[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 52 (Thursday, April 15, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3784-S3790]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               The ``Caring for America's Children'' Act

     Title I: Tax Benefits for Families with Children
       Section 101: Increases the Dependent Care Tax Credit (DCTC) 
     by (a) increasing the amount of allowable expenses to $3,600 
     for one dependent; $6,000 for two or more; (b) increasing the 
     maximum percentage of the allowable expenses to 40 percent; 
     (c) increases the adjusted gross income level receiving the 
     maximum percentage to $50,000; (d) reduces the allowable 
     percentage by 1 percent for each $2,000 over $50,000, not 
     reduced below 10 percent; (d) permiting educational programs 
     and third party transportation costs to be counted as 
     allowable expenses.
       Section 102: Increases the Child Tax Credit from $500 per 
     year to $900 per year.
       Section 103: Makes changes in the Dependent Care Assistance 
     Program (DCAP) by (a) Increasing the dollar contribution 
     limit to $7,000 a year for two or more dependents; (b) 
     Permiting contributions to DCAP accounts during pregnancy, 
     usable for one year after the birth of a child; (c) permiting 
     DCAP funds to be used to pay a spouse or grandparent to care 
     for a pre-school aged child at home; and (d) establishing a 
     DCAP for federal employees.
       Section 104: Permits parents to choose between the 
     Dependent Care Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, and the 
     Dependent Care Assistance Program for each dependent child 
     (each tax benefit mutually exclusive for each child).
       Section 105: Expands the Home Office tax deduction to 
     permit parents to care for a dependent child within the home 
     office space

[[Page S3785]]

