[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 113 (Tuesday, September 2, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8632-S8640]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allard). The Senate will now proceed to 
the consideration of S. 1061, which the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1061) making appropriations for the Departments 
     of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and 
     related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     1998, and for other purposes.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, we are prepared now to proceed with 
consideration of the legislation on appropriations for the Departments 
of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education.
  I have just conferred with my distinguished colleague, Senator 
Harkin, the ranking Democrat, after having conferred with the majority 
leader, and it is our plan to complete action on this bill by tomorrow 
evening, Wednesday evening. That is not to say that the plan will 
conclusively be fulfilled as of that time, but it is our plan to 
proceed in that manner.
  It would be our hope that we would have a firm idea of all the 
amendments which would be offered by the end of business today or if 
not, no later than noon tomorrow, since we are scheduled to have a vote 
tomorrow morning at 9:30, and as is the custom, Senators will be 
arriving today. Some are obviously present now, but as our practice has 
demonstrated in the past, when the rollcall vote is taken, Senators 
will be present.
  We have had some substantial period of time--obviously, slightly more 
than a month--to prepare for this bill, because the majority leader 
announced at the conclusion of our session on July 31-August 1, that 
this would be the first order of business taken up.
  I recall the comment of then majority leader Howard Baker on some 
legislation back in 1982, when we had a tax bill on the floor of the 
Senate and the question was whether we were going to proceed all night, 
which Senator Baker was wont to do, or whether we would go into the 
next morning. I recall Senator Baker said that amendments, like 
mushrooms, grew overnight, and it was his determination to proceed that 
evening. I remember there were about 70 amendments pending. Senator 
Dole was the manager of the bill. It was a tax bill. We proceeded all 
night and finished action about 6:30 in the morning.
  Well, there has been more time than overnight for these amendments, 
like mushrooms, to grow, but we have a bill here which is very 
important.
  There is a lot of business in the Senate, and speaking from a 
personal note, we will be moving ahead with hearings on the 
Governmental Affairs Committee on campaign finance reform, and I serve 
on that committee. I hope to be finished with this bill by tomorrow 
night, whatever time it takes to proceed with the other work of the 
Governmental Affairs Committee.
  Mr. HARKIN. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. SPECTER. My colleague asks me to yield for unanimous consent. I 
am willing to do that.
  Mr. HARKIN. I thank the chairman.


                        Privileges of the Floor

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Ellen Murray, 
Peter Reinecke, and Bev Schroeder be permitted privileges of the floor 
for the duration of the debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, moving now to consideration of the 
pending bill, the pending committee report, we have legislation before 
the Senate for the three departments, the Department of Labor, the 
Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of 
Education for fiscal year 1998, which totals $79.7 billion in 
discretionary budget authority. That is a large sum of money. Mandatory 
spending under this totals $189.3 billion, which is a decrease of $15.2 
billion from the fiscal year 1997 levels.
  We have gone through the budget with great care. We have been 
fortunate enough to have outstanding staffs, both on the Republican 
side of the aisle and the Democratic side of the aisle, and we have 
come forward with these proposals here today. It is my view, Mr. 
President, that when we have a total Federal budget of $1.7 trillion, 
that should provide for the needs of the American people through the 
Federal Governmental operations, if we assess our priorities in a 
proper way. We have just seen landmark legislation with the balanced 
budget legislation, and the tax reduction legislation passed by the 
Congress before we adjourned on August 1, and signed by the President 
into law on August 5. It is very important that we do reach that 
balanced budget. We should not, as a nation, spend beyond our means. I 
believe it is possible to achieve that goal if we work with a scalpel 
and not a meat ax and take care of the important needs for all of 
America.
  We deal here with the subjects of health and education and there are 
no priorities higher than those two items. The people of America, the 
people of the United States, should be healthy and there should be 
educational opportunities so people should have an opportunity to climb 
the ladder in America.
  When I talk of education, I talk from a very keen sense personally of 
education as an opportunity which I have seen. Both of my parents were 
immigrants. My father literally walked across Europe from Russia, 
barely a ruble in his pocket, at the age of 18 in 1911 to make a new 
life for himself and the family which he hoped to have and did have. My 
mother, coming with her parents to the United States from a small town 
on the Russian-Polish border at the age of 5, education was heavily 
emphasized in the Specter household because our parents had so little 
of it. My brother, my two sisters, and I have been able to share in the 
American dream because of that educational opportunity.
  As Senator Harkin and I and our staffs have crafted this legislation, 
we have done our utmost to provide for that educational opportunity. We 
have provided for increases in the maximum Pell grant to $3,000 per 
year. We have provided for guaranteed student loans. It would be 
preferable if we could provide scholarships for all young people, and 
older people who want additional education, but that is not possible in 
a practical sense, so we have a revolving sum where at least the 
education can be obtained, even if there are obligations that would 
have to be paid at a later time.
  We have come to this budget with very deep concerns over the issue of 
health. Regrettably, when the budget resolution was presented to us, 
there was a cut of some $100 million on discretionary health spending 
which required a considerable reallocation of priorities, which Senator 
Harkin and I and our subcommittee and then the full committee and our 
staffs have undertaken. That was especially problemsome when it came to 
the issue of the National Institutes of Health where it was our desire 
to continue to increase the funding on medical research which has been 
so marvelous for America and our advances benefiting the entire world.

  Early in the 105th session, we passed a sense-of-the-Senate 
resolution, or a sense-of-the-Senate resolution was introduced and, I 
believe, passed--we will check the Record on that to be sure--to double 
NIH funding over 5 years. If it wasn't passed, the sense-of-the-Senate 
resolutions pass pretty easily around here because they talk about our 
druthers as opposed to our dollars. Then, when we took up the budget 
resolution, and a sense-of-the-Senate resolution passed to increase NIH 
funding

[[Page S8633]]

