[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 26 (Thursday, March 9, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1392-S1397]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. Graham):
  S. 2225. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow 
individuals a deduction for qualified long-term care insurance 
premiums, use of such insurance under cafeteria plans and flexible 
spending arrangements, and a credit for individuals with long-term care 
needs; to the Committee on Finance.


         The Long-Term Care and Retirement Security Act of 2000

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, long-term tax credits may seem like a 
dull topic. But the expenses of caring for an ailing family member are 
shocking. Millions of people bear these expenses every day, without any 
help.
  Here's a typical example: A state legislator from Ohio named Barbara 
Boyd testified before my Special Committee on Aging last year. Ms. Boyd 
cared at home for her mother who had Alzheimer's disease and breast 
cancer. Her mother had $20,000 in savings and a monthly Social Security 
check. That went quickly. Prescription drugs alone ran $400 a month.
  Antibiotics, ointments to prevent skin breakdown, incontinence 
supplies and other expenses cost hundreds of dollars a month. Ms. Boyd 
exhausted her own savings to care for her mother, and exhausted 
herself. She isn't complaining. Family caregivers don't complain. But 
we can and should use the tax code to ease their burden.
  Yesterday a bipartisan group of legislators, and two prominent 
groups--AARP and the Health Insurance Association of America, announced 
a consensus agreement on a legislative package to help people with a 
variety of long-term care needs. Our bill contains a tax deduction to 
encourage individuals to buy long-term care insurance. We want to help 
people to prepare for their health needs in retirement.

[[Page S1393]]

  The bill also contains a $3,000 tax credit for family caregivers 
caring for a disabled relative at home. Under this legislation, Ms. 
Boyd's mother could have purchased long-term care insurance long before 
she developed Alzheimer's. In addition, Ms. Boyd could have used the 
tax credit to help with the costs of the medications and medical 
supplies for her mother.
  I'm pleased that we have so much agreement in Washington about 
helping people with long-term care expenses. The legislators sponsoring 
this legislation have pushed for long-term care relief for years. 
Today, my colleagues and I will introduce this bill. We'll work to get 
it passed into law as soon as possible. An aging nation has no time to 
waste in preparing for long-term care. Family caregivers need immediate 
relief from their expensive and exhausting work.
  Joining me in introducing this bill is Senator Bob Graham of Florida, 
Representative Nancy Johnson, and Representative Karen Thurman.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAUCUS:
  S. 2226. A bill to establish a Congressional Trade Office; to the 
Committee on Finance.


                 to create a congressional trade office

 Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, last year I introduced a bill to 
create a Congressional Trade Office. That bill was designed to provide 
the Congress with new and additional trade expertise that would be 
independent, non-partisan, and neutral. Today, I am introducing the 
same bill with several small changes.
  The role of Congress in trade policy has expanded in the few short 
months since I introduced my bill in September. We went through Seattle 
and the failure to launch a new multilateral trade round. The public is 
more interested in trade issues than ever before. There is a new 
urgency to reconcile labor and environmental issues with trade. We are 
on the cusp of seeing China enter the WTO with permanent Normal Trade 
Relations with the United States. The General Accounting Office has 
told us of the deficiencies in the Executive Branch in following trade 
agreements and monitoring compliance. And, for the first time, trade 
will be an issue in the Presidential campaign, as well as in Senate and 
House races.
  Congress needs to be much better prepared. And that means we need 
access to more and better information, independently arrived, at from 
people whose commitment is to the Congress, and only to the Congress.
  Congress has the Constitutional authority to provide more effective 
and active oversight of our Nation's trade policy. We must use that 
authority. Congress should be more active in setting the direction of 
trade policy. I believe strongly that we must re-assert Congress' 
constitutionally defined responsibility for international commerce.
  A Congressional Trade Office would provide the entire Congress, 
through the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means 
Committee, with this additional trade expertise. It would have three 
sets of responsibilities.
  First, it will monitor compliance with major bilateral, regional, and 
multilateral trade agreements. Last week, along with Senator Murkowski 
and several other Senators, I introduced the China WTO Compliance Act. 
That bill is designed to ensure continuing and comprehensive monitoring 
of China's WTO commitments. It is also designed to ensure aggressive 
Administration action to ensure compliance with those commitments. But 
that bill deals only with China. Congress needs the independent ability 
to look more closely at agreements with other countries. The 
Congressional Trade Office will analyze the performance under 
key agreements and evaluate success based on commercial results. It 
will do this in close consultation with the affected industries. The 
Congressional Trade Office will recommend to the Congress actions 
necessary to ensure that commitments made to the United States are 
fully implemented. It will also provide annual assessments about the 
agreements' compliance with labor and environmental goals.

