I think we have to reemphasize this
particular aspect of child care. We need well-educated, well-trained
child care providers. One of the ways we can achieve this, one of the
things that we can do to raise the quality of child care, is to say to
individuals who are inclined to go into the child care profession that
we will in fact help them if they want to make this a profession.
We have to let people know, if they are going to earn a degree to
take care of our children, we will help them. Our bill, the bill
introduced today by Senator Wellstone and myself, will do this. Our
bill would help repay the student loans of an individual who earns an
early childhood degree and would help repay the loan of that person who
goes to work in a licensed child care facility. The Quality Child Care
Loan Forgiveness Act would pay off a student loan at the rate of 15
percent a year for people who earn an early childhood degree and who
work in a licensed child care facility.
This bill will help bring more qualified individuals to the child
care profession. It would also help to decrease the high turnover
levels caused, many times, by very low wages.
Let me conclude. The Quality Child Care Loan Forgiveness Act is an
important way to improve the quality of child care. American parents
need it for their peace of mind, and American children need it for
their mind development.
I thank the Chair and ask unanimous consent at this time that the
full 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. 1029
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Quality Child Care Loan
Forgiveness Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) New scientific research shows that the electrical
activity of brain cells actually changes the physical
structure of the brain, and that without a stimulating
environment, a baby's brain suffers.
(2) 12,000,000 children under age 6, and 17,000,000 school-
aged children of working parents, need child care. Demand for
child care is growing as more mothers enter the workforce.
(3) Good quality child care, in a safe environment, with
trained, caring providers who offer stimulating activities
appropriate to the child's age, help children grow and
thrive. Recent research shows that most child care needs
significant improvement.
(4) Good quality child care depends largely on the
provider. Yet providers of child care earn on average only
$6.70 per hour or $11,725
[[Page S7715]]
per year. Such earnings cause high turnover, which affects
the overall quality of a child care program and causes
anxiety for children.
(5) Children attending lower-quality child care facilities
and child care facilities with high staff turnover are less
competent in language and social development.
(6) Low-income and high-income children are more likely
than middle-income children to attend child care facilities
providing high quality child care.
(7) The quality of child care is primarily related to high
staff-to-child ratios, staff education, and administrators'
prior experience. In addition, certain characteristics
distinguish poor, mediocre, and good-quality child care
facilities, the most important of which are teacher wages,
education, and specialized training.
SEC. 3. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to bring more highly trained individuals into the early
child care profession; and
(2) to keep more highly trained child care providers in the
early child care field for longer periods of time.
SEC. 4. LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR CHILD CARE PROVIDERS.
Part B of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1071
et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 428J of such
Act (20 U.S.C. 1078-10) the following:
``SEC. 428I. LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR CHILD CARE PROVIDERS.
``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Child care facility.--The term `child care facility'
means a facility that--
``(A) provides child care services; and
``(B) meets applicable State or local government licensing,
certification, approval, or registration requirements, if
any.
``(2) Child care services.--The term `child care services'
means activities and services provided for the education and
care of children from birth through age 5 by an individual
who has a degree in early childhood education.
``(3) Degree.--The term `degree' means an associate's or
bachelor's degree awarded by an institution of higher
education.
``(4) Early childhood education.--The term `early childhood
education' means education in the areas of early child
education, child care, or any other educational area related
to child care that the Secretary determines appropriate.
``(5) Institution of higher education.--The term
`institution of higher education' has the meaning given the
term in section 1201.
``(b) Demonstration Program.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may carry out a
demonstration program of assuming the obligation to repay,
pursuant to subsection (c), a loan made, insured or
guaranteed under this part or part D (excluding loans made
under sections 428B and 428C) for any new borrower after
October 1, 1994, who completes a degree in early childhood
education and obtains full-time employment in a child care
facility.
``(2) Award basis; priority.--
``(A) Award basis.--Subject to subparagraph (B), loan
repayment under this section shall be on a first-come, first-
served basis and subject to the availability of
appropriations.
``(B) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in
providing loan repayment under this section for a fiscal year
to student borrowers who received loan repayment under this
section for the preceding fiscal year.
``(3) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to
prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out
the provisions of this section.
``(c) Loan Repayment.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall assume the
obligation to repay 15 percent of the total amount of all
loans made after October 1, 1994, to a student under this
part or part D for each complete year of employment described
in subsection (b)(1).
``(2) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to authorize the refunding of any repayment of a
loan made under this part or part D.
``(3) Interest.--If a portion of a loan is repaid by the
Secretary under this section for any year, the proportionate
amount of interest on such loan which accrues for such year
shall be repaid by the Secretary.
``(4) Special rule.--In the case where a student borrower
who is not participating in loan repayment pursuant to this
section returns to an institution of higher education after
graduation from an institution of higher education for the
purpose of obtaining a degree in early childhood education,
the Secretary is authorized to assume the obligation to repay
the total amount of loans made under this part or part D
incurred for a maximum of two academic years in returning to
an institution of higher education for the purpose of
obtaining a degree in early childhood education. Such loans
shall only be repaid for borrowers who qualify for loan
repayment pursuant to the provisions of this section, and
shall be repaid in accordance with the provisions of
paragraph (1).
``(5) Ineligibility of national service award recipients.--
No student borrower may, for the same volunteer service,
receive a benefit under both this section and subtitle D of
title I of the National and Community Service Act of 1990 (42
U.S.C. 12601 et seq.).
``(d) Repayment to Eligible Lenders.--The Secretary shall
pay to each eligible lender or holder for each fiscal year an
amount equal to the aggregate amount of loans which are
subject to the repayment pursuant to this section for such
year.
``(e) Application for Repayment.--
``(1) In general.--Each eligible individual desiring loan
repayment under this section shall submit a complete and
accurate application to the Secretary at such time, in such
manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may
require.
``(2) Conditions.--An eligible individual may apply for
loan repayment under this section after completing each year
of qualifying employment. The borrower shall receive
forbearance while engaged in qualifying employment unless the
borrower is in deferment while so engaged.
``(f) Evaluation.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct, by grant or
contract, an independent national evaluation of the impact of
the demonstration program assisted under this section on the
field of early childhood education.
``(2) Competitive basis.--The grant or contract described
in subsection (a) shall be awarded on a competitive basis.
``(3) Contents.--The evaluation described in this
subsection shall--
``(A) determine the number of individuals who were
encouraged by the demonstration program assisted under this
section to pursue early childhood education;
``(B) determine the number of individuals who remain
employed in a child care facility as a result of
participation in the program;
``(C) identify the barriers to the effectiveness of the
program;
``(D) assess the cost-effectiveness of the program in
improving the quality of--
``(i) early childhood education; and
``(ii) child care services;
``(E) identify the reasons why participants in the program
have chosen to take part in the program;
``(F) identify the number of individuals participating in
the program who received an associate's degree and the number
of such individuals who received a bachelor's degree; and
``(G) identify the number of years each individual
participates in the program.
``(4) Interim and final evaluation reports.--The Secretary
shall prepare and submit to the President and the Congress
such interim reports regarding the evaluation described in
this subsection as the Secretary deems appropriate, and shall
prepare and so submit a final report regarding the evaluation
by January 1, 2002.
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
$10,000,000 for fiscal year 1998, and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years.''.
SEC. 5. LOAN CANCELLATION.
Section 465(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1087ee(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraphs (G), (H), and (I) as
subparagraphs (H), (I), and (J), respectively; and
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (F), the following:
``(G) as a full-time child care provider or educator--
``(i) in a child care facility operated by an entity that
meets the applicable State or local government licensing,
certification, approval, or registration requirements, if
any; and
``(ii) who has a degree in early childhood education;'';
and
(2) in paragraph (3)(A)--
(A) in clause (i), by striking ``(G), (H), or (I)'' and
inserting ``(H), (I), or (J)''; and
(B) in clause (ii), by inserting ``or (G)'' after
``subparagraph (B)''.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague from
Ohio to introduce a bill that is an important step toward protecting
the lives and the future of this Nation's children. Today in the Labor
Committee, we will hear from the parents of a 3-month-old baby who lost
his life after only 2 hours in daycare. We as a society must share some
of the responsibility for this tragedy with the daycare center that
neglected Jeremy Fiedelholtz. We as a society have allowed daycares to
be under funded and understaffed, because we have not valued the
position of daycare provider. We have not treated that job as a
profession, we have not respected their responsibilities and considered
such individuals to have a career worthy of compensation, attention,
and respect.
The bill that my colleague and I introduce today would provide loan
forgiveness for individuals who earn a degree in early childhood
education, and enter and remain employed in the early child care
profession. It would also provide forgiveness for some existing child
care providers who remain in the profession.
The bill seeks to make child care more affordable and to increase the
quality of child care by making a career in child care more profitable.
It would help make the career of caregiver more affordable and more
feasible for those interested in helping children grow. Nationally,
child care workers have the following statistics:
[[Page S7716]]
97 percent are female; 33 percent are women of color; 41 percent have
children; 10 percent are single parents; only 18 percent of child care
centers offer their workers health coverage.
In Minnesota child care centers, the average hourly wage for a child
care provider is $8.72; for an assistant teacher is $6.66; and for an
aide is $5.69. Minnesota family child care providers, who are never
covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act, have an average hourly wage of
$2.79, and make $7,800 a year for a 60-hour work week. With changes
created by the welfare bill in the Federal child care food program,
many family child care providers will become ineligible for this
program; those who don't pass the costs of care on to the parents will
have negative earnings--they will actually lose $71 a week.
Nationally, child care teaching staff earn $6.89 an hour and $12,000
a year. Family child care providers earn $9,500, and unregulated
providers, $5,100. Although they are better educated than the average
worker, child care workers earn one-third of the average male salary
and one-half of the average female salary. It is no surprise that one-
third of them leave their centers every year.
In the meantime, in Minnesota, there are 8,960 children on the
waiting list for child care. There are probably another 13,440 children
who would apply if the waiting list wasn't so long. Mr. President, add
all this up and you have a recipe for disaster. Child care is without
question among the most important issues facing the workforce today.
Parents who can't care for their children, can't work. Child care is
without question among the most important issues facing the field of
education today. Children who are not stimulated and cared for during
the earliest years will never be able to reach his or her full
potential when they grow up.
If we don't take the profession seriously and encourage people of
caliber to enter the profession of caregiving, and reward those who
remain in the profession, then we are risking our economic future and
putting at risk millions of children like Jeremy Fiedelholtz. I urge my
colleagues to join us in this bipartisan effort to invest money where
it is most needed.
Let me just say I am very honored to introduce this legislation with
Senator DeWine. I thoroughly enjoy working with him, and I think we are
both very committed to this piece of legislation.
Mr. President, in the Labor Committee today, we are going to hear
from the parents of a 3-month-old baby who lost his life after only 2
hours in child care. If you look at the reports, the conditions around
our country are not what they should be for children, and if you just
think about the pay scale of women and men--they are mainly women--who
are child care providers, we have devalued the work of adults who work
with children. What this piece of legislation does is it provides loan
forgiveness for individuals who earn a degree in early childhood
development and then remain employed in this early childhood
profession. It also would have some forgiveness for existing child care
providers who remain in the profession.
What we are simply trying to say here, I say to my colleagues, is
that the neuroscience evidence is compelling, these early years are
critical years, we have to get it right, there has to be a nurturing
care and the intellectual stimulation and, yet, if you look around the
country, nationally child care teaching staff earn an average of $6.89
an hour, or about $12,000 a year.
Actually, in many of our States, people who work in zoos, and by the
way I love visiting zoos--it is not my point to put down that work--
earn twice as much as women and men who work in child care centers. If
we really value children and we really understand that pre-K is so
important, and if we really understand--and we should and we must--that
we have to make sure that by age 3, children have gotten the nurturing
care in order for them to be able to go on and do well in school and do
well in life, then it is terribly important that we attach more value
to the work that is being done.
That is what this piece of legislation does, which provides the loan
forgiveness for women and men I hope will go into this profession. It
is a small step forward, but it is an extremely important step.
I am very pleased to introduce this legislation today with my
colleague, Senator DeWine.
______
By Mr. FRIST (for himself and Mr. Wellstone):
S. 1030. A bill to amend title IV of the Public Health Service Act to
establish a National Center for Bioengineering Research; to the
Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
The National Center for Bioengineering Research Act of 1997
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the National
Center for Bioengineering Research Act of 1997. Bioengineering is where
medical need and technical capability meet to increase our capacity to
diagnose and treat disease; to enhance the quality of life of millions
of people with chronic conditions; to save millions of dollars in
health care costs; and to generate billions of dollars for our economy.
Medical devices alone is a $40 billion-a-year industry.
Bioengineering is an interdisciplinary field that applies physical,
chemical, and mathematical sciences and engineering principles to the
study of biology, medicine, behavior, and health. It advances knowledge
from the molecular to the organ systems level, and develops new and
novel biologics, materials, processes, implant, devices, and
informatics approaches for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of
disease, for patient rehabilitation, and for improving health.
Although the term ``bioengineering'' may not be commonplace, many of
the major medical advances from bioengineering are very familiar,
including the heart-lung machine, kidney dialysis, total hip joint
replacements, heart pacemakers, artificial hearts, prosthetics, and
diagnostic medical imaging. Other advances are right around the corner,
including implantable insulin pumps with biosensors that detect exactly
when and how much insulin is needed; and regeneration of tissue,
cartilage, and even organs, instead of transplantation--which brings
with it the risk of rejection, major trauma to the patient, and one of
the highest costs in our entire health care system. As a heart-lung
transplant surgeon, I know first hand about the life-saving
contributions made by all of these bioengineering developments. We need
as many new achievements like this as we can produce.
In spite of such spectacular achievements, however, the field of
bioengineering suffers from fragmentation and a lack of coordination
that could impede and delay future advances in the field. This
fragmentation was recognized as early as 1967, when an international
conference called for better coordination in bioengineering research.
In 1995, at the request of the Senate Committee on Labor and Human
Resources, the NIH submitted a report, ``Support for Bioengineering
Research.'' This report was remarkably consistent with a number of
previous studies over the last 30 years that stressed the need for: a
centralized focus for extramural bioengineering research at NIH; a
strong intramural bioengineering program at NIH; and increased
coordination of bioengineering activities within NIH and among other
Federal agencies.
This legislation seeks to implement those recommendations and is
designed to enhance the state of and improve the coordination of
bioengineering research conducted within NIH and throughout the Federal
Government. This bill calls for the establishment of a National Center
for Bioengineering Research within the National Heart, Lung and Blood
Institute at NIH. The mission of the Center is to:
First, enhance the state of bioengineering research within
NIH;
Second, promote collaborative research projects among NIH
institutes and across Federal agencies;
Third, enhance communication among bioengineering
investigators within Federal agencies and with private sector
entities; and
Fourth, educate the Congress and the public on the critical
importance of bioengineering to both the health and the
economy of the Nation.
This legislation does not create a new institute within NIH. The
Center would have no grantmaking authority. New funding would be
allocated to institutes to support basic research projects in
bioengineering through the standard peer review process.
