[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 136 (Thursday, October 26, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11088-S11097]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2000--Continued

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I rise today to voice my strong support 
for the passage of H.R.782, The Older Americans Amendments Act of 1999. 
Even with the support of seniors' advocacy groups, it has taken the 
Congress a full five years to reach bipartisan agreement on this 
legislation. We should not miss this opportunity to keep our commitment 
to our most vulnerable senior citizens. I want to applaud the 
persistence, commitment, and leadership of Chairman Jeffords and 
Senators DeWine, Mikulski and Kennedy, their staffs, and other 
colleagues on the HELP committee who have been unwilling to give up 
during this long process.
  With the enactment of the Older Americans Act in 1965, Congress 
created a new Federal program specifically designed to meet the social 
services needs of older people. In 1972, Congress added the best known 
program ``Meals on Wheels'' which brought nutritionally balanced meals 
to seniors' homes or to seniors in congregate settings. In Minnesota 
alone, 185,000 seniors benefit from this seniors' meal program. 
Whenever I talk with seniors or their family members in Minnesota, I 
hear about this valuable service that provides seniors with necessary 
nutrition and, in the congregate settings, necessary socialization.
  On the 35th anniversary of the Older Americans Act, it is fitting 
that in a bipartisan bicameral manner we vote to continue the Act's 
broad policy objectives of providing programs related to health, 
housing, long-term care, employment, retirement, and community services 
for low and moderate income seniors. I hope the Senate will 
overwhelmingly pass this legislation, as did the House yesterday, and 
signal America's continuing commitment to our senior citizens.
  In addition to Meals on Wheels, this legislation continues the 
popular senior jobs program which provides financial help for needy 
seniors, provides them with a sense of meaning and usefulness, and also 
expands their opportunities for needed socialization. During the 1999-
2000 program year, Green Thumb (one of the grantees) in Minnesota has 
exceeded the major goals set by Congress and the Department of Labor, 
DOL, for job placement, while serving 1,188 mature job seekers. In 
addition, Minnesota seniors provided nearly 640,000 hours of community 
services to almost 500 public and non-profit ``host agencies'', 
including schools, hospitals, rest homes, libraries, parks, senior 
dining sites and senior centers, museums, and many more.
  During this past winter, Green Thumb in Minnesota engaged in a 
special partnership with the Census Bureau to assist in recruiting 
older census workers. As a result of Green Thumb's advertising, over 
2,700 mature workers were referred to the Census Bureau. With support 
of the Older

[[Page S11089]]