     and maintain the ``exclusive use'' designation for the home 
     office tax deduction.
       Section 106: Requires states to include the cost of child 
     care in the calculation of child support orders.
       Estimated cost of Title I is $35.1 billion over 5 years.
     Title II: Activities to Improve the Quality of Child Care
       Subtitle A--Encouraging Business Involvement in Child Care
       Section 201: Creates a child care tax credit for employers 
     up to $150,000 a year ($250,000 a year with respect to three 
     or more company child care facilities in different locations) 
     in allowable employee-related child care expenses such as the 
     construction or renovation of facilities and employee 
     subsidies. CBO estimate $500 million over 5 years.
       Section 202: Expands the business charitable tax deduction 
     to include the contribution of scientific and computer 
     equipment, transportation services, qualified employee 
     volunteer time, and the use of facilities and equipment to 
     public schools and child care providers.
       Subtitle B--Child Care Quality Improvement Incentive 
           Program
       Section 211: Definition Section
       Section 212: Establishes a state grant program to fund 
     activities designed to improve the quality of child care.
       Section 213: Allocates funds to the states based on the 
     Child Care and Development formula, with a small state 
     minimum.
       Section 214: To receive grant funds, (a) states must 
     certify that the state has not reduced the scope of state 
     child care requirements since 1995, must be in compliance 
     with the provisions of the Child Care and Development Block 
     Grant, and has expended at least 80 percent of the funds 
     allocated to the state for TANF child care matching funds; 
     (b) there is a 10 percent state match requirement for the use 
     of the funds, such match funds can be state or local public 
     or private funds.
       Section 215: Grant funds may be used for a variety of 
     activities designed to improve the quality of child care 
     within the state. This section identifies some of the 
     allowable activities including supplementing child care 
     provider salaries, assistance to small businesses desiring to 
     provide child care assistance to employees, expansion of 
     resource and referral services, educational and training 
     scholarship for child care providers, increasing subsidies 
     for recipients of Child Care and Development Block Grant 
     recipients, subsidizing child care for special needs 
     children, conducting background checks and increasing the 
     monitoring of child care providers; State grant program 
     authorized for $200 million a year.
       Subtitle C--Increased Enforcement of State Health and 
           Safety Standards
       Section 221: Amends the Child Care and Development Block 
     Grant (CCDBG) to encourage states to improve the enforcement 
     of existing state laws and regulations regarding the 
     inspection of child care facilities; provides a bonus for 
     states which effectively enforce existing state law and a 
     decrease in CCDBG administrative funds for states which do 
     not adequately enforce state child care inspection 
     requirements.
       Subtitle D--Distribution of Information About Quality Child 
           Care
       Section 231: Authorizes $15 million to the Department of 
     Health and Human Services to (a) provide technical assistance 
     and the disseminate information on high quality child care to 
     parents, local governments, child care organizations, and 
     child care providers; (b) conduct a public awareness campaign 
     promoting quality child care; (c) develop a mechanism for the 
     collection and dissemination of information on the supply and 
     demand for child care services; and (d) assist existing child 
     care credentialing and accreditation entities in improving 
     their procedures and methods.
     Title III: Expanding Professional Development Opportunities
       Section 301: Creates a child care training infrastructure 
     utilizing the Internet and existing distance learning 
     resources to provide high quality, interactive skills 
     training for child care providers.
       Section 302: Sets aside at least 10 percent of the 
     authorized funds, within the child care training 
     infrastructure, to establish and operate a revolving loan 
     funds to enable child care providers to purchase computers 
     and other equipment to access the child care training 
     infrastructure through no-interest loans. Authorization for 
     Title III--$50 million a year.
     Title IV: Expanding Youth Development Opportunities During 
         the Non-School Hours
       Section 401: Establishes youth development focused programs 
     that provide care for school-aged children during the non-
     school hours.
       Section 402: Definition Section.
       Section 403: Establishes a state grant program to expand 
     and create quality non-school hours programs for school-aged 
     children and youth which meet the child care needs of the 
     parents as well and the goals of positive youth development; 
     the federal share of this program is 80 percent, state and 
     local matching funds may be in cash or in-kind.
       Section 404: Allocates funds to states based on the number 
     of youth aged 5 through 17 who reside in the state and the 
     number of children in the state qualifying for free or 
     reduced-price school lunches. There is a small state minimum 
     allocation of .5 percent of the total appropriated amount for 
     the program.
       Section 405: States submit an application to the Secretary 
     of HHS in order to receive funds and designate the 
     administrative regions or political subdivisions which will 
     be used in the distribution of the funds in the state.
       Section 406: The state will allocate funds to 
     administrative regions or political subdivisions within the 
     state based on the number of 5 to 17 year olds and the number 
     of children qualifying for free or reduced-price school 
     lunches in the region or subdivision; the state will award 
     grants on a competitive basis to entities within each region 
     or subdivision up to the amount of the regional allocation; 
     preference for grants will be given to activities which 
     remove barriers to the availability of non-school hours child 
     care and coordinate public and private resources.
       Section 407: Entities desiring to receive grant funds will 
     submit an application to the state.
       Section 408: Grant funds will be used for activities that 
     meet the child care needs of working parents during the non-
     school hours including before- and after-school, weekends, 
     school holidays, vacation periods and other non-school hours; 
     activities will promote at least two youth development 
     competencies (social, physical, emotional, moral or 
     cognitive) and be designed to increase youth protective 
     factors and reduce risk factors; a broad range of activities 
     can be funded including leadership development, delinquency 
     prevention, sports and recreation, arts and cultural 
     activities, character development, tutoring and academic 
     enrichment, mentoring, and other locally determined programs; 
     and at least 50 percent of the funds made available to an 
     entity must be used to subsidize the cost of participation in 
     the non-school hours program for low-income youth.
       Section 409: The Assistant Secretary for HHS establishes 
     mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of 
     funded activities; coordinates the grant program with similar 
     activities in other federal agencies; provides appropriate 
     training and technical assistance to states and local 
     entities; and can terminate funding for States or entities 
     which fail to comply with the requirements of the Act.
       Section 410: The Governor of each State designates an 
     entity to administer the grant activities, including 
     monitoring compliance with rules and regulations, providing 
     technical assistance, and providing information on grant 
     activities to HHS.
       Section 411: Ensures that activities funded under this 
     Title will be coordinated, at the local level, with 
     activities receiving funds from the Safe and Drug-Free 
     Schools and Communities Act and the 21st Century Community 
     Learning Centers Act.
       Section 412: Authorizes the grant program for: $500 million 
     for FY 00, $600 million for FY 01, $700 million for FY 02, 
     $800 million for FY 03, and $1 billion for FY 04.
     Title V: Child Care in Federal Facilities
       Section 501: Short title, ``Federal Employees Child Care 
     Act''.
       Section 502: Definition section.
       Section 503: Child care centers located in federal 
     executive and judicial facilities have to meet a standard no 
     less stringent than those required of other child care 
     facilities in the same geographical area within six months 
     and within three years meet the standards established by a 
     child care accreditation entity; establishes procedures to be 
     followed if the child care center is not in compliance with 
     these rules including plans to correct deficiencies, closing 
     the affected portion of a child care center if a situation is 
     life threatening or poses a risk of serious bodily harm and 
     is not corrected within two business days, and the disclosure 
     of violations to parents and facility employees; legislative 
     facilities have to obtain and maintain accreditation from a 
     child care accreditation entity within one year or the 
     appropriate congressional administrative entity will issue 
     regulations to ensure the safety and quality of care for 
     children in the legislative facility; the Administrator of 
     GAO may provide technical assistance to other agencies and 
     conduct studies and reviews at the request of federal 
     agencies; and an interagency council is established to 
     facilitate cooperation and coordinate policies; authorizes 
     $900,000 for General Services Administration to carry out 
     this Title.
       Section 504: Authorizes an evaluation of federal child care 
     services.
       Section 506: Authorizes federal agencies to utilize 
     appropriated funds to subsidize or otherwise assist lower 
     income federal employees meet the costs of child care 
     provided through contract or on-site.
       Section 507: Re-authorizes the Trible Amendment which 
     permits federal facilities to provide on-site child care 
     services; authorizes federal agencies to conduct pilot 
     projects on innovative approaches to providing employee child 
     care services; and requires criminal background checks for 
     employees of child care facilities located in federal 
     facilities.
     Title VI: Expanding Child Care Subsidy for Low-Income 
         Families
       Section 601: Changes the authorization for the Child Care 
     and Development Block Grant Act (CCDBG) from $1 billion to $2 
     billion.
       Section 602: Changes the CCDBG Act a) assuring that the use 
     of automated payment systems will not limit parental choice 
     and

[[Page S3786]]