This legislation is introduced today as a stand-alone bill. But I
expect it to
[[Page S7717]]
be included in the reauthorization bill for the National Institutes of
Health which, as Chair of the Public Health and Safety Subcommittee of
the Committee on Labor and Human Resources, I intend to move forward
during the first session of the 105th Congress.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill and summary be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 1030
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Center for
Bioengineering Research Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Bioengineering is an interdisciplinary field that
applies physical, chemical, and mathematical sciences and
engineering principles to the study of biology, medicine,
behavior, and health. It advances knowledge from the
molecular to the organ systems level, and develops new and
novel biologics, materials, processes, implants, devices, and
informatics approaches for the prevention, diagnosis, and
treatment of disease, for patient rehabilitation, and for
improving health.
(2) Efforts to reduce Federal budget deficits require that
resources be managed in ways to maximize productivity.
(3) As part of the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993, Congress
asked for a report on the state of bioengineering research at
the National Institutes of Health.
(4) In 1994, as requested by the Congress, an External
Consultants Committee submitted a report to the Director of
the National Institutes of Health on support for
bioengineering research.
(5) In 1995, the Director of the National Institutes of
Health submitted a report to Congress on Support for
Bioengineering Research, that included recommendations for
greater coordination of bioengineering research.
(6) In 1996, an amendment to the National Institutes of
Health Revitalization Act of 1996 directed the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, acting through the Director of the
National Institutes of Health, to ``prepare and submit to the
Committee on Labor and Human Resources of the Senate and the
Committee on Commerce of the House of Representatives, a
report containing specific plans and timeframes on how the
Director will implement the findings and recommendations of
the Report to Congress entitled Support for Bioengineering
Research submitted to Congress in August 1995 in compliance
with Public Law 103-43, the National Institutes of Health
(NIH) Revitalization Act of 1993, Section 1912''. This
legislation passed the Senate but was not acted upon by the
House.
(7) In the spring of 1997, the National Institutes of
Health established the Bioengineering Consortium, with
representation from each of the institutes, to advance
bioengineering and its mission within the National Institutes
of Health.
(8) Legislation is needed to support and further the
efforts already begun by the National Institutes of Health in
order to maximize the health benefits for the American
people.
SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL CENTER FOR BIOENGINEERING
RESEARCH.
(a) In General.--Subpart 2 of part C of title IV of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285 et seq.) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 425A. NATIONAL CENTER FOR BIOENGINEERING RESEARCH.
``(a) Establishment.--The Director of the National Heart,
Lung, and Blood Institute shall establish, within the
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, a National Center
for Bioengineering Research (in this section referred to as
the `Center'). The Center shall be headed by a director, who
shall be appointed by the Director of the National Heart,
Lung, and Blood Institute.
``(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the Center is to--
``(1) promote basic research in bioengineering; and
``(2) establish an office to enhance the state of and
improve coordination of bioengineering research conducted
within the National Institutes of Health and throughout the
Federal Government.
``(c) Duties.--The Center shall--
``(1) enhance bioengineering research at the National
Institutes of Health by--
``(A) increasing the proportion of National Institutes of
Health funds that are devoted to basic rather than applied
bioengineering research;
``(B) improving the review of bioengineering grant
applications; and
``(C) increasing intramural research in bioengineering;
``(2) convene a conference of bioengineering experts
representing relevant Federal agencies, academia, and private
sector entities to make recommendations to the Director of
the Center regarding--
``(A) setting the agenda of the Center; and
``(B) identifying promising research directions and
emerging needs and opportunities in bioengineering research;
``(3) promote joint funding of collaborative bioengineering
research projects conducted by the national research
institutes and other agencies of the National Institutes of
Health or conducted by any such institute and another Federal
entity;
``(4) enhance communication among bioengineering
investigators within Federal agencies and with private sector
entities;
``(5) educate members of Congress and the public on the
critical importance of bioengineering in enhancing the
diagnosis and treatment of disease and strengthening the
economy;
``(6) annually convene a group of bioengineering experts
from Federal agencies and private sector entities to advise
the Director of the Center; and
``(7) prepare and submit to Congress, through the Director
of the National Institutes of Health, an annual report.
``(d) Limitation.--The Center may not use amounts provided
under this section to award grants.
``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) For the center.--There is authorized to be
appropriated $750,000 for each fiscal year for the general
operation of the Center.
``(2) For general bioengineering activities.--There is
authorized to be appropriated $20,000,000 for each of the
fiscal years 1998 through 2007, to be allocated at the
discretion of the Director of NIH among the bioengineering
activities being carried out by the national research
institutes and other agencies of the National Institutes of
Health.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 401(b)(2) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 281(b)(2)) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(F) The National Center for Bioengineering Research.''.
NATIONAL CENTER FOR BIOENGINEERING RESEARCH ACT OF 1997
Definition
Bioengineering is an interdisciplinary field that applies
physical, chemical, and mathematical sciences and engineering
principles to the study of biology, medicine, behavior, and
health. It advances knowledge from the molecular to the organ
systems level, and develops new and novel biologics,
materials, processes, implants, devices, and informatics
approaches for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of
disease, for patient rehabilitation, and for improving
health.
Background
As part of the 1993 reauthorization of NIH, Congress asked
for a report on the state of bioengineering research at NIH.
In 1994, an interim report from an External Consultants
Committee was submitted to the Director of NIH, who submitted
a report to Congress in August, 1995 that included
recommendations for greater coordination of bioengineering
research. In spring 1997 NIH established a Bioengineering
Consortium, with representation from each of the institutes,
to advance bioengineering and its mission within NIH. This
legislation seeks to support and further the efforts already
begun by NIH in order to maximize the health benefits for the
American people.
Impact of Bill
Bill would create National Center for Bioengineering
Research, located within the National Heart, Lung and Blood
Institute. Mission of the Center is to enhance bioengineering
research within NIH; improve coordination and communication
across all Federal agencies; educate members of Congress and
the public on importance of bioengineering in enhancing
diagnosis and treatment of disease and strengthening the
economy; annually convene bioengineering experts to advise
Director of the Center; and submit an annual report to
Congress.
Center would have no grant-making authority. New funding
would be allocated to institutes to support basic research in
bioengineering.
______
By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. D'Amato):
S. 1031. A bill to protect Federal law enforcement officers who
intervene in certain situations to protect life or prevent bodily
injury; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
the federal law enforcement officers' good samaritan act of 1997
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Federal Law
Enforcement Officers' Good Samaritan Act of 1997. This bill will help
Federal officers do what they do best: protect lives. Under this bill,
any Federal law enforcement officer who, while off duty, should
unexpectedly arrive at or is present at a crime will be able to take
appropriate action.
Mr. President, perhaps a hypothetical example would best explain the
intent of this legislation. Lets say a law enforcement officer stops at
a convenience store on his way home from work one evening. While
picking up a gallon of milk and a loaf of bread, a criminal attempts to
rob this particular store. Now most law enforcement folks will tell you
that, in this situation, they would feel compelled to take some kind of
appropriate action. But in many jurisdictions, if they do
[[Page S7718]]
take action and are hurt, or are forced to hurt the criminal, they may
not be eligible for their health benefits, and may be open to be sued
by the criminal for their actions. The law enforcement officer, acting
on his training, and intervening in a situation that he had the
training and ability to deal with, would have to cover these expenses
from his own pocket. Mr. President, this does not sound fair to me. It
can create a situation where the officer may feel unable to act in
response to his sense of duty because of concerns that he will be
penalized for acting. This legislation would eliminate these legitimate
worries.
Let me make it clear that this bill does not expand Federal law
enforcement authority. A Federal officer could only make a citizen's
arrest, if necessary, and local law enforcement officials would still
have jurisdiction in the case. My office has spoken with the National
Association of Attorneys General, and they are supportive of this
legislation.
I hope that my colleagues will take the time to look at this
legislation, and join Senator Alfonse D'Amato and me in sponsoring this
bill. Our Government has invested a lot of time, energy, and trust in
the training and support of our Federal law enforcement officers. We
need to be sure that they are able to perform their duties--and to act
as we would hope and expect them to act.
Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to join with Senator
Grassley in the introduction of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers'
Good Samaritan Act. This bill is essential to protect trained federal
law enforcement officers who want to offer assistance when they witness
a crime but are afraid of the repercussions afterwards if it is not a
crime defined under their agency's authorizing statute.
Agents in the federal law enforcement community are charged with the
investigation of criminal activities defined in their authorizing
statute. For example, DEA agents investigate drug crimes and a Secret
Service agent's role is limited to financial crimes. If acting ``within
the scope of their employment'', meaning they deal with only those
crimes listed in their agency's authorizing statute, the actions of the
Special Agent will not result in personal liability. In addition, the
employing agency may assign counsel or provide worker's compensation if
the Special Agent was injured in the line of duty.
However, when an off-duty Federal Agent witnesses the commission of a
violent crime, such as a DEA agent witnessing a robbery, the
intervention is deemed to be outside the scope of his or her
employment. Unfortunately, that special agent's intervention may
subject the off-duty Federal Law Enforcement Agent to personal
liability--without the protections afforded them if they were on duty.
There are few cases nation-wide but it has affected the intervention
of our Federal Law Enforcement Officers. In one instance, two DEA
agents on a surveillance saw a parked car occupied by a man and a young
woman. The car was not part of the surveillance. This did not stop the
agents from intervening when they saw the young woman struggling with
the man and screaming for help. Their assistance was not ``within the
scope of their employment'' but these trained agents wanted to help,
using their expertise in crisis situations. The DEA agents certainly
were not thinking a lawsuit when they intervened but because their
actions were outside the scope, they were acting as private citizens--
subjecting their personal assets to a lawsuit.
Federal agents who unexpectedly encounter violence in our communities
face an unconscionable choice: 1.) stand by and allow the violence to
occur; 2.) refuse help to the victim and allow the perpetrator to
escape; or 3.) intervene as a private citizen and risk bankruptcy by a
potential lawsuit.
Currently, there exists no federal statute authorizing Federal
Special Agents to intervene during the commission of certain violent
crimes outside the scope of their statutory authority, and protecting
their personal assets when they assist someone in need. I urge my
colleagues to review the merits of this bill and join in this effort to
relieve the fear of our specially trained law enforcement agent and
possibly encouraging their intervention when citizens need it the most.
This bill explicitly defines when a specially trained agent may be
protected if he or she offers assistance ``outside the scope of their
employment''. These instances are limited to:
(A) the protection of any person in his presence from the imminent
infliction of bodily harm;
(B) offering immediate help to any victim who suffers bodily harm in
his presence; and
(C) preventing the escape of any person he reasonably believes to be
responsible for inflicting, attempting or threatening to inflict,
bodily harm to another in his presence.
It will provide the Agent with the same qualified immunity that he
has if the act was within the ``scope of his employment'': counsel will
be provided to the agent, the Federal Government will indemnify for the
damages caused, worker's compensation will be available.
This bill will not curtail the rights of an injured party. It does
not prevent an injured party from suing for damages incurred during the
intervention by the Agent nor will it restrict the amount of damages
that an injured party may receive if the court finds that the Agent
acted unreasonably.
This bill will not expand the powers or authorities of Federal law
enforcement agencies or give Federal law enforcement agents authority
to investigate or to direct any state or local law enforcement body,
usurping the powers of the state or local law enforcement agencies,
outside of their jurisdiction. Finally, this bill will not restrict the
filing of criminal charges if the action of the Agent fits the current
statutory definition.
Federal law enforcement agents need this protection and I urge its
passage.
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Campbell):
S. 1036. A bill to amend section 435(d)(1)(A)(ii) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 with respect to the definition of an eligible
lender; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
kid's bank act
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce legislation
amending the Higher Education Act to revise the proportion of student
loans that a bank can maintain in relation to their total consumer
portfolio. This bill will allow the Young Americans Bank to continue
providing a unique opportunity for young people to learn to control a
checking account, save for the future, and manage credit obligations.
The bank has had resounding success in teaching young clients how to
responsibly handle their finances.
The Young Americans Bank has been operating for ten years as the only
bank in the nation that exclusively serves young people under the age
of 22. It is a full service, State chartered, federally insured bank
with almost 17,000 customers from all 50 States and 11 foreign
countries. Another exceptional element of the bank is that its holding
company, the Young American Education Foundation, is the only nonprofit
holding company in the country.
While educating our youth on how to make responsible financial
decisions, the Young Americans Bank also has a natural demand for
student loans. Section 435 of the Higher Education Act prohibits banks
from having student loans comprise more than 50 percent of total loans.
Clearly this prohibits the Young Americans Bank from accommodating the
large percentage of student loans that they would like to provide for
their young clients. It is also important to note that allowing the
bank to carry a larger student loan portfolio would improve the bank's
financial performance, which in turn would provide more funds for
educational programming.
My legislation would allow very small, nonprofit banks to exceed the
50-percent student loan ratio. The exception would apply only to
institutions with a total outstanding student loan volume of $10
million or less, and all loans would have to be made to those age 22
and under.
The Young Americans Bank enjoys broad support, and I have received
letters endorsing this legislation from Denver's Mayor Wellington Webb,
the Colorado Bankers Association, the Colorado Governor's office and
numerous financial institutions and universities.
The operation and objectives of the Young Americans Bank should not
be limited. This bank does an outstanding
[[Page S7719]]
job of providing financial and educational opportunities to young
people, and I encourage my colleagues to support their mission and
encourage the expansion of such a successful institution.
______
By Mr. JEFFORDS (for himself, Mr. Dodd, and Mr. Enzi):
S. 1037. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
establish incentives to increase the demand for and supply of quality
child care, to provide incentives to States that improve the quality of
child care, to expand clearing-house and electronic networks for the
distribution of child care information, to improve the quality of child
care provided through Federal facilities and programs, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
The Creating Improved Delivery of Child Care: Affordable, Reliable, and
Educational Act of 1997
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, today, there are more than 12 million
children under the age of five--including half of all infants under one
year of age--who spend at least part of their day being cared for by
someone other than their parents. There are millions more school-aged
children under the age of twelve who are in some form of child care at
the beginning and end of the school day as well as during school
holidays and vacations. And more six to twelve year olds who are
latchkey kids--returning home from school to no supervision because
parents are working and there are few, if any, alternatives.
The past two decades have seen a dramatic rise in the number of women
in the paid labor force. Women now constitute 46% of our nation's labor
force. Most women are working to meet their family's basic needs. More
than 60% of women with pre-school aged children are employed full- or
part-time. Their employment is not a choice, but an essential part of
their family's economic survival. And for most of these families, child
care is not an option, but a requirement.
Many of the traditional sources of child care are no longer
available--as many of the friends, neighbors, grandparents, and other
relatives who used to be available to provide child care are also
working. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that for parents who must
work, child care services that are dependable and of high quality make
it easier to find and keep a job. Good child care helps parents reach
and maintain economic self-sufficiency. Congress acknowledged this when
it passed welfare reform last year, which dramatically increased the
amount of entitlement money available for child care.
Steady increases in the number of employed women with young children,
combined with last year's welfare reforms, have placed tremendous
pressures on communities to dramatically expand the amount of available
child care. While the supply of child care has increased over the past
10 years, there are still significant shortages for parents in rural
areas, those with school-aged children or infants, and for lower-income
families.