Americans Act, Green Thumb provided job counseling and training to most 
of these workers.
  In total, for the 1999-2000 program year, approximately 2,260 
Minnesota seniors were placed in jobs through all the grantee programs 
in the state. Programs like these are invaluable for the seniors 
involved, for their families, and for communities. We must vote to 
continue them.
  This legislation also contains a number of new programs which I 
wholeheartedly endorse because I believe they will protect seniors and 
provide support for their families and communities. Most noteworthy is 
the National Family Caregiver Program which is authorized at $125 
million. Minnesota will receive about $1.8 million for the program. The 
Caregiver Program will provide grants to states for the following long-
term care services: information about available services to caregivers, 
whether they be spouses, children, or grandchildren; assistance to 
caregivers in gaining access to services; individual counseling; 
organization of support groups and caregiver training to help families 
make decisions and solve programs related to their care giving roles; 
and, perhaps most important of all, respite services to provide 
families temporary relief from care giving responsibilities.
  This legislation also authorizes new programs for protection of older 
women from domestic violence and sexual abuse, rural health care model 
programs, and computer training. There are also grants to establish 
multi- disciplinary centers of gerontology to do research and train 
people in different disciplines to work with the elderly. As our 
elderly population grows so does the need for appropriately-trained 
people to meet their health and social needs.
  Every program in The Older Americans Amendments Act of 1999 is needed 
and will contribute to the emotional and physical well being of our 
seniors, those who love them, and the communities in which they live. I 
urge all of my colleagues to vote for this bill.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I support 
H.R. 782, the Older Americans Act Amendments of 1999. This legislation, 
of which I am a cosponsor, has been a long time coming. For five long 
years, senior citizens have been anxiously awaiting the reauthorization 
of the Older Americans Act, and seniors in my home state of West 
Virginia have felt betrayed by the failure of Congress to reauthorize 
this bill. Betrayed, Mr. President. That is why I am so pleased that, 
in the final days of the 106th Congress, the Senate has the opportunity 
to vote on this much-needed legislation.
  According to the West Virginia Bureau of Senior Services, in Fiscal 
Year 1999, the Older Americans Act made it possible for approximately 
50,459 seniors in West Virginia to have access to vital services like 
transportation, congregate and home delivered meals, adult day care, 
and health screenings. In addition, 676 seniors in West Virginia were 
able to move into the work force through Title V, the Senior Community 
Service Employment Program. These programs have surely helped many, 
many seniors, Mr. President, and I am pleased that the Senate is 
demonstrating how important our nation's oldest citizens are by 
reauthorizing the Older Americans Act.
  I am also pleased that this legislation would establish a new 
National Family Caregiver Support program, which would include respite, 
adult day care, and home care services for individuals with the 
greatest social and economic needs. With West Virginia having the 
country's oldest population for the second year in a row, and with more 
than fifteen percent of West Virginia's seniors who are age sixty and 
older considered to be living in a state of poverty, the National 
Family Caregiver Support program will offer much-needed assistance for 
home-bound seniors and their families, who are struggling to cope with 
the emotional and financial burdens placed on them.
  In June of this year, I was fortunate to attend, and speak at, the 
first-ever International Conference on Rural Aging, held in my home 
state of West Virginia. This conference was an historic opportunity for 
global leaders in the aging community to converge and explore the 
various challenges facing the exploding senior population, both in the 
United States and across the globe. Of the many issues that were 