by some $2 billion. Then Senator Harkin and I offered an amendment to 
increase it--not a sense-of-the-Senate resolution, but hard dollars of 
$1.1 billion. That would have left us with a net of about $950 million 
to achieve the 7.5-percent increase Senator Harkin and I committed to 
early in the session for the NIH.
  When we brought that amendment to the floor, it was roundly defeated 
63-37, which was somewhat disappointing. But it was an illustration of 
what happens in the Senate when you have a sense of the Senate, which 
is an expression of what you would like to see, or druthers, as opposed 
to a hard amendment which puts up money. And when we balance the 
budget, if we put up 7.5 percent, which is $952 million, we have to 
have someplace to take it from. When that choice is made, it isn't too 
easy to get the votes. That amendment went down to defeat, as I said, 
63-37. But then we went back to the drawing boards with our sharp 
pencils--mainly staff's sharp pencils--and figured out a way on the 
allocation of priorities to find that 7.5 percent, or $952 million, and 
we did find it. It was not easy to do, but we thought that that was 
what ought to be done.
  In the United States, it is my view that we have the best health care 
system in the world, but it continues to need improvement. I personally 
was the beneficiary of that health care system about 4 years ago when 
an MRI detected a life-threatening problem that I had, and I was able 
to get my medical situation corrected. There is nothing like having a 
problem and using the MRI personally to do a little research to find 
out about its development. I was surprised to find that it had only 
been developed in 1984, less than a decade before I found the need to 
use it.
  Within the course of the past week, I had occasion to return to my 
home State of Kansas for my 50th high school reunion. I probably should 
not have given the date. I may get leave to amend and revise the 
Congressional Record on that. Just kidding. It was my 50th high school 
reunion. My Aunt Rose Isemberg, in Wichita, who is 85, was the 
beneficiary of a serious operation and is well on her way to recovery. 
I focused on that factor and mentioned to my Aunt Rose that in some 
countries you can't get an operation when you are that old. In some 
countries you can't get one if you are past 60. So we have a marvelous 
health system in the United States, but, again, one which needs 
improvement.
  When I returned to my hometown of Russell, KS, to my high school 
reunion, I was reminiscing with my sister-in-law, Joyce Specter, about 
the medical care in Russell, KS. My brother had some serious ailments 
several years ago, and I was with him. Unfortunately, he passed away. 
Back then, I wanted to talk to Dr. Merkel, and it was 6:45 on a 
Saturday night. I asked for his home number and I was told, ``You can't 
call Dr. Merkel at home at 6:45 on a Saturday. You will find him in the 
office.''
  Notwithstanding our graduations of doctors and medical experts, rural 
America still doesn't have as much by way of health care providers as 
rural America needs. So we do have significant improvements to be made 
in our health system in America. This is something which we have 
focused on as we have moved ahead in this bill and our efforts to 
provide health care coverage for all Americans.
  Again, on a personal note, I was fascinated to hear of the health 
coverage offered by Israel, without regard for preexisting conditions 
or without regard for age--a factor called to my attention by my 
sister, Hilda Morgenstern, and my brother-in-law, Arthur Morgenstern, 
who have dual citizenship in the United States and in Israel. There are 
examples around the world as we try to extend health coverage and 
services to the 37 to 41 million Americans who are not now covered. It 
is appropriate to note that in the reconciliation bill we passed, the 
Balanced Budget Act, we have taken action to provide some $24 billion 
to cover America's uninsured children, numbering about 10 million. 
There is a question, as we work through the program, as to how many of 
those children we will be able to cover.
  Mr. President, during the course of our deliberations, Senator Harkin 
and I received requests from Members, totaling more than 700 such 
requests, for expanded funding for programs within the subcommittee's 
jurisdiction, and, to the maximum extent possible, we tried to honor 
those requests. We had very substantial support for increasing the 
funding for the National Institutes of Health and, as noted, we have 
done that with an increase of 7.5 percent, some $952 million. So that 
now we have nearly $13.7 billion for the National Institutes of Health, 
and their achievements have been near miraculous as they have moved 
ahead with research on breast cancer, ovarian cancer--very serious 
ailments for women--and prostate cancer for men, Alzheimer's disease--
very substantial advances in research there--mental health research, 
research on heart conditions, and virtually every known ailment that 
has come within the scope of the National Institutes of Health.
  One of the really educational experiences that I personally have had 
on the job as chairman of the subcommittee is we have received so many 
requests from so many people around the United States who have ailments 
that I had never heard about. I do believe that we have a budget which 
can accommodate research along those lines. If this recommendation is 
insufficient, I believe the Congress of the United States is prepared, 
on a priority basis, to allocate whatever it takes on medical research 
in the United States to do the job. Even with that kind of a funding, 
there are many applications which are not granted. We have moved ahead 
very substantially in the time that I have been in the Senate, whether 
the chairman was Senator Weicker, later Governor Weicker, or Senator 
Chiles, later Governor Chiles, or whether Senator Harkin was chairman, 
or during my chairmanship.
  The committee has placed a very high priority on women's health. The 
bill provides for increased funding. There will be funding for expanded 
programs to develop mental health care services for women, to provide 
moneys for a comprehensive review of the impact of heart disease on 
women, where in the past less attention was paid to that important 
item. Women do have different problems, very different from men, when 
it comes to heart ailments. For so many years, the research had been on 
men alone. The additional funding will help launch an osteoporosis 
public education program aimed at teenagers.
  In our legislation, we have provided funding for both family planning 
and for abstinence programs. One of the most controversial issues 
facing America is the controversy of pro-choice/pro-life. But there is 
one item that can be generally agreed upon, and that is if we can cut 
down on premarital sex among teenagers and unintended pregnancies, and 
the abortions which follow, that is an objective where there is general 
agreement, and we have produced additional funding here for those 
programs devoted to abstention.
  One of the items on which we continue to increase funding is our 
program on Healthy Start. That is an initiative to try to give prenatal 
care to women and avoid having low-birthweight babies. I saw my first 
1-pound baby at Alma Illery Medical Facility in Pittsburgh more than a 
decade ago, and I was shocked to see a child no bigger than my hand, 
which weighed less than a pound. When you have a child with that low 
birthweight, there are medical problems that last a lifetime and 
enormous costs to society. Those children frequently cost as much as 
$300,000 by the time they are out of the hospital in a few weeks or a 
few months. Thousands are born each year. It is a multibillion-dollar 
expense. The program of prenatal care has had great results and is one 
which we are pushing ahead in the legislation pending.
  The issue of AIDS continues to be a matter of overwhelming importance 
in the United States. Today's front page of the Washington Post is 
devoted significantly to it. Our bill contains some $3.265 billion for 
research, education, prevention, and services, including an $81 million 
increase for the Ryan White CARE Program, named after the young man who 
developed AIDS on a blood transfusion--nothing at fault even remotely 
there. This issue continues to be of enormous importance in the United 
States.
  Our legislation provides further assistance in funding for substance 
abuse, both alcohol and drugs, a major problem in our country.

[[Page S8634]]

  We have taken the initiative with some $50 million for new programs 
to assist communities in preventing juvenile crime. That is an issue of 
great concern in the United States and one which falls partially within 
the jurisdiction of our subcommittee. It is not inappropriate to note 
at this time that pending before the Judiciary Committee is extensive 
legislation on juvenile crime. It is my hope that we will craft a bill, 
when the issue comes to the floor of the U.S. Senate, which will take 
into account not only tough measures to try juveniles as adults, where 
they are, in fact, adults by size or inclination and prior record, but 
also to work on the literacy training and job training.
  Based on the experience I have had on the Judiciary Committee, and 
before that as district attorney of Philadelphia, it is my view that we 
can control violent crime in America if we approach it at two levels. 
One, where we have career criminals, to have life sentences. The armed 
career criminal bill that I offered, which passed back in 1984, has 
made a significant effort in that regard. Where you have a career 
criminal with three or more violent offenses, now, by Federal law, 
there is a mandatory sentence in the Federal courts of 15 years to 
life. We have been putting more people in jail, and there has been a 
decrease in the crime rate. In my judgment, that is attributable to the 
factor that there are more violent criminals now in prison. The other 
half of the equation, though, is to provide realistic rehabilitation 
for those who are not career criminals, where they are going to be 
released. It is no surprise that if you have a functional illiterate 
without a trade or skill, a person who goes back onto the street 
without training, without a job, that person is likely to go through 
the revolving door and become a recidivist.
  That is why one of the first bills I introduced when I came to the 
Senate, alongside the armed career criminal bill, was legislation for 
realistic rehabilitation, for job training and literacy training. As we 
craft that juvenile crime bill, it is my hope that we will have an 
appropriate balance on the juveniles, on literacy training and job 
training, because we know that 1 day they are going to be released from 
jail. A societal option is either to have them as law-abiding citizens, 
working their way and contributing to society, or becoming criminals. 
So it is in the interest of law-abiding citizens, as well as the 
individuals themselves, that appropriate attention be given to literacy 
training and job training.
  Also included in this bill is our allocation of funding for Head 
Start. Some $4.3 billion is included here, which is an increase of some 
$324 million. We increase the number of children by 36,000, to a total 
of 836,000, on our planned route to having 1 million covered by Head 
Start by the year 2002.
  Also in our budget is funding to protect women against violence when 
we talk about the categories of battered women's shelters, rape 
prevention, runaway youth prevention, domestic violence community 
demonstrations, and the domestic violence hotline.