I think that few of us know how much child care costs. The Senate
Employee's Child Care Center costs between $150 and $175 a week--$7,800
to $9,100 a year. That places it in the high-middle range in terms of
costs for the Washington, D.C. area. The younger the child, the higher
the costs--and Senate Employee's Child Care Center does not accept
children under 18 months old, the most expensive type of child care.
The costs of child care are almost wholly dependent upon the
geographic area, the type of child care, and the age of the child. For
example, a family purchasing full-time child care services for a four-
year-old in rural New York using a family child care home may pay as
little as $60 a week. In contrast, a family with an infant using a
child care center in New York City may pay more than $250 a week.
For a 3- to 4-year-old child, the least expensive age group, the
national average for center-based child care is $4,600 a year. The
average cost for high quality care, such as that provided by the Senate
Employee's Child Care Center, is between $8,500 and $9,100 a year. The
cost of family-based child care is generally less expensive, while in-
home care with a nanny or au pair is generally more expensive.
A family normally spends about twenty-percent of its income on
housing and ten-percent on food. The costs of child care for a low-or
middle-income family can rival the cost of housing and be double the
cost of food. Even though most of us recognize the critical part that
child care plays in the economic survival of families, we often fail to
recognize it as a basic cost which consumes a significant portion of a
family's income.
Parents can only purchase child care they can afford. Those who do
find care that is affordable and convenient are often unsatisfied with
the quality of the care their child receives. In fact, one quarter of
all parents would change their child care arrangement if they could
find and afford something better.
Since 1990, the costs of child care have risen about six-percent
annually. This is almost triple the annual increase in the cost of
living. At the same time, there are strong indicators that the quality
of child care has significantly decreased during that same period of
time. Parents are paying more but getting less.
The quality of child care in America is very troubling. A recent
nationwide study found that forty-percent of the child care provided to
infants in child care centers was potentially injurious. Fifteen-
percent of center-based child care providers for all pre-schoolers are
so bad that a child's health and safety are threatened; seventy-percent
are mediocre--not hurting or helping children; and fifteen-percent
actively promote a child's development. Center-based child care, the
object of this study, is the most heavily regulated and frequently
monitored type of child care. There are strong indications that care
for children in less regulated settings, such as family-based child
care and in-home care, is far worse.
Combining the research on the quality of child care with the
breakthroughs on the development of the human brain produces a very
disturbing situation. Many children enter child care by eleven weeks of
age, are in care for close to 30 hours a week, and often stay in some
form of child care until they enter school. During that same period of
life, a child's brain is undergoing a series of extraordinary changes.
In the first three years of life, the brain either makes the
connections it needs for learning or it atrophies, making later efforts
at remediation in learning, behavior, and thinking difficult, at best.
The experiences and stimulation that a caretaker provide to a child are
the foundations upon which all future learning is built. The brain's
greatest and most critical growth spurt is between birth and ten years
of age--precisely the time when non-parental child care is most
frequently utilized. A Time magazine special report on ``How a Child's
Brain Develops'' (February 3, 1997) said it best, ``. . . Good,
affordable day care is not a luxury or a fringe benefit for welfare
mothers and working parents but essential brain food for the next
generation.'' While bad child care can seriously impair a child's
development, high-quality child care significantly increases the
chances of good developmental outcomes for children.
Think about it. At the most important time in the development of a
child's brain, more than twelve million children are being cared for by
people who are paid less than the person who picks up your garbage each
week, and are required to have less training than the person who cuts
your hair, and less skill-based testing than the person delivering
packages to your house. Child care providers play an important role in
a child's development, for they help fine-tune the child's capacity to
think and process information, social skills, emotional health, and
acquisition of language.
Last year, our goal in child care was to streamline federal
assistance by creating a cohesive structure for federal assistance and
to provide sufficient government funds to subsidize child care for
welfare recipients who were transitioning into work. This year our goal
must be to promote the healthy development of children in child care. I
am worried that the pressure of the need to accommodate the increasing
demand for child care will force many into forgoing quality just to
increase the number of child care slots available.
[[Page S7720]]
I rise today to introduce legislation entitled ``Creating Improved
Delivery of Child Care: Affordable, Reliable, and Educational Act of
1997,'' the CIDCARE Act. It incorporates modifications to the tax code,
an incentive grant program for states (including wage subsidies for
child care providers who get additional training and education and a
grant program to encourage small business partnerships to provide child
care for employees), a technology-based infrastructure for the
professional development of child care providers, educational loan
forgiveness for child care providers, requirements that states include
the cost of child care in the calculation of child support orders,
expansion of the federal government's technical assistance and
information dissemination role, and requirements that child care
centers located in federal facilities to meet high quality standards of
care.
There is no one thing--no magic bullet--that will ensure higher
quality child care. Each of these provisions has been included to solve
a specific problem or break through a barrier that has hampered efforts
to improve the quality of child care. Taken as a whole, these
provisions represent a comprehensive effort to increase the
supply while simultaneously creating a demand for high-quality child
care, and make it affordable for low- and middle-income families.
To offset the cost of these changes, the bill reduces, but does not
eliminate, the dependent care tax credit for upper income taxpayers.
Over a 5-year period, it gradually decreases the amount that an
employee can place in a dependent care assistance plan used to
reimburse nonaccredited or non-credential child care. In addition, the
legislation expands the coordinated enforcement efforts of the Internal
Revenue Service and the HHS Office of Child Support Enforcement, which
will significantly reduce the amount of fraud related to illegal tax
deduction and credit claims by noncustodial, noncontributing parents.
The first provision in CIDCARE makes several changes in the Child and
Dependent Care Tax Credit [CDCTC]. This tax credit is the largest tax-
based subsidy for child care. The bill raises the income level for the
receipt of the highest percentage of employment-related child care
costs from $10,000 to $20,000. The percentage is decreased at a rate of
1 percent for each additional $2,500 in adjusted gross income and sets
a minimum percentage of 10 percent for incomes of $70,000 and above.
This change represents a more equitable distribution of limited
resources based on the percentage of income a family must use to meet
child care expenses. For families qualifying for the EITC, the
legislation makes the child care tax credit refundable, on a quarterly
basis. This will enable many low-income working families to move from
part-time to full-time employment, by easing the burden of child care
costs and having the money available at regular intervals throughout
the year.
Another revision to the Child Care Tax Credit establishes, over a 5-
year period, different rates for the tax credit, dependent on whether
the child care is provided in an accredited child care facility or by a
credentialed professional. This will reward parents who choose high-
quality child care and help defray the additional costs of that care.
I am sensitive to the concerns of colleagues who object to reducing
the child care tax credit. But before you judge this reduction too
harshly, let's put it into perspective. The tax credit remains at or
above the current rate of 20 percent for parents with adjusted gross
incomes of $45,000 or less, regardless of the type of child care. The
median income of families with children nationally is $37,000. While
there are wide differences in between States, there are only four
States where the median exceeds $45,000 AGI, triggering a reduction in
the current rate of 20 percent. The median income in most States is
significantly below this trigger.
At the end of the 5-year phase in period, the tax credit remains at
or above the current 20 percent rate for families with an AGI of
$55,000--if they choose high-quality child care. No States have median
incomes of families with children which exceed this which triggers a
reduction below current child care tax rate. Families with incomes at
or above $70,000 will still receive a tax credit of ten percent,
increased to 12.5% if high quality care is used.
In terms of money, a one percent decrease in the child care tax
credit equals $24 when care for one child is claimed, and $48 for two
or more children. Families making $70,000 or more are the hardest hit
by my legislation. Yet their maximum financial cost is $240 a year for
one child,or $480 a year for two or more children--about half of one
percent of their adjusted gross income.
The second area of changes occurs in the Dependent Care Assistance
Plan (DCAP). The CIDCARE Act increases the amount that an employee can
contribute to a DCAP account, if the funds are used to pay for the care
of two or more eligible persons. In addition, the amount of DCAP
contributions is increased for high-quality care and decreased for care
that is provided by an unaccredited child care facility or a person who
has not received a professional credential. At the end of the five year
phase in, the maximum decrease in the DCAP amount for unaccredited care
is 20% lower than the current ceiling on contributions. These
differential rates are phased in over a five year period in order for
child care providers to achieve accreditation or become credentialed in
child care.
Current law prohibits DCAP from being used to pay relatives for care.
While I support needed controls on the use of DCAP accounts in most
cases, my legislation would make a very limited exception to this
prohibition. DCAP payments could be made to pay a parent or grandparent
to care for a newborn child. The DCAP account could be joined at
anytime during a pregnancy. The funds would be available for up to 12
months from the date of deposit into the employee's DCAP account--
because babies have a timetable all their own when it comes to being
born.
The last change CIDCARE makes in the Dependent Care Assistance Plan
is a requirement that federal employees have the opportunity to
contribute to DCAP. Private employees, as well as many state and local
governments, have had DCAP available for their employees since 1981.
Consistent with the intent of the Congressional Accountability Act, I
want to make this child care subsidy available to federal workers,
including legislative branch employees.
Child care is a growing concern to businesses, big and small.
Employers are coming to the realization that affordable, convenient
high-quality child care is a critical element in hiring and retaining
skilled employees. Many companies, such as Johnson & Johnson, IBM, and
others have been very innovative in providing child care assistance for
their employees. Small businesses in particular are finding it
difficult to meet the child care needs of their employees, but
recognize the importance of that help.
The CIDCARE Act creates a tax credit for employers providing or
otherwise supporting high-quality child care arrangements for their
employees. On the Budget Reconciliation bill passed by the Senate,
Senator Kohl introduced an amendment to provide a time-limited tax
credit for employers who provide child care for their employees. To
reinforce the importance of the Kohl amendment, I have included it in
CIDCARE. Fifty percent of the expenses incurred by a business to meet
the child care needs of employees will be credited toward the business'
Federal tax liability. Eligible expenses are capped at $150,000 per
year, and the tax credit sunsets after three years.
Costs allowed to businesses under this provision include startup
costs, renovations to meet accreditation standards, professional
development for child care providers, general operating expenses,
subsidized child care for lower paid employees, support for child care
resource and referral services and other child care activities. These
provisions encourage business involvement and innovation in meeting the
child care needs of employees and increasing the demand for higher
quality child care.
Current law prohibits businesses from receiving a charitable
deduction for donations made to public entities, such as schools and
child care services. CIDCARE will extend eligibility for a business
charitable deduction to the donation of educational equipment and
[[Page S7721]]
supplies donated to public schools, public child care providers, and
public child care support entities, such as resource and referral
services. If child care is to improve and meet the developmental needs
of our Nation's children, every available resource must be made
available. Computers which are discarded because they are too slow or
have insufficient hard drive capacity, can be the first step into the
computer-age for a small child or the link to professional training for
a child care provider.
A critical part of improving the quality of child care is
professional development for child care providers. Since the 1970's
there has been a decline in child care teacher salaries. In 1990,
teachers in child care centers earned an average of $11,500 a year.
Assistant teachers, the largest growing segment of child care
professionals, were paid 10- to 20-percent less than child care
teachers. The 1990 annual income of regulated family child care
providers was $10,944 which translates to about $4 an hour.
Nonregulated family child care, generally comprised of providers taking
care of a smaller number of children, earned an average of $4,275 a
year--substantially less than minimum wage.
With these wages, it is easy to understand why more child care
providers do not participate in professional training or attend college
classes to improve their skills. The costs of applying for and
receiving certification as a qualified child care professional are
minimal, but understandably out of reach for many child care providers.
This legislation will exempt expenses directly related to child care
accreditation or becoming credentialed from the 2 percent floor that is
applied to miscellaneous itemized deductions. This will at least permit
child care providers to receive a full deduction for the expenses
associated with improving the child care services which they provide.
This incentive for professional growth and the development of new
skills is a small but critical part of my overall effort to support
high-quality child care.
The last tax modification in CIDCARE creates a very limited exception
to the executive use rule governing the tax deduction for home office
expenses. The legislation will permit the mixed use of home office
space for business and personal purposes to allow a person to care for
his or her child. In some ways, the need for this exception comes down
to fundamental fairness. How many school holidays, snow days and other
times do children accompany their parents into work?
I can always tell when the schools are unexpectedly closed, by the
increased number of little people I see in Senate offices and eateries.
I have been in Senate offices and other workplaces where a crib or
playpen is clearly in evidence. Yet, none of us question whether our
offices are exclusively for business use. One of the big incentives for
telecommuting and home-based business is to allow parents to have more
time with their families, yet existing law would keep a new mother from
legitimately claiming a home office deduction if she has her child
sleeping in a crib in a corner of the room where she is working.
The non-tax related provisions of the legislation are designed to
complement and work with the tax provisions. In order for families to
be able to take advantage of the increased tax credits for child care
in an accredited center or with a provider who has received a child
care credential, there need to be more of these high quality centers
and better trained providers. Child care providers must have easy,
affordable access to training and other activities which will lead to
accreditation and credentialing. This effort will require that the
federal government join forces with states and the business community.
Parents must be made aware of how to identify quality child care and
its importance in their children's lives. And the federal government
should set an example by requiring that child care centers located in
federal facilities meet higher standards of care. It will take all of
these provisions, working together, to improve the quality of child
care for our children.
The CIDCARE Act will require that states include the cost of child
care in the calculation of child support obligations. When a custodial
parent is employed or actively seeking employment, the state procedures
for the determination of the amount of child support need to include an
amount equal to or more than the child care rates used by the state to
administer the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act. When child
care is being provided in an accredited child care center or by a
credentialed child care that rate will be increased by fifty-percent.
Since the passage of the Child Care and Development Act in 1990,
states have been setting ``market'' or ``comparable'' rates for child
care. CIDCARE uses those rates as a baseline for adding the cost of
child care to the amount of child support which a non-custodial parent
will be required to pay. Current child support calculations
include estimates of the other basic expenses necessary to provide
financially for a child. In many instances, the expense of child care
is the direct result of the divorce or lack of financial support from
the non-custodial parent. It is only fair that child care expenses be
included in those calculations. If the custodial parent secures higher
quality child care, the non-custodial parent will share in the
additional costs of that care. Children should not be forced into poor
quality child care because a non-custodial parent refused to share in
the additional expense of higher quality care.
The CIDCARE bill establishes a $260 million competitive grant program
to assist states in improving the quality of child care. To be
eligible, a state must not have reduced the scope or otherwise
decreased the state's licensing requirements since 1995, must be in
compliance with the requirements of the Child Care and Development
Block Grant, must have drawn down at least 80% of the amount awarded to
the state in federal entitlement child care funds requiring a state
match, and must conduct annual on-site monitoring of state licensed or
otherwise regulated child care facilities, with at least one
unannounced visit every 3 years. The legislation requires that a
Priority be given to states that raise at least a 10% match for the
federal funds from business or other private sources.
States must use at least 20% of the grant funds awarded to establish
a subsidy program to provide salary increases to child care providers
who are credentialed in the state. The low level of child care wages is
the most often cited reason for the tremendous staff turnover in the
child care profession. In areas where child care subsidies as low as
fifty cents an hour are put in place, the staff turnover rate drops
dramatically. The wage subsidy also will encourage more child care
providers to get additional training or advance their education.
