[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 155 (Friday, November 7, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H10305-H10313]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2264, DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN 
 SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998

  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the House, 
I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2264) 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, and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). Pursuant to the previous 
order of the House, the conference report is considered as having been 
read.
  (For conference report and statement, see prior proceedings of the 
House of today.)
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and 
the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter].


                             General Leave

  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on 
the conference report to accompany H.R. 2264 and that they may include 
tabular and extraneous material.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. PORTER. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am proud to bring to the floor today the conference 
report on fiscal year 1998 appropriations bill for the Departments of 
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies.
  As is normally the case, in the recent past, this bill has been 
through a long, torturous process from inception to the completion. The 
bill was on the floor for over 40 hours, and we had an unprecedented 
number of amendments offered. We have been almost 2 months in 
conference.
  I feel constrained to add, Mr. Speaker, that virtually all of the 
issues that have delayed the timely consideration of this bill are 
authorizing in nature and have nothing to do with the funding 
activities of the departments and agencies covered by this bill. Our 
work on dollar issues was completed long ago.
  My experience over the last several years has given me a new 
appreciation for the rules of the House that prohibit legislating on 
appropriation bills, and the delay we faced speaks to the need to 
enforce it more stringently.
  Mr. Speaker, with that said, I want to outline the remarkable policy 
initiatives we have achieved in this bill. The bill contains a revision 
of the Hyde amendment to ensure that no Federal funds are used to 
purchase health plans that pay for abortions except in the case of 
rape, incest, or endangerment of the life of the mother.
  I am particularly proud that this signal achievement was accomplished 
by negotiation among the parties rather than the rancorous and divisive 
debates that have characterized this issue in the past and other issues 
during consideration of this bill.
  I want to commend the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hyde], the 
distinguished chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, and the 
gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey] for their work on this issue, as 
well as their staff members Howard Wolfson, Brad Close, and my own 
staff member, Rob Bradner.
  The conference report incorporates a revision of the Goodling 
amendment negotiated by the chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
[Mr. Goodling]. I believe that he will be speaking

[[Page H10306]]

on the substance of this agreement, and I will leave the description of 
it to him.
  Goals 2000 State grants are funded at $464 million below last year's 
level.
  The conference report prohibits OSHA from issuing any standards on 
ergonomics and prohibits the enforcement of any volunteer guideline 
relating to ergonomics under the general duty. Again, this divisive 
issue was resolved by negotiation within the committee. I want to 
commend the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bonilla] and the ranking member 
of both the subcommittee and the full committee, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], for their work in resolving this issue.
  The conference report prohibits the expenditure of any further 
Federal funds for a new election for the International Brotherhood of 
Teamsters. The conference report prohibits the use of Federal funds for 
needle exchange programs for 6 months and provides conditions for the 
administration of such programs if the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services permits them.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Mississippi and member of the 
subcommittee [Mr. Wicker] and the gentlewoman from California [Ms. 
Pelosi], a member of the subcommittee, and the gentleman from Illinois 
[Mr. Hastert] for their work on this issue. While not all who worked on 
compromises are pleased with the final results, they all deserve our 
thanks for their hard work.
  The conference report freezes funding for the National Labor 
Relations Board. In real terms, this funding level represents a cut in 
funding below fiscal year 1997. The gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. 
Dickey] has been a particularly strong advocate in this area.
  The conference report prohibits implementation of NLRB regulations 
regarding single site bargaining units. If implemented, this regulation 
would create a huge number of new organizing drives in small businesses 
and service sectors.

                              {time}  1715

  The conference report continues the shift of funding and emphasis 
within OSHA away from enforcement and toward compliance assistance. 
Compliance assistance increases by $6.4 million, or 17 percent, while 
enforcement increases by $3 million, only 2.3 percent.
  Mr. Speaker, the bill provides increases for programs that fund 
Federal education mandates or Federal responsibilities. Special 
education is increased by $775 million, an increase of 19 percent. This 
funding helps offset the mandates Federal law has placed on local 
school districts. The bill also provides $805 million for Impact Aid to 
offset the additional costs and lost tax base resulting from Federal 
installations.
  High priority programs are funded. NIH is increased by $907 million, 
an increase of 7.1 percent. This level will assure that the medical and 
economic benefits of biomedical research will continue. Within this 
funding level NIH will be able to increase funding for diabetes, 
Parkinson's disease, cancer, coronary/heart disease, and others at 
rates greater than the overall increase for NIH.
  Other high priority items such as CDC, infectious disease control, 
breast and cervical cancer screening, TRIO, programs to prevent 
violence against women and health professionals training, are all 
increased.
  Pell grants, essentially a Federal voucher for college, are increased 
to a maximum of $3,000 and the Secretary of Education is given 
discretion to allow more independent students to qualify for student 
aid. The conference report increases the income protection allowances 
for all students receiving Federal financial aid.
  The bill includes an absolute prohibition on the use of human embryos 
in federally funded research, an initiative of the gentleman from 
Arkansas [Mr. Dickey] and the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Wicker].
  In addition, the conference report also includes the Student Loan 
Consolidation Act. This bill passed the House October 21 as H.R. 2535. 
The bill would allow the consolidation of both direct and guaranteed 
loans and it exempts education tax credits from the calculation of 
student aid.
  Mr. Speaker, there are many other provisions in this conference 
report that commend it to a broad spectrum of Members of the House. 
Probably the factor that I am most proud of is that from its inception 
to this very minute, this has been a bipartisan bill. I believe this 
conference report shows the benefit of this House following the 
instructions of the voters and putting aside partisan bickering and 
getting on with the business of governing. Mr. Speaker, I would urge 
the Members to support this conference report.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to add at this point some additional personal 
comments. The passage of this bill is never easy and the fact that we 
are now about to complete action on it is testimony to the hard work of 
many, many people.
  As I mentioned during the passage of the bill in the House, this bill 
has been supported, shaped and its progress furthered by the work of 
the members of the subcommittee: the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Obey], my ranking member, and the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. 
Livingston], the chairman of the committee. I have only the highest 
respect and admiration for them and for the work they accomplished in 
fashioning this bill.
  I want to spend a moment expressing my gratitude and that of the 
committee for one of our very best staffers who is leaving after this 
session to take another job. I am referring to Sue Quantius who is on 
the floor with us today.
  Sue is leaving the committee to take a position with the Association 
of American Universities. She has been with the committee since 1989 
and has been assigned to the Labor-HHS subcommittee the entire time. 
Prior to that time she worked for the Senate Appropriations Committee 
and for the Office of Management and Budget. She has served our country 
with extreme dedication and distinction for all of this time.
  With our subcommittee, her responsibilities have primarily been with 
various health programs that we fund, including most especially the 
National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention. As Members know, I have had a particular interest in NIH 
over the years. Since I have been chairman, Sue has been a great help 
to me, especially with regard to NIH. Mr. Speaker, she has done 
absolutely magnificent work. I just do not know how we are going to 
replace her. We are all going to miss her very, very much. We wish her 
the very best of everything as she undertakes her new responsibilities. 
I hope that she will continue to stay in touch with all of us.
  Finally, I want to express my thanks to the staff of the gentleman 
from Wisconsin, including Cheryl Smith, Mark Mioduski and Scott Lilly, 
his able staff director. As always, we have had the work of the full 
committee staff, headed by Jim Dyer, that has been invaluable to us.
  I want to express my appreciation in addition to Sue Quantius; to my 
own subcommittee staff, Mike Myers, Bob Knisley, Tony McCann as well as 
Julie Debolt and Dr. David Sander of my own staff. Without the 
assistance of each of these individuals and their support and the 
support of many more, we would not have been able to achieve this 
conference report which will, I believe, be passed and signed into law 
by the President.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 8\1/2\ minutes. Before I get 
into the bill, I would simply like to take a moment to also, from the 
minority side of the aisle, extend our best wishes to Sue Quantius as 
she leaves to pursue other opportunities in life. As the subcommittee 
chairman indicated, Sue has been with our subcommittee for 9 years. She 
has worked for four full committee chairmen during that time, including 
myself and the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston]. The gentleman 
from Illinois kindly left out that Sue had the great misfortune to 
begin her public service by serving as an intern on the Commission on 
Administrative Review, which was a reform commission which I chaired. 
We got half of our package through, the ethics package, but the other 
half of the package, the administrative changes in the House, were 
abruptly interrupted by a resounding ``no'' vote on the rule, and it 
took about 10 years for

