[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 122 (Wednesday, October 4, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9861-S9863]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
Mr. JEFFORDS:
S. 3158. A bill to shift Impact Aid funding responsibility for
military connected children and property from the Department of
Education to the Department of Defense; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
``EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR MILITARY CONNECTED CHILDREN ACT OF 2000''
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``Educational
Assistance for Military Connected Children Act of 2000,'' legislation
that would transfer from the Department of Education to the Department
of Defense financial responsibility for impact aid payments used to
support the education of military dependents.
The impact aid program is authorized as Title VIII of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965. Unlike other ESEA programs,
however, impact aid payments are not used to support specific
educational activities. Rather, these payments serve as general aid to
local educational agencies to replace tax dollars which are foregone as
the result of the presence of the Federal government. For example,
Federal property--such as military installations--is not subject to
property taxes. In addition, under the terms of the Soldiers' and
Sailors' Civil Relief Act of 1940, many military personnel do not pay
taxes in the States and localities where their children attend school.
Replacing lost revenues that would otherwise have been available to
support local schools is an obligation of the Federal government in
those cases where the revenue loss is directly related to Federal
action. The Department of Education, through the impact aid program,
provides nearly $1 billion each year for this purpose.
Over the past two years, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions has been reviewing all ESEA programs. In the course of
that review, I have come to the conclusion that the children of
military personnel would be better served if the impact aid provided on
their behalf were offered through the Department of Defense.
For one thing, DOD officials are in a far better position than are
Education Department personnel to assess the needs of schools on or
near military bases and to be aware of activities--such as downsizing
or the construction or renovation of base housing--which can have a
major effect on the amount of the impact aid assistance available to a
school. In many cases, my committee has been asked, after the fact, to
address specific impact aid problems which have confronted schools as a
result of such decisions.
In addition, problems such as inadequate funding, overcrowded
conditions, and lengthy delays in the issuance of impact aid payments
could be better addressed if their resolution were the responsibility
of those who are most familiar with the needs of these schools and
their students.
On a number of occasions in the past, defense-related legislation has
included provisions which have directly changed impact aid or have
supported parallel programs. I do not see that the interests of schools
or students are best served by this duplication of effort.
The Department of Defense currently offers of variety of services to
military dependents--ranging from child care to health services. I
believe the education of these children to be equally important. The
legislation I am offering today is, I believe, a good starting point
for impact aid reform designed to improve the educational opportunities
available to military dependents.
______
Mr. ASHCROFT:
S. 3159. A bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to
clarify provisions relating to the use of accrued compensatory time by
certain public employees; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
state and local government family friendly workplace act
Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a very
important piece of legislation. This bill continues my effort to help
working parents balance the demands between work and family.
Over the past five years, we have been talking about the difficulty
that parents have balancing work and family obligations. I do not think
there are two values that are more highly or intensely admired in
America than these. The first one is the value we place on our
families. We understand that more than anything else the family is an
institution where important things are learned, not just knowledge
imparted but wisdom is obtained and understood in a family which
teaches us not just how to do something but teaches us how to live.
The second value which is a strong value in America and reflects our
heritage is the value of work. Americans admire and respect work. The
difficult issue that face us as a nation, is how are we going to
resolve these tensions? I think that is one of the jobs, that we
[[Page S9862]]
have to try and make sure we build a framework where people can resolve
those tensions. Since 1965, the amount of time parents spend with their
children has dropped 40 percent and a 1993 study that found that 66
percent of adults surveyed nationwide wanted to spend more time with
their children.
This tension between the workplace and the home place, juxtaposed or
set in a framework of laws created in the 1930's that does not allow us
flexibility, is a problem. For example, you might be asked to do
overtime over and over and over again, and you do overtime, and then
you are paid time and a half. But at some point, you would rather have
the time than the money. If the employer agreed to it voluntarily--both
parties--we ought to let that happen. Right now, it is against the law.
According to a number of surveys, this is what Americans want. For
example, a poll by Money magazine found that 64 percent of the American
people--and 68 percent of women--would rather have their overtime in
the form of time off, than in cash wages. Eighty-two percent said they
supported the Republican's plan to give working men and women more
control over their hard-earned time. Money magazine, May 1997.
In an attempt to address these work and family tensions, in each of
the last three Congresses, I have introduced legislation. Each of these
bills provide flexible working arrangements--or ``flex-time,'' and
compensatory time off--or ``comp time.''