In addition, states will need to use at least twenty-percent of the
funds awarded for a grant program to provide start-up funds for
partnerships of small businesses to develop and operate child care
cooperative services for their employees. While large employers have
both the number of employees to justify an on- or near-site child care
center and the additional financial resources for start-up costs, small
businesses have been struggling with ways to help their employees meet
their child care needs. This grant program will provide time-limited
help for partnerships of small businesses who work together to develop
child care resources for their employees.
States can use the remainder of grant funds awarded for any of the
following activities: developing standards for of entities applying for
state recognition for the accreditation and credentialing of child care
providers; establishing a scholarship program to help child care
providers meet the costs of education and training; expanding state-
based child care training and technical assistance activities; improve
consumer education efforts including the expansion of resource and
referral services and child care complaint systems; providing increased
rates of reimbursement provided under federal or state child care
assistance for children with special needs; purchasing
special supplies, equipment, or meeting other extraordinary expenses
necessary for the care of special needs children for distribution to
child care providers serving special needs children, or providing
increased rates of reimbursement provided under federal or state child
care assistance for accredited and credentialed care. Each of these
activities has been demonstrated
[[Page S7722]]
to be a contributing factor in improving the quality of child care.
Parents, child care providers, employers, and others need a
constantly updated source of information about improving the quality of
child care. States need a central depository where they can learn what
other states are doing as well as a place where they can contribute
their own ideas and activities from which others can learn. The
collection and dissemination of information, demonstrations, and
technology is one of the most important roles of the federal
government.
Under provisions in the CIDCARE Act, the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) will collect information about the importance of
high quality child care (including what it is, how to identify it, why
it is important for children), and in partnership with the ADCouncil or
similar professional advertising entity, distribute that information
through a national public awareness campaign and other mechanisms. To
increase the capacity of child care credentialing and accreditation
entities, HHS will award competitive grants to child care credentialing
and accreditation entities that have not been in existence more than 10
years for the purpose of refining and evaluating their procedures for
and methods of granting child care accreditation and/or credentialing.
The legislation authorizes $10 million annually, to conduct these
information and technology transfer activities.
The CIDCARE Act authorizes $50 million a year to create and operate a
technology-based training infrastructure to enable child care providers
nationwide to receive the training, education, and support they need to
improve the quality of child care. The bill builds upon existing
distance learning, Internet, and satellite resources, with sufficient
funding to expand access to affordable child care training and
information. The primary focus of the infrastructure will be to
disseminate the training necessary to become an accredited child care
center or a credentialed child care professional. Training and
education, delivered at a minimal cost and accessible to individuals
within 25 miles of their homes, will remove one of the most substantial
barriers to child care credentialing and accreditation.
Essentially, the legislation establishes a child care training and
education interactive ``network'', which will be used by child care
credentialing and accreditation entities for training, skills testing,
and other activities needed to achieve and maintain child care
credentialing and accreditation. Entities recognized by 2 or more
states as providing accepted child care credentialing or accreditation
services will be active participants in decisions governing the use of
the child care ``training network.'' Time lines for the creation and
implementation of the infrastructure and caps on administrative costs
are included in the bill provide both financial and programmatic
accountability.
Through the child care training infrastructure, a no interest
revolving loan fund is established to enable child care providers and
child care support entities to purchase computers, satellite dishes,
and other technological equipment which enable them to participate in
the child care training provided on the national infrastructure. For
the first five years of the legislation, at least ten-percent of the
funds appropriated for the child care training infrastructure will be
placed into the revolving loan fund. This part of CIDCARE, like similar
federal loan programs, establishes that the funds be kept in a separate
interest bearing account, establishes application procedures, terms and
conditions for the approval of such loans, and procedures for handling
loan defaults.
At the current time, child care centers located in federal facilities
are not required to meet even basic safety and health requirements.
They are not subject to state or local laws or regulations governing
the operation of a child care center. The CIDCARE Act will require
federal child care centers (those in buildings leased or owned by the
federal government--legislative, executive, judicial branches) to meet
all state and local licensing and other regulatory requirements related
to the provision of child care, within six months of the passage of
this legislation--or make substantial progress towards meeting those
requirements. The appropriate Administrator of each branch of
government shall issue regulations specifying center-based child care
accreditation standards and require all child care facilities in
federal buildings under their control achieve accreditation within 3
years of the passage of this legislation.
If the child care program located in a federal facility fails to be
in compliance, or show substantial compliance with state and local
licensing requirements within six months or with the identified
accreditation standards within three years, the agency must cease
providing child care in that child care center. On-site monitoring to
ensure compliance with these regulations and standards must be
performed by an outside entity. The legislation authorizes $900
thousand to the General Services Administration (GSA) to implement this
provision.
CIDCARE will require that federal child care programs provided by the
Corporation for National and Community Service, the Departments of
Defense, Education, Housing and Urban Affairs, Justice, and Labor, will
ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that by October 1, 2001, any
child care made available through programs funded or operated by those
Departments and the Corporation, be provided by an accredited child
care facility or a credentialed child care professional. The federal
government needs to demonstrate a commitment to quality child care, by
raising the standards it applies to its own programs.
The CIDCARE Act will expand the Community Development Block Grant to
include the renovation or upgrading of child care facilities to meet
accreditation standards as an allowable use of the grant funds. It also
will extend existing Perkins and Stafford Loan forgiveness programs to
include persons who work as credentialed professionals in a child care
setting. Just as these loan forgiveness programs helped encourage more
people to become teachers, I hope that this extension of these two
educational loan programs to child care providers will result in more
and better qualified child care providers. To be eligible for loan
forgiveness, the person must be employed full time providing child care
services and have a degree in early childhood education or development
or receive professional child care credentials.
The need for high-quality child care is compelling. Having
affordable, convenient child care is tied directly to a family's
ability to produce income. Good child care can be an effective way to
support the healthy development of children, particularly in the
acquisition of social and language skills. For the millions of children
who spend much of their preschool lives and many of their nonschool
hours being cared for by someone other than their parents, child care
provides the foundation upon which all future education will be built--
and determines to a large extent whether that foundation will be strong
or weak.
As we all know, quality child care costs money. It costs money to
parents who bear the biggest burden for the cost of child care. It
costs businesses both through the direct assistance that they provide
to employees to help with the costs of child care, and through their
ability to hire and retain a skilled work force. It costs Government
through existing tax provisions, direct spending, and discretionary
spending targeted at child care. But the costs of not making this
investment are even higher. Those costs can be measured in the expense
of remedial education, the expansion of an unskilled labor force, the
increase in prison populations, and most importantly, the blunted
potential of millions of children.
I urge my colleagues to join Senator Dodd, Senator Roberts and me in
support of the CIDCARE bill.
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. 1037
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Creating
Improved Delivery of Child
[[Page S7723]]
Care: Affordable, Reliable, and Educational Act'' or as the
``CIDCARE Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.
TITLE I--DEMAND FOR QUALITY CHILD CARE
Sec. 101. Expansion of dependent care tax credit.
Sec. 102. Expansion of dependent care assistance program.
Sec. 103. Inclusion of child care costs in child support orders.
TITLE II--SUPPLY OF QUALITY CHILD CARE
Subtitle A--Tax Benefits for Quality Child Care
Sec. 201. Allowance of credit for employer expenses for child care
assistance.
Sec. 202. Charitable contributions of scientific equipment to
accredited and credentialed child care providers and to
elementary and secondary schools.
Sec. 203. 2-percent floor on miscellaneous itemized deductions not
applicable to accreditation and credentialing expenses of
child care providers.
Sec. 204. Expansion of home office deduction to include use of office
for dependent care.
Subtitle B--Child Care Quality Improvement Incentive Program
Sec. 211. Definitions.
Sec. 212. Establishment of State program.
Sec. 213. State eligibility and application requirements.
Sec. 214. Use of funds by States.
Sec. 215. Authorization of appropriations.
Subtitle C--Distribution of Information About Quality Child Care
Sec. 221. Expansion of role of the Department of Health and Human
Services in the collection and dissemination of
information and technology.
Sec. 222. Child care training infrastructure.
Sec. 223. Child care training revolving fund.
Subtitle D--Quality Child Care Through Federal Facilities and Programs
Sec. 231. Providing quality child care in Federal facilities.
Sec. 232. Providing quality child care through Federal programs.
Sec. 233. Use of community development block grants to establish
accredited child care centers.
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Provisions
Sec. 241. Student loan repayment and cancellation for child care
workers.
Sec. 242. Expansion of coordinated enforcement efforts of Internal
Revenue Service and HHS Office of Child Support
Enforcement.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Accredited child care center.--The term ``accredited
child care center'' means--
(A) a center that is accredited, by a child care
credentialing or accreditation entity recognized by a State,
to provide child care to children in the State (except
children who a tribal organization elects to serve through a
center described in subparagraph (B));
(B) a center that is accredited, by a child care
credentialing or accreditation entity recognized by a tribal
organization, to provide child care for children served by
the tribal organization;
(C) a center that is used as a Head Start center under the
Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.) and is in compliance
with any applicable performance standards established by
regulation under such Act for Head Start programs; or
(D) a military child development center (as defined in
section 1798(1) of title 10, United States Code).
(2) Child care credentialing or accreditation entity.--The
term ``child care credentialing or accreditation entity''
means a nonprofit private organization or public agency
that--
(A) is recognized by a State agency or tribal organization;
and
(B) accredits a center or credentials an individual to
provide child care on the basis of--
(i) an accreditation or credentialing instrument based on
peer-validated research;
(ii) compliance with applicable State and local licensing
requirements, or standards described in section
658E(c)(2)(E)(ii) of the Child Care and Development Block
Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9858c(c)(2)(E)(ii)), as appropriate, for
the center or individual;
(iii) outside monitoring of the center or individual; and
(iv) criteria that provide assurances of--
(I) compliance with age-appropriate health and safety
standards at the center or by the individual;
(II) use of age-appropriate developmental and educational
activities, as an integral part of the child care program
carried out at the center or by the individual; and
(III) use of ongoing staff development or training
activities for the staff of the center or the individual,
including related skills-based testing.
(3) Credentialed child care professional.--The term
``credentialed child care professional'' means--
(A) an individual who is credentialed, by a child care
credentialing or accreditation entity recognized by a State,
to provide child care to children in the State (except
children who a tribal organization elects to serve through an
individual described in subparagraph (B)); or
(B) an individual who is credentialed, by a child care
credentialing or accreditation entity recognized by a tribal
organization, to provide child care for children served by
the tribal organization.
(4) State; tribal organization.--The terms ``State'' and
``tribal organization'' have the meaning given the term in
section 658P of the Child Care and Development Block Grant
Act (42 U.S.C. 9858n).
TITLE I--DEMAND FOR QUALITY CHILD CARE
SEC. 101. EXPANSION OF DEPENDENT CARE TAX CREDIT.
(a) Percentage of Employment-Related Expenses Determined by
Status of Care Giver.--Section 21(a)(2) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (defining applicable percentage) is
amended to read as follows:
``(2) Applicable percentage defined.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the term
`applicable percentage' means--
``(i) in the case of employment-related expenses described
in subsection (b)(2)(A)(ii) incurred for the care of a
qualifying individual described in subsection (b)(1)(A) by an
accredited child care center or a credentialed child care
professional, the initial percentage reduced (but not below
12.5 percent) ratably for each $2,500 (or fraction thereof)
by which the taxpayers's adjusted gross income for the
taxable year exceeds $20,000, and
``(ii) in any other case, 30 percent reduced (but not below
10 percent) ratably for each $2,500 (or fraction thereof) by
which the taxpayers's adjusted gross income for the taxable
year exceeds $20,000 but does not exceed $70,000.
``(B) Initial percentage for expenses incurred for
accredited or credentialed providers.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A)(i), the initial percentage shall be
determined in accordance with the following table:
The initial percentage is--e year beginning in--
1998........................................................31.5 ....
1999..........................................................33 ....
2000........................................................34.5 ....
2001..........................................................36 ....
2002 and thereafter.......................................37.5.''....
(b) Definitions.--Section 21(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to definitions of qualifying
individual and employment-related expenses) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(E) Accredited child care center.--The term `accredited
child care center' means--
``(i) a center that is accredited, by a child care
credentialing or accreditation entity recognized by a State,
to provide child care to children in the State (except
children who a tribal organization elects to serve through a
center described in clause (ii));
``(ii) a center that is accredited, by a child care
credentialing or accreditation entity recognized by a tribal
organization, to provide child care for children served by
the tribal organization;
``(iii) a center that is used as a Head Start center under
the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.) and is in
compliance with any applicable performance standards
established by regulation under such Act for Head Start
programs; or
``(iv) a military child development center (as defined in
section 1798(1) of title 10, United States Code).
``(F) Child care credentialing or accreditation entity.--
The term `child care credentialing or accreditation entity'
means a nonprofit private organization or public agency
that--
``(i) is recognized by a State agency or tribal
organization; and
``(ii) accredits a center or credentials an individual to
provide child care on the basis of--
``(I) an accreditation or credentialing instrument based on
peer-validated research;
``(II) compliance with applicable State and local licensing
requirements, or standards described in section
658E(c)(2)(E)(ii) of the Child Care and Development Block
Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9858c(c)(2)(E)(ii)), as appropriate, for
the center or individual;
``(III) outside monitoring of the center or individual; and
``(IV) criteria that provide assurances of--
``(aa) compliance with age-appropriate health and safety
standards at the center or by the individual;
``(bb) use of age-appropriate developmental and educational
activities, as an integral part of the child care program
carried out at the center or by the individual; and
``(cc) use of ongoing staff development or training
activities for the staff of the center or the individual,
including related skills-based testing.
``(G) Credentialed child care professional.--The term
`credentialed child care professional' means--
``(i) an individual who is credentialed, by a child care
credentialing or accreditation entity recognized by a State,
to provide child care to children in the State (except
children who a tribal organization elects to serve through an
individual described in clause (i)); or
``(ii) an individual who is credentialed, by a child care
credentialing or accreditation entity recognized by a tribal
organization, to provide child care for children served by
the tribal organization.
[[Page S7724]]
``(H) Tribal organization.--The term `tribal organization'
has the meaning given the term in section 658P of the Child
Care and Development Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9858n).''
(c) Credit Made Refundable for Low Income Taxpayers.--
(1) In general.--Section 21 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to credit for household and dependent care
services) is amended by redesignating subsection (f) as
subsection (g) and by inserting after subsection (e) the
following:
``(f) Credit Made Refundable for Low Income Taxpayers.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this subtitle, in the
case of an applicable taxpayer individual, the credit
allowable under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall be
treated as a credit allowable under subpart C of this part.
``(2) Applicable taxpayer.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term `applicable taxpayer' means a taxpayer
with respect to whom the credit under section 32 is allowable
for the taxable year.
``(3) Coordination with advance payments and minimum tax.--
Rules similar to the rules of subsections (g) and (h) of
section 32 shall apply with respect to the portion of any
credit to which this subsection applies.''.