  Another important item--controversial, as many are in this bill--is 
our program on low-income heat and energy fuel assistance. We have 
maintained funding of some $1 billion for this winter, and advanced 
funding of $1.2 billion for next year's winter program. This is a 
program which is controversial because in some States the needs are not 
as great as they are in other States. But what we have essentially for 
many Americans, especially elderly Americans, is a choice on either 
heating or eating. With many elderly in the program with annual incomes 
of $8,000 or less, they are totally unable to cope without some 
assistance on fuel costs.
  We also have within this bill important programs for the elderly, 
including community service employment programs, part-time employment 
opportunities for low-income elderly, home delivered nutrition 
services, and the National Senior Volunteer Corps.
  We have as well school-to-work where there is a transition moving 
from school to work, coordinated also with the job training programs 
and Job Corps which provide educational opportunities and vocational 
training for those young people in our society who may not prefer that 
to the college education and may be more appropriately directed in that 
line.
  On education, Mr. President, we have moved ahead with an increase of 
some $3.1 billion in our discretionary education funds.
  I especially commend my distinguished colleague, Senator Harkin, for 
his leadership in this very, very important line.
  We have had difficulties in bringing this particular bill to the 
floor in the past. It was not until April 1996 when we were able to--
after an amendment offered by Senator Harkin and myself to increase 
funding for this subcommittee by $2.6 billion --move ahead.
  I commend the President for his initiatives and priority setting on 
education, which is, as I noted earlier, a priority second to none for 
the United States.
  In this line, we have special education programs funded at some $921 
million. And I commend the chairman of the Educational Opportunities 
Committee in the House, my colleague, Bill Goodling from Pennsylvania, 
and also our colleague, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, for their 
leadership in this item where we are trying to maintain the Federal 
commitment to special education. We are coming very close to the high 
marks set in S. 1. Again, it is a matter of establishing priorities, 
which we have done here.
  On our student aid programs, the bill provides some $8.5 billion, 
which is an increase of almost $1 billion--$997.3 million over last 
year's appropriations. The Pell grant is going up by some $300 to a 
maximum grant of $3,000. The Supplemental Educational Opportunity 
Grants Program is increased by some $51 million.
  I go into some detail for at least two reasons, Mr. President. These 
are important programs, and we are not taking up anybody's time, 
Senator Harkin and I being the only two Senators on the floor. I will 
yield in a few minutes for Senator Harkin's opening comments.
  On job training, we have provided $5.2 billion for the job training 
programs, which is more than $500 million over the 1997 level. That 
includes increases for Job Corps, adult training, and training for 
dislocated workers, which is a very, very important problem for 
Americans, especially in my home State of Pennsylvania where we have 
seen the demise of the steel industry and the coal industry and the 
glass industry.
  So many of the problems of the dislocated workers are caused by 
imports which are coming into the United States, which really ought not 
to be coming into the United States, where we are dealing with concerns 
on defense policy or on foreign policy. And so many American workers 
are taking it on the chin. The least we can do is to have retraining 
for the dislocated workers.
  Our bill provides very important funding for worker safety programs 
in the Department of Labor where we are now providing almost $1 
billion--just $1 million short; $999 million--for worker safety 
programs. This is an increase of some $37 million above 1997's level 
for worker safety activities.
  Mr. President, I have gone over, believe it or not, just a few of the 
highlights of this bill, which totals almost $80 billion. We have in 
excess of $11 billion for the Department of Labor, almost $32 billion 
for the Department of Health and Human Services, and almost $30 billion 
on the Department of Education, coming to a total of almost $80 billion 
in discretionary funding.
  To repeat, Mr. President, on the schedule, which the majority leader 
and Senator Harkin and I have discussed earlier, it would be our plan--
our optimistic plan, but our plan nonetheless--to conclude action on 
this bill by tomorrow night. We would like to have all amendments filed 
by the close of business today and, in any event, no later than noon 
tomorrow. All the Senators will be here, as we have every expectation 
for the vote scheduled at 9:30 tomorrow so that we can make our plans 
and scheduling for any amendments which may be filed.
  At this time, I am pleased to yield to my distinguished colleague, 
Senator Harkin.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I thank my chairman for his leadership on 
this plan and for outlining in great detail the various aspects of the 
bill that he

[[Page S8635]]