[[Page H10307]]

most of those recommendations to be adopted on a piecemeal basis. That 
was an ignominious beginning to a distinguished career. I simply want 
to say that her work on biomedical research, on health issues in 
general and other issues has been superb. The public has been greatly 
served. Sue is another one of those persons about whom the public never 
hears much but without whom Government simply would not work. I 
appreciate the work that she has done for all of us.
  Mr. Speaker, one of my closest friends in politics is a man from 
Ireland by the name of John Hume. John Hume has noted on many occasions 
that politics is supposed to be the settlement of fiercely held 
differences by peaceful means. As people know, I do not shrink from 
political fights or arguments, and I do not shrink from fights on 
substance. But I prefer not to have them. I think that we are all, or 
we all ought to be, happiest on this House floor when we are pursuing 
politics not as war but as a method by which we accomplish important 
things for the people we represent.
  This bill more than any other bill that the Congress passes does 
that. This bill affects more human beings, more families in this 
country than any other bill that we touch. I think it is worthy of note 
to compare the atmosphere in which this bill was debated just 2 years 
ago with the atmosphere in which it is being debated today. Two years 
ago, this bill attempted to cut key programs for education and health 
and worker protection by some $6 billion. Those efforts to cut programs 
such as education and health and worker training were a principal 
reason that the Government was shut down. Two years ago, education was 
cut in this bill by $3.5 billion, worker protection by almost 15 
percent, job training for unemployed workers by almost 30 percent. 
Assistance to low-income folks in order to heat their homes in the dead 
of winter was cut by about a third.
  Today, in contrast, we do not have a Government shutdown. We do not 
have partisan warfare on this bill. The gentleman from Illinois is 
right. This bill has been pursued in a bipartisan way with a bipartisan 
coalition producing very positive results. This bill is $5.8 billion 
above last year for key programs in it. The National Institutes of 
Health is increased by 7 percent. That means research that we do on all 
of the diseases that human beings fear, whether it is cancer or heart 
disease or Alzheimer's or Parkinson's or you name it. We are trying to 
make steady progress in attacking all of the diseases that plague 
mankind. Education is up by 12 percent, over $3 billion. Pell grants 
have a 24-percent increase. Pell grants are the major program outside 
of student loans that help working-class kids get a decent education 
beyond high school.
  We have provided a $300 increase in the maximum grant for independent 
students and for dependent students. Special education services for 
disabled children, up by 18 percent in this bill. We have bilingual 
education increased by 35 percent in this bill. We have the most 
important education reform effort since title I, $150 million for 
comprehensive school reform to give local schools the tools to do the 
job locally in improving the operation of their schools so that they 
can raise student performance to meet high standards.