(2) Advance payment of credit.--
(A) In general.--Chapter 25 of such Code (relating to
general provisions relating to employment taxes) is amended
by inserting after section 3507 the following:
``SEC. 3507A. ADVANCE PAYMENT OF DEPENDENT CARE CREDIT.
``(a) General Rule.--Except as otherwise provided in this
section, every employer making payment of wages with respect
to whom a dependent care eligibility certificate is in effect
shall, at the time of paying such wages, make an additional
payment equal to such employee's dependent care advance
amount.
``(b) Dependent Care Eligibility Certificate.--For purposes
of this title, a dependent care eligibility certificate is a
statement furnished by an employee to the employer which--
``(1) certifies that the employee will be eligible to
receive the credit provided by section 21 for the taxable
year,
``(2) certifies that the employee reasonably expects to be
an applicable taxpayer for the taxable year,
``(3) certifies that the employee does not have a dependent
care eligibility certificate in effect for the calendar year
with respect to the payment of wages by another employer,
``(4) states whether or not the employee's spouse has a
dependent care eligibility certificate in effect,
``(5) states the number of qualifying individuals in the
household maintained by the employee,
``(6) states whether a qualifying individual will be cared
for by an accredited child care center or a credentialed
child care professional, and
``(7) estimates the amount of employment-related expenses
for the calendar year.
``(c) Dependent Care Advance Amount.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this title, the term
`dependent care advance amount' means, with respect to any
payroll period, the amount determined--
``(A) on the basis of the employee's wages from the
employer for such period,
``(B) on the basis of the employee's estimated employment-
related expenses included in the dependent care eligibility
certificate, and
``(C) in accordance with tables provided by the Secretary.
``(2) Advance amount tables.--The tables referred to in
paragraph (1)(C) shall be similar in form to the tables
prescribed under section 3402 and, to the maximum extent
feasible, shall be coordinated with such tables and the
tables prescribed under section 3507(c).
``(d) Other Rules.--For purposes of this section, rules
similar to the rules of subsections (d) and (e) of section
3507 shall apply.
``(e) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, terms
used in this section which are defined in section 21 shall
have the respective meanings given such terms by section
21.''.
(B) Conforming amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 25 of such Code is amended by adding after the item
relating to section 3507 the following:
``Sec. 3507A. Advance payment of dependent care credit.''.
(d) Effective Dates.--
(1) Applicable percentage.--The amendments made by
subsection (a) and (b) shall apply to taxable years beginning
after December 31, 1997.
(2) Credit made refundable.--The amendments made by
subsection (c) shall apply to taxable years beginning after
December 31, 2000.
SEC. 102. EXPANSION OF DEPENDENT CARE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Section 129(a)(2)(A) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to limitation of exclusion) is
amended to read as follows:
``(A) Dollar limitation.--
``(i) In general.--The amount which may be excluded under
paragraph (1) for dependent care assistance with respect to
dependent care services provided during a taxable year shall
not exceed--
``(I) in the case of dependent care services provided by an
accredited child care center or a credentialed child care
professional for a qualifying individual described in section
21(b)(1)(A), an amount determined in accordance with the
following table:
For 2 or more
``In the case of taxable years For 1 qualifying qualifying
beginning in: individual, the individuals, the
amount is: amount is:
1998.............................. $5,200 $6,700
1999.............................. $5,400 $6,900
2000.............................. $5,600 $7,100
2001.............................. $5,800 $7,300
2002 and thereafter............... $6,000 $7,500,
``(II) in the case of other dependent care services for a
qualifying individual described in section 21(b)(1)(A) or
payments described in subsection (e)(1)(B), an amount
determined in accordance with the following table:
For 2 or more
``In the case of taxable years For 1 qualifying qualifying
beginning in: individual, the individuals, the
amount is: amount is:
1998.............................. $4,800 $6,300
1999.............................. $4,600 $6,100
2000.............................. $4,400 $5,900
2001.............................. $4,200 $5,700
2002 and thereafter............... $4,000 $5,500,
and
``(III) in the case of other dependent care services for a
qualifying individual described in subparagraph (B) or (C) of
section 21(b)(1), $5,000.
``(ii) Amounts for married individuals filing separate
returns.--In the case of a separate return by a married
individual, clause (i) shall be applied by using one-half of
any amount specified in such clause.
``(iii) Providers.--For purposes of clause (i)(I), the
terms `accredited child care center' and `credentialed child
care professional' have the meaning given such terms by
subparagraphs (E) and (G) of section 21(c)(2), respectively.
(b) Payments for Stay-at-Home Care Allowed.--
(1) In general.--Section 129(e)(1) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to definitions and special rules) is
amended to read as follows:
``(1) Dependent care assistance.--The term `dependent care
assistance' means--
``(A) the payment of, or provision of, those services which
if paid for by the employee would be considered employment-
related expenses under section 21(b)(2) (relating to expenses
for household and dependent care services necessary for
gainful employment), and
``(B) any payment to the employee from amounts contributed
to the employee's account during the pregnancy of the
employee paid within 1 year after such contribution and
during the period in which--
``(i) the employee,
``(ii) the employee's spouse, or
``(iii) a parent of the employee or the employee's spouse,
stays at home to care for a qualifying individual described
in section 21(b)(1)(A).''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 129(c) of such Code (relating to payments to
related individuals) is amended by striking ``No amount'' and
inserting ``Except in the case of payments described in
subsection (e)(1)(B), no amount.''.
(B) Section 129(e)(9) of such Code (relating to identifying
information required with respect to service provider) is
amended by striking ``No amount'' and inserting ``Except in
the case of payments described in paragraph (1)(B)(i), no
amount.''.
(c) Dependent Care Assistance Program for Federal
Employees.--Subpart G of part III of title 5, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after chapter 87 the following:
``CHAPTER 88--DEPENDENT CARE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
``Sec. 8801. Definitions
``(a) For the purpose of this chapter, `employee' means--
``(1) an employee as defined by section 2105 of this title;
``(2) a Member of Congress as defined by section 2106 of
this title;
``(3) a Congressional employee as defined by section 2107
of this title;
``(4) the President;
``(5) a justice or judge of the United States appointed to
hold office during good behavior (i) who is in regular active
judicial service, or (ii) who is retired from regular active
service under section 371(b) or 372(a) of title 28, United
States Code, or (iii) who has resigned the judicial office
under section 371(a) of title 28 with the continued right
during the remainder of his lifetime to receive the salary of
the office at the time of his resignation;
``(6) an individual first employed by the government of the
District of Columbia before October 1, 1987;
``(7) an individual employed by Gallaudet College;
``(8) an individual employed by a county committee
established under section 590h(b) of title 16;
``(9) an individual appointed to a position on the office
staff of a former President under section 1(b) of the Act of
August 25, 1958 (72 Stat. 838); and
``(10) an individual appointed to a position on the office
staff of a former President, or
[[Page S7725]]
a former Vice President under section 4 of the Presidential
Transition Act of 1963, as amended (78 Stat. 153), who
immediately before the date of such appointment was an
employee as defined under any other paragraph of this
subsection;
but does not include--
``(A) an employee of a corporation supervised by the Farm
Credit Administration if private interests elect or appoint a
member of the board of directors;
``(B) an individual who is not a citizen or national of the
United States and whose permanent duty station is outside the
United States, unless the individual was an employee for the
purpose of this chapter on September 30, 1979, by reason of
service in an Executive agency, the United States Postal
Service, or the Smithsonian Institution in the area which was
then known as the Canal Zone; or
``(C) an employee excluded by regulation of the Office of
Personnel Management under section 8716(b) of this title.
``(b) For the purpose of this chapter, `dependent care
assistance program' has the meaning given such term by
section 129(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
``Sec. 8802. Dependent care assistance program
``The Office of Personnel Management shall establish and
maintain a dependent care assistance program for the benefit
of employees.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1997.
SEC. 103. INCLUSION OF CHILD CARE COSTS IN CHILD SUPPORT
ORDERS.
(a) In General.--Section 466(a) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 666(a)) is amended by inserting after paragraph
(19) the following:
``(20) Child care costs.--
``(A) In general.--Procedures under which all child support
orders enforced under this part shall include in the case of
a custodial parent who is employed or is actively seeking
employment an amount equal to or more than the applicable
payment rate for the type of child care services provided to
that parent's child or children that is established in
accordance with section 658E(c)(4) of the Child Care and
Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858c(c)(4)),
increased by 50 percent of such rate if such services are
provided by an accredited child care center or a credentialed
child care professional.
``(B) Definitions.--In this paragraph, the terms
`accredited child care center' and `credentialed child care
professional' have the meaning given those terms in section 2
of the CIDCARE Act.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
applies to child support orders enforced or otherwise
modified by a court on and after the date of enactment of
this Act.
TITLE II--SUPPLY OF QUALITY CHILD CARE
Subtitle A--Tax Benefits for Quality Child Care
SEC. 201. ALLOWANCE OF CREDIT FOR EMPLOYER EXPENSES FOR CHILD
CARE ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
business related credits) is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``SEC. 45D. EMPLOYER-PROVIDED CHILD CARE CREDIT.
``(a) Allowance of Credit.--For purposes of section 38, the
employer-provided child care credit determined under this
section for the taxable year is an amount equal to 50 percent
of the qualified child care expenditures of the taxpayer for
such taxable year.
``(b) Dollar Limitation.--The credit allowable under
subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not exceed
$150,000.
``(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Qualified child care expenditure.--The term
`qualified child care expenditure' means any amount paid or
incurred--
``(A) to acquire, construct, rehabilitate, or expand
property--
``(i) which is to be used as part of a qualified child care
facility of the taxpayer,
``(ii) with respect to which a deduction for depreciation
(or amortization in lieu of depreciation) is allowable, and
``(iii) which does not constitute part of the principal
residence (within the meaning of section 1034) of the
taxpayer or any employee of the taxpayer,
``(B) for the operating costs of a qualified child care
facility of the taxpayer, including costs related to the
training of employees, to scholarship programs, and to the
providing of increased compensation to employees with higher
levels of child care training,
``(C) under a contract with a qualified child care facility
to provide child care services to employees of the taxpayer,
``(D) under a contract to provide child care resource and
referral services to employees of the taxpayer, or
``(E) for the costs of seeking accreditation from a child
care credentialing or accreditation entity (as defined in
section 21(b)(2)(F) with respect to a qualified child care
facility.
``(2) Qualified child care facility.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified child care facility'
means a facility--
``(i) the principal use of which is to provide child care
assistance, and
``(ii) which meets the requirements of all applicable laws
and regulations of the State or local government in which it
is located, including, but not limited to, the licensing of
the facility as a child care facility.
Clause (i) shall not apply to a facility which is the
principal residence (within the meaning of section 1034) of
the operator of the facility.
``(B) Special rules with respect to a taxpayer.--A facility
shall not be treated as a qualified child care facility with
respect to a taxpayer unless--
``(i) enrollment in the facility is open to employees of
the taxpayer during the taxable year,
``(ii) the facility is not the principal trade or business
of the taxpayer unless at least 30 percent of the enrollees
of such facility are dependents of employees of the taxpayer,
and
``(iii) the use of such facility (or the eligibility to use
such facility) does not discriminate in favor of employees of
the taxpayer who are highly compensated employees (within the
meaning of section 414(q)).
``(d) Recapture of Acquisition and Construction Credit.--
``(1) In general.--If, as of the close of any taxable year,
there is a recapture event with respect to any qualified
child care facility of the taxpayer, then the tax of the
taxpayer under this chapter for such taxable year shall be
increased by an amount equal to the product of--
``(A) the applicable recapture percentage, and
``(B) the aggregate decrease in the credits allowed under
section 38 for all prior taxable years which would have
resulted if the qualified child care expenditures of the
taxpayer described in subsection (c)(1)(A) with respect to
such facility had been zero.
``(2) Applicable recapture percentage.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of this subsection, the
applicable recapture percentage shall be determined from the
following table:
The applicable
recapture
``If the recapture evpercentage is:
Years 1-3....................................................100
Year 4........................................................85
Year 5........................................................70
Year 6........................................................55
Year 7........................................................40
Year 8........................................................25
Years 9 and 10................................................10
Years 11 and thereafter........................................0.
``(B) Years.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), year 1
shall begin on the first day of the taxable year in which the
qualified child care facility is placed in service by the
taxpayer.
``(3) Recapture event defined.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term `recapture event' means--
``(A) Cessation of operation.--The cessation of the
operation of the facility as a qualified child care facility.
``(B) Change in ownership.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), the
disposition of a taxpayer's interest in a qualified child
care facility with respect to which the credit described in
subsection (a) was allowable.
``(ii) Agreement to assume recapture liability.--Clause (i)
shall not apply if the person acquiring such interest in the
facility agrees in writing to assume the recapture liability
of the person disposing of such interest in effect
immediately before such disposition. In the event of such an
assumption, the person acquiring the interest in the facility
shall be treated as the taxpayer for purposes of assessing
any recapture liability (computed as if there had been no
change in ownership).
``(4) Special rules.--
``(A) Tax benefit rule.--The tax for the taxable year shall
be increased under paragraph (1) only with respect to credits
allowed by reason of this section which were used to reduce
tax liability. In the case of credits not so used to reduce
tax liability, the carryforwards and carrybacks under section
39 shall be appropriately adjusted.
``(B) No credits against tax.--Any increase in tax under
this subsection shall not be treated as a tax imposed by this
chapter for purposes of determining the amount of any credit
under subpart A, B, or D of this part.
``(C) No recapture by reason of casualty loss.--The
increase in tax under this subsection shall not apply to a
cessation of operation of the facility as a qualified child
care facility by reason of a casualty loss to the extent such
loss is restored by reconstruction or replacement within a
reasonable period established by the Secretary.
``(e) Special Rules.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Aggregation rules.--All persons which are treated as
a single employer under subsections (a) and (b) of section 52
shall be treated as a single taxpayer.
``(2) Pass-thru in the case of estates and trusts.--Under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary, rules similar to the
rules of subsection (d) of section 52 shall apply.
``(3) Allocation in the case of partnerships.--In the case
of partnerships, the credit shall be allocated among partners
under regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
``(f) No Double Benefit.--
``(1) Reduction in basis.--For purposes of this subtitle--
``(A) In general.--If a credit is determined under this
section with respect to any property by reason of
expenditures described in subsection (c)(1)(A), the basis of
such property shall be reduced by the amount of the credit so
determined.
[[Page S7726]]
``(B) Certain dispositions.--If during any taxable year
there is a recapture amount determined with respect to any
property the basis of which was reduced under subparagraph
(A), the basis of such property (immediately before the event
resulting in such recapture) shall be increased by an amount
equal to such recapture amount. For purposes of the preceding
sentence, the term `recapture amount' means any increase in
tax (or adjustment in carrybacks or carryovers) determined
under subsection (d).
``(2) Other deductions and credits.--No deduction or credit
shall be allowed under any other provision of this chapter
with respect to the amount of the credit determined under
this section.
``(g) Termination.--This section shall not apply to taxable
years beginning after December 31, 1999.''
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 38(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended--
(A) by striking out ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (11),
(B) by striking out the period at the end of paragraph
(12), and inserting a comma and ``plus'', and
(C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(13) the employer-provided child care credit determined
under section 45D.''