  Second, the Congressional Trade Office will have an analytic 
function. For example, after the Administration delivers its annual 
National Trade Estimates report, the NTE, to Congress, it will analyze 
the major outstanding trade barriers based on the cost to the US 
economy. It will also provide an analysis of the Administration's Trade 
Policy Agenda.
  The Congressional Trade Office will analyze proposed trade 
agreements, including agreements that do not require legislation to 
enter into effect. It will examine the impact of Administration trade 
policy actions, including an assessment of the Administration's 
argument for not accepting an unfair trade practices case. And it will 
analyze the trade accounts every quarter, including the global current 
account, the global trade account, and key bilateral trade accounts.
  Third, the Congressional Trade Office will be active in dispute 
settlement deliberations. It will evaluate each WTO decision where the 
US is a participant. In the case of a US loss, it will explain why it 
lost. In the case of a US win, it will measure the commercial results 
from that decision. It will do a similar evaluation for NAFTA disputes. 
Congressional Trade Office staff should participate as observers on the 
US delegation at dispute settlement panel meetings at the WTO.
  The Congressional Trade Office is designed to service the Congress. 
Its Director will report to the Senate Finance Committee and the House 
Ways and Means Committee. It will also advise other committees on the 
impact of trade negotiations and the impact of the Administration's 
trade policy on those committees' areas of jurisdiction.
  The staff will consist of professionals who have a mix of expertise 
in economics and trade law, plus in various industries and geographic 
regions. My expectation is that staff members will see this as a career 
position, thus, providing the Congress with long-term institutional 
memory.
  The Congressional Trade Office will work closely with other 
government entities involved in trade policy assessment, including the 
Congressional Research Service, the General Accounting Office, and the 
International Trade Commission. The Congressional Trade Office will not 
replace those agencies. Rather, the Congressional Trade Office will 
supplement their work, and leverage the work of those entities to 
provide the Congress with timely analysis, information, and advice.
  Dispute resolution and compliance with trade agreements are central 
elements of US trade policy. The credibility of the global trading 
system, and the integrity of American trade law, depend on the belief, 
held by trade professionals, political leaders, industry 
representatives, workers, farmers, and the public at large, that 
agreements made are agreements followed. They must be fully 
implemented. There must be effective enforcement. Dispute settlement 
must be rapid and effective.
  Often more energy goes into negotiating new agreements than into 
ensuring that existing agreements work. The Administration has 
increased the resources it devotes to compliance, and I support that. 
But an independent and neutral assessment in the Congress of compliance 
is necessary. It is unrealistic to expect an agency that negotiated an 
agreement to provide a totally objective and dispassionate assessment 
of that agreement's success or failure.
  Looking at the WTO dispute settlement process, I don't think we even 
know whether it has been successful or not from the perspective of U.S. 
commercial interests. A count of wins versus losses tells us nothing. 
The Congressional Trade Office will give us the facts we need to 
evaluate this process properly.
  Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution says: ``The Congress 
shall have power . . . To regulate commerce with foreign nations.'' It 
is our responsibility to provide oversight and direction on US trade 
policy. The Congressional Trade Office, as I have outlined it today, 
will provide us in the Congress with the means to do so.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BOND (for himself Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Craig, Mrs. Lincoln, 
        Mr. Johnson, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Robb, Mr. 
        Stevens, and Mr. Warner):
  S. 2227. A bill to amend chapter 79 of title 5, United States Code, 
to allow

[[Page S1394]]

Federal agencies to reimburse their employees for certain adoption 
expenses, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs.