                              {time}  1730

  On education testing, we have a slightly different proposition from 
the original committee proposition. The administration can proceed with 
development of tests. It prevents field-testing in the first year, 
which originally would have been allowed by the original committee 
agreement. It prevents test administration for 1 year, in contrast to 
the original committee bill that would have had a permanent prohibition 
on testing without new authorization.
  Worker protection, workers' rights to organize, to bargain for decent 
wages, to work in decent working conditions are all protected in 
contrast to the very sharp reductions made in those programs in past 
years, at least the attempts that were made.
  We have a needle exchange program in here that may be controversial, 
but which will save lives, which may proceed after March 31 of next 
year.
  This bill repeals the $50 billion ripoff that was being provided in 
the tax bill for the tobacco industry.
  It provides a $100 million increase for low-income heating assistance 
program, a 10-percent increase.
  Cuts in family planning are fully restored.
  Goals 2000, we reached a compromise at last year's freeze level.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I would say that this bill is worthy of the 
tradition left to this House by people like Bill Natcher and Silvio 
Conte who worked for years to make this a bipartisan product. It is, I 
think, something that Members can be proud of because the fight in the 
budget, after all, is not really about how much we spend, it is where 
we spend it, and at least on this side of the aisle, and I think a good 
many Members on that side of the aisle, as well, recognized that we 
need to put more of our funds into education, into health, into jobs, 
into job training, into worker protection.
  That is what this bill does. It is, I think, a progressive effort to 
meet the Nation's needs, and I make no apology for the funding that we 
spend in it. It is spent on the people we represent for their most 
important long-term needs as families, and I would urge Members to 
support this bill.
  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], the chairman of the full committee.
  (Mr. LIVINGSTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I believe very strongly that this bill 
represents the essence of what is good legislation and a great 
legislative process. The fact is that we looked at this bill a very 
long time ago, some 6 months ago, and could tell that there was no way 
on God's Green Earth that this bill was going to pass without 
bipartisan support. There were Members on both sides who had problems 
with this bill, and there was a possibility that, if framed in an 
inappropriate manner, that the bill would never get signed into law, 
that we could end up in closure of government and repeat all the 
mistakes that have been made in the past with respect to issues 
involved in this bill.
  Fact is we went through prolonged debate and through the incredible 
leadership of the chairman, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter], 
and ranking minority member of the full committee and the subcommittee, 
the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], we were able to wend through 
the minefield of all of the obstacles and all of the hurdles that could 
have imploded this bill and prevented our ability to be here today.
  For our Members in the minority, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Obey] has listed a number of items of great importance to members of 
his party and to people throughout this country. In fact, there is lots 
more money for medical research and for education preferences.
  But for our conservative friends, let me say also that following the 
allocation of money within the budget agreement, we were able to stop 
national education testing in its tracks with an agreement negotiated 
between President Clinton and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 
Goodling]. We expanded the traditional Hyde language to make sure no 
Federal funds were used to purchase health plans that would pay for 
abortions. There are additional prohibitions on the needle distribution 
exchange program so that the authorizers are able to get involved over 
the next 6 months and take further action. There is a prohibition on 
the use of human embryos for federally-funded research. There is a 
prohibition on the expenditure of Federal funds for a new Teamsters 
election. There is a prohibition on issuance of new OSHA standards on 
ergonomics. There is a freeze on funding for the NLRB, the National 
Labor Relations Board.
  My conservative friends have had many objections about this bill, and 
many of their objections have been answered and have been recognized 
and codified into law in this bill.
  Does it satisfy everybody? Of course not. But this is a bill which 
spends tens of billions of dollars on important projects still 
eliminates 7 programs that were unnecessary and concentrates the 
resources on those areas where we need them. I commend the people that 
have worked on this bill, and I urge the adoption of the conference 
report.

[[Page H10308]]

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Speaker, I was remiss in not also indicating my profound 
appreciation for the way that the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] 
has handled this bill as well as the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. 
Livingston]. We have certainly disagreed, sometimes vehemently, many 
times on many issues, but we have always tried to keep in mind that our 
obligation was in the end to bridge those differences, and in the case 
of Mr. Porter we are dealing with a subcommittee chairman who not only 
feels his strong sense of obligation, but knows this bill and knows the 
programs in it, and that was always an invaluable help.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. 
Stokes].
  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report 
on H.R. 2264, and I want to commend our chairman, the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Porter], and our ranking member, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], for their leadership in producing this conference 
agreement.
  This measure represents the true spirit of bipartisan effort to craft 
a workable compromise on fiscal year 1998 funding for this bill. For 
example, the measure funds a youth opportunity areas initiative, which 
is urgently needed to address the continuing double-digit unemployment 
among our Nation's most disadvantaged youth. In many instances these 
young people have given up on themselves. I strongly believe that we 
must do all that we can to help ensure that all of our Nation's young 
people are equipped with the knowledge and the skills that they need to 
compete in and remain in the work force.
  For undergraduate historically black colleges and universities, the 
bill provides $118.5 million. The HBCU is a national resource, and this 
investment would help to strengthen the infrastructure at these vital 
institutions of higher education.
  For the health professions education and training, the conference 
measure provides $293 million. The funds are urgently needed to help 
ensure an adequate supply of health care providers. I know that the 
portion of the funds that are invested in training minorities and other 
individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds will help to address the 
continuing shortage of health care providers in our Nation's inner 
cities and rural communities, and it would help also to address the 
continuing disparity in minority health.
  Mr. Speaker, the $529.7 million provided for the trio programs and 
the $7.3 billion in support of the Pell grant program would help to 
ensure the students will not only enter college, but more importantly, 
they will have access to support services they need in order to help 
ensure their retention and graduation.
  I am pleased that the conference report is not excessively 
overburdened with major legislative provisions.
  On the issue of national testing, I am encouraged that we have been 
able to reach an interim position, and I look forward to working 
closely with the authorizers on this very important matter.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in voting yes on the 
conference report on H.R. 2264.
  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mississippi [Mr. Wicker], a valued member of our subcommittee.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for 
yielding the time.
  I want to commend the chairman of the subcommittee as well as the 
ranking member of this subcommittee for the hard work and negotiation 
and the lengthy time that they put into this very important 
legislation. I support it. I hope we have strong support from both 
sides of the aisle for this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, it is not the type of bill that I would have written had 
I been writing it in a vacuum. It might not be a better bill if I wrote 
it, but it would be a different bill. But just think about this, Mr. 
Speaker, this is the first conference report on Labor HHS appropriation 
that we have had in 3 years, and I think it is better for this House 
and for the Senate and for the process to work its will rather than to 
go with continuing resolutions and resolve the issues that way.
  I think the leadership is to be commended for pushing this through 
and for us finally getting to this stage for the first time in 3 years 
of actually being able to have a conference committee report a bill and 
for us to vote on it.
  I commend the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], and Mr. 
Livingston spoke about the things that were achieved for conservatives. 
I think members of my party should realize that Mr. Livingston is 
himself a conservative, and he has worked hard for those issues that 
are important on our side of the aisle.
  It has already been mentioned that this bill before us today contains 
the Goodling language that stops national testing. It contains an 
expansion of the Hyde amendment; a moratorium for the first 6 months of 
this fiscal year on needle exchange programs funded by taxpayer funds, 
which will allow the Congress to work its will on an authorizing piece 
of legislation next year; a prohibition on the use of human embryos for 
federally-funded research, again a very important issue to 
conservatives around this Nation.
  The bill also contains important modifications in the law with regard 
to OSHA to make sure that we protect American jobs at the same time 
that we are protecting and looking out for workers' health and safety, 
and in addition a freeze on funding for the National Labor Relations 
Board and a host of other issues that are important to conservatives.
  This is a contentious bill. Any time we talk about the Department of 
Labor, the subgroups there, NLRB, OSHA, and then throw in HHS with 
needle exchanges and the entire issues of Federal education policy, we 
are going to have a contentious bill. But I commend the leadership for 
moving us in the right direction. I commend the bill to conservatives, 
and I hope on my side of the aisle we will have a tremendous vote in 
favor of the bill.
  And then let us not lose sight of the fact that we are doing 
important things to prevent disease and to protect the health of 
Americans in this legislation.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi], a member of the subcommittee.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for 
his leadership on this bill and for yielding me the time.
  I rise in support of the Labor-HHS conference report. In particular I 
commend the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] for negotiating an excellent bipartisan bill, a 
bill in which the subcommittee can take considerable pride.
  This conference report is a refreshing change from last 2 years when 
the bill had been the focus of deep ideological disputes and a vehicle 
for sending objectionable legislative riders to the President. 
Thankfully, thanks to the leadership also of our chairman of the full 
committee, the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], as well as 
the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], we have returned to the bipartisan tradition 
which has historically characterized this bill. As our former chairman 
Mr. Natcher would say, this is a good bill.