(2) The table of sections for subpart D of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding
at the end the following new item:
``Sec. 45D. Employer-provided child care credit.''
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
1997.
SEC. 202. CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF SCIENTIFIC EQUIPMENT TO
ACCREDITED AND CREDENTIALED CHILD CARE
PROVIDERS AND TO ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY
SCHOOLS.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 170(e)(4) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special rule
for contributions of scientific property used for research)
is amended to read as follows:
``(B) Qualified research, child care, or education
contribution.--For purposes of this paragraph, the term
`qualified research, child care, or education contribution'
means a charitable contribution by a corporation of tangible
personal property (including computer software), but only
if--
``(i) the contribution is to--
``(I) an organization described in section 501(c)(3) and
exempt from taxation under section 501(a) which is an
accredited child care center (as defined in section
21(c)(2)(E)) or a child care center actively seeking
accreditation or certification of its employees by a child
care credentialing or accreditation entity (as defined in
section 21(c)(2)(F)) on the date of such contribution,
``(II) an organization described in section 501(c)(3) and
exempt from taxation under section 501(a) which is a
professional or educational support entity for accredited
child care centers or credentialed child care professionals
(as defined in subparagraphs (E) and (G) of section 21(c)(2),
respectively),
``(III) an educational organization described in subsection
(b)(1)(A)(ii),
``(IV) a governmental unit described in subsection (c)(1),
or
``(V) an organization described in section 41(e)(6)(B),
``(ii) the contribution is made not later than 3 years
after the date the taxpayer acquired the property (or in the
case of property constructed by the taxpayer, the date the
construction of the property is substantially completed),
``(iii) the property is scientific equipment or apparatus
substantially all of the use of which by the donee is for--
``(I) research or experimentation (within the meaning of
section 174), or for research training, in the United States
in physical or biological sciences, or
``(II) in the case of an organization described in
subclause (I), (II), (III), or (IV) of clause (i), use within
the United States for educational purposes or support
activities related to the purpose or function of the
organization,
``(iv) the original use of the property began with the
taxpayer (or in the case of property constructed by the
taxpayer, with the donee),
``(v) the property is not transferred by the donee in
exchange for money, other property, or services, and
``(vi) the taxpayer receives from the donee a written
statement representing that its use and disposition of the
property will be in accordance with the provisions of clauses
(iv) and (v).''.
(b) Donations to Charity for Refurbishing.--Section
170(e)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(D) Donations to charity for refurbishing.--For purposes
of this paragraph, a charitable contribution by a corporation
shall be treated as a qualified research, child care, or
education contribution if--
``(i) such contribution is a contribution of property
described in subparagraph (B)(iii) to an organization
described in section 501(c)(3) and exempt from taxation under
section 501(a),
``(ii) such organization repairs and refurbishes the
property and donates the property to an organization
described in subparagraph (B)(i), and
``(iii) the taxpayer receives from the organization to whom
the taxpayer contributed the property a written statement
representing that its use of the property (and any use by the
organization to which it donates the property) meets the
requirements of this paragraph.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Paragraph (4)(A) of section 170(e) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``qualified
research contribution'' each place it appears and inserting
``qualified research, child care, or education
contribution''.
(2) The heading for section 170(e)(4) of such Code is
amended by inserting ``, child care, or education'' after
``research''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
1997.
SEC. 203. 2-PERCENT FLOOR ON MISCELLANEOUS ITEMIZED
DEDUCTIONS NOT APPLICABLE TO ACCREDITATION AND
CREDENTIALING EXPENSES OF CHILD CARE PROVIDERS.
(a) In General.--Section 67(b) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (relating to miscellaneous itemized deductions) is
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (11), by
striking the period at the end of paragraph (12) and
inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following:
``(13) the deduction allowable for accreditation and
credentialing expenses of child care providers.''.
(b) Definition.--Section 67 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to 2-percent floor on miscellaneous itemized
deductions) is amended by redesignating subsections (e) and
(f) as subsections (f) and (g), respectively, and by
inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) Accreditation and credentialing expenses of child
care providers.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) In general.--The term `accreditation and
credentialing expenses of child care providers' means direct
professional costs and educational and training expenses paid
or incurred by an eligible individual in order to achieve and
remain qualified for service as an employee of an accredited
child care center or as a credentialed child care
professional (as defined in subparagraphs (E) and (G) of
section 21(c)(2), respectively).
``(2) Eligible individual.--The term `eligible individual'
means an individual 60 percent of the taxable income of whom
for any taxable year is derived from service described in
paragraph (1).''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
1997.
SEC. 204. EXPANSION OF HOME OFFICE DEDUCTION TO INCLUDE USE
OF OFFICE FOR DEPENDENT CARE.
(a) In General.--Section 280A(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to certain business use) is amended by
adding at the end the following: ``A portion of a dwelling
unit and the exclusive use of such portion otherwise
described in this paragraph shall not fail to be so described
if such portion is also used by the taxpayer during such
exclusive use to care for a dependent of the taxpayer.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
1997.
Subtitle B--Child Care Quality Improvement Incentive Program
SEC. 211. DEFINITIONS.
In this subtitle:
(1) Child care provider.--The term ``child care provider''
means--
(A) a center-based child care provider, a group home child
care provider, a family child care provider, or other
provider of non-residential child care services for
compensation that--
(i) is licensed, regulated, registered, or otherwise
legally operating under State law; and
(ii) satisfies the State and local requirements;
applicable to the child care services it provides; or
(B) a child care provider that is 18 years of age or older
who provides child care services only to eligible children
who are, by affinity or consanguinity, or by court decree,
the grandchild, great grandchild, sibling (if such provider
lives in a separate residence), niece, or nephew of such
provider, if such provider does not reside with the child for
whom they are providing care and if the provider complies
with any applicable requirements that govern child care
provided by the relative involved.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Health and Human Services.
SEC. 212. ESTABLISHMENT OF STATE PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish a program to
award competitive grants to eligible States to enable such
States to carry out activities to improve the quality of
child care for children in the States (except children who a
tribal organization elects to serve under section 215(b)).
(b) Awarding of Grants.--
(1) Distribution.--Amounts appropriated for a fiscal year
under section 215(a) shall be distributed through competitive
grants awarded to eligible States that apply for funds and
that propose activities that meet the requirements of this
subtitle.
(2) Amount.--The amount of a grant awarded to a State under
this section shall be determined by the Secretary on a
competitive basis, except that the amount of any such grant
for a fiscal year shall not be less than
[[Page S7727]]
an amount equal to .75 percent of the total amount
appropriated for the fiscal year under section 215(a).
(c) Limitation on Administrative Costs.--The Secretary
shall not use in excess of 10 percent of the amount
appropriated under section 215(a) for a fiscal year for the
administrative costs associated with the administration of
the program under this section.
SEC. 213. STATE ELIGIBILITY AND APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this subtitle, a State shall certify to the Secretary that
the State--
(1) has not reduced the scope of any State child care
standards or requirements that were in effect in calendar
year 1995;
(2) has not limited the State licensing requirements with
respect to the types of providers that must obtain licenses
in order to provide child care in the State as compared to
the types of providers that were required to obtain licenses
in calendar year 1995;
(3) has not otherwise restricted the application of State
child care licensing requirements that were in effect in
calendar year 1995;
(4) is in compliance with the requirements applicable to
the State under the Child Care and Development Block Grant
Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9801 et seq.); and
(5) has, with respect to the fiscal year involved, made
available sufficient State matching funds to draw down at
least 80 percent of the amount awarded to the State for the
preceding fiscal year under a grant under section 418(a)(2)
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 618).
(b) Priority.--In awarding grants under this subtitle, the
Secretary shall give priority to States that contribute an
amount (generated from businesses or other private sources)
equal to not less than 10 percent of the amount requested
under the grant to the activities to be funded under the
grant.
(c) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this subtitle, a State shall prepare and submit to the
Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and
containing such information as the Secretary shall require,
including--
(1) an assurance that the State will comply with the
requirements applicable to States under this subtitle;
(2) an assurance that the State will annually conduct on-
site monitoring of State licensed or regulated child care
facilities, with at least 1 unannounced monitoring visit of
each such facility every 3 years; and
(3) an assurance that the State will not use funds received
under the grant to supplant or replace funds used by the
State to improve the quality or increase the supply of child
care as required under section 658G of the Child Care and
Development Block Grants Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858e).
SEC. 214. USE OF FUNDS BY STATES.
(a) Required Activities.--A State shall--
(1) use not less than 20 percent of the amounts received
under a grant awarded to the State under this subtitle to
establish a subsidy program to provide funds to child care
providers who are credentialed in the State (as described in
section 2(3));
(2) use not less than 20 percent of the amounts received
under a grant awarded to the State under this subtitle to
establish a grant program to assist small businesses located
in the State in establishing and operating child care
programs that may include--
(A) technical assistance in the establishment of a child
care program;
(B) assistance for the start-up costs related to a child
care program;
(C) assistance for the training of child care providers;
(D) scholarships for low-income wage earners;
(E) the provision of services to care for sick children or
to provide care to school aged children;
(F) the entering into of contracts with local resource and
referral or local health departments;
(G) assistance for any other activity determined
appropriate by the State; or
(H) care for children with disabilities; and
(3) use amounts remaining after the State reserves funds
for activities under paragraphs (1) and (2) to carry out one
or more of the activities described in subsection (b).
(b) Permissible Activities.--A State may use amounts
provided under a grant awarded under this subtitle to the
State to--
(1) improve parental choice through consumer education
efforts in the State concerning child care, including the
expansion of resource and referral services and improving
State child care complaint systems;
(2) establish a scholarship program for child care
providers to assist in meeting the educational or training
costs associated with the accreditation or credentialing;
(3) expand State-based child care training and technical
assistance activities;
(4) develop criteria for State recognition of entities to
accredit facilities, and credential child care providers, in
the State, as described in section 2;
(5) provide increased rates of reimbursement under Federal
or State child care assistance programs for child care that
is provided by credentialed child care professionals or at
accredited child care centers;
(6) provide differential rates of reimbursement under
Federal or State child care assistance programs for children
with special needs; or
(7) purchase special equipment or supplies or other provide
for the payment of other extraordinary expenses required for
the care of special needs (including disabled) children and
the distribution of such equipment or supplies to child care
providers serving special needs children.
(c) Small Business and Child Care Grant Program.--
(1) Application.--To be eligible to receive assistance from
a State under a grant program established under subsection
(a)(2), a small business shall prepare and submit to the
State an application at such time, in such manner, and
containing such information as the State may require.
(2) Preference.--
(A) In general.--In providing assistance under a grant
program under this subsection, a State shall give priority to
applicants that desire to form consortium to provide child
care in geographic areas within the State where such care is
not generally available or accessible.
(B) Consortium.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), a
consortium shall be made up of 2 or more entities which may
include businesses, nonprofit agencies or organizations,
local governments, or other appropriate entities.
(3) Limitation.--With respect to grant funds received for
purposes of this subsection, a State may not provide in
excess of $50,000 in assistance from such funds to any single
applicant. A State may not provide assistance under a grant
to more than 10 entities.
(4) Matching requirement.--To be eligible to receive funds
for purposes of establishing a grant program under subsection
(a)(2), a State shall provide assurances to the Secretary
that, with respect to the costs to be incurred by an entity
receiving assistance in carrying out activities under such
program, such entity will make available (directly or through
donations from public or private entities) non-Federal
contributions to such costs in an amount equal to--
(A) for the first fiscal year in which the entity receives
such assistance, not less than 25 percent of such costs ($1
for each $3 of assistance provided to the entity under the
grant);
(B) for the second fiscal year in which an entity receives
such assistance, not less than 33\1/3\ percent of such costs
($1 for each $2 of assistance provided to the entity under
the grant); and
(C) for the third fiscal year in which an entity receives
such assistance, not less than 50 percent of such costs ($1
for each $1 of assistance provided to the entity under the
grant).
(5) Requirements of providers.--To be eligible to receive
assistance under a grant awarded under this subsection a
child care provider shall comply with all applicable State
and local licensing and regulatory requirements and all
applicable health and safety standards in effect in the
State.
(6) Administration.--
(A) State responsibility.--A State shall have
responsibility for administering the grants awarded under
this subsection and for monitoring entities that receive
assistance under such grants.
(B) Audits.--A State shall require that each entity
receiving assistance under a grant awarded under this
subsection conduct of an annual audit with respect to the
activities of the entity. Such audits shall be submitted to
the State.
(C) Misuse of funds.--
(i) Repayment.--If the State determines, through an audit
or otherwise, that an entity receiving assistance under a
grant awarded under this subsection has misused such
assistance, the State shall notify the Secretary of such
misuses. The Secretary, upon such a notification, may seek
from such an entity the repayment of an amount equal to the
amount of any misused assistance plus interest.
(ii) Appeals process.--The Secretary shall by regulation
provide for an appeals process with respect to repayments
under this subparagraph.
(d) Limitation on Administrative Costs.--Not more than 10
percent of the aggregate amount of funds available to a State
under this subtitle in each fiscal year may be expended for
administrative costs incurred by such State to carry out
activities under this subtitle. As used in the preceding
sentence, the term ``administrative costs'' shall not include
the costs of providing direct services (as such direct
services costs are defined for purposes of the Child Care and
Development Block Grant Act of 1990 42 U.S.C. 9801 et seq.)).
SEC. 215. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this subtitle $260,000,000 for each of the fiscal
years 1998 through 2002.
(b) Reservation.--The Secretary shall reserve not more than
1.5 percent of the funds appropriated under this section for
a fiscal year to make grants under this subtitle to tribal
organizations submitting applications under section 213(b) to
be used in accordance with section 214.
Subtitle C--Distribution of Information About Quality Child Care
SEC. 221. EXPANSION OF ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES IN THE COLLECTION AND
DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY.
(a) Provision of Information.--The Secretary of Health and
Human Services, directly or through a contract awarded on a
competitive basis to a qualified entity, shall provide
technical assistance and collect and disseminate information
concerning the importance of high quality child care to
States,
[[Page S7728]]
units of local government, private non-profit child care
organizations, child care credentialing or accreditation
entities, child care providers, and parents, including, in
partnership with the Advertising Council or other
professional advertising group, a public awareness campaign
promoting quality child care.
(b) Grant Program.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Health and Human
Services, acting through the National Child Care Information
Center, shall award competitive grants to child care
credentialing or accreditation entities (as defined in
section 2(2)) that have been providing credentialing or
accreditation services for child care providers for not more
than 10 years.
(2) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this subsection, a child care credentialing or accreditation
entity shall prepare and submit to the Secretary an
application at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary shall require.
(3) Use of funds.--Amounts provided under a grant awarded
under paragraph (1) shall be used by grantees to refine and
evaluate the procedures and methods used by such grantees in
accrediting facilities as accredited child care centers or
providing child care credentials to individual child care
providers. Such procedures and methods shall be designed to
ensure that the highest quality child care is provided by
accredited child care centers and credentialed individuals,
to provide information about the accreditation or
credentialing process to providers, and to provide subsidies
to needy individuals and organizations to enable such
individuals and organization to participate in the
accreditation or credentialing process.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000 for
each of the fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
SEC. 222. CHILD CARE TRAINING INFRASTRUCTURE.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Child care provider.--The term ``child care provider''
has the meaning given the term in section 211.