addressed at the conference, including the lack of access to quality 
health care and vital services, loss of independence and autonomy, and 
lack of proper elderly nutrition, I am proud to say that the Older 
Americans Act offers seniors programs that support their desire to 
remain in their own homes and live independently. The Older Americans 
Act gives seniors, in both urban and rural areas, the opportunity to 
maintain a high-quality of life and the opportunity to feel like active 
participants in their communities. Among the highest concerns of the 
elderly in the United States, the need for reauthorization of the Older 
Americans Act has been labeled a critical priority for keeping pace 
with the rapidly growing aging population.
  I would like to point out, Mr. President, that Copernicus was 70 when 
he argued that the sun, not the Earth, is the center of the cosmos. 
Grandma Moses was in her 70s when she started painting. Claude Monet 
painted his famous water lilies at the age of 74. My friend from Ohio, 
former Senator John Glenn, ventured back into space at the age of 76. 
Benjamin Franklin was 79 when he invented bifocals. These remarkable 
individuals were most certainly contributing to society well into what 
society would consider the ``Golden Years.'' By reauthorizing the Older 
Americans Act, we are not only giving many other ``golden seniors'' the 
opportunity to contribute to society, but we are acknowledging the 
sense that we value them and we are proud to invest in them. I am proud 
to support this legislation, and I encourage all of my colleagues to do 
so as well.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, it is truly a privilege to be here today 
to speak in support of this important reauthorization of the Older 
Americans Act. I want to thank Senators Jeffords, DeWine, Mikulski and 
Kennedy for their leadership and steadfast work toward bringing this 
for us to consider today. As you know, this is the first 
reauthorization of these programs in eight long years. The House passed 
H.R. 782 on a vote of 405-2 yesterday. It's time has come today.
  The Older Americans Act is the most important Federal senior's 
services program and has provided essential services to our nation's 
seniors for the last 35 years. In particular, the program has provided 
services to those seniors who are vulnerable because poverty, frailty 
or isolation. As America gets older, we have a growing need for the 
services and programs authorized by the OAA. We in Iowa have the 
highest percentage of seniors over the age of 85 in the country. We are 
ranked 5th in the nation in our percentage of seniors over the age of 
65. The services provided through the Older Americans Act provide a 
lifeline to many of my constituents.
  I'm proud to support the strengthening of programs such as congregate 
and home delivered meals, family caregiver support, in-home services 
for the frail elderly such as those with Alzheimer's disease, home 
health, and the senior community service program. These programs help 
Iowa seniors live independently and remain in their homes and 
communities.
  One of my constituents told me recently what the OAA means to her: 
Virginia Mehl, who lives in a rural town in Iowa, had never worked away 
from her farm home. At the age of 79, faced with the death of her 
husband, she had to go and find work, cleaning an office. Suffering 
from fibromyalgia, she was having a real tough time. Thankfully, 
someone pointed her to Green Thumb, one of the organizations 
administering the senior community service employment program. With 
their help, Mrs. Mehl learned computer and office skills, enabling her 
to be placed in the office where she now works. She told me: ``Green 
Thumb is the best thing that ever happened to me. [I have] the 
opportunity to learn new skills, meet new people, and pay for my aqua-
exercise classes which I need for my disease.''
  Mrs. Mehl is just one example of how the Older Americans Act has been 
an extraordinary vehicle for helping hundreds of thousands of senior 
Americans obtain the training and job experience needed to improve 
their lives and provide economic independence, changing the negative 
stereotypes about aging, encouraging seniors to embrace new technology 
and keep up with the changing face of our economy.