     will facilitate the prompt, accurate payment of child care 
     providers; changing to 70 percent (from ``a substantial 
     portion'') the use of CCDBG funds for low-income families who 
     are not TANF qualified recipients of child care subsidies; 
     requiring states to better support parental choice of child 
     care providers by establishing separate subsidy rates 
     dependent upon the age of the child, the setting of the child 
     care services (home, center, group), special needs, and 
     geographic location; and applying any required parental co-
     payment to be reduced by the amount of the difference between 
     the child care subsidy provided and 85 percent of the state 
     established market rate for that child.
     Title VII: Construction and Renovation of Child Care 
         Facilities
       Subtitle A--Community Development Block Grants
       Section 701: Permits use of Community Development Block 
     Grant funds to renovate or construct child care facilities. 
     (No cost)
       Subtitle B--Mortgage Insurance For Child Care Facilities
       Section 711: Amends Title II of the National Housing Act to 
     provide insurance for mortgages on new and rehabilitated 
     child care facilities.
       Section 712: Amends the National Housing Act to provide 
     mortgage insurance for the purchase or refinancing of 
     existing child care facilities; Authorized for $30 million 
     for FY 01, to remain available until expended.
       Section 713: Authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to 
     conduct a study of the secondary mortgage markets to 
     determine whether markets exist for purchase of mortgages 
     eligible for insurance under the National Housing Act, 
     whether the market will affect the availability of credit for 
     development of child care facilities and the extent to which 
     the market will provide credit enhancement for loans for 
     child care facilities.
       Section 714: Establishes a competitive grant program to 
     provide technical and financial assistance to child care 
     providers for the renovation, construction, and purchase of 
     child care facilities; Authorized for $10 million a year for 
     FY00-04.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today Senator Jeffords, Senator Dodd, 
Senator Landrieu, and I are proposing legislation to expand and improve 
quality child care across the country. The provisions are intended to 
support the full range of child care choices that parents make, 
including the decision to provide stay-at-home care.
  Child care is one of the most pressing challenges facing the nation. 
The need to improve the affordability, accessibility, and quality of 
child care is indisputable. Across the country, 13 million children 
under age 6 spend all or part of their day in child care.
  Every child deserves high quality care. We know that child 
development, especially in the early years, is dependent on safe, 
reliable care that offers stable relationships and intellectually 
stimulating activities. Child care that fulfills these goals can make 
all the difference in enabling children to learn, grow, and reach their 
full potential. This bill will help improve the quality and safety of 
care by establishing a competitive grant program to help states improve 
the quality of their care.
  The bill also gives new incentives to businesses to assist in the 
care of their employees' children and to strengthen the quality of 
care. Businesses will be permitted a tax deduction for donations of 
equipment, materials, transportation services, facilities, and staff 
time to public schools and care providers. Employers who contribute to 
the child care arrangements of their employees will receive a tax 
credit of 50 percent of their expenses up to $150,000 a year ($250,000 
a year with respect to three or more facilities in different locations) 
in allowable employee-related child care expenses such as the 
construction or renovation of facilities and employee subsidies.
  The quality of care can also be improved by giving the public more 
information about the caliber of the programs in their community. 
Working parents deserve to know that their children are not just safe, 
but well cared for. Our bill will provide that reassurance by improving 
parents' access to the information they need to make informed decisions 
about the selection of child care. Establishing a more effective system 
for distributing public information will make it easier for parents to 
select care with confidence, and will also encourage care providers to 
improve their services.
  Raising children is expensive, in and of itself, and families who 
place their children in out-of-home care face the additional burden of 
obtaining quality child care. Millions of families cannot afford the 
child care they need in order to raise, protect, and teach their 
children. Full-day care can easily cost up to $10,000 per year--often 
as much as college tuition for an older child. Too often, the high cost 
of quality care puts it out of reach for many working families, 
particularly those earning low wages. These parents--working parents--
constantly must choose between paying the rent or mortgage, buying 
food, and providing the quality care their child needs.
  Our bill provides support to all families with children, whether they 
rely on out-of-home care or not. It increases the Dependent Care Tax 
Credit (DCTC) by raising the amount of allowable expenses to $3,600 for 
one dependent and $6,000 for two or more, and by permitting educational 
programs and third party transportation to count as allowable expenses.
  Affordable child care is in particularly short supply for young 
children and for children who need care during nontraditional hours, 
such as during the late afternoon and evening. As more and more parents 
leave welfare for work, the demand for this type of care will continue 
to increase. The General Accounting Office estimates that under the 
welfare reform rules requiring more parents to work, the supply of 
child care will meet only 25 percent of the demand in many urban areas. 
We must ensure that the necessary support systems, such as child care 
and health care, are in place so that low-income parents can 
successfully move from welfare to self-sufficiency.
  Our bill addresses these concerns by increasing the authorization of 
the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act from $1 billion 
to $2 billion a year. It requires states to improve the way in which 
subsidy rates are determined. Parents will have a choice of child care 
providers, not just the least expensive care. Seventy percent of the 
CCDBG funds are set aside for non-welfare-related low-income working 
parents. The bill also contains a new state grant program to encourage 
the development of quality child care programs during non-school hours.
  It is long past time for Congress to give child care the high 
priority it deserves. This bipartisan bill addresses the serious 
challenges confronting millions of families with children, and I urge 
my colleagues to join us in supporting this significant initiative.
  Mr. President, an excellent column in yesterday's Washington Post by 
Judy Mann eloquently analyzed the hardships facing families seeking 
adequate child care. I believe her analysis will be of interest to all 
of us concerned about the issue, and I ask unanimous consent that it be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

               [From The Washington Post, April 14, 1999]

                    The Slow Evolution of Child Care

                             (By Judy Mann)

       I first started worrying about child care more than 30 
     years ago when I became a single working parent with a 1-year 
     old child. We didn't call it child care back then, because it 
     didn't really exist.
       We called baby-sitting.
       Some women took children into their homes and baby-sat them 
     all day. They were a godsend to that first cohort of women 
     who--out of choice or necessity--went into the paid 
     workforce. But out of these homes also came some horror 
     stories of crowding, of children stuck in front of TV sets 
     all day, of germs being passed around with such alacrity that 
     mothers lost jobs because they missed so many workdays having 
     to care for sick children.
       So how far have we come in 30 years? It's not overly harsh 
     to say; not that far. We have licensed family day-care 
     centers, school-based child care, child care centers in 
     office parks and churches, and we have corporations that run 
     child care centers across the country. The federal government 
     subsidizes child care with vouchers for some low-income 
     families and by allowing people to shelter some money spent 
     on child care from income tax.
       But for most working parents, child care remains an 
     enormous source of financial stress and emotional anxiety. 
     Even people who can afford live-in nannies aren't spared that 
     bad apple who abuses children or disappears without warning.
       At best, we have a patchwork of child care that is woven 
     together by a common thread: The people who take care of our 
     children are woefully underpaid and under-trained. Turnover 
     ranges from 25 percent to 50 percent as they succumb to the 
     lure of better-paying jobs. The median income for child care 
     providers is $6.12 an hour; for parking lot attendants, it is 
     $6.38. We pay $6.90 an hour to people who walk our dogs. What 
     do we value most--our kids, our cars, our pets?
       We are the most prosperous nation on earth, with an economy 
     that is booming like