             the federal employees adoption assistance act

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, today I join my colleagues in the House, 
Congressmen Bliley and Oberstar and 42 other House Members, as well as 
Senators Landrieu, Craig, Jeffords, Lincoln, Johnson, Lieberman, 
Jeffords, Robb, Stevens, and Warner, in introducing a bill to reimburse 
all federal employees up to $2,000 for qualified expenses associated 
with the adoption of a child and for special-needs adoptions--the 
Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act of 2000.
  Every year, couples who are unable to have children of their own 
spend literally thousands of dollars to adopt a child. Statistics show 
that approximately 2.1 million couples in the Unites States are 
infertile. One of the main reasons for this is because couples are 
waiting longer to start a family in order to focus on careers. Many 
seek treatment to conceive a child, but are unsuccessful. For them, 
their only hope of having a child of their own is through adoption.
  The adoption process demands an incredible amount of time and money 
and creates stress that can affect job performance. For this reason 
many private-sector businesses, such as Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard, 
Sprint, Prudential, Home Depot, and Freddie Mac, now provide financial 
assistance to employees adopting a child, thus increasing employee 
satisfaction, productivity, and loyalty and commitment to the employer. 
Unfortunately, the largest employer in the U.S.--the federal 
government--currently provides no financial assistance for adoption 
expenses to its employees. That is why I am introducing the Federal 
Employees Adoption Assistance Act.
  This legislation would allow federal agencies to reimburse employees 
up to $2,000 for all qualified expenses associated with the adoption of 
a child, including special-needs children. Any benefit paid by this 
legislation would come out of funds available for salaries and expenses 
of the relevant agencies. Currently, active-duty armed services 
personnel receive this adoption benefit, $2,000 per adoption; however, 
no other branch of the federal government covers this expense.
  A key aspect of adoption that is frequently overlooked, and that I 
have made sure is addressed in this legislation, is that of special-
needs children. Recent estimates show there are currently around 
110,000 special-needs children in foster care who are eligible for 
adoption. Many of these children have physical or mental disabilities 
and need extensive care and therapy. Another common situation is two or 
more siblings in need of a family willing to take on the responsibility 
of more than one child. Most of these children are currently in foster 
care waiting to find a permanent home and family of their own, and are 
less likely to be adopted than non-special-needs children.
  Often, couples who may already have children of their own are 
interested in opening their home and their hearts to adopt a child or 
children with special needs, but are hesitant to do so due to the costs 
involved. By providing an adoption reimbursement benefit, many couples 
already considering adopting special-needs children decide to go ahead 
with the process. The Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act 
broadens the adoption benefits package to include the costs associated 
with special-needs adoptions.
  Mr. President, this is why I, along with numerous colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle and in both chambers, are introducing and advocating 
the passage of this legislation. Additionally, this bipartisan and 
bicameral bill has the endorsement of numerous adoption advocacy 
groups, including:
  Bethany Christian Services in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Covenant House, 
The Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption, The Edgewood Children's Center 
in St. Louis, Missouri, Family Voices, The National Adoption Center, 
The National Council for Adoption, The National Treasury Employees 
Union, and Voice for Adoption.
  As a member of the Congressional Coalition on Adoption, I believe we 
should provide incentives to make sure that more children find loving 
parents. I thank my colleagues, Senators Landrieu, Craig, Jeffords, 
Lincoln, Johnson, Lieberman, Jeffords, Robb, Stevens, and Warner, 
Congressmen Bliley and Oberstar, and the numerous other House and 
Senate sponsors, as well as the many adoption advocacy groups, for 
joining me in promoting adoption and supporting our civil servants by 
cosponsoring and endorsing this legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                   Bethany Christian Services,

                                  Grand Rapids, MI, March 3, 2000.
     Hon. Christopher Bond,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond, I have read the draft of the Federal 
     Employees Adoptions Assistance Act that you have proposed. On 
     behalf of Bethany Christian Services, I express my support 
     for this legislation.
       Bethany is a national child welfare 501(c)3 organization 
     and is located in 31 states. We place close to 1500 children 
     for adoption each year and most of them have some form of 
     ``special need.'' The families that choose to adopt are 
     typically in need of some form of financial assistance.
       Thank you for your efforts to promote adoption with this 
     proposed legislation.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Glenn De Mots,
     President.
                                  ____