[[Page S11090]]

  Seniors in our States have been calling on us since 1995 to 
reauthorize these important programs. Today, at long last, and with 
strong bipartisan cooperation, we will do just that.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to echo the strong support of 
my colleagues for the reauthorization of the Older Americans Act.
  In July, we celebrated the 35th anniversary of the Older Americans 
Act, a milestone for a program that has meant so much to millions of 
America's seniors. The Older Americans Act brings critical support 
services to the elderly in communities throughout this nation and has 
greatly benefitted seniors in my State.
  The long overdue reauthorization of this Act is particularly 
significant for the State of Rhode Island. The Older Americans Act has 
had a long and rich legacy in my State since the Act's inception. 
Indeed, former Rhode Island Congressman John Fogarty played a key role 
in authoring the original Act, and I am pleased to have played a role 
in the reauthorization of this historic Act.
  Since 1965, thousands of Rhode Island seniors have enjoyed the 
benefits of Older Americans Act programs--from congregate and home 
delivered meals, senior center programs, protective and legal services 
for the elderly, among other essential programs and services, all of 
which have brought comfort and enrichment to the lives of seniors in my 
State. For example, this year, Older Americans Act funding has helped 
to provide the following services to seniors in my State: 667,101 
congregate meals at 74 sites; 540,008 home delivered meals; and 3,500 
clients served through the home visitation program.
  For many unfortunate reasons, authorization of this legislation 
lapsed in 1995 and since that time, Congress has been wrangling with 
its reauthorization. And if it were not for the hard work and sheer 
determination on the part of Senators Jeffords, Kennedy, DeWine, and 
Mikulski and their staffs frankly we would not be here this afternoon. 
I would also like to recognize Janette Takamura, the Assistant 
Secretary for Aging, for her insights and expertise that have proven 
invaluable throughout this process and for her tremendous leadership at 
the Administration on Aging. Indeed, getting to this point has not been 
easy. I commend my colleagues for their diligence and willingness to 
compromise on key issues, and I have been pleased to support these 
efforts.
  Their long and hard work has resulted in a thoughtful and balanced 
bill that lays out a vision for Older Americans Act programs for the 
next several decades. Specifically, this legislation streamlines and 
updates existing programs and authorizes new programs designed to meet 
the needs of the growing population of American seniors and their 
families in the coming century.
  In particular, as an original cosponor of S. 707, legislation 
introduced by Senators Grassley and Breaux, I would like to highlight 
the inclusion of the Family Caregiver Support program in the Older 
Americans Act reauthorization. The Family Caregiver Support program is 
designed to meet the critical needs of families who are caring for 
loved ones with chronic illnesses or disabilities. This program will 
support respite services for caregivers, counseling and caregiver 
training and information about additional support services in the 
community.
  Family caregivers are the unsung heros in the provision of long-term 
care in this country. Nationally, more than 7 million Americans serve 
as caregivers for relatives, friends and loved ones. Last Fall, I held 
a Special Senate Committee on Aging field hearing in Rhode Island to 
explore the burdens and challenges that face family caregivers in my 
State.
  My home State of Rhode Island has the third highest concentration of 
people over the age of 65 in the Nation, has enjoyed a longstanding 
commitment to community-based services for the elderly.
  Consequently, over 90 percent of Rhode Island seniors are living 
outside of institutional-based care settings, thanks in large part to 
the selfless contributions of families and friends in providing elders 
with the support they need to remain in their homes and communities.
  Indeed, my State has already begun to work on creative ways to 
provide caregivers the resources they need. Recently, the Rhode Island 
Department of Elderly Affairs was one of 16 national recipients of an 
Administration on Aging demonstration grant to develop and implement a 
model to provide training, support and qualified respite care for 
Alzheimer's families. Monies provided through the new Family Caregiver 
program under the Older Americans Act will greatly help to fortify and 
expand ongoing home- and community-based initiatives in my State.
  I would also like to commend my colleagues for the inclusion of 
funding under Title IV to help States start to address the 
transportation needs of our Nation's seniors. Indeed, in Rhode Island, 
there is a growing demand from senior centers for transit vans to move 
seniors who cannot drive and are not served by regular mass transit. 
This is an issue of growing importance in my State, and I look forward 
to further considering ways to improve senior transit.
  In closing, I would again like to express my appreciation to my 
colleagues and their staffs for their tremendous efforts to reauthorize 
this monumental piece of legislation. Thank you, Mr. President.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to be a cosponsor of Older 
Americans Act amendments of 2000. Seniors are a vital part of our 
community. The programs authorized by this Act help make sure low-
income and frail seniors have every opportunity to stay independent, in 
their own homes, and remain a part of the community. Through meals on 
wheels and the congregate meal program thousands of seniors in 
Washington state whether homebound or not, receive nutritious meals and 
an opportunity to socialize with their peers. Through community service 
employment many low-income seniors who have poor job prospects have 
been meaningfully employed in a wide range of activities including 
education, health care, senior centers and nutrition services for older 
people. This reauthorization makes sure these needs will continue to be 
met.
  In addition this bill funds activities to protect the rights of the 
vulnerable elderly through the long-term care ombudsman program which 
provides volunteer advocates for seniors living in nursing homes and 
other long-term facilities; through programs to prevent elder abuse, 
neglect and exploitation; and through assistance programs for insurance 
and other public benefits.
  This year's authorization also includes an important new addition to 
the Older Americans Act--the National Family Caregiver Support program. 
Thousands of families are choosing to care for their senior parents and 
grandparents in their own homes. This can be a wonderful option for 
seniors who are no longer able to live independently but may not need 
or want the full time care of a nursing home, or for those seniors 
unable to afford assisted living arrangements. Counseling, training and 
respite care will be available to family caregivers. These services 
will also be made available to grandparents who are caregivers to 
children.
  I deeply believe that seniors in this country should continue to have 
access to the quality services they have received in the past from the 
Older Americans Act. This reauthorization not only accomplishes that 
goal but includes needed improvements. My only regret is that I was 
unable to be here in person to vote in favor of its passage.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I am pleased today to support passage of 
the Older Americans Act (OAA) Reauthorization. This Act has been 
providing a wide range of services, such as a community service 
employment program, nutrition services, and research, training, and 
demonstration activities since 1965 for older persons, especially those 
at risk of losing their independence.
  One such service is the Act's nutrition program, which provides 
millions of meals to older persons in congregate settings, such as 
senior centers, and to frail older persons in the comfort of their 
homes. The nutrition program is the Act's largest program providing 
meals to people who are generally older, poor, and living alone. Most 
significantly, this program is often the most important source of a 
balanced, nutritious meal for its elderly participants. While these 
seniors need some assistance securing adequate meals for themselves, 
through OAA they don't have to give up living on their own to ensure 
they have proper nutrition.