The comp time provisions in the Family Friendly Workplace Act (S.
1241) would permit employees to choose, if the employer agreed, to be
compensated with time-and-a-half compensatory time off for overtime
hours worked in lieu of time-and-a-half pay--whenever time is more
valuable than financial compensation to the employee. This gives hourly
employees the ability to meet their family obligations while still
taking home a full paycheck.
The flex time provisions would allow private sector hourly employees
to work biweekly work schedules the same as federal employees have been
able to since 1978. Rather than being limited to 40 hours in a seven-
day period, private sector workers could schedule 80 hours over a two-
week period in any combination if their employers agree. Overtime would
have to be paid for any hours ordered by the employer in excess of
those in the designated biweekly work schedule. For example, if an
employer asked an employee to work 45 hours in a week when the employee
was scheduled to work only 35 hours under the biweekly work schedule,
the employer would be required to pay the employee 10 hours of overtime
compensation. This is true even though absent the agreement, the
employer would only be required to pay the employee five hours of
overtime.
When these provisions were developed, I took seriously the concerns
raised by my constituents that adequate protections had to be contained
in the bill to make sure this was a real choice made by employees--not
employers. Both of the provisions were designed to do just that. In the
Family Friendly Workplace Act employers cannot require accepting
compensatory time off in lieu of over time pay as a condition of
employment. Nor can they require employees to work flex time as a
condition of employment. In addition, such agreements to work these
alternative work schedules have to be in writing, signed by the
employee. Coercion into these programs--or even attempted coercion--is
strictly prohibited and contain severe penalties.
Due to the nature of comp time, there also are protections specific
to that program. Employers would be prohibited from coercing, or
attempting to coerce, employees into using or not using their comp
time. The bill requires employers to cash-out their employees' comp
time bank at the end of each year or in the alternative, within thirty
days of their employees' request. These cash-out provisions serve two
important purposes. First, it ensures that employers who offer the
option of comp time do not do so with the belief that it will give them
ability to avoid paying overtime. Second, it also structures comp time
programs with a built-in incentive for employers to allow employees to
use their comp time when it is needed by the employee.
Today, I am introducing legislation to provide these superior
protections to state and local government workers. First, it will
prohibit the practice of requiring employees to accept comp time as a
condition of employment. It also will require state and local
governments to cash-out comp time banks at the end of each year or
within thirty days of request by the employees. Finally, it will
specifically prohibit state and local governments from forcing
employees to use their accumulated comp time against their wishes. It
is those workers who are giving up time with their families--they
should be able to use it to spend time with their families. These
protections will impact 290,405 workers in Missouri, or approximately
twelve percent of the workforce.
No doubt, state and local governments will be concerned about the
cost of cashing out these comp time banks or changing their scheduling
patterns in order to allow workers to use their accumulated comp time.
As a former Governor, I understand these concerns. However, I have to
take seriously the practice that can no longer be called isolated
incidents. Forcing employees to work over time takes away time from
their families. Our police officers, fire fighters, corrections'
officers, and other state and local government workers should have the
choice whether that time should be compensated with time or money. They
know what best fits their needs and should not be forced--with the
blessings of the federal government--into giving up that choice.
______
Mr. LAUTENBERG:
S. 3160. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study
the suitability and feasibility of designating the Abel and Mary
Nicholson House, Elsinboro Township, Salem County, New Jersey, as a
unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
abel and mary nicholson house national historic site study act of 2000
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Abel and
Mary Nicholson House National Historic Site Study Act of 2000. This
bill would require the Secretary of the Interior to study the
suitability and feasibility of designating the Abel and Mary Nicholson
House located in Elsinboro Township, Salem County, New Jersey, as a
unit of the National Park System. As part of the study the Secretary
would also be required to consider management alternatives to create an
administrative association with the New Jersey Coastal Heritage Trail
Route. The bill I am introducing today would authorize the National
Park Service to acquire this land in compliance with the service's
standard rules and regulations.
Mr. President, the Abel and Mary Nicholson House is prized for its
architectural and historical significance to, not only my state, but,
our entire nation. It is a unique resource which can provide
unparalleled opportunities for studying our national cultural and
natural heritage. Situated along Alloway Creek, a tributary of the
Delaware River, the house is surrounded by an intact cultural landscape
of farm fields, wetlands and forests. The original access to the house
was from the creek, as rivers were the highways of 18th century
America.