                              {time}  1745

  While this is a good bill, it is good because of the excellent work 
again, as I said, of the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the 
gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], who fought very hard to forge this 
bipartisan legislation. We were given many difficult challenges by the 
Committee on the Budget, so that many problems that, ironically, it may 
have forced this responsible bipartisan bill.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] in particular 
for doing such an excellent job in reflecting progressive values in 
these negotiations.
  With regard to labor programs, the bill makes significant investments 
in job training, Job Corps, Job Youth and adult training. At the same 
time, the bill adequately funds worker protection programs, and, 
unlike, the last 2 years, does not include riders designed to weaken 
the protection of American workers.

[[Page H10309]]

  I am particularly pleased under an agreement negotiated by the 
gentleman from Illinois [Chairman Porter] and the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], OSHA will be able to continue its important work 
in developing an ergonomic standard and will be able to assist business 
in the next year to adopt important changes in work environment 
designed to prevent repetitive stress injuries.
  With regard to health, the bill is a significant improvement over the 
budget agreement. In addition, the bill provides huge increases in AIDS 
drug assistance programs, and also will make a difference between life 
and death for thousands of Americans living with HIV disease.
  I am also particularly pleased with the compromise in the legislation 
about the needle exchange program which the gentleman from Illinois 
[Mr. Porter] addressed in his remarks. This compromise, I think, will 
enable the needle exchange programs which are part of a HIV prevention 
program and which do not increase the use of drugs to proceed, and it 
retains for the Secretary the discretion, unless Congress works its 
will between now and next spring, to lift the prohibition on needle 
exchange programs, as long as, as I say, they are part of a program to 
prevent HIV and drug abuse.
  With regard to education, I am pleased that so many of the 
President's important education priorities have been accommodated in 
this bill. I am particularly pleased with the funding for the bilingual 
education and the investment and support services and professional 
development to improve the quality of these programs. I am also pleased 
with the high priority placed on direct financial assistance to 
students for higher education.
  For all these reasons, this is a great bill, and I urge my colleagues 
to support it.
  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to 
the gentlewoman from Kentucky [Mrs. Northup], the newest member of our 
subcommittee team, who has done an absolutely outstanding job, the best 
of any freshman I have ever seen.
  Mrs. NORTHUP. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have an opportunity to 
speak about this bill and to have served on this subcommittee. I want 
to also thank the subcommittee chair and the ranking member and the 
other members of the subcommittee that have worked so hard on this 
bill.
  Many of the benefits of this bill, the appropriations that we have 
made, have been discussed previously, but I would just like to say that 
one of the reasons this is such a tough bill is because education and 
health are intrinsically different than anything else we spend our 
money for.
  It is one thing to be dispassionate about road construction or 
military buildup, but it is impossible to be dispassionate about our 
children. Moms and dads across this country feel passionately and 
emotionally about the schools that their children attend and whether or 
not they learn and how much they learn and whether they are prepared 
for the future.
  This world is changing. The world our children will know will be 
different than the world that we have known, and they have to be 
prepared in different ways and for different experiences. The way they 
will be pioneers in their lives will be different than the way we are 
pioneers in our lives. So as our schools are grappling with change, it 
is difficult for their moms and dads and for all of us to pick the best 
of what we have and make sure we continue that and prepare it in new 
ways for new worlds.
  We are also confused and not certain about what the Federal role is 
going to be in an educational system that has largely heretofore been a 
state responsibility and organization. Assuming that will continue and 
that we will expect schools to succeed locally, we are looking for the 
way that the best Federal investment can be made in our schools.
  So I want to say that education is different. It is different than 
road construction. The fact that there is an unpatched pothole is not 
very emotional, but if your child goes to school and does not learn to 
read, that is very emotional.
  I want to in particular thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the subcommittee 
chairman, for your commitment to the blind community and the deaf 
community. I have served very closely with the blind community in 
Louisville. We happen to be the home for the American Printing House 
for the Blind. My husband and I have been very involved in this 
community, and we recognized here in this bill the importance of 
continued access that the blind community needs to those services. So I 
wanted to thank the gentlemen in particular for that.
  Mr. Speaker, I recommend this bill to the rest of the Members.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report and to 
congratulate and thank both the chairman, the gentleman from Illinois 
[Mr. Porter], with whom I have served on this committee for, I suppose, 
all of my career on the committee, which is from 1983 to date, and also 
to congratulate the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey].
  Mr. Speaker, in many ways this is a bill that is not difficult from 
the standpoint that almost every member of Congress and the 
overwhelming majority of Americans probably believe it is the most 
important bill that we consider in this House on an annual basis as it 
affects themselves, their families, their children, the education of 
this Nation, as well as their children, the health care of themselves 
and this Nation.
  Our former chairman, Mr. Natcher, used to say that if you take care 
of the health of your people and provide for the education of your 
children, you will continue to live in the strongest and best nation on 
Earth. He was correct. He said this was the People's House and that 
this was the people's bill. He was also correct in that.
  But it is also a very difficult bill, because the priorities within 
the bill are agreed by all to be principal priorities, and, therefore, 
the allocation of resources between them is difficult.
  Both the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Porter) and the ranking 
member, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], are always under a 
great deal of pressure, and the supplicants or the lobbyists or the 
interests that are represented in this bill are all good, and, 
therefore, it is very difficult to say no.
  This bill, I think, represents a good piece of legislation, of which 
the American public can be proud. It was forged in a bipartisan basis, 
sometimes contentious, because there are strong differences on many 
issues. But this bill as it relates to education, unlike, frankly, some 
previous bills in previous Congresses, reflects a commitment to invest 
in the future of our country by investing in our children.
  Head Start is increased, critically important, to make sure that our 
disadvantaged children have an opportunity to be competitive, both in 
education and in the marketplace. It is important that they be partners 
as America completes in the global marketplace.
  Chapter I, that tries to ensure that those same children and others 
who may have been disadvantaged in life will not be disadvantaged in 
terms of the focus of this Congress and of the education establishment, 
in making sure that we make a special effort to give them the capacity 
to learn, to work and to compete.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of this conference 
report, which reflects a compromise, testing having been one of the 
more difficult items, block grants as opposed to categorical 
expenditures being another. But they were debated, sometimes hotly, 
strongly held views, but ultimately, through the leadership of the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the gentleman from Wisconsin 
[Mr. Obey], and I might also say the chairman of our committee, the 
gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], who has done such an 
outstanding job leading the Committee on Appropriations through this 
difficult process, we have a bill of which we can all be proud and 
which we can enthusiastically support.
  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling], the very able chairman of 
the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