(2) Elementary school; secondary school.--The terms
``elementary school'' and ``secondary school'' have the
meanings given the terms in section 14101 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8001).
(3) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the
term in section 1201(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 1141(a)).
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Health and Human Services.
(5) Training site.--The term ``training site'' means a
training site described in subsection (e)(1).
(b) Grant.--The Secretary shall make a grant to an eligible
organization to develop and operate a technology-based child
care training infrastructure, in order to facilitate--
(1) the accreditation of facilities as accredited child
care centers and accredited family child care homes;
(2) the credentialing of individuals as credentialed child
care professionals; and
(3) the dissemination of child care, child development, and
early childhood education information and research to child
care providers.
(c) Use of Funds.--An organization that receives a grant
under subsection (b) shall use the funds made available
through the grant to--
(1) develop partnerships, to the maximum extent possible,
with elementary schools, secondary schools, institutions of
higher education, Federal, State, and local government
agencies, and private entities, to share equipment, technical
assistance, and other technological resources, for the
development of the infrastructure described in subsection
(b);
(2) enter into arrangements with entities for the provision
of sites from which the infrastructure will disseminate
training;
(3) ensure the establishment of at least 2 of the training
sites in each State, and additional training sites based on
the populations and geographic considerations of States;
(4) enter into arrangements with child care credentialing
or accreditation entities that are recognized (as described
in section 2(2)) by more than 1 State agency or tribal
organization, for the development of child care training to
be disseminated through the infrastructure;
(5) provide, directly or through a contract (which may for
good cause be a sole source contract), expertise to convert
training courses for distance transmission, provide
interactive environments, and conduct registration, testing,
electronic storage of information, and such other technology-
based activities to adapt and enhance training course content
consistent with the medium of transmission involved through
the infrastructure;
(6) provide, through a logistical scheduling mechanism,
equitable access to the infrastructure for all child care
credentialing or accreditation entities described in
paragraph (4) that request an opportunity to disseminate
child care training through the infrastructure and meet the
requirements of this section;
(7) develop and implement a mechanism for participants in
the training to evaluate the infrastructure, including
providing comments on the accessibility and affordability of
the training, and recommendations for improvements in the
training;
(8) develop and implement a monitoring system to provide
data on the training provided through the infrastructure,
including data on--
(A) the number of facilities and individuals participating
in the training;
(B) the number of facilities receiving accreditation
(including a repeat accreditation) as accredited child care
centers, and individuals receiving credentialing (including a
repeat credentialing) as credentialed child care
professionals, after fulfilling requirements that include
participation in the training;
(C) the number of accredited child care centers, and
credentialed child care professionals, participating in the
training; and
(D) the number of sites in which the training is received,
analyzed--
(i) by State; and
(ii) by location in an urban, suburban, or rural area; and
(9) establish and operate the child care training revolving
fund described in section 223.
(d) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive the grant, an
organization shall be an organization that--
(1) is a private, nonprofit entity that is not--
(A) a child care credentialing or accreditation entity;
(B) a subsidiary or affiliate of a child care credentialing
or accreditation entity; or
(C) an entity that has a subsidiary or affiliate that is a
child care credentialing or accreditation entity;
(2) has experience in developing partnerships with child
care credentialing or accreditation entities, institutions of
higher education, and State and local governments, for the
provision of child care training;
(3) has experience in providing and coordinating the
provision of child care training to family child care
providers and center-based child care providers;
(4) is related to child care provider support organizations
in 35 or more States, through membership in a common
organization, affiliation, or another mechanism;
(5) has experience in working with rural and urban child
care provider support organizations and child care providers;
and
(6) has experience in working with national child care
groups and organizations, including Federal government
agencies, providers of child care training, child care
credentialing or accreditation entities, and educational
groups.
(e) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
subsection (b), an organization shall submit an application
to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing
such information as the Secretary may require, including--
(1) information describing, and indicating a preliminary
count of the number of, the sites from which the
infrastructure will disseminate training;
(2) an assurance that the organization will require that--
(A) each child care credentialing or accreditation entity
that disseminates training through the infrastructure will
provide, during at least 60 percent of the dissemination
period, an opportunity for participants in the training--
(i) to interact with an identified trainer or training
leader at the training site; or
(ii) to elect to engage in other interactive training; and
(B) no child care credentialing or accreditation entity may
collect fees for participation in the training that total
more than--
(i) the cost to the entity for developing, conducting, and
providing materials for, the training; minus
(ii) the amount that the entity receives under this section
or from any other source to develop, conduct, and provide
materials for, the training; and
(3) information demonstrating that the organization will
comply with the organizational structure requirements of
subsections (g) and (h), including a copy of the bylaws
described in subsection (g)(2)(B).
(f) Development and Operation of Infrastructure.--
(1) Contracts.--An organization that receives a grant under
subsection (b) may use funds made available through the grant
to enter into contracts, which may for good cause be sole
source contracts, for the development of the technological
and logistical aspects of the infrastructure. The
organization shall enter into such a contract with an entity
with experience in establishing technology-based interactive
educational or training programs.
(2) Time Lines.--
(A) Board, personnel, and revolving fund.--Not later than 6
months after the date of receipt of the grant, the
organization shall establish the governing board described in
subsection (g), appoint a Chief Executive Project Officer
described in subsection (h), and establish and operate the
child care training revolving fund described in section 223.
Not later than 1 year after the date of receipt of the grant,
the Chief Executive Project Officer shall appoint the
personnel described in subsection (h).
(B) Training sites.--
(i) 50 percent operational.--Not later than 3 years after
the date of receipt of the grant, the organization shall
disseminate training at 50 percent of the sites described
[[Page S7729]]
in the information submitted under subsection (e)(1).
(ii) 75 percent operational.--Not later than 4 years after
the date of receipt of the grant, the organization shall
disseminate training at 75 percent of the sites.
(iii) 90 percent operational.--Not later than 5 years after
the date of receipt of the grant, the organization shall
disseminate training at 90 percent of the sites.
(C) Evaluation.--The organization shall develop and
implement the mechanism for conducting evaluations of the
infrastructure described in subsection (c)(6) not later than
3 years after the date of receipt of the grant.
(g) Governing Board.--
(1) In general.--An organization that receives a grant
under subsection (b) shall establish a governing board.
(2) Composition.--
(A) In general.--The governing board shall be composed of
representatives of child care credentialing or accreditation
entities that are recognized (as described in section 2(2))
by more than 1 State agency or tribal organization. The
representatives shall be appointed by the entities. The
composition of the governing board shall be specified in the
bylaws of the board.
(B) Initial bylaws.--The organization shall develop the
initial bylaws of the board. The bylaws shall include
provisions specifying the manner in which representatives of
all child care credentialing or accreditation entities
described in subparagraph (A) that are disseminating training
through the infrastructure shall participate in the
activities of the governing board. The provisions shall
provide for the participation through rotation of the
representatives in the membership of the board, involvement
of the representatives in committees of the board, or through
other mechanisms that ensure, to the maximum extent possible,
fair and equal participation of the representatives.
(C) Amended bylaws.--The governing board may amend the
bylaws with the consent of the chief executive officer of the
organization receiving a grant under subsection (b). The
chief executive officer shall give the consent unless the
chief executive officer demonstrates good cause for refusal
of the consent. Any amended bylaws shall provide for the
participation of representatives of all child care
credentialing or accreditation entities described in
subparagraph (A) that are disseminating training through the
infrastructure, as described in subparagraph (B).
(3) Duties.--The governing board, with oversight by the
chief executive officer of the organization, shall--
(A) advise the organization on the development and
operation of the child care training infrastructure;
(B) review and approve the strategic plan described in
subsection (h)(2)(A) and annual updates of the plan;
(C) review and approve the proposal described in subsection
(h)(2)(B), with respect to the contracts, financial
assistance, standards, policies, procedures, and activities
referred to in such subsection; and
(D)(i) review, and advise the Chief Executive Project
Officer regarding, the actions of the Chief Executive Project
Officer with respect to the personnel of the governing board,
and with respect to such standards, policies, procedures, and
activities as are necessary or appropriate to carry out this
section; and
(ii) inform the Chief Executive Project Officer of any
aspects of the actions of the Chief Executive Project Officer
that are not in compliance with the annual strategic plan
referred to in subparagraph (B) or the proposal referred to
in subparagraph (C), or are not consistent with the
objectives of this section.
(h) Chief Executive Project Director and Personnel.--
(1) In general.--
(A) Chief executive project director.--The chief executive
officer of an organization that receives a grant under
subsection (b) shall appoint, compensate, and terminate the
employment of a Chief Executive Project Officer to enable the
governing board to perform its duties. The chief executive
officer of the organization shall consult with the governing
board before appointing, changing the compensation of, or
terminating the employment of, the Chief Executive Project
Officer.
(B) Personnel.--The Chief Executive Project Officer shall
appoint, compensate, and terminate the employment of such
additional personnel as may be necessary to enable the
governing board to perform its duties.
(2) Duties of chief executive project officer.--The Chief
Executive Project Officer shall--
(A) prepare and submit to the governing board and the chief
executive officer of the organization a strategic plan every
3 years, and annual updates of the plan, with respect to the
development and major operations of the infrastructure;
(B)(i) prepare and submit to the governing board and the
chief executive officer of the organization a proposal with
respect to such contracts and other financial assistance, and
such standards, policies, procedures, and activities, as are
necessary or appropriate to carry out this section; and
(ii) after receiving and reviewing an approved proposal
under subsection (g)(3)(C), enter into such contracts and
award such other financial assistance, and establish and
administer such standards, policies, procedures and
activities, as are necessary or appropriate to carry out this
section;
(C) prepare and submit to the governing board and the chief
executive officer of the organization an annual report, and
such interim reports as may be necessary, describing the
major actions of the Chief Executive Project Officer with
respect to the personnel of the governing board, and with
respect to the standards, policies, procedures, and
activities; and
(D) inform the governing board and the chief executive
officer of the organization of, and provide an explanation to
the governing board regarding, any substantial differences
regarding the implementation of this section between--
(i) the actions of the Chief Executive Project Officer; and
(ii)(I) the strategic plan approved by the governing board
and the chief executive officer of the organization under
subsection (g)(3)(B); or
(II) the proposal approved by the governing board and the
chief executive officer of the organization under subsection
(g)(3)(C).
(i) Corporation.--The organization may establish a
nonprofit corporation containing the governing board, Chief
Executive Project Officer, and personnel, to carry out this
section.
(j) Administrative Costs.--Prior to the date on which the
organization disseminates training at 75 percent of the sites
described in the information submitted under subsection
(e)(1), the organization may use not more than 25 percent of
the funds made available through the grant to pay for the
administrative costs of carrying out this section. Effective
on that date, the organization may use not more than 15
percent of the funds to pay for the administrative costs.
(k) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $50,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 1998 through 2003.
SEC. 223. CHILD CARE TRAINING REVOLVING FUND.
(a) Establishment.--
(1) In general.--The Chief Executive Project Officer
described in section 222(h) shall use not less than 10
percent of the funds made available through the grant made
under section 222 during the 5 years after the date of
receipt of the grant to establish and operate a child care
training revolving fund (referred to in this section as the
``Fund'')--
(A) from which the Chief Executive Project Officer shall
make loans to eligible borrowers for the purpose of enabling
the persons to purchase computers, satellite dishes, and
other equipment that will be used to disseminate training
through the infrastructure described in section 222; and
(B) into which all payments, charges, and other amounts
collected from loans made under subparagraph (A) shall be
deposited notwithstanding any other provision of law.
(2) Separate account.--The Fund shall be maintained as a
separate account. Any portion of the Fund that is not
required for expenditure shall be invested in obligations of
the United States or in obligations guaranteed or insured by
the United States.
(3) Interest earned.--The interest earned on the
investments shall be credited to and form a part of the Fund.
(b) Eligible Borrowers.--To be eligible to receive a loan
under subsection (a), a borrower shall be a child care
provider who seeks to receive training through the
infrastructure or an entity that has entered into an
arrangement with the Chief Executive Project Officer to
provide a training site (as defined in section 222) for the
infrastructure.
(c) Application.--To be eligible to receive a loan under
subsection (a), a borrower shall submit an application to the
Chief Executive Project Officer at such time, in such manner,
and containing such information as the Chief Executive
Project Officer, in consultation with the governing board and
the chief executive officer of an organization receiving a
grant under section 222(b) may require. At a minimum, the
application shall include--
(1) an assurance that the person shall use the equipment
funded through the loan to receive or disseminate training
through the infrastructure, for such period as the Secretary
may by regulation prescribe; and
(2) an assurance that the person shall permit other persons
to use the equipment to receive or disseminate training
through the infrastructure, for such period as the Secretary
may by regulation prescribe.
(d) Loans.--In making loans under subsection (a), the Chief
Executive Project Officer shall--
(1) to the maximum extent practicable, equitably distribute
the loans among borrowers in the various States, and among
borrowers in urban, suburban, and rural areas; and
(2) take into consideration the availability to the
borrowers of resources from sources other than the Fund,
including the availability of resources through the
partnerships described in section 222(c)(1).
(e) Terms and Conditions.--
(1) Conditions.--The Chief Executive Project Officer may
make a loan to a borrower under subsection (a) only if the
Chief Executive Project Officer determines that--
(A) the borrower is unable to obtain resources from other
sources on reasonable terms and conditions; and
(B) there is a reasonable prospect that the borrower will
repay the loan.
(2) Terms.--A loan made under subsection (a) shall be--
(A) for a term that does not exceed 4 years; and
(B) at no interest.
[[Page S7730]]
(3) Collateral.--The Chief Executive Project Officer may
require any borrower of a loan made under subsection (a) to
provide such collateral as the Chief Executive Project
Officer determines to be necessary to secure the loan.
(4) Procedures and definitions.--Prior to making loans
under subsection (a), the Chief Executive Project Officer
shall establish written procedures and definitions pertaining
to defaults and collections of payments under the loans which
shall be subject to the review and approval of the Secretary.
The governing board and chief executive officer of the
organization involved shall provide to each applicant for a
loan under subsection (a), at the time application for the
loan is made, a written copy of the procedures and
definitions.
(f) Defaults.--
(1) Notice.--The Chief Executive Project Officer shall
provide the governing board and the chief executive officer
of the organization at regular intervals written notice of
each loan made under subsection (a) that is in default and
the status of the loan.
(2) Action.--
(A) Notification.--After making reasonable efforts to
collect all amounts payable under a loan made under
subsection (a) that is in default, the Chief Executive
Project Officer shall notify the governing board and the
chief executive officer of the organization that the loan is
uncollectable or collectible only at an unreasonable cost.
The notification shall include recommendations for future
action to be taken by the Chief Executive Project Director.