[[Page S3787]]

     the end of the ``1812 Overture.'' We are also the only modern 
     industrial nation that does not have an organized, 
     affordable, reliable system of child care for the people 
     creating those economic success.
       Child care advocates have been working for more than 20 
     years to try to get this country to understand that child 
     care isn't just about baby-sitting. It's about giving 
     youngsters a good start in life and reducing stress on 
     working parents. We have lacked the national will to make 
     good child care one of our central responses to the changes 
     in family life for one simple reason: Working parents are so 
     busy trying to survive day-to-day that they have no time or 
     energy for political action.
       This may be changing, thanks in part to a ``Caring for 
     Kids'' public affairs campaign that Lifetime Television has 
     undertaken with the National Council of Women's 
     Organizations. Begun in March of last year, the campaign 
     now involves about 150 nonprofit organizations. The 
     coalition is targeting April as ``Childcare Month,'' and 
     about 1,500 community campaigns are going to be held to 
     support its central message: Make child care a priority in 
     the 2000 election.
       Putting technology to good use, the campaign has collected 
     more than 2,000 personal child care stories from families 
     across the country who have faxed, phoned or visited the 
     campaign's Web site at www.lifetimetv.com. These stories have 
     been delivered to Congress, and some have been used in a 
     documentary produced by Lee Grant that will premiere on 
     Lifetime on April 20. ``Confronting the Crisis: Childcare in 
     America'' is the most powerful hour of film on the nation's 
     child care problem that I have ever seen.
       One of its great sources of strength is in showing that 
     child care is no longer a woman's problem: It now involves 
     fathers as well, and fathers play a starring role in the 
     documentary. We meet Jeff, a widower, and one of 2 million 
     single fathers, who quit a well-paid night job because there 
     was no nighttime child care available. He now works days, and 
     he and his sister share child care responsibilities. 
     ``Everything's rushed,'' he said--as apt a description of the 
     working parent culture as you could find.
       We meet women in the welfare-to-work programs that 10,000 
     companies are participating in, Chicora is up at 4 a.m. to 
     get her child to day care so she can go to work. Her mother 
     died, so she is raising her 15-year-old sister as well. She 
     earns $9.50 an hour and is able to make it because she gets a 
     child care voucher. When that runs out, she will face child 
     care costs of about $6,000 a year. ``Education's first,'' she 
     says, and she holds all the hope in the world for her child. 
     She doesn't need a miracle to make it: That she is still in 
     the game is the miracle. What she needs is for that voucher 
     to continue until she can get on her feet financially.
       We go to France, where child care is ``part of the 
     culture,'' in Grant's words. And we meet Sheriff Pat 
     Sullivan, of Arapahoe County, Colo., a leader of ``Fight 
     Crime: Invest in Kids,'' an organization of law enforcement 
     officials who believe before-school and after-school programs 
     are critical to preventing youth violence. Sullivan is a 
     conservative Republican. The question, he says, is where to 
     put tax dollars. The answer is not in more jails, he says, 
     but in child care, and that includes programs that keep 
     adolescents busy. Idle minds are the devil's playground.
       Voices from across the political spectrum, from law 
     enforcement to social workers, from brain researchers to 
     pediatricians, are calling for a vastly improved system of 
     child care. Neglect, whether in infancy or adolescence, is 
     the breeding ground of despair, and that, in turn, is the 
     breeding ground for antisocial behavior. The hope here is 
     that the ``Caring for Kids'' campaign and Lifetime's 
     documentary can help galvanize the nation into action.

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today with my distinguished 
colleague from Vermont and other members of this body in strong support 
of legislation that takes a much needed step on behalf of our Nation's 
children. I am very sad to say, however, that Louisiana ranks among the 
worst when it comes to providing for its children. By providing access 
to quality child care that is both safe and affordable the Caring for 
America's Children Act will improve the lives of children in Louisiana 
and across the Nation.
  As a professional with two young children, I am well aware of the 
challenges that face working parents as they balance their children's 
needs with the demands of their careers. I also know first hand how 
expensive quality child care is, costing anywhere from over $3,000 per 
year to over $10,000 per year, depending upon where a family resides. 
For the parents of some 800,000 children in Louisiana who spend most of 
their day outside their parent's care, these costs are prohibitive. It 
is especially difficult for over 50 percent of Louisiana families who 
need child care, but whose incomes fall below the Federal poverty 
level.
  To address this dilemma, this legislation would increase the child 
care and development block grant (CCDBG) from $1 billion to $2 billion. 
By doubling the funding level for CCDBG, twice as many poor children 
will receive quality child care. Presently, however, only eight percent 
of Louisiana's poor children are being assisted through this program. 
With this increase another 40,000 children will receive needed help. 
Nevertheless, the demand for assistance will far outweigh funding, so 
thousands of parents and their children will continue to go unserved.
  In addition to the shortage of funding for low-income children, 
Louisiana, like many other states, must confront two other critical 
issues dealing with child care. First, facilities must be improved and 
expanded. Secondly, minimum quality standards must be set at the state 
and local levels for child care providers. This like other educational 
improvements will only occur when we expect more, provide more, and pay 
more for quality care. If we do not, the status quo will remain the 
same. For example, the average wage of a child care worker in Louisiana 
in 1997 was only $10,760, barely above what a minimum wage job would 
pay annually. Worse yet, the ratio of children to care givers in 
Louisiana far exceeded the recommended ratios.
  On a national level, safety in child care facilities is another 
critical issue. Earlier this week the Consumer Product Safety 
Commission announced that it had examined 220 licensed child care 
settings. They found that most contained at least one safety violation, 
such as crib bedding that could suffocate babies or loops on window 
blind cords that could cause strangulation. Moreover, the agency found 
that 31,000 children, age 4 and younger, were treated in 1997 in 
hospital emergency rooms for injuries they received in child care and 
school settings. Additionally, at least 56 children have died in child 
care facilities since 1990.
  To provide states with additional resources for the purpose of 
improving the quality of their day care facilities, this bill 
establishes a quality improvement incentive program. States would 
receive funds based on the CCDBG formula, which could be used for a 
variety of activities designed to improve the quality of child care 
within each state. Additionally, the bill also provides greater 
professional development opportunities for child care workers through a 
new distance learning program and interactive computer applications. 
The legislation will also provide states with greater flexibility, so 
that they can use their community development block grant funds for the 
construction and/or renovation of child care facilities.
  Finally, important tax provisions are included in this legislation 
for both parents who work or stay home. Toward this end, the bill would 
increase:
  the child tax credit from $500 to $900 per year;
  the dependent care tax credit (DCTC) to $3,600 for one dependent and 
$6,000 for two or more dependents; and
  expand the home office tax deduction so that parents who work out of 
their home will not be penalized.