just covered, in our efforts to craft a truly bipartisan bill to bring 
to the floor of the Senate.
  Mr. President, S. 1061, the Labor, Health and Human Services, 
Education and related agencies for fiscal year 1998, is now before us.
  Again, I want to start by commending our chairman for his skill and 
his craftsmanship in putting this bill together.
  Senator Specter has ably balanced the many, often competing requests 
we have received--as he mentioned, over 700 different types of requests 
from Senators. It is always a very tough job, and I appreciate how 
closely he has worked with me and my staff in crafting a truly 
bipartisan plan.
  For example, the bill's broad support was reflected in its unanimous 
approval by the full Appropriations Committee.
  I am especially pleased that the bill provides significant increases 
in funding for key education programs.
  Senator Specter quite ably went over those. I will not repeat those 
again. I will just mention what Senator Specter had said in terms of 
the bill grants--the increase in the stipend from $2,700 to $3,000. 
This will help over 3.6 million low- and moderate-income students in 
colleges and institutions of higher learning this next year. This is 
the highest level of Pell grant support.
  The bill exceeds the support for education recommended by the 
bipartisan budget agreement by $164 million. It includes significant 
increases for special education and education technology and, in 
particular, funds to support teacher training. Computers in the 
classroom are of no value if teachers don't know how to use them 
effectively.
  The mark in the bill puts special emphasis on early intervention. The 
cornerstone, as we know, for educational success are the first years of 
a child's life. Recent research on the brain provides irrefutable proof 
about the dramatic development in children before the age of 3. So we 
must intensify our efforts to make sure that all children enter school 
ready to learn. We have begun to lay the foundation in this bill by 
increasing Head Start funding by $324 million, and we have doubled the 
set-aside for early Head Start which serves children up to the age of 
3.
  This bill also provides an 11-percent increase in funding to $350 
million for the early intervention program for infants and toddlers 
with disabilities served by part H of the Individuals With Disabilities 
Education Act.
  Again, Mr. President, as we know, it is vital for children without 
disabilities to have early educational services. We know that it is 
doubly vital for kids, infants, and toddlers with disabilities to have 
those early intervention programs before the age of 3.
  I am also very pleased that we are able to make a start--not a big 
one, but at least a start--on the Education Grant Infrastructure 
Program. I think we can all agree that the infrastructure needs of our 
school systems are truly staggering. Most estimates of nationwide 
school repair and construction costs exceed $100 billion. Again, 
clearly, school construction and repair will and should remain 
primarily a State and local responsibility. Nevertheless, I think there 
is a limited Federal role here, and it is one would that is connected 
to the longstanding Federal support for the education of disadvantaged 
children through the title I program.
  I am often asked the question, Mr. President, ``Where is it indicated 
in the Constitution of the United States that education funding must 
come out of property taxes?'' I have here a little pocket copy of the 
Constitution that I try to carry with me at all times. I find it a very 
good reference. A lot of times I hold it up, and ask people, ``Where? 
Show me where in the Constitution of the United States, as amended, 
that it says that education in America is to be funded on the basis of 
property taxes.''
  You can read every word in the Constitution of the United States and 
the Bill of Rights, all the amendments thereto, and you will not find 
one thing in the Constitution that says how education is to be funded. 
It doesn't say we have to pay for it through property taxes. But that 
is sort of the system that evolved in our country over the years. So 
what we have are these anomalies.
  I happen to maintain a residence, as many of my colleagues do, in 
suburban Virginia, in Fairfax County. To be sure, both of my daughters 
have gone to public schools in Fairfax County, and I can tell you the 
schools here are wonderful. They are great schools. That is 12 miles 
from where we are standing right now.
  Five blocks from here, in the District of Columbia, are some of the 
worst schools in our country. Why is it? Why the difference in 12 
miles? Well, it is because in Fairfax County, you have a lot of high-
income people who pay a lot of property taxes. And they have great 
schools. Yet, five blocks from the Capitol, you have very low income 
with very low property taxes, and no ability to fix up and repair their 
schools. This is true all over our country.
  I refer those who are interested to a book, of course, written by a 
good friend of mine, Jonathan Kozol, called ``Savage Inequalities.'' It 
is not a new book. It is at least 10 years old, I guess, by now. That 
problem is very clearly across America--what it means to be a child 
lucky enough to be born to moderate to well-to-do parents who live in 
an area where there are high property taxes and high property values. 
The schools are good. If you live in an inner city, or sometimes in 
Appalachia, or rural areas of America where you have low property 
taxes, you have bad schools.
  So homeowners who are living in poor school districts have to carry a 
much heavier tax burden to raise school construction funds. Where they 
have the worst schools, they need the most repairs. Yet, they have the 
least ability to do so because they have a low tax base.
  Homeowners who live in affluent districts, however, have it much 
easier. So the homeowners who live in the poor areas have a much harder 
burden to carry in repairing and constructing new schools. And so I 
have long felt it is, indeed, at least part of the responsibility of 
the Federal Government to equalize this, to equalize it somewhat.
  Now, in States we have acquisition formulas. In my State of Iowa, for 
example, yes, property taxes are local, but the State recognizes, as 
many other States have done, that it provides for a lot of 
inequalities. So the State has stepped in with equalization formulas to 
try to equalize funding for schools at least in regard to construction 
and repair for those who are in poor areas and those who are in rich 
areas, more affluent areas. But, again, we have anomalies existing 
throughout the country, and so I think the Federal Government could 
emulate a little bit of what the States have done and have some kind of 
equalization where we will provide funds for repair and construction of 
school facilities to those areas with the greatest needs and the fewest 
local resources.
  Now, again, I would not want this money to replace money that is 
already being provided by the States. We do not want to do that. We do 
not want to provide money to a low-income school district and the State 
will say, well, good, we are getting all those Federal dollars; now we 
don't have to do anything.
  Therefore, there must be an effort at equity by the States to 
continue to have their equalization programs. And I would envision that 
the rules developed by the Department would take that into account in 
providing this money that we have for school construction and repair.
  A major concern I have about the bill is our inability to more 
adequately address our health services and training needs while at the 
same time simultaneously providing generous increases for health 
research.
  Now, again, I will not go into it at length here. I have talked about 
it many times in the Chamber, and I will talk about it and keep talking 
about it until we do something about it. And that is the need to 
provide more money for biomedical research.
  As my friend, the chairman, said earlier, a few months ago the Senate 
went on record 99 to 0 to double NIH funding over the next 5 years. A 
few weeks after that, Senator Specter and I offered an amendment, very 
modest, to provide about a $1.1 billion increase out of our pot for 
increased funding for NIH. And as Senator Specter pointed out, that 
went down almost 2 to 1. We got 37 votes for it.
  So it was sort of the will of the Senate. It is our will to provide a 
doubling

[[Page S8636]]

