[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 77 (Monday, June 19, 2000)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1039-E1040]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. NANCY L. JOHNSON

                             of connecticut

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 15, 2000

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4577) making 
     appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human 
     Services, and Education, and related agencies for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes:

  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge my 
colleagues to vote to move this bill forward but also to express my 
concerns about what I consider to be seriously inadequate funding 
levels for education, health, and job training.
  Chairman John Porter did an admirable job constructing this bill 
considering the difficult 302(B) allocation he was given in the budget 
resolution. I opposed that resolution because it inadequately funded so 
many agencies. But as in years past, the Senate has more generous 
subcommittee allocations and therefore will fund many programs at 
higher levels than the House. Furthermore, the

[[Page E1040]]

President has consistently advocated higher spending levels, though he 
has funded them through unacceptable taxes and cuts in key programs 
that members of both parties reject. Hence, as this bill moves through 
the process of Senate consideration and then the House-Senate 
conference, allocation levels will rise to what I believe will be sound 
funding levels appropriately funded. Therefore I vote in favor of this 
bill to move it forward in the process. I would note that last year's 
House Labor-HHS proposal provided only $35.6 billion for education 
programs while the President proposed a total of $37.1 billion. 
Ultimately, the process produced a bill that provided $38 billion for 
education and tied to that level of funding was greater flexibility so 
communities could meet their own needs. I have no doubt the same result 
will occur again this year which is why I am willing to put aside my 
concerns with this specific bill and move this legislation forward.
  H.R. 4577 provides funding increases for a number of programs of 
importance, including many health initiatives. I am very proud that 
Chairman Porter has targeted community health centers for support as 
these facilities are the only source of affordable health care in many 
neighborhoods. Helping people secure health insurance should be a 
priority for this Congress, but that health insurance will not be 
helpful unless people have a medical facility they can use. The House 
proposal increases funding by $81.3 million, $31 million more than the 
President's request.
  This legislation also provides critical funding increases for 
programs that help
  In some cases, our bill is far more generous than the Senate. The 
House provides $86 million more than the Senate and $156 million more 
than the President for the Centers for Disease Control. While we were 
not able to provide the full 15% increase previously agreed to for NIH, 
Chairman Porter's bill does increase funding by 5%, the same as the 
President requested. Chairman Porter also has made a commitment to work 
toward the full 15% increase in conference with the Senate. The House 
bill is also much more generous to SAMHSA providing $50 million more 
than the Senate, a $60 million increase over last year. SAMHSA funding 
is critical to helping deliver substance abuse and mental health 
services to communities.


                          Job Training/Welfare

  While I am very happy to see an increase in funding for Job Corps 
programs, residential facilities that provide job training, placement 
and support services to at-risk youth, I am deeply concerned about 
funding cuts to many of our other job training programs. While the 
economy is experiencing its highest rates of growth in our history and 
unemployment and welfare rolls are at an all time low, job training is 
more important than ever. Many families moving off public assistance 
can only become economically independent and secure with help to 
develop their skills and to win their battles against addiction. They 
urgently need these job training programs if they are going to 
successfully transition off of welfare. The cuts to the one-stop career 
centers as well as WIA adult training grants are both going to 
undermine our effort to move families off of welfare and to help low 
wage workers move up the skill and wage ladder. I urge my colleagues to 
visit a one step center in their district to see how effective they 
are.
  Another area of great concern is the under-funding of the Social 
Services Block Grant, used by states to fill funding gaps in their 
social welfare programs. States use SSBG to fund domestic violence 
shelters, adoption services, meals-on-wheels, elderly and disabled 
services and child and adult protective services to name a few. During 
the debate over welfare reform, Congress guaranteed the states that it 
would fund SSBG at $2.38 billion and that states could transfer 10% of 
their TANF dollars into SSBG to develop the support network necessary 
to families in transition from dependence to independence. However, to 
pay for last year's transportation bill, SSBG's authorization was cut 
to $1.7 billion and the transfer was reduced to 4.25%. While the level 
is lower than that I advocate for in my legislation, H.R. 4481, the 
House actually funded SSBG at its new authorization level of $1.7 
billion. The Senate however cuts the program by $1.1 billion to $600 
million. A cut of this magnitude will be devastating to the community 
organizations that serve some of our most needy constituents. I urge my 
colleagues to restore full funding to $2.38 billion and the transfer to 
10%.


                               Education

  The House proposal provides additional resources to many important 
education programs but its failure to increase the allocation for Title 
I should be of concern to all Members. Both the President and the 
Senate provided increases which would enable us to reach as many as 
260,000 more children. Further, H.R. 4577 would fund the Teacher 
Empowerment Act, a block grant of the Eisenhower Professional 
Development program, Goals 2000 and the President's class-size 
reduction program, at $1.75 billion instead of the proposed $2 billion 
authorization level. If Republicans are going to advocate for block 
granting similar pots of money--which I support--we must adequately 
fund the whole. As we have seen with TANF, Congress must abide by our 
promises and fully fund these programs if the new flexibility granted 
is to matter to kids, teachers and taxpayers. This cut of $300 million 
sets a very dangerous precedent for those who strongly support block 
grants and I hope my colleagues will reconsider this funding level.
  However, there are many programs which received increased funding 
from the Committee. The bill increases the average Pell Grant to 
$3,500, its highest level in history. Republicans have increased the 
Pell Grant, which saw cuts when the Democrats controlled both the White 
House and the Congress, by $1,200, or 50% since assuming the majority 
in 1995. Further, while the bill doesn't provide the additional $2 
billion in funding agreed to by the House for IDEA, it does increase 
funding by $500 million. If there is one program that comes up in every 
meeting I have had with teachers and administrators in my district, it 
is IDEA. The increase of $500 million is a step in the right direction. 
I also applaud the Head Start increase of $400 million or 7.5% and the 
TRIO program increase of an additional $115 million over FY00.
  Given the challenge presented to the committee by the budget 
resolution, they did a commendable job on this bill. However, many of 
its funding levels are inadequate and must grow through the process or 
I will vote against sending this bill to the President. Again, I will 
support this proposal because I believe that in the end we will have a 
bill that reflects our priorities--education, health care, and job 
training.

                          ____________________