                                            Dave Thomas Foundation


                                                 for Adoption,

                                        Dublin, OH, March 8, 2000.
     Hon. Christopher Bond,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond: As you know, adoption is a personal 
     thing for me. I was adopted when I was six weeks old, and If 
     I hadn't had a family to care for me, I know, I wouldn't be 
     where I am now. Today over 110,000 children in the United 
     States foster care system are waiting to be adopted. I'd like 
     to see them have the same chance that I had for a loving home 
     and family. I support your efforts to help these children and 
     the families who adopt them through the introduction of the 
     Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act of 2000.
       Wendy's began to offer adoption assistance to our employees 
     in 1990, and since then thirty-six employees have adopted. We 
     discovered many advantages to offering adoption benefits. 
     They are a highly valued part of employees' benefits and they 
     make the process of building a family more fair. When a 
     company offers adoptive parents financial assistance and 
     leave comparable to maternity benefits, they are doing what 
     is best for families--and employees appreciate it. Adoption 
     benefits also provide an opportunity to give back to the 
     community. By offering employers adoption benefits we are 
     making it possible for more children to be adopted from the 
     child welfare system. Through our work at Wendy's, we are 
     reminded that building and supporting families is the right 
     thing to do. It costs so little to make a tremendous 
     difference in the lives of families and children.
       We appreciate your hard work to ensure that this 
     legislation covers a broader range of adoption related 
     expenses. This is especially important because of the unique 
     costs that families who adopt children with special needs 
     incur.
       Again, thank you for your efforts to encourage the federal 
     government to join the growing number of employers who agree 
     that adoption benefits make good business sense. We commend 
     you for your leadership in this area and hope your fellow 
     Members of Congress will support it.
           Warm regards,
                                                      Dave Thomas,
     Founder.
                                  ____



                                               Covenant House,

                                      New York, NY, March 8, 2000.
     Hon. Christopher Bond,
     Russell Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond: Covenant House is proud to be a 
     supporter of the Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act of 
     2000. I would like to have joined you for the actual 
     announcement of this legislation but am unable to do so due 
     to a previous commitment.
       Each year, thousands of youth come to Covenant House 
     lacking the support of a stable family and desperately in 
     need of love and protection. This legislation will encourage 
     federal employees to adopt youth who have this great need and 
     hopefully set an example for employers throughout the nation 
     to provide similar encouragement to their employees who want 
     to adopt a youth. We know so many young people whose lives 
     would have been turned around if only adoption could have 
     been possible for them.
       Thank you so much for drafting and sponsoring this 
     important legislation.
           Sincerely,
                                   Sister Mary Rose McGeady, D.C.,
                                                        President.

[[Page S1395]]

     
                                  ____
                                     Edgewood Children Center,

                                 St. Louis, MO, February 16, 2000.
     Hon. Christopher S. Bond,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond: As you know, at Edgewood Children's 
     Center we often work with children whose own families are 
     unable to care for them. Finding permanent families for those 
     children is usually more of a priority than anything else we 
     do.
       The ``Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act'' will 
     support an important group of potential parents in their 
     desire to parent these and other children. Easing the 
     financial burden of adoption will increase the pool of 
     available families and make the way easier for those who 
     choose this important step.
       Thank for, once again, leading the way on behalf of kids. 
     Know of our strong support of this bill and please let me 
     know of anything we can do to be of assistance.
           Most sincerely,
                                               Susan S. Stepleton,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                                                Family Voices,

                                  Algodones, NM, February 9, 2000.
     Senator Christopher Bond,
     Russell Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond: Family Voices is pleased to write in 
     support of the ``Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act'' 
     you have proposed. Family Voices, 30,000 members understand 
     the delicate nature of our children with special needs have a 
     loving home to grow up in and a nurturing family to support 
     them.
       We believe that any assistance that can be provided to help 
     families adopt children with special needs is crucial. 
     Today's changing health care environment and families 
     concerns about growing costs may provide barriers to the 
     adoption of our children with special needs. Your bill simply 
     equals the playing field for our children with special needs 
     and the families who wish to be apart of their lives. Our 
     children deserve a nurturing environment and this bill will 
     encourage adopting families to take a second look at our 
     kids. You have truly addressed a need our children and their 
     future families have and Family Voices stands behind your 
     efforts.
           Sincerely,

                                                Julie Beckett,

                                      National Policy Coordinator,
     Family Voices, Inc.
                                  ____