[[Page H10310]]

  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  (Mr. GOODLING asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank the chairman 
and the ranking member, the subcommittee chairman, and all the 
conferees for their hard work on a report that is always very 
difficult. I am sure I helped make it even more difficult. The national 
testing issue did not make it any easier for them. However, it was one 
of the most important policy battles I think we have had to fight. We 
all want quality education, high academic standards, for all of our 
children, and we believe parents and local governments can best do 
that.
  I want to thank the 295 Members and particularly the Speaker and the 
gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Graham] for all of their help and 
their support, and particularly the staffs, the staff of the 
Appropriations Committee, the staff of my committee. If we had to pay 
all the overtime that they would have earned, we would be out of money 
for the rest of the year, I suppose.
  I also want to talk just a little bit about some of the other good 
things that are there as far as I am concerned. I want to thank the 
gentleman from Illinois [Chairman Porter] and the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] for keeping their commitment to increase funding 
for special ed in the conference report. The agreement continues to 
make great strides toward meeting our obligations to State and local 
school districts through a near $700 million increase to the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
  I am pleased the report provides increases to other high-priority 
programs such as Even Start and Chapter 2 education and block grants to 
the States.
  I want to thank the appropriators for including the Emergency Student 
Loan Consolidation Act, which will mean an awful lot to parents and 
students.
  Finally, the bill makes important changes to the need analysis 
formula in the Higher Education Act, which ensures that students and 
families who qualify for new higher education tax credits will not be 
penalized in the Federal Government's determination of eligibility and 
student financial aid.
  I thank again all who put this appropriations bill together. It is a 
very important bill, and I am sure it will receive overwhelming 
support.
  Mr. Speaker, I'd first like to thank the chairman, the ranking 
member, and other conferees for their hard work on the conference 
report. The Labor, HHS bill is never an easy task. And the national 
testing issue did not make it any easier.
  I am pleased to announce that, we have finally reached an agreement 
on testing. I wish to thank the Chairman and Ranking member and many 
other members of Congress for their input and hard work on this 
important matter. It was truly a team effort.
  Three months ago when members of the House decided to fight the 
President's plan to give new federal tests to our school children, we 
started with children in mind. From the beginning, we believed that a 
new federal test would do nothing to help our children. If more testing 
were the answer to the problems in our schools, testing would have 
solved them a long time ago.
  Everyone in this body supports high standards and accountability. No 
question about that. But we all agree new federal tests created by 
Washington bureaucrats are not the answer.
  Most importantly the conference report stops the Department of 
Education's plans for new national tests for one year. As a result, 
this House--not the White House--now controls this issue.
  This agreement stops the President's plan in its tracks for one year 
by prohibiting pilot testing, field testing, implementation, 
administration, and implementation of new national tests.
  The White House acknowledges that Congress will now play a very large 
role in deciding if, how, and when any new national tests will be 
implemented, if at all.
  The Administration recognizes that existing commercial tests now used 
in the states may very well fit their purposes and provide the kind of 
information we need to adequately assess our students. We have agreed 
to have the National Academy of Sciences study this issue and report 
back to us next fall.
  A few other key points of the conference agreement are: The existing 
test development contract entered into by the Department of Education 
will be transferred out of the Department to the National Assessment 
Governing Board; the National Academy of Sciences will study the 
technical quality of the test items already developed by the Department 
and recommend safeguards against tests being used in an inappropriate 
manner; no student is required to take any national test in any subject 
or grade; the Committee on Education and the Workforce will hold 
several hearings on the National Assessment Governing Board and the 
National Assessment of Educational Progress during the first half of 
1998. At that time, the President will have an opportunity to have his 
testing proposal fully debated, and Congress will have the opportunity 
to work its will.
  This is a clear victory. It affirms the 295-125 vote last month 
prohibiting funds for new federal tests. I thank each of those 295 
members who voted for the the Goodling Amendment and stood with us in 
our negotiations with the White House.
  On other matters, I want to thank Chairman Porter and Mr. Obey for 
keeping their commitment to increase funding for special education in 
this conference report. This agreement continues to make great strides 
toward meeting our obligations to States and local school districts 
through a nearly $700 million increase to the Individuals with 
Disabilities Education Act Grants to States.
  Second, I am pleased that the conference report provides increases to 
other high-priority programs, such as Even Start and Chapter 2 
education block grants to States.
  Third, I want to thank the appropriators for including the Emergency 
Student Loan Consolidation Act. This bill passed the House by a voice 
vote on October 21st, but stalled in the Senate until today. The bill 
will help thousands of students who have been unable to obtain a 
consolidation loan due to the Department of Education's shutdown of 
their direct loan consolidation processing center.
  Finally, this bill makes important changes to the need analysis 
formula in the Higher Education Act which will ensure that students and 
families who qualify for the new higher education tax credits will not 
be penalized in the Federal Government's determination of eligibility 
for student financial aid.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey], also a member of the 
subcommittee.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I am proud of this conference report. The 
committee, under the strong leadership of the gentleman from Illinois, 
Chairman Porter and the ranking member, the gentleman from Wisconsin 
[Mr. Obey], along with our Senate colleagues, succeeded in producing a 
bill which reflects our shared priorities.
  We worked very hard on this bill, and this bill truly reflects a real 
bipartisan effort. Again, I want to thank the chairman and the ranking 
member for creating the atmosphere and the commitment among all of us 
to work together.
  I also want to thank the staffs on both sides who have been so very 
helpful and cooperative in reaching our goals.
  Mr. Speaker, this conference report recognizes the clear need for an 
increased investment in our children's education. I am pleased that we 
were able to provide $3.2 billion more than last year in funds for 
education. In particular, I am pleased that $40 million in new funds 
have been provided to keep our schools open after hours in order to 
provide a safe haven for our youth and to improve reading and other 
academic skills.
  We increased the maximum Pell grant by $300 per student and overall 
Pell funding by $1.4 billion. The bill also includes language expanding 
the eligibility of independent and dependent students for Pell grants. 
In addition, we were able to restore funding to the SSIG student aid 
program which helps so many young people get that education.
  We made a number of significant increases in health programs. We were 
able to provide the National Institutes of Health with a 7 percent 
increase over last year. This will allow the National Institutes of 
Health to increase funding for breast cancer research and other dreaded 
diseases so that advances in prevention and treatment will continue.
  Funding for AIDS drug assistance has been increased by $119 million 
more than last year. This will help to provide life-sustaining medicine 
to AIDS patients across the country.
  I am also very pleased that we provided $268 million for job 
training. In part, these funds will help to assist those on welfare so 
they can better obtain decent-paying jobs.