(B) Instructions.--On receiving the notification, the
governing board and the chief executive officer of the
organization shall advise the Chief Executive Project
Officer--
(i) to continue with its collection activities;
(ii) to cancel, adjust, compromise, or reduce the amount of
the loan; or
(iii) to modify any term or condition of the loan,
including any term or condition relating to the time of
payment of any installment of principal, or portion of
principal, that is payable under the loan.
(g) Administration and Assistance.--
(1) In general.--Consistent with section 222(j), the Chief
Executive Project Officer shall, out of funds available in
the Fund--
(A) pay expenses incurred by the Chief Executive Project
Officer in administering the Fund; and
(B) provide competent management and technical assistance
to borrowers of loans made under subsection (a) to assist the
borrowers to achieve the purposes of the loans.
(2) Assistance by the secretary.--The Secretary shall
provide to the chief executive officer of the organization
and the Chief Executive Project Officer such management and
technical assistance as the chief executive officer of the
organization and the Chief Executive Project Officer may
request in order to carry out the provisions of this section.
(h) Regulations.--The Secretary may prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out the objectives
of this section, including regulations involving reporting
and auditing.
Subtitle D--Quality Child Care Through Federal Facilities and Programs
SEC. 231. PROVIDING QUALITY CHILD CARE IN FEDERAL FACILITIES.
(a) Definition.--In this section:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of General Services.
(2) Executive agency.--The term ``Executive agency'' has
the meaning given the term in section 105 of title 5, United
States Code, but does not include the Department of Defense.
(3) Executive facility.--The term ``executive facility''
means a facility that is owned or leased by an Executive
agency.
(4) Federal agency.--The term ``Federal agency'' means an
Executive agency, a judicial office, or a legislative office.
(5) Judicial facility.--The term ``judicial facility''
means a facility that is owned or leased by a judicial
office.
(6) Judicial office.--The term ``judicial office'' means an
entity of the judicial branch of the Federal Government.
(7) Legislative facility.--The term ``legislative
facility'' means a facility that is owned or leased by a
legislative office.
(8) Legislative office.--The term ``legislative office''
means an entity of the legislative branch of the Federal
Government.
(b) Executive Branch Standards and Enforcement.--
(1) State and local licensing requirements.--
(A) In general.--The Administrator shall issue regulations
requiring any entity operating a child care center in an
executive facility to comply with applicable State and local
licensing requirements related to the provision of child
care.
(B) Compliance.--The regulations shall require that, not
later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act--
(i) the entity shall comply, or make substantial progress
(as determined by the Administrator) toward complying, with
the requirements; and
(ii) any contract for the operation of such a child care
center shall include a condition that the child care be
provided in accordance with the requirements.
(2) Accreditation standards.--
(A) In general.--The Administrator shall issue regulations
specifying child care center accreditation standards and
requiring any entity operating a child care center in an
executive facility to comply with the standards.
(B) Compliance.--The regulations shall require that, not
later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act--
(i) the entity shall comply, or make substantial progress
(as determined by the Administrator) toward complying, with
the standards; and
(ii) any contract for the operation of such a child care
center shall include a condition that the child care be
provided by an entity that complies with the standards.
(C) Contents.--The standards shall base accreditation on--
(i) an accreditation instrument described in section
2(2)(B);
(ii) outside monitoring described in section 2(2)(B), by--
(I) the Administrator; or
(II) a child care credentialing or accreditation entity, or
other entity, with which the Administrator enters into a
contract to provide such monitoring; and
(iii) the criteria described in section 2(2)(B).
(3) Evaluation and enforcement.--
(A) In general.--The Administrator shall evaluate the
compliance of entities described in paragraph (1) with the
regulations issued under paragraphs (1) and (2). The
Administrator may conduct the evaluation of such an entity
directly, or through an agreement with another Federal
agency, other than the Federal agency for which the entity is
providing child care. If the Administrator determines, on the
basis of such an evaluation, that the entity is not in
compliance with the regulations, the Administrator shall
notify the Executive agency.
(B) Termination of agency provision of child care or
contract.--On receipt of the notification--
(i) if the entity operating the child care center involved
is the agency, the agency shall terminate the direct
provision of child care by the agency; and
(ii) if the entity operating the child care center is a
contractor, the agency shall terminate the contract of the
entity to operate the center.
(C) Cost reimbursement.--The Administrator may require
Executive agencies to reimburse the Administrator for the
costs of carrying out subparagraph (A) with respect to
entities operating child care centers for the agencies. If an
entity described in paragraph (1) operates a child care
center for 2 or more Executive agencies, the Administrator
shall allocate the costs of providing such reimbursement
among the agencies in a fair and equitable manner, based on
the extent to which each agency is eligible to place children
in the center.
(c) Legislative Branch Standards and Enforcement.--
(1) State and local licensing requirements and
accreditation standards.--The Architect of the Capitol shall
issue regulations for entities operating child care centers
in legislative facilities, which shall be the same as the
regulations issued by the Administrator under paragraphs (1)
and (2) of subsection (b), except to the extent that the
Architect may determine, for good cause shown and stated
together with the regulations, that a modification of such
regulations would be more effective for the implementation of
the requirements and standards described in such paragraphs.
(2) Evaluation and enforcement.--Subsection (b)(3) shall
apply to the Architect of the Capitol, entities operating
child care centers in legislative facilities, and legislative
offices. For purposes of that application, references in
subsection (b)(3) to regulations shall be considered to be
references to regulations issued under this subsection.
(d) Judicial Branch Standards and Enforcement.--
(1) State and local licensing requirements and
accreditation standards.--The Director of the Administrative
Office of the United States Courts shall issue regulations
for entities operating child care centers in judicial
facilities, which shall be the same as the regulations issued
by the Administrator under paragraphs (1) and (2) of
subsection (b), except to the extent that the Director may
determine, for good cause shown and stated together with the
regulations, that a modification of such regulations would be
more effective for the implementation of the requirements and
standards described in such paragraphs.
(2) Evaluation and enforcement.--Subsection (b)(3) shall
apply to the Director described in paragraph (1), entities
operating child care centers in judicial facilities, and
judicial offices. For purposes of that application,
references in subsection (b)(3) to regulations shall be
considered to be references to regulations issued under this
subsection.
(e) Application.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this section, if 3 or more child care centers are operated in
facilities owned or leased by a Federal agency, the head of
the Federal agency may carry out the responsibilities
assigned to the Administrator under subsection (b)(3)(A), the
Architect of the Capitol under subsection (c)(2), or the
Director described in subsection (d)(2) under such
subsection, as appropriate.
(f) Technical Assistance.--The Administrator may provide
technical assistance to Executive agencies, and to entities
operating child care centers in executive facilities, in
order to assist the entities in complying
[[Page S7731]]
with this section. The Architect of the Capitol and the
Director of the Administrative Office of the United States
Courts may provide, or request that the Administrator
provide, technical assistance to legislative offices and
judicial offices, respectively, and to entities operating
child care centers in legislative facilities and judicial
facilities, respectively, in order to assist the entities in
complying with this section.
(g) Council.--The Administrator shall establish an
interagency council, comprised of all Federal agencies
described in subsection (e), to facilitate cooperation and
sharing of best practices, and to develop and coordinate
policy, regarding the provision of child care in the Federal
Government.
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $900,000 for
fiscal year 1998 and each subsequent fiscal year.
SEC. 232. PROVIDING QUALITY CHILD CARE THROUGH FEDERAL
PROGRAMS.
(a) Corporation for National and Community Service.--
Effective October 1, 2001, the Chief Executive Officer of the
Corporation for National and Community Service shall ensure
that, to the maximum extent practicable, any child care made
available under any Federal financial assistance program
carried out by the Chief Executive Officer, directly or
through a child care allowance, shall be child care provided
by an accredited child care center or a credentialed child
care professional, as the terms are defined in section 2.
(b) Departments of Education, Housing and Urban
Development, Justice, and Labor.--Effective October 1, 2001,
the Secretary of Education, Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development, Attorney General, and Secretary of Labor shall
ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, any child
care made available under any Federal financial assistance
program carried out by the Attorney General or Secretary
involved, directly or through a child care allowance, shall
be child care provided by an accredited child care center or
a credentialed child care professional, as the terms are
defined in section 2.
(c) Social Services Block Grants.--Section 2002(a) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397a(a)) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(3) Effective October 1, 2001, child care services made
available under this subsection shall, to the maximum extent
practicable, be child care services provided by an accredited
child care center or a credentialed child care professional,
as the terms are defined in section 2 of the CIDCARE Act.''.
SEC. 233. USE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS TO
ESTABLISH ACCREDITED CHILD CARE CENTERS.
Section 105(a) of the Housing and Community Development Act
of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (22), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (23), by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon;
(3) in paragraph (24), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(4) in paragraph (25), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(5) by adding at the end the following:
``(26) the establishment of accredited child care centers
(as that term is defined in section 2 of the CIDCARE Act), by
upgrading existing child care facilities to meet standards
for accredited child care centers, or by renovating existing
structures for use as accredited child care centers.''.
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Provisions
SEC. 241. STUDENT LOAN REPAYMENT AND CANCELLATION FOR CHILD
CARE WORKERS.
(a) Stafford Loan Repayment.--Section 428J of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1078-10) is amended--
(1) in the section heading by striking ``and nurses'' and
inserting ``, nurses and child care workers'';
(2) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``and nursing
profession'' and inserting ``, nursing and child care
professions'';
(3) in subsection (b)(1)--
(A) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period and
inserting ``; or''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) is employed full time providing child care services,
and possesses a certificate or degree in early childhood
education or development.''; and
(4) in subsection (g)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and community service''
and inserting ``community service, and child care''; and
(B) in paragraph (3)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and community
service'' and inserting ``community service, and child
care''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``and community
service'' and inserting ``community service, and child
care''.
(b) Perkins Loan Cancellation.--Section 465(a)(2) of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ee(a)(2)) is
amended--
(1) in subparagraph (H), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in subparagraph (I), by striking the period and
inserting ``; or''; and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (I) the following:
``(J) as a full-time employee who provides child care
services and possesses a certificate or degree in early
childhood education or development.''.
SEC. 242. EXPANSION OF COORDINATED ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS OF
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND HHS OFFICE OF
CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT.
(a) State Reporting of Custodial Data.--Section
454A(e)(4)(D) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
654(e)(4)(D)) is amended by striking ``the birth date of any
child'' and inserting ``the birth date and custodial status
of any child''.
(b) Matching Program by IRS of Custodial Data and Tax
Status Information.--
(1) National directory of new hires.--Section 453(i)(3) of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 653(i)(3)) is amended by
striking ``a claim with respect to employment in a tax
return'' and inserting ``information which is required on a
tax return''.
(2) Federal case registry of child support orders.--Section
453(h) of the such Act (42 U.S.C. 653(h)) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(3) Administration of federal tax laws.--The Secretary of
the Treasury shall have access to the information described
in paragraph (2), consisting of the names and social security
numbers of the custodial parents linked with the children in
the custody of such parents, for the purpose of administering
those sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 which
grant tax benefits based on support and residence provided
dependent children.''
(c) Minimum Past-Due Support Threshold for Use of Offset
Procedure.--
(1) Part d families.--Section 464(b)(1) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 664(b)(1)) is amended by inserting
``(not to exceed $150)'' after ``minimum amount''.
(2) Other families.--Section 464(b)(2)(A) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 664(b)(2)(A)) is amended by striking ``$500'' both
places it appears and inserting ``$150''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on October 1, 1997.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, it is my pleasure today to join my colleague
from Vermont, Senator Jeffords, as we introduce the Creating Improved
Delivery of Child Care: Affordable, Reliable, and Educational (CIDCARE)
Act of 1997.
This legislation will go a long way toward giving parents peace of
mind. Child care shouldn't be like going to Las Vegas--where you roll
the dice and hope for the best. Parents should be confident that when
they are not able to be with their children, their children will still
be well cared for. We shouldn't be gambling with our children's health
and safety.
Up to this point Mr. President, we in the federal government have
largely deferred the issue of quality of child care to the states. The
sole significant contribution of the federal government to improving
the quality of this nation's child care is the modest 4% setaside for
quality improvement that we struggled to create within the child care
development block grant. This lack of federal support for quality has
not served children well.
A few years ago my good friend, Professor Ed Zigler of Yale
University, did a survey of state child care regulations. He found, in
short, that states are failing the ``quality test''--no state had child
care regulations in place that could be characterized as good quality
standards. Only a third of states had minimally acceptable regulations.
Two-thirds of states had regulations that didn't even address the
basics--caregiver training, safe environments, appropriate provider-
child ratios.
Keep in mind, we're not even talking about how well or whether states
actually enforced those standards. This study was simply asking a
question about the first step in quality--whether states had basic
child care quality standards on the books that providers could be held
to. This legislation addresses, for the first time on a federal level,
the issues of quality child care. We have safety standards for the food
we eat and the cars we drive. Is it too much to have some basic
standards for child care providers--individuals who literally hold a
child's life in their hands? I think not, Mr. President. And even
beyond basic health and safety standards, we must consider how we can
assist caregivers in supporting children's growth and development.
Mr. President, this legislation will help working families afford
child care. Specifically, this bill more equitably distributes the
child care tax credit by making the credit refundable for lower income
families, increasing the credit for families under $55,000, and phasing
down the credit to a minimum of 10% for higher income taxpayers.
Further, it increases the amount that employees can contribute to
Dependent Care Assistance Plans (DCAP).
[[Page S7732]]
The CIDCARE bill further provides incentives for parents to choose
high quality child care by providing a higher tax credit and larger
DCAP allowances for families that use accredited or credentialed
services, reflecting the higher expenses associated with higher quality
care.
Additionally, this legislation encourages child care centers and
providers to offer high quality child care. It gives child care
providers a higher deduction for the educational expenses related to
achieving or maintaining accreditation. It further provides $50 million
to create and operate a technology-based training infrastructure, that
builds upon existing distance learning, Internet, and satellite
resources, to enable child care providers nationwide to receive
training, education, and support. It also provides loan forgiveness for
Perkins and Stafford educational loans for child care workers who
obtain a degree in early childhood education or receive professional
child care credentials. This bill would also require federal child care
centers to meet all state and local licensing and other regulatory
requirements related to the provision of child care.
This legislation will also give businesses incentives to support
quality child care for their employees and the community at large. It
will allow businesses a charitable deduction for donating educational
equipment to non-profit child care providers, support entities, and
public schools and provides a tax credit for employers who develop
child care centers for their employees.
Finally, Mr. President, the CIDCARE bill will provide grants to
states to support quality child care. It establishes a $260 million
competitive grant program to assist states in improving the quality of
child care through mechanisms such as: salary increases for
credentialed child care providers: developing standards for the
accreditation and credentialing of child care providers; scholarship
programs to help child care providers meet the costs of education and
training; expanding training and technical assistance activities;
consumer education efforts, and increased rates of reimbursement for
the care of children with special needs.
Mr. President, quality child care can no longer be considered a
luxury reserved for the very few. This should not be a partisan issue.
All of us want the best for our children. And when they can't be with
their parents, we want them to be in high quality care. This
legislation will move us in that direction. I urge my colleagues to
join Senator Jeffords and myself in support of the CIDCARE bill.
____________________