                                             Missouri Coalition of


                                          Children's Agencies,

                                Jefferson City, MO, March 4, 2000.
     Hon. Christopher S. Bond,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond: As you know, the Missouri Coalition of 
     Children's Agencies is the professional association 
     representing sixty-five private child caring agencies in 
     Missouri. The vast majority of these agencies spend a 
     considerable portion of their time attempting to find 
     permanent homes for the abused and neglected children in 
     their care. This function is second only to providing a safe 
     and caring environment for these children.
       The ``Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act'' is a 
     great step in providing an important potential group of 
     adoptive parents for children in need of permanent homes. 
     Anything we can do to increase the pool of potential adoptive 
     families can only help increase the chances for the children 
     who most need the love and stability of a permanent home. 
     Reducing the financial burden of adoption is a great step 
     forward for these potential families.
       We truly appreciate your strong support of children. If 
     there is anything our association or its individual members 
     can do to help in this effort, please let me know.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Joe Ketterlin,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                                     National Adoption Center,

                                                 Philadelphia, PA.
     Hon. Christopher S. Bond,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond: For the past four years, the National 
     Adoption Center has been in the forefront of encouraging 
     employers to offer adoption benefits through its Adoption and 
     the Workplace project. During this time, more than 125 
     employers have implemented benefits' policies, including 
     financial reimbursement for adoption expenses. This support 
     allows families to consider adoption as a viable option and 
     to provide loving homes to children who need permanence.
       The reaction of adoptive families who receive adoption 
     benefits has been overwhelmingly positive. Many have spoken 
     of their appreciation of their employer's efforts to provide 
     fairness in relation to those who create families 
     biologically and often express their gratitude through 
     greater loyalty and commitment to their workplace.
       We support the Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act 
     you are proposing as an effective way of providing financial 
     reimbursement to employees interested in adopting and as a 
     means of encouraging families to consider adoption as a 
     family-building alternative. We feel that this legislation 
     addresses the need for equity, recognizing that families who 
     adopt have traditionally had no employer-supported financial 
     benefits, unlike those who receive maternity coverage.
       We commend you for this farsighted bill and urge your 
     fellow legislators to support it.
           Sincerely,
                                               Carolyn L. Johnson,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                                National Council for Adoption,

                                 Washington, DC, February 8, 2000.
     Hon. Christopher S. Bond,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond: I reviewed the draft version of the 
     Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act that you have 
     proposed and am in support of this legislation. As you know, 
     the National Council For Adoption has taken the position of 
     promoting adoption for the past 20 years. The Federal 
     Employees Adoption Assistance Act provides families with much 
     needed financial assistance to defray the cost of certain 
     adoption expenses. By providing this assistance, hopefully a 
     number of strong families that would not otherwise have the 
     financial ability to adopt a child will have the opportunity 
     to provide a loving home to a child in need of a family.
       As a supporter of companion legislation sponsored by 
     Representative Tom Bliley and Representative James Oberstar, 
     the National Council for Adoption supports your efforts to 
     enact the Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act into law 
     this year.
           Sincerely,
                                               David M. Malutinok,
     President.
                                  ____


 Statement of Colleen M. Kelley, National President, National Treasury 
   Employees Union, in Support of the Federal Adoption Assistance Act

       The National Treasury Employees Union, which represents 
     over 155,000 federal workers in the Department of the 
     Treasury, Department of Energy, Federal Communications 
     Commission, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Patent and 
     Trademark Office and other agencies announces its strong 
     support for the bipartisan legislation introduced by Senator 
     Kit Bond and Representative Tom Bliley to provide adoption 
     assistance for federal employees.
       Many federal employees are ready and willing to provide a 
     loving home for a child in need. Sadly, significant financial 
     barriers often exist particularly for the lower and middle 
     grade public servants that make up the membership of our 
     union. This legislation would lessen the financial burden 
     these hopeful parents would bear as they take on the duties 
     of providing love and care for a child in need of a home.
       The federal government should set the example for employers 
     everywhere in developing compassionate and socially 
     responsible employment and benefit policies. NTEU asks that 
     Congress move quickly on this important legislation.
                                  ____