[[Page H10311]]

  While I am disappointed that the Hyde amendment restricting access to 
abortion for low-income women is still in this bill, I am very pleased 
that we were able to prevent a radical expansion of this prohibitive 
restriction.

                              {time}  1800

  The bill also repeals the $50 billion tuberculosis giveaway.
  Of course, there are some programs that I wish we could have expanded 
even more: Worker protection, title I education, and Centers for 
Disease Control are among those programs. However, on balance, I 
believe that this is a very good bill that meets so many of the 
important needs of our constituents, and I urge my colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle to support this bill.
  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana [Mr. Souder].
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for yielding me 
this time.
  Compromise is probably not my greatest strength, and while there are 
many good things in this bill, there are many things that I not only 
dislike, I detest, but that is kind of the rule of how compromise 
works, and I appreciate working with the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
Porter], the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], with the gentleman 
from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston] and all of the others on this 
committee.
  When asked at the press conference today, ``It's not a disappointment 
then, in the end?'', Mr. McCurry was asked about the national testing, 
and he said, ``Well, I mean in a perfect world we would have gotten our 
plan as it was designated by the Secretary of Education and the 
President, but it's not a perfect world when you have a Republican 
Congress, to say the very least.'' And that is an accurate statement 
about how things work.
  I appreciate the time we had to debate it and to air our differences. 
I think we have made progress on some of the issues for the movement 
conservatives, particularly on testing. We held a number of other 
issues. I probably will not say this too many times in my career, but I 
intend to vote for a Labor-HHS appropriations bill, and I appreciate 
the process we went through. I think it is a reasonable compromise 
given the differences we have between the House and the Senate and the 
President, and I thank the leadership for that.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker,, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro], also a member of the 
subcommittee.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference 
report, and I would like to thank Chairman Porter and Ranking Member 
Obey for their hard work and their bipartisan spirit. I am pleased that 
it contains a substantial increase for health research at the NIH, for 
disease prevention work at the Centers for Disease Control, and for 
important educational programs such as Head Start and IDEA.
  I am especially proud that the conference report includes a 
substantial increase in funding for quality care, child care for 
children under the age of 3. New research has shown that the early 
years are a critical time of intellectual, emotional, moral, and 
physical development, which prepare a child to be healthy and 
productive in later life. We cannot afford to waste these critical 
learning years.
  This conference report includes a $50 million increase in the child 
care and development block grant for States to improve the quality of 
care for our youngest children. It also includes $69 million more than 
the President requested to expand the Early Start, zero to 3 program, 
within Head Start. These funds will give thousands of additional 
children an opportunity to have the very best start in life.
  I am pleased that the bill includes funding to improve our schools 
and hold our students to the highest standards, including the $200 
million for whole school reform, to assist our least successful 
students in meeting educational goals. I have the experience of New 
Haven, CT and the Kolmer model of schools to point to as how whole 
school reform can work and does work.
  Throughout this process, we have at times faced the possibility that 
the bipartisanship would be undermined by controversial riders 
regarding abortion, parental consent for contraceptives, needle 
exchange and other issues. I am glad to say that none of these 
controversial riders are in this bill.
  I am pleased to support this conference report, and I urge my 
colleagues to join me in voting for its passage.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bentsen].
  (Mr. BENTSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, and I 
agree, I think it is a very good compromise. When we look at the levels 
of funding in this bill, it underscores that in a period of balancing 
budgets and a decline in discretionary spending what some of the 
priorities of the Government are, and I think this is a victory in many 
areas.
  In particular, I want to commend the chairman of the subcommittee and 
the ranking member for the increase in the National Institutes of 
Health funding by 7 percent. It was not too long ago in 1995 when this 
House passed a budget that would have cut NIH funding by 5 percent in 
real terms. So this is a step in the right direction.
  Given the fact that the House may or may not in the next couple of 
days take up the issue of trade, it is important that we continue to 
put funds into biomedical research and what the NIH does, because that 
is an area where America leads the world.
  Second of all, from what I can tell from the bill, it does not make 
the changes that were proposed in the immunization funding or that 
would have affected the carryover funds. That is terribly important to 
my State of Texas and my home city of Houston, which could have been 
adversely affected by cutting back on the carryover funding that is 
used a great deal in the City of Houston which has an expanding 
immunization program, particularly for the indigent, and I appreciate 
the fact that the committee was wise enough not to cut those funds 
back.
  I want to commend again the chairman and the ranking member. This is 
a good bill. I intend to support it, and I hope my colleagues will do 
so.
  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I see that Sue Quantius is back. As I said, the chairman and I have 
been on this subcommittee I think just about the same time. I think he 
has been on maybe a session before me. Sue Quantius, I am not sure how 
long Sue has been with us, but I know she worked on the Senate side.
  I mentioned the health care of our people, and I know it is a 
particular interest of the chairman, and our expert on the committee is 
Sue Quantius. She has done an outstanding job; she is one of the most 
knowledgeable people in Washington on health care issues and 
particularly on NIH funding and NIH resources, objectives, and 
responsibilities. I want to rise, as I know the chairman has, and as I 
know the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] has, in thanking her for 
the service that she has given.
  The American public and this House ought to be very proud of the 
staff of the Committee on Appropriations. It is arguably the most 
bipartisan, nonpartisan staff on Capitol Hill. To the great credit of 
the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], our chairman, when he 
became chairman, most of the staff stayed because we all on both sides 
of the aisle perceive them as very true professionals who know their 
subject, who work hard, have great talent and great commitment to the 
product of this committee and to this country.
  Sue, on behalf of myself and all of us on this side of the aisle, and 
I know the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] has already done that, 
and I know our present chairman in office has done that, but I want to 
join them and say thank you and to wish you Godspeed. Your next 
endeavor, your next employer is a very fortunate entity indeed. Thank 
you very much.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Edwards].
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago I met a young Army soldier in 
my