of funding for NIH over 5 years, but there is no money there to back it 
up.
  Now, there are some who say, well, we can take it out of our bill. If 
we did so, Mr. President, under the constraints of the Balanced Budget 
Act that we have adopted here, under the constraints of that balanced 
budget agreement, if we doubled funding for NIH out of the pot of money 
that we have, there would not be one single penny left for any other 
discretionary health program.
  What does that mean? There would be no Centers for Disease Control. 
We would have no money for that. We would have no community health 
centers in any States, no substance abuse programs, no family planning 
money, no mental health program money from the Federal Government. All 
of that would be wiped out. And we still would not have enough money to 
double NIH funding over 5 years. So here we have it, on the one hand, 
99 Senators saying we want to double NIH funding, biomedical research 
funding over 5 years, but we don't have the money to do it--not within 
our bill we don't, unless those 99 Senators, or at least 51 of those 
Senators want to cut all of the funding for the Centers for Disease 
Control and wipe it out, cut out all Ryan White funding, cut out every 
one of our community health centers in America, and on and on and on. 
If we do that, we get close. We do not get the double, but we get 
close.
  Obviously, there are not going to be 51 Senators who will vote to cut 
out the community health centers in America or the Centers for Disease 
Control. That would be ridiculous. As I have said many times, we have 
to go outside the discretionary fund that we have for the National 
Institutes of Health. We have to provide a different source of 
funding--outside of our appropriations process.
  What I have advocated, along with our former colleague, Senator Mark 
Hatfield--we advocated it at least since 1991, 1992--is setting up a 
medical research trust fund that would be funded out of the premiums 
that we pay in for our health insurance coverage.
  Again, Mr. President, you and I and all the rest of us here and 
Americans throughout the country who have insurance programs, we pay in 
every year and our employer pays in, matches it. It varies how much is 
matched, but we pay in, both employers and employees pay in for health 
insurance to the tune of about $700-some billion a year.
  I always ask audiences when I talk about this, do you know how much 
of that money goes for health research, to find the causes and cures 
for things like diabetes and Alzheimer's and cancer and AIDS and 
Parkinson's disease and mental health? How much of that money that you 
put into your premiums goes to pay for medical research?
  The answer is zero. Not one single penny. No corporation in America 
would try to continue to move along without putting some money into 
research. And yet we sort of stagger along in this country every year 
putting more and more money into health insurance programs to pay for 
taking care of people with Alzheimer's or with cancer or with 
Parkinson's disease or with diabetes, et cetera, et cetera. We pay all 
that money in to take care of those illnesses once they occur, but not 
one penny is used to find the causes and cures.
  It does not seem to make sense. So what Senator Hatfield and I 
advocated for several years was that just one penny, just one penny out 
of every dollar that we put into our health insurance programs go to a 
trust fund.
  Think of it like this. We have a highway trust fund. Every time you 
buy a gallon of gas, some of that money goes into the highway trust 
fund. It cannot be used for anything else. It must be used for 
transportation purposes. We have an airport and airways trust fund. 
When I buy an airplane ticket, some of that goes into the airports and 
airways trust fund. So it is not new. Well, we have a Social Security 
trust fund, obviously, but we have a lot of different trust funds to 
meet what we have determined to be national priorities that otherwise 
could not get sufficient funding through the appropriations process. 
And the American people by and large have supported us. Most everyone I 
know supports the highway trust fund and airways trust fund.
  What they do not support is us using the money for something else. 
But they support us using that trust fund money for highways and for 
bridges and for airports and for airways because that is what the money 
was put in there for. And so we have proposed that we set up that trust 
fund. That one penny a year would provide us a little over a 50-percent 
increase in funding for NIH. That would get us a long way toward 
doubling that funding in 5 years.
  Now, Senator Hatfield is no longer in the Senate, but my cosponsor on 
the bill is now my colleague and our esteemed chairman, Senator 
Specter. We are both pushing very hard again to find another source of 
funding for biomedical research, and I believe the trust fund concept 
is the way to go. We have hundreds and hundreds of different entities 
throughout America supporting that concept.
  We had a vote in the Senate a few weeks ago on this concept of having 
this trust fund. I believe we got--we got over 51 votes, I know that, 
for it, but we needed 60 votes because of a point of order. So over 50 
Senators have, indeed, voted at least in concept for setting up this 
type of a trust fund and funding it this way. I know I can speak for 
Senator Specter in saying we will continue our efforts to enlist the 
support of other Senators to set up this form of a trust fund. 
Otherwise, we are simply never going to have the kind of funding for 
biomedical research that we need. What we are going to do basically is 
to keep raising insurance premiums to pay for the illnesses that 
continue to plague us. But if we put the money into research and find 
the causes and cures--Mr. President, we all struggle around here trying 
to figure out what is the long-term solution to the Medicare problem: 
People living longer, fewer and fewer people paying into the Medicare 
trust fund. We know we have a problem. We have to do something about 
it. Every medical expert will tell you, if you want to solve the 
Medicare problem, find the causes and cures; it is early intervention 
of illnesses and diseases.
  If we, for example, could just delay, delay the onset of Alzheimer's 
by 5 years, we could have no problem in the Medicare trust fund--just 
delay it 5 years. That is not to mention actually finding the cure for 
Alzheimer's. That is not to mention osteoporosis or diabetes that so 
plagues our culture, or hearing loss or eye loss. All the things that 
affect us in our older age are now coming back and costing Medicare 
more and more money because people are living longer.
  These are the things we can do to make sure the Medicare trust fund 
is solvent in the future, but only if we put adequate money into 
biomedical research.
  I said I was not going to talk about it, but once I got on a roll I 
could not stop myself because I feel so strongly that we really are 
shortchanging ourselves when we are not putting the money into medical 
research.
  Finally, Mr. President, in our report we have tried to focus the 
Department of Health and Human Services on the issue of fraud and abuse 
in Medicare. Speaking of Medicare, a recent inspector general's report 
found that improper Medicare billing losses could be as high as 17 
percent of last year's $194 billion Medicare budget--17 percent.
  Now, again, let me digress here a little bit, Mr. President. A few 
years ago, when I held the position that Senator Specter now holds as 
chairman of this subcommittee, I asked for a study to be done on losses 
in Medicare due to waste, fraud, and abuse. Well, we did the study. It 
came back and said it was as high as maybe 10 to 14 percent. Well, some 
of those in the system challenged those findings. They said, well, your 
survey wasn't big enough. You only did one area of the country. You did 
not sample enough items. And so it was a skewed kind of study--the 
losses surely are not that big.
  Well, I said, OK, fair enough criticism. So then, under the 
leadership of Senator Specter, when we changed hands in the Senate, we 
went back and we asked them to do another study, nationwide. Several 
thousand were sampled. Every region was sampled. Guess what happened. 
The first study came up short. It was not 10 to 14 percent. It was as 
high as 17 percent of Medicare payments were going out for waste and 
abuse.
  Well, we must make this a priority and address this serious problem. 
We

[[Page S8637]]

have in this bill; we have focused on it. Senator Specter has taken the 
lead.
  Let me sum up once again by complimenting our chairman, Senator 
Specter, and his staff and my staff for their work in putting together 
this legislation. I look forward to a smooth process, hopefully, as 
Senator Specter said, that will enable us to be done by tomorrow.
  And I would again just close by referring, as I did earlier, to the 
Constitution of the United States. Time and again I have had people 
question why we do what we are doing here in this subcommittee--in 
health and in human services and in education, labor, all of the 
various things that we cover here. The National Institutes of Health, 
what business is that of the Congress? Why are you getting involved in 
all those things?
  Well, you know, it is interesting, Mr. President, that twice in the 
Constitution of the United States there is mention made of the general 
welfare of the people of this country--first in the preamble when it 
says, ``We the people of the United States,'' and it lays out why we 
are developing the Constitution, ``in order to form a more perfect 
Union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the 
common defense, promote the general welfare''--promote the general 
welfare--``and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our 
posterity * * *'' Right there in the preamble it says we are doing this 
because we want to promote the general welfare of the people of this 
country.
  Well, how do you do that? Article I of the Constitution, which lays 
out the structure of Congress and our responsibility, section 8 of 
article I lays out what we are supposed to do here, lays out our 
responsibilities. Congress shall have the power to do all kinds of 
things--borrow money, regulate commerce, coin money, establish post 
offices, declare a war, et cetera, et cetera. But, in the first 
paragraph it says:

       The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, 
     Duties, Imports and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for 
     the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States. 
     * * *