By providing parents with these additional benefits, families will have 
greater options in ensuring their children receive the most appropriate 
care depending on individual family circumstances.
  I am also very pleased that appropriate modifications to our Federal 
child care system are included in this legislation. Most importantly, 
this bill would allow Federal agencies to use appropriated funds for 
the purpose of making child care more affordable to low-income Federal 
workers. Additionally, within six months of the passage of this 
legislation every Federal child care facility will have to be licensed. 
Within three years, they must also meet standards established by a 
child care accreditation entity. The Federal facilities title also 
reauthorizes the Trible amendment that allows Federal facilities to 
provide on-site care and innovative approaches to expand child care 
services on a contractual basis.
  Before the Congress enacts legislation to enhance child care at the 
state level, it is essential that the Federal Government first address 
the deficiencies and inadequacies within its own system. While the 
Federal Government has made significant improvements, we must ensure 
that Federal Government leads by example.
  Mr. President, improving the availability of quality and affordable 
child

[[Page S3788]]

care should not be a partisan issue. A recent Carnegie study found that 
children in poor quality child care are delayed in language and reading 
skills, and display more aggression toward other children and adults. 
We should not delay one more year while thousands of children are held 
back because of our inaction in the Congress.
  I thank Senator Jeffords for his leadership on this issue.
                                 ______
                                 
      Mr. ROTH (for himself, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Coverdell, Mr. Helms, 
        Mr. Robb, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Biden, Mr. Sessions, Mr. 
        Hutchinson, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Grams, Mr. Shelby, Mr. 
        McConnell, and Mr. Harkin):
  S. 815. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 
the credit for producing electricity from certain renewable resources; 
to the Committee on Finance.


                poultry electric energy power (peep) act

  Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce legislation that 
would amend section 45 of the Internal Revenue Code to provide a tax 
credit to biomass energy facilities that use poultry litter as a fuel 
for generating electricity.
  I am pleased to report that my bill has received even more cosponsors 
than when it was introduced in the 105th Congress. Fourteen of my 
colleagues are joining me as original cosponsors. They include Senators 
Jeffords, Coverdell, Helms, Robb, Mikulski, Biden, Sessions, 
Hutchinson, Sarbanes, Leahy, Grams, Shelby, McConnell, and Harkin.
  Mr. President, I am bullish on poultry's future in America. It is 
hard not to be with worldwide poultry consumption growing at double-
digit rates.
  In the United States, poultry production has tripled since 1975. We 
now produce almost 8 billion chickens a year to feed the growing 
worldwide demand.
  In particular, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia produce some of the 
world's finest poultry. Just last year Delmarva poultry farmers 
produced over 600 million chickens. Our poultry farmers are among the 
most productive and efficient in the world.
  As the amount of chickens we produce as a nation has grown, so too 
has the need to find creative means for disposing of poultry manure.
  Due to environmental pressures, spreading manure on land is no longer 
an option in some areas for our rapidly growing poultry industry. In 
those areas, the nutrient runoff from the manure has been identified as 
a contributing factor in surface and groundwater pollution.
  Addressing these water quality problems will require a range of 
innovative approaches. One part of the solution may be to use poultry 
manure to generate electricity.
  The United Kingdom has two utility plants that use poultry manure to 
generate electricity. These two poultry power plants will, when 
combined with a third scheduled to open soon, burn 50 percent of the 
UK's total volume of chicken manure.
  The electricity generated by these plants will supply enough power 
for 37,000 homes. These plants have the support of both the poultry 
industry and the international environmental community.
  The way this system works is simple.
  Power stations buy poultry manure from surrounding poultry farmers 
and transport it to the power station. At the station the manure is 
burned in a furnace at high temperatures, heating water in a boiler to 
produce steam which drives a turbine linked to a generator. The 
electricity is then transferred to the local electricity grid for use 
by commercial and residential customers.
  There are no waste products created through this process. Instead, a 
valuable by-product emerges in the form of a nitrogen-free ash, which 
is marketed as an environmentally friendly fertilizer.
  The legislation I am introducing today will provide a tax credit to 
energy facilities that use poultry manure as a fuel to generate 
electricity.
  It will build on concepts in the Tax Code that provide incentives for 
innovative alternative energy production.
  This legislation will provide incentives for electricity generation 
that will not only help dispose of poultry manure, but will also supply 
our Nation's farmers with a clean fertilizer free of nitrates.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring my bill, the Poultry 
Electric Energy Power Act. It is important for future generations that 
we continue to explore innovative alternative technologies that will 
help protect our environment.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 815

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Poultry Electric Energy 
     Power (PEEP) Act''.

     SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF CREDIT FOR PRODUCING ELECTRICITY FROM 
                   CERTAIN RENEWABLE RESOURCES.

       (a) Credit for Producing Electricity From Poultry Waste.--
     Section 45(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
     (defining qualified energy resources) is amended by striking 
     ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A), by striking the 
     period at the end of subparagraph (B) and inserting ``, 
     and'', and by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) poultry waste.''
       (b) Extension of Placed in Service Date.--Section 45(c)(3) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualified 
     facility) is amended by striking ``1999'' and inserting 
     ``2005''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to facilities placed in service after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I am proud to join Senator Roth as an 
original co-sponsor of legislation to amend Section 45 of the tax code 
for the production of electricity from environmentally-friendly 
methods, including poultry litter, the Poultry Electric Power Act.
  Mr. President, our nation's poultry consumption continues to grow in 
rapid numbers. We now produce almost 8 billion chickens a year in the 
United States. My home State of Minnesota is now the nation's largest 
producer of turkeys, with an estimated 44 million produced last year 
alone. According to the Minnesota Turkey Growers Association, Minnesota 
turkey producers and processors earned 1997 incomes of $180 million and 
spinoff industries earned $374 million in 1996. In Minnesota, the 
turkey industry includes 2,810 jobs in production and 4,552 jobs in 
processing. So, Mr. President, you can see that the poultry industry is 
extremely important to rural Minnesota.
  I continue to believe that we must explore a wide variety of 
alternative energy sources that provide a number of benefits for our 
nation. First, this bill will provide another market and revenue source 
for our farmers who so badly need diversified sources of income. 
Second, the bill will assist our nation in increasing our energy 
security. Third, this bill will help to improve the environment not 
only by providing a clean energy source, but by assisting in the 
disposal of poultry manure in an environmentally friendly way. Fourth, 
this bill will help create spin-off jobs for our nation's rural 
communities--jobs many rural communities badly need.
  I hope my colleagues will support this legislation and I want to 
thank Senator Roth for leading this important effort in the Senate.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DORGAN:
  S. 816. A bill to amend section 3681 of title 18, United States Code, 
relating to the special forfeiture of collateral profits of a crime; to 
the Committee on the Judiciary.


                     FEDERAL SON OF SAM LEGISLATION

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, last year, I introduced a bill to correct 
problems with the Federal ``Son of Sam'' law, as those problems were 
perceived by the U.S. Supreme Court. Today, I am reintroducing this 
legislation, which deals with a continuing problem. The New York 
statute analyzed by the Supreme Court, as well as the Federal statute 
which I seek to amend, forfeited the proceeds from any expressive work 
of a criminal, and dedicated those proceeds to the victims of the 
perpetrator's crime. Because of constitutional deficiencies cited by 
the Court, the Federal statute has never been applied, and without 
changes, it is highly unlikely that it ever will be. Without this bill, 
criminals can become wealthy from the fruits of their

[[Page S3789]]

crimes, while victims and families are exploited.
  The bill I now introduce attempts to correct constitutional 
deficiencies cited by the Supreme Court in striking down New York's Son 
of Sam law. In its decision striking down New York's law, the Court 
found the state to be both over inclusive and under inclusive: Over 
inclusive because the statute included all expressive works, no matter 
how tangentially related to the crime; under inclusive because the 
statute included only expressive works, not other forms of property.
  To correct the deficiencies perceived by the Court, this bill changes 
significantly the concepts of the Federal statute. Because the Court 
criticized the statute for singling out speech, this bill is all-
encompassing: It includes various types of property related to the 
crime from which a criminal might profit. Because the Court criticized 
the statute for being over inclusive, including the proceeds from all 
works, no matter how remotely connected to the crime, this bill limits 
the property to be forfeited to the enhanced value of property 
attributable to the offense. Because the Court found fault with the 
statute for not requiring a conviction, this bill requires a 
conviction.
  The bill also attempts to take advantage of the long legal history of 
forfeiture. Pirate ships and their contents were once forfeited to the 
government. More recent case law addresses the concept of forfeiting 
any property used in the commission of drug related crimes, or proceeds 
from those crimes. I hope that courts interpreting this statute will 
look to this legal history and find it binding or persuasive.
  The bill utilizes the Commerce Clause authority of Congress to 
forfeit property associated with State crimes. This means that if funds 
are transferred through banking channels, if UPS or FedEx are used, if 
the airwaves are utilized, or if the telephone is used to transfer the 
property, to transfer funds, or to make a profit, the property can be 
forfeited. In State cases, this bill allows the State Attorney General 
to proceed first. We do not seek to preempt State law, only to see that 
there is a law in place which will ensure that criminals do not profit 
at the expense of their victims and the families of victims.
  One last improvement which this bill makes over the former statutes: 
The old statute included only crime which resulted in physical harm to 
another; this bill includes other crimes. Examples of crimes probably 
not included under the old statute, but included here are terrorizing, 
kidnaping, bank robbery, and embezzlement.
  Mr. President, our Federal statute, enacted to ensure that criminals 
not profit at the expense of their victims and victim's families, is 
not used today because it is perceived to be unconstitutional. I 
believe victims of crime deserve quick action on this bill, drafted to 
ensure that they are not the source of profits to those who committed 
crimes against them. I asked for your support.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 816

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SPECIAL FORFEITURE OF COLLATERAL PROFITS OF CRIME.