                                           Voice for Adoption,

                                 Washington, DC, February 9, 2000.
     Hon. Christopher Bond,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bond: On behalf of Voice for Adoption (VFA), I 
     applaud your efforts to help special needs children move from 
     foster care to permanent loving homes. VFA supports the 
     Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act.
       Founded in 1996, VFA has more than 70 national and local 
     special needs adoption organizations as members. VFA 
     participants include professionals, parents, and advocates 
     committed to securing adoptive families for America's waiting 
     children.
       Our distinguished board of directors has more than two 
     hundred years combined experience in the adoption field. 
     VFA's board includes: North American Council on Adoptable 
     Children (NACAC), the National Adoption Center, Adoption 
     Exchange Association (AEA) Child Welfare League of America 
     (CWLA), Children Awaiting Parents (CAP), the Institute for 
     Black Parenting, Three River Adoption Council, Spaulding for 
     Children, Family Builders Adoption Network and The Evan B. 
     Donaldson Adoption Institute. Our aim is to ensure permanent, 
     nurturing families for our nation's most vulnerable children 
     and to strengthen support for families who adopt.
       In 1998, approximately 520,000 children were in out-of-
     home, foster, kinship, or residential care. The average age 
     of these children in foster care is 9.5 year old. These 
     children can expect to spend on average more than three years 
     in the foster care system and be moved more than three 
     different times during their stays.
       The Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act, which allows 
     up to $2,000 reimbursement for adoption expenses, would 
     encourage employees of the federal government to adopt who 
     would not have been able to afford it otherwise.
       Again, VFA applauds your leadership with this important 
     piece of legislation.
           Sincerely,
                                            Courteney Anne Holden,
                                               Executive Director.

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues and to 
acknowledge the leadership of Senator Bond in introducing the Federal 
Employees Adoption Assistance Act of 2000.
  Congress has repeatedly demonstrated strong support for adoption.

[[Page S1396]]

 I think there is a clear consensus here that adoption is a positive 
experience--for children needing homes, for birth parents, and for 
adoptive parents, not to mention for society at large. In recent years, 
we have shaped federal policies so that they do more to help waiting 
children find permanent, loving families.
  Now we have an opportunity to bring home our advocacy for adoption.
  The Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act follows the lead of a 
growing number of private sector businesses in establishing an adoption 
benefit for employees. It is well known that family-friendly workforce 
policies help attract and retain qualified workers. While adoption 
benefits generate considerable good will and loyalty among employees, 
they cost little for employers, because they are relatively rarely 
used. Yet in view of what continues to be a huge price tag for 
adoption--in the tens of thousands of dollars--these benefits can truly 
make a difference in helping an employee choose this option for 
creating or expanding a family.
  By implementing these policies for federal workers, we can underscore 
our strong message of support for adoption and encourage more private 
sector employers to do likewise. At the same time, we will be improving 
the competitiveness of the federal government in recruiting good 
workers and helping to increase current workers' job satisfaction and 
commitment.
  The benefit that could be provided by the Federal Employees Adoption 
Assistance Act is by no means lavish, but it compares favorably with 
similar benefits in the private sector. This policy will be good for 
workers, good for the federal government, good for taxpayers, and--most 
important--good for the more than 100,000 children in this country who 
are eligible for adoption today but still awaiting a permanent, loving 
family.
  I congratulate Senator Bond for bringing this initiative to the 
Senate and encourage all our colleagues to join us in working to pass 
this important legislation.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the 
legislation that is being introduced by my friend and colleague from 
Missouri, Senator Bond. As Chairman of the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions and a member of the Congressional 
Coalition on Adoption, I have been a long-standing supporter of 
legislation to make adoption easier. This bill does exactly that by 
requiring federal agencies to reimburse their employees up to $2,000 
for all qualified expenses associated with the adoption of a child. 
Both this bill and its House companion, introduced by Representatives 
Tom Bliley and James Oberstar last August, have gathered the support of 
a bipartisan group of legislators and numerous groups in the adoption 
community.
  Currently, many private sector businesses provide financial 
assistance to employees who wish to adopt a child. These businesses 
understand that adoption can be a very time-consuming, exhausting, and 
expensive process for parents. Relieving the financial burden on their 
employees will not only help encourage adoption, but also produce a 
happier and more productive work force.
  The legislation being introduced today provides a benefit for our own 
hard-working federal employees. In the process, it brings the federal 
government up to par with those private-sector businesses that already 
provide financial assistance to employees adopting a child. Even 
further, it establishes a leadership role for the federal government in 
this area. This hopefully will encourage even more businesses to assist 
their employees financially should they wish to adopt a child.
  I am proud to stand today with several of my colleagues as co-
sponsors of the Federal Employees Adoption Assistance Act of 2000. I 
hope the Senate will proceed quickly to pass this legislation. It makes 
sense, both for the approximately 110,000 children currently awaiting 
adoption in the United States, and for those federal employees who are 
willing and able to provide a home for them.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, and Mr. Gorton):
  S. 2228. A bill to require the Secretary of the Army to conduct 
studies and to carry out ecosystem restoration and other protective 
measures within Puget Sound, Washington, and adjacent waters, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.