  Interesting, they put the common defense and the general welfare 
together. That is our responsibility--article I, section 8. What we are 
supposed to do in providing for that general welfare obviously changes 
with times and circumstances. What was providing for the general 
welfare in the last century certainly is not what we deem to be 
providing for the general welfare in this century, and certainly it 
will change in the future. But, nonetheless, I believe that the bill 
before us meets our constitutional requirement in two ways: First, by 
promoting the general welfare, and second, by providing for the general 
welfare through the appropriations process. So, that is our 
constitutional obligation and I believe that we have done our level 
best, in a bipartisan manner, to meet that requirement of article I, 
section 8 of the Constitution.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sessions). The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, do I understand that there will be a time 
for general discussion of the spending bill for the Departments of 
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education? Am I correct that 
there is a consent agreement on the time for debate on this legislation 
before the Senate moves to the Agriculture appropriations bill? Will 
the Chair clarify that for me?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. KENNEDY. When do we move to the Agriculture Appropriations bill?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. At 2:15 we take up the agricultural 
appropriations bill.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I support this year's spending bill for 
the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education.
  I commend Senator Specter and Senator Harkin for their outstanding 
job in developing this bipartisan legislation. This bill also reflects 
President Clinton's priorities in his 1998 budget for strengthening our 
commitment to education, enhancing the productivity of the Nation's 
workforce, and improving the health of all Americans.
  Clearly there is an urgent need to allocate increased resources to 
these important investments if the Nation is to maintain its 
competitive edge in the 21st century.
  We need to ensure that millions of children do not fall behind in 
reading, in math, in science, and technology.
  We need to make certain that the rising cost of tuition does not put 
college education out of the reach for working families.
  We need to ensure that the rising demand for job training services is 
met, as 1.7 million welfare recipients leave the welfare rolls and seek 
jobs under last year's welfare reform legislation.
  We must also recognize the need for increased funding for biomedical 
research, which holds great promise to cure or prevent so many 
illnesses and can be an important factor in finding a long-term 
solution to the fiscal problems facing Medicare.
  This year's spending legislation for the Departments of Labor, Health 
and Human Services, and Education takes an important step toward making 
these critical investments for our Nation's future.
  Most notably, it increases the Pell grant maximum from $2,700 to 
$3,000, which will increase college aid for over 3.6 million low- and 
middle-income students.
  The bill increases Head Start funding by $324 million over last 
year's level, which will provide essential preschool services to an 
additional 36,000 low-income children.
  It increases the education technology funding by $275 million to help 
teachers learn to use technology effectively and help raise student 
achievement.
  It provides $40 million for the construction and repair of schools in 
needy areas. The General Accounting Office has found that a third of 
the Nation's schools, with 14 million students, have one or more 
buildings needing extensive repair. This was an concern that was 
debated and discussed during the consideration of the budget. Great 
leadership on this issue has been provided by our friend from Illinois, 
Senator Moseley-Braun.
  The legislation provides $81 million over last year's level for the 
Ryan White AIDS Program and $24 million for the Community and Migrant 
Health Program.
  And it provides $1.2 billion in fiscal year 1999 for LIHEAP, which 
will enable this important program to serve thousands of additional 
senior citizens, the disabled, and working families by providing them 
with heating and cooling assistance.
  Yet the bill falls short in a number of important areas. It fails to 
provide the additional $700 million that President Clinton requested to 
help 218,000 independent students afford a higher education under the 
Pell Grant Program. We need to make sure that individuals who are 
moving through the economy are going to be able to upgrade their 
skills. We know that unlike 30 years ago when an individual had a job 
and kept that job for his or her entire life, individuals who now enter 
the job market will probably have seven different jobs over the course 
of their lives. What we are attempting to do is recognize the 
importance of making available to these middle-income Americans the 
opportunities to upgrade their skills and continue their education.
  None of us can visit the various community colleges without seeing 
the dramatic change that has taken place in the ages of many of the 
students who will be attending. We see the average age increased now to 
26 or 27 years of age. These are individuals who are taking advantage 
of various training programs and educational opportunities to upgrade 
their skills so they can participate in the new economy. This issue is 
a high priority of the President, but we have seen the funding for 
independent students fall short.
  No funds were also appropriated this year for the new child literacy 
program. Low achievement in reading is a national problem that deserves 
our immediate attention. Children who lack reading skills by the fourth 
grade are more likely to fall behind and eventually to drop out of 
school. We have had extensive hearings in the Senate Labor and Human 
Resources Committee on that particular need. We know the committee has 
delayed funding for child literacy, and we know that we do not have, at 
this time, the authorizing legislation needed to ensure that those 
efforts and those resources would be

[[Page S8638]]

carefully targeted to get the most meaningful assistance to children. 
But we also know that the chairman of our authorizing committee, 
Senator Jeffords, and others--a broad, bipartisan group--are strongly 
committed toward developing that literacy program. This issue is a 
national priority, and we should not delay action.
  As the ranking member of the Labor and Human Resources Committee, I 
am strongly committed to seeing that legislation authorizing the child 
literacy initiative is enacted this year. We cannot stand by and delay 
the $260 million needed to implement this important program.
  The Appropriations Committee also eliminated the Supplemental State 
Incentive Grant Program that helped over 1 million students attend 
college last year. Any of us who have had the chance to talk to 
students who are using this program know what a difference it makes. I 
think, given the very modest amount of resources we are talking about--
some $50 million--we ought to be able to continue the Supplemental 
State Incentive Grant Program.
  Both the National Labor Relations Board and the Health Professions 
Education Program are seriously underfunded in this spending bill. 
These shortfalls will adversely affect the investigation of unfair 
labor practices and the access of minority and low-income Americans to 
health care services.
  There is in the country a sense that we have committed large 
resources for the development of professional education in the area of 
health care. You can make a case that in certain areas of our country 
we do have greater numbers of trained professionals in our health care 
system than are necessary. But what we do not have is the kind of 
outreach programs which this Health Professions Education Program was 
meant to have--to ensure that many low-income individuals and 
minorities would be able to access the education and be able to go and 
serve in underserved areas of the Nation.
  The initial proposal by the administration in the area of health 
professions was dramatically even below what has been appropriated--or 
requested for appropriations in the House or the Senate. Both the House 
and Senate bills have made improvements on the Clinton administration's 
proposal, and I think that Health Professions Education programs ought 
to be strengthened in the final legislation.
  Also, the appropriations for the National Labor Relations Board will 
mean that the opportunity for investigations of various unfair labor 
practices will be unattended. If we are really interested in the 
continued fairness in the workplace, and when we recognize that, over 
the past year, hundreds of thousands of workers were shortchanged in 
terms of back pay and other types of unfair practices, we want to make 
sure their interests are going to be adequately protected.
  I commend the Appropriations Committee for its 7.8 percent increase 
for the National Institutes of Health. But much more funding is needed 
if the Nation is to continue to make progress in the development of new 
and more effective treatments for cancer, AIDS, heart disease, and many 
other serious and debilitating conditions.
  Both Senator Harkin, Senator Specter, Senator Mack, and many others 
have worked tirelessly on behalf of the NIH over the years. I have 
welcomed the opportunity to join with them and others to try to make 
sure that the opportunities that are out there now, which are 
unparalleled in terms of our research history, are taken advantage of 
in order to make an important difference in terms of the health of our 
fellow citizens and American families; but also in terms of reducing 
the burden of health care for those families, and also to the States 
and the Federal Government.
  Increased funding for biomedical research will reap other rewards as 
well. It will encourage more of the best and brightest of America's 
college graduates to make their careers in scientific research. It will 
provide benefits to the larger economy as scientific advances move from 
the laboratory into the private sector, creating new businesses and job 
opportunities for many individuals.
  Equally important is a recent study by researchers at Duke University 
that indicates expanded funding for NIH can help keep Medicare solvent 
for the long term. Currently, the very ill account for the overwhelming 
majority of Medicare costs. If we invest in biomedical research to make 
senior citizens healthier, we can save enormous sums, protect Medicare 
for future generations, and prevent many of the illnesses of old age.
  Mr. President, yesterday the Nation saluted its working families on 
Labor Day. This year's spending bill pays tribute to these families by 
making a downpayment on important education, labor, and health 
programs.
  More still needs to be done. Legislation still can be approved, but 
it should not be weighted down with poison pill amendments, as was the 
case in the 104th Congress when language was offered which would have 
prohibited Medicaid funding of abortions, and it would have barred OSHA 
from considering new ergonomic rules. The bill represents a careful 
bipartisan compromise, and I strongly support its adoption.
  I mentioned, Mr. President, in my comments, the provisions on the 
increase in the Pell Grant Program and education technology. We find a 
number of States are moving ahead in voluntary ways, such as 
Massachusetts, to make sure that all of their schools are actually 
going to be tied into the Internet system. A combination of the 
excellent cooperation between the software council in my State of 
Massachusetts and the labor unions resulted in every school in the 
State tied into the Internet system. They have laid 50 miles of cable 
in Boston alone, which was the result of voluntary contributions of 
labor in wiring those schools and voluntary contributions from the 
various industries in providing the software.
  What we need to do is make sure we not only have the education 
technology, but have trained educators who are going to be using 
technology in various ways that are going to enhance education. There 
are important resources in this bill for that program.
  The Head Start Program, which under the more recent authorization 
will help expectant mothers in parenting skills as well as reaching 
down into the early childhood years. Still, there is enormous need for 
the expansion of that program which is so important.
  Years ago, we felt that the principal advantage of Head Start was 
just to equip children with confidence-building measures, so as they 
entered education in kindergarten and the first grade, they would be 
able to move ahead in learning. Now we are finding out that they are in 
a position in the very early years--2 years old, 3 years old, 4 years 
old--to actually learn something. That is what the most recent research 
is showing, and we need to make sure we are going to be able to reach 
out to many of the disadvantaged children, the poorest children who do 
not have the opportunities for the development of that kind of early 
start and give some help and assistance for them.
  School construction and repair work has been an issue that has, in 
recent times, come before us. I can mention in terms of Boston, New 
Bedford, Fall River, Lowell, Lawrence, and Springfield--and the list 
goes on--the number of schools that are closed every day in major 
cities during the wintertime because of poor repairs and temperatures. 
The need for school repairs are so important.
  Local school districts are doing something, and we have a modest 
Federal program, as has been outlined, to begin to show that such an 
initiative is enormously important. If children go to schools that are 
deteriorating and dilapidated, you are sending a message to the 
children--maybe it is a subliminal message, but a message nonetheless--
that even though as political leaders we are making speeches about the 
importance of children and the importance of education, the children 
see that education is not the priority of a State, a community, or the 
Nation as it should be. This is a modest effort to address this 
important issue.
  There is support of the Ryan White bill and community and migrant 
health, which is important in reaching out to so many people. And the 
LIHEAP program which is a tried and tested program which is absolutely 
essential for so many of our elderly who live in the colder climates.