       Section 3681 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Forfeiture of proceeds.--Upon the motion of the 
     United States attorney made at any time after conviction of a 
     defendant for an offense described in paragraph (2), and 
     after notice to any interested party, the court shall order 
     the defendant to forfeit all or any part of proceeds received 
     or to be received by the defendant, or a transferee of the 
     defendant, from a contract relating to the transfer of a 
     right or interest of the defendant in any property described 
     in paragraph (3), if the court determines that--
       ``(A) the interests of justice or an order of restitution 
     under this title so require;
       ``(B) the proceeds (or part thereof) to be forfeited 
     reflect the enhanced value of the property attributable to 
     the offense; and
       ``(C) with respect to a defendant convicted of an offense 
     against a State--
       ``(i) the property at issue, or the proceeds to be 
     forfeited, have travelled in interstate or foreign commerce 
     or were derived through the use of an instrumentality of 
     interstate or foreign commerce; and
       ``(ii) the attorney general of the State has declined to 
     initiate a forfeiture action with respect to the proceeds to 
     be forfeited.
       ``(2) Offenses described.--An offense is described in this 
     paragraph if it is--
       ``(A) an offense under section 794 of this title;
       ``(B) a felony offense against the United States or any 
     State; or
       ``(C) a misdemeanor offense against the United States or 
     any State resulting in physical harm to any individual.
       ``(3) Property described.--Property is described in this 
     paragraph if it is any property, tangible or intangible, 
     including any--
       ``(A) evidence of the offense;
       ``(B) instrument of the offense, including any vehicle used 
     in the commission of the offense;
       ``(C) real estate where the offense was committed;
       ``(D) document relating to the offense;
       ``(E) photograph or audio or video recording relating to 
     the offense;
       ``(F) clothing, jewelry, furniture, or other personal 
     property relating to the offense;
       ``(G) movie, book, newspaper, magazine, radio or television 
     production, or live entertainment of any kind depicting the 
     offense or otherwise relating to the offense;
       ``(H) expression of the thoughts, opinions, or emotions of 
     the defendant regarding the offense; or
       ``(I) other property relating to the offense.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. BOXER:
  S. 817. A bill to improve academic and social outcomes for students 
and reduce both juvenile crime and the risk that youth will become 
victims of crime by providing productive activities during after school 
hours; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


                after school and anti-crime act of 1999

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, every day, millions of working parents are 
faced with the dilemma of finding constructive activities for their 
school-aged children to become involved in during the after school 
hours. These parents know that, when unsupervised, the likelihood of 
their child becoming involved with drugs, alcohol or criminal activity 
is increased. In fact, juvenile crime peaks during the hours of 3 p.m. 
and 6 p.m.--after school.
  That is why I am introducing a bill to help assuage the concerns of 
parents, law enforcement and communities to help develop edifying 
activities for youth during the after school hours. The After School 
Education and Anti-Crime Act of 1999 will help give our children safe, 
productive places to go after the school bell rings, which is what 
ninety-two percent of all Americans have indicated they strongly 
support.
  Not only do after school programs provide children with activities 
and parents with relief, they also help law enforcement officials 
connect with their communities and help them reduce incidences of 
juvenile crime. Several law enforcement organizations have expressed 
their support of my proposal and for after school programs, including 
the National Association of Police Athletic and Activity Leagues 
(PALS), Fight Crime Invest in Kids, National Sheriffs Association, 
Major Cities' Police Chiefs and other law enforcement representing 
California, Illinois, Texas, Arizona, Maine and Rhode Island.
  This legislation would authorize $600 million in funding for after-
school programs. These programs, as developed by communities, will 
offer positive alternatives in the after school hours, such as 
mentoring, academic assistance, recreation, technology and job skills 
training, and drug, alcohol, and gang prevention programs.
  If passed, the funding in this bill would enable an estimated 1.1 
million children each year to participate in after school programs. The 
demand for after school programs is very high. Last year alone, nearly 
2,000 school districts applied for after school federal assistance--of 
that, only 287 grants were awarded.
  We have the opportunity in the 106th Congress to answer the call of 
communities all across America that understand the importance of--and 
need for--after school programs for kindergarten, elementary and 
secondary school students. After school programs are anti-crime, pro-
education, pro-community, and make common sense.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I ask unanimous 
consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

[[Page S3790]]

                                 S. 817

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``After School Education and 
     Anti-Crime Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to improve academic and social 
     outcomes for students and reduce both juvenile crime and the 
     risk that youth will become victims of crime by providing 
     productive activities during after school hours.

     SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Today's youth face far greater social risks than did 
     their parents and grandparents.
       (2) Students spend more of their waking hours alone, 
     without supervision, companionship, or activity, than the 
     students spend in school.
       (3) Law enforcement statistics show that youth who are ages 
     12 through 17 are most at risk of committing violent acts and 
     being victims of violent acts between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m.
       (4) The consequences of academic failure are more dire in 
     1999 than ever before.
       (5) After school programs have been shown in many States to 
     help address social problems facing our Nation's youth, such 
     as drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and gang involvement.
       (6) Many of our Nation's governors endorse increasing the 
     number of after school programs through a Federal/State 
     partnership.
       (7) Over 450 of the Nation's leading police chiefs, 
     sheriffs, and prosecutors, along with presidents of the 
     Fraternal Order of Police and the International Union of 
     Police Associations, which together represent 360,000 police 
     officers, have called upon public officials to provide after 
     school programs that offer recreation, academic support, and 
     community service experience, for school-age children and 
     teens in the United States.
       (8) One of the most important investments that we can make 
     in our children is to ensure that they have safe and positive 
     learning environments in the after school hours.

     SEC. 4. GOALS.