                   Puget sound ecosystem restoration

  Mrs. MURRAY. 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. 2228

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

     SECTION. 1. PUGET SOUND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION.

       (a) In General.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall conduct 
     studies and carry out ecosystem restoration and other 
     protective measurers within Puget Sound, Washington, and 
     adjacent waters and associated estuary and near-shore 
     habitat, including--
       (1) the 17 watersheds that drain directly into Puget Sound;
       (2) Admiralty Inlet;
       (3) Hood Canal;
       (4) Rosario Strait; and
       (5) the eastern portion of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.
       (b) Implementation.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall use funds made 
     available to carry out this section to carry out ecosystem 
     restoration and other protective measures (including 
     environmental improvements related to facilities of the Corps 
     of Engineers in existence on the date of enactment of this 
     Act) determined by the Secretary to be feasible based on--
       (A) the studies conducted under subsection (a); or
       (B) analyses conducted before such date of enactment by 
     non-Federal interests.
       (2) Criteria and procedures for review and approval.--In 
     consultation with the Secretary of Commerce and the Governor 
     of the State of Washington, the Secretary shall develop 
     criteria and procedures consistent with the National Marine 
     Fisheries Service and State fish restoration goals and 
     objectives for reviewing and approving analyses described in 
     paragraph (1)(B) and the protective measures proposed in 
     those analyses. The Secretary shall use prior studies and 
     plans to identify project needs and priorities wherever 
     practicable.
       (3) Prioritization of projects.--In prioritizing projects 
     for implementation under this subsection, the Secretary shall 
     consult with public and private entities active in watershed 
     planning and ecosystem restoration in Puget Sound watersheds, 
     including the Salmon Recovery Funding Board, the Northwest 
     Straits Commission, the Hood Canal Coordinating Council, 
     county watershed planning councils, and salmon enhancement 
     groups, and shall give full consideration to their priorities 
     for projects.
       (c) Public Participation.--In developing and implementing 
     protective measures under subsections (a) and (b), the 
     Secretary shall provide for public review and comment in 
     accordance with applicable Federal law, including--
       (1) providing advance notice of public meetings;
       (2) providing adequate opportunity for public input and 
     comment;
       (3) maintaining appropriate records; and
       (4) compiling a record of the proceedings of meetings.
       (d) Compliance With Applicable Law.--In developing and 
     implementing protective measures under subsections (a) and 
     (b), the Secretary shall comply with applicable Federal law, 
     including the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
     U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
       (e) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) In general.--Studies and technical assistance provided 
     to determine the feasibility of protective measures under 
     subsections (a) and (b) shall--
       (A) be considered to be project costs; and
       (B) be shared by non-Federal interests during project 
     implementation in accordance with this subsection.
       (2) Non-federal share.--Subject to paragraph (4), the non-
     Federal share of the cost of the protective measures shall be 
     35 percent; except that if a project would otherwise be 
     eligible for cost-sharing under section 1135 of the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2294 note), the 
     non-Federal share of the cost of the protective measures for 
     the project shall be 25 percent.
       (3) In-kind contributions.--Not more than 80 percent of the 
     non-Federal share may be provided in the form of services, 
     materials, supplies, or other in-kind contributions necessary 
     to carry out the protective measures.
       (4) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of any 
     single protective measure shall not exceed $5,000,000.
       (5) Operation and maintenance.--The operation and 
     maintenance of the protective measures shall be a non-Federal 
     responsibility.
       (6) Tribal cost-sharing.--The Secretary shall waive the 
     first $200,000 in non-Federal cost share for all studies and 
     projects cosponsored by federally recognized Indian tribes.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to not

[[Page S1397]]

     to exceed $125,000,000 to pay the Federal share of the cost 
     of carrying out this section.

                          ____________________