[[Page H10312]]

district who had missed the birth of his first child because he was 
serving our Nation in Desert Storm. He then missed the birth of his 
second child because he was doing his duty, as his Nation called him to 
do, in Bosnia.
  There is nothing this Congress can do to make up for the sacrifice of 
that young Army soldier. But what I am deeply grateful for is that 
through the leadership of Chairman Porter and Ranking Member Obey, this 
Nation has made a commitment through the Impact Aid Program to see that 
that young soldier when he is serving thousands of miles away from his 
family, serving his country, he or she can be sure that his or her sons 
and daughters will receive a firstclass education. It seems to me that 
that is a moral duty of this Congress. It is also the right thing to do 
to ensure a strong national defense, because all of the technology in 
the world, without the best and brightest soldiers and Marines and Navy 
pilots and sailors, will not ensure our Nation's defense.
  So I want to thank, not only for the whole effort of this tremendous 
piece of legislation, but in particular, I want to thank the gentleman 
from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] and the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] 
for their outstanding leadership and not forgetting those young 
children and military families who may not ever see their parents at 
graduation because their parents may end up giving the ultimate 
sacrifice in time of war.
  This is a great bill, and particularly on impact aid. I say thank 
you.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Missouri [Mr. Skelton].
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, let me join my friend from Texas in 
complimenting the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and our ranking 
member the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey]. I represent a district 
that has Whiteman Air Force Base and Fort Leonard Wood, both of whom 
are areas that are heavily impacted by the Federal Government, the 
Federal reservations, and impact aid is so important for those 
children. We have to take care of the families of the people in uniform 
and this is a wonderful way to do it. So I join my friend from Texas 
[Mr. Edwards] in complimenting them and thanking this committee for the 
effort.
  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, as we wind up this first session of the 105th Congress, 
all of us I think are pretty well exhausted. We have had little sleep 
night after night, especially during the last week. We have been in 
intense negotiations for hours and hours on end. Nerves are frazzled. 
We say things we may not mean. We make accusations that are perhaps 
unfounded. We even raise questions about the processes of democracy so 
that we can have things come out our way. It is a time when Republicans 
sometimes are fighting it out with Democrats, the White House is 
fighting it out with the Congress, the Senate is fighting it out with 
the House, authorizers are opposite appropriators, committee chairmen 
are against other committee chairmen, and often things get a bit out of 
hand.
  Several of the bills, there are four that remain, including this one, 
have been subject to intense negotiations. This conference report has 
certainly been one of them. But in the end, Mr. Speaker, all of us 
believe in the processes of democracy that allow us to work with one 
another and to find the middle, the place where the American people 
are. Compromise in my judgment is not at all a bad word, it is exactly 
what our Founders envisioned for us. It was their intent that we had to 
cooperate with one another, work together as Americans, and find how we 
can best reflect the values of the American people.