       The goals of this Act are as follows:
       (1) To increase the academic success of students.
       (2) To promote safe and productive environments for 
     students in the after school hours.
       (3) To provide alternatives to drug, alcohol, tobacco, and 
     gang activity.
       (4) To reduce juvenile crime and the risk that youth will 
     become victims of crime during after school hours.

     SEC. 5. PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION.

       Section 10903 of the 21st Century Community Learning 
     Centers Act (20 U.S.C. 8243) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``to Local 
     Educational Agencies for Schools'' after ``Secretary''; and
       (B) by striking ``rural and inner-city public'' and all 
     that follows through ``or to'' and inserting ``local 
     educational agencies for the support of public elementary 
     schools or secondary schools, including middle schools, that 
     serve communities with substantial needs for expanded 
     learning opportunities for children and youth in the 
     communities, to enable the schools to establish or''; and
       (C) by striking ``a rural or inner-city community'' and 
     inserting ``the communities'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking ``States, among'' and inserting ``States 
     and among''; and
       (B) by striking ``United States,'' and all that follows 
     through ``a State'' and inserting ``United States''; and
       (3) in subsection (c), by striking ``3'' and inserting 
     ``5''.

     SEC. 6. APPLICATIONS.

       Section 10904 of the 21st Century Community Learning 
     Centers Act (20 U.S.C. 8244) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c);
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
       (i) in the first sentence, by striking ``an elementary or 
     secondary school or consortium'' and inserting ``a local 
     educational agency''; and
       (ii) in the second sentence, by striking ``Each such'' and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(b) Contents.--Each such''; and
       (3) in subsection (b) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``or consortium'';
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (C) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``, including 
     programs under the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act 
     of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858 et seq.)'' after ``maximized'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (C), by inserting ``students, parents, 
     teachers, school administrators, local government, including 
     law enforcement organizations such as Police Athletic and 
     Activity Leagues,'' after ``agencies,'';
       (iii) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or consortium''; 
     and
       (iv) in subparagraph (E)--

       (I) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``or 
     consortium''; and
       (II) in clause (ii), by striking the period and inserting a 
     semicolon; and

       (E) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) information demonstrating that the local educational 
     agency will--
       ``(A) provide not less than 35 percent of the annual cost 
     of the activities assisted under the project from sources 
     other than funds provided under this part, which contribution 
     may be provided in cash or in kind, fairly evaluated; and
       ``(B) provide not more than 25 percent of the annual cost 
     of the activities assisted under the project from funds 
     provided by the Secretary under other Federal programs that 
     permit the use of those other funds for activities assisted 
     under the project; and
       ``(5) an assurance that the local educational agency, in 
     each year of the project, will maintain the agency's fiscal 
     effort, from non-Federal sources, from the preceding fiscal 
     year for the activities the local educational agency provides 
     with funds provided under this part.''.

     SEC. 7. USES OF FUNDS.

       Section 10905 of the 21st Century Community Learning 
     Centers Act (20 U.S.C. 8245) is amended--
       (1) by striking the matter preceding paragraph (1) and 
     inserting:
       ``(a) In General.--Grants awarded under this part may be 
     used to establish or expand community learning centers. The 
     centers may provide 1 or more of the following activities:'';
       (2) in subsection (a)(11) (as redesignated by paragraph 
     (1)), by inserting ``, and job skills preparation'' after 
     ``placement''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(14) After school programs, that--
       ``(A) shall include at least 2 of the following--
       ``(i) mentoring programs;
       ``(ii) academic assistance;
       ``(iii) recreational activities; or
       ``(iv) technology training; and
       ``(B) may include--
       ``(i) drug, alcohol, and gang prevention activities;
       ``(ii) health and nutrition counseling; and
       ``(iii) job skills preparation activities.
       ``(b) Limitation.--Not less than \2/3\ of the amount 
     appropriated under section 10907 for each fiscal year shall 
     be used for after school programs, as described in paragraph 
     (14). Such programs may also include activities described in 
     paragraphs (1) through (13) that offer expanded opportunities 
     for children or youth.''.

     SEC. 8. ADMINISTRATION.

       Section 10905 of the 21st Century Community Learning 
     Centers Act (20 U.S.C. 8245) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(c) Administration.--In carrying out the activities 
     described in subsection (a), a local educational agency or 
     school shall, to the greatest extent practicable--
       ``(1) request volunteers from business and academic 
     communities, and law enforcement organizations, such as 
     Police Athletic and Activity Leagues, to serve as mentors or 
     to assist in other ways;
       ``(2) ensure that youth in the local community participate 
     in designing the after school activities;
       ``(3) develop creative methods of conducting outreach to 
     youth in the community;
       ``(4) request donations of computer equipment and other 
     materials and equipment; and
       ``(5) work with State and local park and recreation 
     agencies so that activities carried out by the agencies prior 
     to the date of enactment of this subsection are not 
     duplicated by activities assisted under this part.''.

     SEC. 9. COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTER DEFINED.

       Section 10906 of the 21st Century Community Learning 
     Centers Act (20 U.S.C. 8246) is amended in paragraph (2) by 
     inserting ``, including law enforcement organizations such as 
     the Police Athletic and Activity League'' after 
     ``governmental agencies''.

     SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 10907 of the 21st Century Community Learning 
     Centers Act (20 U.S.C. 8247) is amended by striking 
     ``$20,000,000 for fiscal year 1995'' and all that follows and 
     inserting ``$600,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2000 
     through 2004, to carry out this part.''.

     SEC. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, take effect 
     on October 1, 1999.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DeWINE (for himself and Mr. Reid):
  S. 818. A bill to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
to conduct a study of the mortality and adverse outcome rates of 
Medicare patients related to the provision of anesthesia services; to 
the Committee on Finance.

                          ____________________