The Abel and Mary Nicholson House is a Delaware Valley, brick,
patterned-end mansion constructed in 1722. The original portion of the
house has existed for 280 years with only routine maintenance, no major
remodeling or restoration, and without the intrusion of either
electricity or a central heating system. It stands alone as the only
known, pristine survivor of an Anglo-American building tradition that
existed for three quarters of a century.
The Nicholson House is changing the thinking of architectural
historians about the construction and use of rooms in the earliest
houses of the Delaware Valley. The house has been called an
architectural Rosetta stone that provides new insight to our
understanding of the use and function of interior space during the 18th
century. Additionally, Mr. President, an 1859 addition to the house
enhances the significance of the property with a similar level of
architectural integrity.
Mr. President, the Abel and Mary Nicholson House also has cultural
significance in its well-documented associations with the earliest
Quaker settlement in North America and the first permanent English
settlement in New
[[Page S9863]]
Jersey. Abel Nicholson arrived in New Jersey at the age of three. He
was brought to New Jersey by his father, Samuel Nicholson, a follower
of John Fenwick. They arrived in 1675, seven years before William Penn
arrived to settle Philadelphia. John Fenwick was the founder of
Greenwich and Salem, New Jersey, the first permanent English-speaking
settlements on the Delaware River.
Samuel Nicholson purchased 2,000 acres in Elsinboro Township, New
Jersey and a 16-acre lot in the City of Salem where he constructed a
home. It was in the Salem house that the first Salem Meeting of the
Society of Friends was organized in 1676. In 1680, Samuel Nicholson
donated the Salem house to the Salem Meeting and relocated to the
Elsinboro property. In 1693, Abel Nicholson married Mary Tyler, the
daughter of another Quaker. Abel and Mary Nicholson built the present
house, in 1722, which historians believe either replaced or abutted the
earlier structure built by his father.
Mr. President, the Nicholson House represents the Mid-Atlantic
region's colonial history and traditions. Because of its architectural
integrity and what it is teaching scholars about how 18th century
building spaces were used, it is considered to transcend regional
significance and ranks as one of America's iconic early structures.
Mr. President, the Abel and Mary Nicholson House is a national
treasure that deserves consideration for preservation and protection so
it can continue to teach future generations of Americans about the
contributions and lives of the early Americans. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 3160
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 ``Abel and Mary Nicholson
House National Historic Site Study Act of 2000''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) the Abel and Mary Nicholson House, located in Elsinboro
Township, Salem County, New Jersey, was built in 1722;
(2) the original section of the House is the only pristine,
surviving portion of a Delaware Valley brick patterned-end
house featuring a diaper or diamond pattern in glazed bricks
in the gable wall of the building, and less elaborate
decorations of checkered string courses on the other 3 walls;
(3) the original section of the House--
(A) contains early paint, original hinges, locks, shelving,
floorboards, roof framing, and chimneypieces; and
(B) has received only routine maintenance and no major
remodeling, and is without the intrusion of either
electricity or a central heating system;
(4) the 1859 addition to the House enhances the
significance of the property with a similar level of
architectural integrity;
(5) the House has well-documented associations with the
earliest Quaker settlement in North America;
(6) the House and surrounding property may be available for
acquisition from a willing donor; and
(7) the House is--
(A) 1 of the most significant ``first period'' houses
surviving in the Delaware Valley; and
(B) an architectural Rosetta stone on the domestic life of
the first 2 generations of settlers in the Delaware Valley.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) House.--The term ``House'' means the Abel and Mary
Nicholson House, located in Elsinboro Township, Salem County,
New Jersey.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National
Park Service.
SEC. 4. STUDY.
(a) In General.--Not later than 3 years after the date on
which funds are made available to carry out this Act, the
Secretary shall, in consultation with the State of New
Jersey--
(1) carry out a study on the suitability and feasibility of
designating the House as a unit of the National Park System;
(2) consider management alternatives to create an
administrative association with the New Jersey Coastal
Heritage Trail Route; and
(3) submit to the Committee on Resources of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate a report describing the findings of
the study.
(b) Contents.--The study under subsection (a) shall be
conducted in accordance with Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-
1 et seq.).
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are
necessary to carry out this Act.
____________________