[[Page S8639]]

  Independent students, as I mentioned, is a key element and needs 
support. I believe students--young, middle age, and older--who are 
going back to upgrade their skills at community colleges should be able 
to get some help and assistance under the various education programs. 
The importance of this was understood in the budget agreement. I know 
both Senators Specter and Harkin understand the importance of these 
programs. Still, this is an area that we need to give, I think, some 
attention to as we go on into the conference.
  We will have some opportunity to debate child literacy as we move 
ahead. The real question is in timing. I think all of us here 
understand the importance of the enhancement of the literacy program. 
There are many excellent programs that are taking place now, and we 
want to continue to make progress. We are not making progress 
nationwide, and this is an area of enormous importance.
  Again, with NIH and health professions education, the appropriations 
exceed what was initially proposed by the administration. The House has 
a more favorable funding level. This program is very, very important in 
creating opportunities for people to go into the health professions who 
will go out and serve in many different parts of our communities.
  Mr. President, again, I express strong support for the job that was 
done, and I commend our committee for those areas where they have, I 
think, made a very, very important commitment of scarce resources. We 
understand that there will be at least an expectation that as we move 
into the conference, there may be additional resources that will be 
available that could be used for funding some of these areas where 
there is an important need.
  I look forward, as this debate takes place, to try to see if we 
cannot find either offsets to enhance these programs that are a 
priority or at least to work with the committee to see if out of the 
conference we cannot get greater attention.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
  Mr. SPECTER addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.


                         Privilege of the Floor

  Mr. SPECTER. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I ask unanimous 
consent that Mr. Jim Sourwine and Mr. Jack Chow, detailees to this 
committee, be granted the privilege of the floor during the 
consideration of this bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I had referred earlier to the allocation 
of funding of the various Departments in fiscal year 1998 for the 
current bill, and the specific breakdown is as follows: Labor, $11 
billion; Health and Human Services, $31.9 billion; Education, $29.3 
billion; and related agencies, $7.5 billion; with the total being $79.7 
billion.
  There is a long list of related agencies made a part of this bill, 
but illustrative of those agencies are agencies such as the Corporation 
for Public Broadcasting, Federal Mediation Conciliation Service, the 
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, the National Labor 
Relations Board, the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, 
the Railroad Retirement Board. Those are illustrative of the agencies 
covered by the bill. I make that delineation to give those watching on 
C-SPAN 2 a fuller picture of what this bill covers, and for the Record.
  Earlier I had referred to certain consolidations and eliminations of 
programs which Senator Harkin and I have worked on for fiscal year 1994 
through fiscal year 1997. There are a total of 134 programs, according 
to information provided by staff, totaling $1,471,405,000. I ask 
unanimous consent that the programs in the various departments and the 
amount of savings be printed in the Record, with this information being 
provided by staff, as I say, totaling 134 programs and almost $1.5 
billion.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                          PROGRAM TERMINATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    FY '95      FY '95
                                  originally     post      FY '96    FY
                                    enacted   rescission            '97
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              LABOR
 
Youth Fair Chance...............     24,785           0         0      0
Rural Concentrated Employment...      3,861           0         0      0
JTPA Capacity Building..........      6,000           0         0      0
Natl Commission Employ. Policy..      2,223           0         0      0
Veterans' Homeless Programs.....      5,011           0         0      0
Natl Center for the Workplace...      1,113           0         0      0
Glass Ceiling Commission........        738         738       142      0
Office of the American Workplace      7,415       7,082         0      0
 
               HHS
 
HRSA:
  HPSL Recap....................      8,020       8,020         0      0
  Trauma Care...................      4,793         293         0      0
 