                              {time}  1815

  So, Mr. Speaker, I believe that this bill truly does represent, 
through bipartisan work, through true compromise, through honest 
negotiation, exactly what the American people expect of us.
  I am very proud that this year we have managed to work together and 
managed to work through a very, very difficult process, and still come 
out with great respect for one another. I have tremendous respect for 
my colleague, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey]. I think we do 
work well together. That is a very positive thing.
  I believe we have fashioned a bill that really does reflect the 
values of this country, and have done so in a very strong, bipartisan 
fashion, in the true traditions of the democracy of this great land we 
all are privileged to live in and to serve.
  Mr. Speaker, I would commend this bill to each of the Members. I 
think we have done the best job that possibly could have been done. I 
thank everyone for their willingness to work together.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] is recognized for 3\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I simply would like to do two things. First of 
all, the gentleman from Illinois, Chairman Porter, was gracious enough 
to mention the contributions made by all our staffers on both sides on 
the committee.
  I would also like to add, in addition to my staffers who have already 
been cited by the chairman, I would also like to add Christina 
Hamilton, from my personal office, who worked very hard on this bill.
  I would also like to express our best wishes to a very dedicated 
staffer who has worked for the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi] 
for the past 10 years on this bill. Dr. Steve Morin is moving back to 
San Francisco. We will miss his expertise on many health and labor 
programs, most notably, his great work on the issues relating to AIDS, 
and trying to minimize the terrible damage that that disease causes, 
and giving researchers the resources they need to search for a cure.
  I think this is a very progressive bill, and I would point out once 
again, if I could have had my way, this bill would have at least $5 
billion more in this devoted to education and health and worker 
protection. But this bill is $900 million above the bill as it left the 
House. That is not bad, under these circumstances.
  I again congratulate each and every member of the subcommittee, and 
the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the gentleman from 
Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], and all of the Members on my side of the 
aisle, for working so hard to both define their views and to resolve 
their differences.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I am rising today to clarify an amendment 
offered by Representative Carolyn McCarthy and myself that was included 
in the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill. The amendment added 
$100,000 to the Department of Education's Program Administration 
account so that the Department can expand its web site to include 
information for all public and private scholarship and financial aid 
programs.
  It is my understanding that the committee report includes explicit 
language stating that the conferees have agreed that the funds are 
specifically included to enable the Department to expand its web site 
to provide this information, pursuant to Section 409A(1) of the Higher 
Education Act. This provision states that the Department of Education 
shall award a contract to maintain a computerized database of all 
private and public student financial assistance programs. Our amendment 
is geared to help the Department fulfill this goal.
  I thank the Committee chairmen and staff for working with us on this 
matter to help ensure that the Department will receive the funding it 
needs for this important project.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member is pleased that the fiscal 
year 1998 Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations Act 
conference report contains several provisions regarding important rural 
health programs which benefit rural communities across the nation, as 
well as continued funding for the Ellender Fellowships. In addition, 
this Member would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from 
Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], the Chairman of the Committee on 
Appropriations, the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], 
the ranking member of both the full Committee and the Subcommittee on 
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education and the distinguished 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Porter), the Chairman of the Subcommittee, 
for their work on these important issues.

  Regarding rural health funding, this Member would like to 
specifically mention two programs which this Member strongly supports 
and has expressed this support together with other members of the House 
Rural Health Care Coalition to the Subcommittee. These programs are 
Rural Outreach Grants, and the National Health Service Corps.

[[Page H10313]]

  This conference report includes $32.6 million for Rural Outreach 
Grants, which is an increase of $4.8 million above the fiscal year 1997 
level and $7.6 million above the amount requested by the President. 
This important program support projects that provide health services to 
rural populations not currently receiving them and that enhance access 
to existing services.
  The National Health Service Corps receives $115.4 million in this 
conference report, which is equivalent to both the fiscal year 1997 
level and the amount requested by the President. One of the top health 
care concerns in rural America is the shortage of physicians and other 
health professionals due to the difficulties rural areas have in 
attracting and retaining primary health care professionals. The 
National Health Service Corps program addresses this need by providing 
scholarships to, and repays loans of, primary care professionals in 
exchange for obligated services in a Health Professional Shortage Area.
  The program also provides matching grants to states for a loan 
repayment program. These incentives for health professionals and 
physicians to serve in rural areas are greatly needed.

  This Member is also pleased that this conference report includes $1.5 
million for Ellender fellowships. Earlier this year, this Member 
testified before the subcommittee regarding this important program. 
This amount is the same as the fiscal year 1997 level, even though the 
President's budget did not include any funds for the extraordinary 
valuable citizen education program for American high school students. 
The Ellender Fellowships are used to enable low-income students to 
participate in the highly successful Washington Close Up program.
  Each year the Close Up foundation awards thousands of Ellender 
Fellowships, which included 3,942 students during the 1995-1996 school 
year. Nationally, since 1971 over 480,000 students and teachers have 
participated in the Washington Close Up Program. Almost 95,000 of those 
participants received full or partial fellowships.
  Again, Mr. Speaker, this Member commends the distinguished gentleman 
from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], the Chairman of the Committee on 
Appropriations, the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], 
the ranking member of both the full committee and the subcommittee, and 
the distinguished gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter], for their 
continued support of these important programs.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the conference report.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the conference report.
  Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XV, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were-- yeas 352, 
nays 65, not voting 16, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 615]

                               YEAS--352

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chambliss
     Christensen
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayworth
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kim
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCrery
     McDade
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     Riggs
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Adam
     Smith, Linda
     Snyder
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Sununu
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)

                                NAYS--65

     Aderholt
     Archer
     Bachus
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Blunt
     Brady
     Bryant
     Cannon
     Chabot
     Chenoweth
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Conyers
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Doolittle
     Everett
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Hastings (WA)
     Hefley
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hostettler
     Hutchinson
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Largent
     Manzullo
     McIntosh
     Mica
     Moran (KS)
     Neumann
     Norwood
     Paul
     Paxon
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pombo
     Radanovich
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Snowbarger
     Stearns
     Stump
     Stupak
     Talent
     Taylor (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--16

     Blumenauer
     Cubin
     Flake
     Frank (MA)
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Hoekstra
     Klug
     Leach
     McCollum
     McDermott
     Quinn
     Riley
     Schiff
     Yates
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1839

  The Clerk announced the following pair:
  On this vote:

       Mr. Quinn for, with Mr. McCollum against.

  Messrs. BRYANT, BARTON of Texas, and EVERETT changed their vote from 
``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the conference report was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________