[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.
____________________