             SAMHSA
 
CMHS:
  Clinical Training/AIDS              5,394       5,379         0      0
   Training.....................
  Community Support Demos.......     24,184      24,147         0      0
  Homeless Service Demos........     21,227      21,205         0      0
  AIDS Demos....................      1,487       1,485         0      0
CSAT:
  Target Cities.................     35,520      35,520         0      0
  Pregnant/Postpartum Women.....     54,228      54,228         0      0
  Campus Program................          0           0         0      0
  Criminal Justice Programs.....     37,502      37,502         0      0
  Critical Populations..........     23,561      23,561         0      0
  Comprehensive Comm. Treatment.     27,277      27,073         0      0
  Training......................      5,590       5,590         0      0
  AIDS Training.................      2,787       2,787         0      0
  AIDS Linkage..................      7,739       7,739         0      0
  AIDS Outreach.................      7,500       7,500         0      0
  Treatment Capacity Expansion..      6,701       6,701         0      0
CSAP:
  Pregnant Women & Infants......     22,501      22,501         0      0
  Other Programs................      6,643       6,318         0      0
  Community Partnerships........    114,741     114,741         0      0
  Prevention/Ed Dissemination...     13,465      13,465         0      0
  Training......................     16,049      16,049         0      0
  B and F.......................          0           0         0      0
Assistant Secretary:
  Natl. Vaccine Program.........      1,000         988         0      0
  Health Care Reform Data.......      2,760       1,344         0      0
  Streamlining Costs............      1,500       1,500         0      0
  Health Service Management.....     17,801      18,432         0      0
  Natl. AIDS Program Office.....      1,750       1,730         0      0
HCFA:
  Essential Access Comm. Hosp...      3,500       2,000         0      0
  New Rural Health Grants.......      1,737           0         0      0
  Rural Hosp. Transition Demos..     17,621      17,621    13,089      0
ACF:
  Civics & English Ed Grants....      6,000       4,000         0      0
  Children & Families Services:.
  Comp. Child Develop. Cntrs....          0           0         0      0
  Child Devel. Assoc.                 1,372       1,372         0      0
   Scholarship..................
  Runaway Youth-Drugs...........     14,466      14,466         0      0
  Youth Gang Substance Abuse....     10,520      10,520         0      0
  Child Abuse Challenge Grants..          0           0         0      0
  ABCAN.........................        288         288         0      0
  Dependent Care Plan. & Dev....     12,823      12,823         0      0
  Emerg. Protection Grants......          0           0         0      0
  Child Welfare Rsch............      6,395       6,395         0      0
  Family Support Centers........      7,371       7,371         0      0
  Community Services:...........
  Homeless Service Grants.......     19,752      19,752         0      0
  Rural Housing.................      2,927           0         0      0
  Farmworker Assistance.........      3,084           0         0      0
  Demonstration Partnerships....      7,977         601         0      0
  Violent Crime Reduction Progs:
  Youth Education Demo..........          0           0       400      0
Administration on Aging:
  Federal Council on Aging......        176         176         0      0
  White House Conf. on Aging....      3,000       3,000         0      0
  SSA Notch Commission..........          0           0         0      0
 
               ED
 
Education Reform:
  Goals 2000, National Programs.     21,530           0         0      0
  School to Work, National Progs      6,875       6,875         0      0
Ed for the Disadvantaged: State      27,560      27,560         0      0
 School Improvement.............
School Improvement:
  Safe/Drug Free-Postsecondary..          0           0         0      0
  Safe/Drug Free-National Progs.     25,000      25,000         0      0
  Safe/Drug Free-Safe Schools...          0           0         0      0
  Law Related Education.........      5,899           0         0      0
  Christa McAuliffe.............      1,946       1,946         0      0
  Women's Ed Equity.............      3,967       3,967         0      0
  Dropout Prevention Demos......     28,000           0         0      0
  Genl Assist-Virgin Islands....          0           0         0      0
  Territorial Teacher Training..          0           0         0      0
  Follow Through................          0           0         0      0
  Training Early Child Ed            13,875           0         0      0
   Violence.....................
  Family/Comm. Endeavor Schls...     11,100           0         0      0
Indian Education:
  Special Progs Indian Children.     14,342      12,342         0      0
  Special Progs Adult Indians...      5,420       5,420         0      0
  Indian Ed Natl Activities.....        125         125         0      0
Bilingual/Immigrant Ed:
  Bilingual Ed Support Services.     14,330      14,330         0      0
  Bilingual Ed Prof Development.     24,866      25,180         0      0
Special Institutions:
  NTID-Endowment Grants.........        336         336         0      0
  NTID-Construction.............        150         150         0      0
  Gallaudet Endowment grants....      1,000       1,000         0      0
  Gallaudet Construction........          0           0         0      0
Voc Ed:
  Comm. Based Orgs..............      9,479           0         0      0
  Consumer Homemaking Ed........     34,409           0         0      0
  State Councils................      8,848       8,848         0      0
  Natl Programs, Demos..........     20,684           0         0      0
  Natl Programs, Data systems...      6,000       4,250         0      0
  Bilingual Vocational Training.          0           0         0      0
  Adult Ed Evaluation/Tech            3,900       3,900         0      0
   Assist.......................
  State Lit Resource Cntrs......      7,787           0         0      0
  Workplace Lit Partnerships....     18,736      12,736         0      0
  Lit Training for Homeless           9,498           0         0      0
   Adults.......................
Student Financial Assist: State      20,000           0         0      0
 Postsec. Review................
 
            HIGHER ED
 
Aid for Institutional Develop:
  Endowment Grants..............      6,045       6,045         0      0
  HBCU-Set Aside................      2,015       2,015         0      0
  Evaluation....................      1,000       1,000         0      0
  Endowment Challenge Grants....      8,060       8,060         0      0
  Native Hawaiian/Alaska Arts...      1,000           0         0      0
  Eisenhower Leadership.........      4,000       1,080         0      0
  Innovative Proj. Comm. Serv/..      1,423       1,423         0      0
  Cooperative Ed................      6,927       6,927         0      0
  Law School Clinical Experience     14,920           0         0      0
  Financial Aid Database........        496           0         0      0
  Assistance to Guam............          0           0         0      0
  Natl Science Scholars.........      6,424       3,303         0      0
  Natl Acad Science-Space/Tech..      2,000           0         0      0
  Douglas Teacher Scholarships..     14,599         299         0      0
  Olympic Scholarships..........      1,000           0         0      0
  Teacher Corps.................      1,875           0         0      0
  Women/Minority Graduate Ed....          0           0         0      0
  Harris Fellowships............     20,244      10,144         0      0
  Javits Fellowships............      7,787           0         0      0
  Faculty Develop. Fellowships..      3,732           0         0      0
  School, Coll, Univ                  3,893       3,893         0      0
   Partnerships.................
  Legal Training for                  2,964       2,964         0      0
   Disadvantage.................
Howard University:
  Howard U Research.............      4,614       4,614         0      0
  Howard U Construction.........      5,000       5,000         0      0
  Regular Program...............      3,530       3,530         0      0
  Clinical Law Center...........      5,500       5,500         0      0
  College Housing Acad. Fac.
   Loans:.......................
  National Diffusion Network....     14,480      11,780         0      0
  Ed Tech-Natl Activities.......     13,000      13,000         0      0
  Loan Subsidies................        168           0         0      0
OERI:
  Natl Brd Prof. Teach.                   0           0         0      0
   Standards....................
  Fund for Improve of Schools...          0           0         0      0
  Blue Ribbon Schools...........          0           0         0      0
Libraries:
  College Library Tech..........          0           0         0      0
  Research Libraries............          0           0         0      0
  Literacy......................      8,026       8,026         0      0
  Departmental Management.......
  HBCU Capital Financing Brd....         74          74         0      0
  Natl Brd-FIPSE................        128         128         0      0
 
        RELATED AGENCIES
 
CNCS:
  Vista Literacy................      5,024       5,024         0      0

[[Page S8640]]

 
  Senior Demo Program...........      1,000       1,000         0      0
  Natl Ed Standards/Improvement.      2,000       2,000         0      0
  RRB Special Management Fund...        659         659       659      0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                   

                          ____________________