[[Page S11091]]

  In an effort to expand other home-based services, this bill 
authorizes $125 million in appropriations for a National Family 
Caregiver Support Program. The new caregiver program which will provide 
grants to support families and other providers of in-home and community 
care to older individuals, to develop innovative approaches to 
caregiving, and to link family support programs with programs for 
persons with mental retardation or related developmental disabilities 
and their families. This provision will help not only our seniors, but 
their families who are struggling to care for them in a home 
environment rather than a nursing home.
  Another example of how OAA helps seniors keep their independence is 
through the senior community service employment program, which provides 
opportunities for part-time employment in community service activities 
for unemployed, low-income older persons. One goal of this program is 
to increase the income of these persons, however the broader goal is to 
assist them obtain jobs and become more self-sufficient. While the 
program supports over 61,500 jobs for elderly Americans, we all benefit 
from its efforts. Its participants are enthusiastic additions to our 
labor force, eagerly taking on jobs in community service that might 
otherwise go unattended. The participants are eager to enter the 
workforce and are often hired into other jobs outside of the program 
because of their strong work ethic.
  In my home state of Tennessee, 1,224 positions have been established 
for the senior community service employment program through 1999. 
During that same year, 547 older Tennesseans were placed into the 
workforce outside those positions, which means that Tennessee has a 
rate of 45 percent for transitioning these subsidized part-time jobs 
into employment outside the program. Of the four senior community 
service employment program grantees operating in Tennessee, Green Thumb 
is the oldest and largest, serving 744 elderly Tennesseans during 2000. 
Green Thumb is currently transitioning 65 percent of elderly 
Tennesseans from their training program into the workforce, or in other 
words, at a much higher rate than the national average.
  In Tennessee, the seniors served by the senior community service 
employment program are typically destitute women, with little to no job 
experience and the inability to pay for food and other basic needs. I 
recently heard the story of 83 year old Nell Taylor of Trenton, 
Tennessee. Ms. Taylor has worked at the Department of Human Services in 
Trenton since 1987 after starting with Green Thumb in 1985. As a result 
of her experience in the program, she wrote, ``I am so thankful to know 
I have a job in DHS for it makes me feel like I am wanted and I am 
important.''
  Other stories illustrating the success of this program are those of 
Elizabeth Powell and Marion Perry. Elizabeth Powell is a teacher's 
assistant, who also tutors individuals in the ``English as a Second 
Language class,'' at the Rhea County Adult Education program in Dayton, 
Tennessee. At 69 years of age, Ms. Powell inspires students having 
received her own GED at age 58 and knowing personally how the lack of a 
diploma or GED hinders job opportunities. Marion Perry of Etowah, 
Tennessee, is a 57-year-old, part-time school bus driver who needed a 
second job to support his family, which includes several adopted and 
foster children of various nationalities. Within a couple of weeks, 
Green Thumb assisted Perry in securing a job as a security guard with a 
local company.
  These few programs I've mentioned today, together with the many other 
services and activities established by OAA, are providing our elderly 
Americans with needed services, helping them maintain their 
independence, and affirming the valuable role they play in our 
community. I would like to thank Senator Jeffords and Senator DeWine 
for their leadership on this issue. I would also like to thank Senator 
Kennedy for his work and dedication to this issue.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from Ohio 5 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, in half an hour we are going to have the 
opportunity to cast two votes. The first vote will be on the Gregg 
amendment. The second vote will be on the Older Americans Act. We have 
the opportunity to do something that Congress has not done for 8 years; 
that is, to reauthorize and change and improve the Older Americans Act. 
For 5 years this bill has not been reauthorized. It is time we do it.
  Let me be very candid and very blunt about the amendment of my 
colleague from New Hampshire. I understand his concerns. He has 
expressed them very well. The reality is we have taken his concerns 
into consideration, and we have done more than that, we have 
incorporated them into this bill. So the bill we will ultimately pass 
today, I certainly hope without the Gregg amendment, will reflect what 
my colleague from New Hampshire has already contributed. That has 
already been done. He should be very proud of that because he has been 
the voice talking about accountability.
  The bill that is in front of us is a bill that needs to pass. Lest 
anyone make a mistake about what is at stake on this first vote on the 
Gregg amendment, if the Gregg amendment is agreed to, the Older 
Americans Act reauthorization will die. It is as simple as that. We 
have taken a long time to get to this point. We are in the last few 
days of this Congress.
  The House of Representatives, that has been working with us so very 
closely, passed this identical bill yesterday by an overwhelming vote, 
with only two votes against it. The idea we would be able to add the 
Gregg amendment, which makes changes in the bill, and get the bill 
ultimately passed is absurd. Make no mistake about it; the key vote 
today is on the Gregg amendment. Anyone who is for the Older Americans 
Act needs to vote against the Gregg amendment.
  Let me talk about the accountability we have been able to put into 
this bill. The accountability takes care of those issues about which 
Senator Gregg was concerned. We do it, basically, in two separate ways. 
We do it by requiring, for the first time, the Department of Labor to 
have very specific standards and very specific criteria. We enumerate 
that in the section I have in front of me called ``Responsibility 
Tests.'' We outline what the Department of Labor will take into 
consideration when they decide whether or not this contract will be let 
to an organization. It says:

       Before final selection of a grantee, the Secretary shall 
     conduct a review of available records to assess the applicant 
     agency or State's overall responsibility to administer 
     Federal funds.
       As part of the review described in [this paragraph] the 
     Secretary may consider any information, including the 
     organization's history with regard to the management of other 
     grants.

  It goes on and on, page after page, to describe what is in there that 
they will have to look at.
  The second way this bill brings about accountability is after the 
fact, if a grantee is awarded a contract. It provides for a process of 
review, to make a determination whether or not the grantee has met the 
national performance standards.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 5 minutes allocated have expired.
  Mr. DeWINE. I ask unanimous consent for 1 additional minute.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. I am sorry, but I am just about out.
  Mr. President, how many minutes do I have?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont has 10 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, earlier I recognized the many 
contributions made by Senator Gregg to the provisions contained in our 
bill. We were glad to add those provisions. I regret that my colleague 
does not find them sufficient. But I must say that his amendment goes 
too far, and if adopted it will kill any chance of reauthorizing the 
Older Americans Act this year. I urge all of the Senators to vote 
against the amendment.
  On its face, this proposal may look reasonable, but it is not.
  It sets standards that would penalize all grantees and would preclude 
them providing these valuable services without the opportunity to have 
what are book keeping disputes adjudicated.

[[Page S11092]]

  Moreover, the bill expressly requires each grantee to comply with OMB 
circulars and rules and requires the grantees to maintain records 
sufficient to permit tracing of funds to ensure that funds have not 
been spent unlawfully.
  The bill institutes and requires performance outcome measures, annual 
grantee evaluations, grantee accountability and it creates a new grant 
competition for those not meeting performance measures.
  It provides Governors and States greater resources and influence over 
job slot allocations, but also requires broad stakeholder participation 
in a State Senior Employment Services Plan coordinated through 
Governor's offices.
  Our bill introduces performance measures and competition into the 
senior employment program for the first time. The bill would establish 
a `three strikes and you're out' policy to ensure performance goals are 
met.
  Failure to pass these reforms this year will maintain the status quo. 
It will only continue a system that does not serve the job placement 
needs of seniors in many states, and will not correct the deficiencies 
in the administration and planning of the program. The only way these 
improvements will be realized is to pass the Older Americans Act 
Amendments of 2000, a bipartisan, bicameral initiative.
  This amendment is not opposed by just the aging organizations like 
AARP. It is also opposed by the Southern Governors Association. 
Yesterday, Governor Bush of Florida urged us to pass this bill and send 
it the President for his signature. Governor Huckabee of Arkansas said.

       The Senate must move expeditiously to pass this bill 
     without any amendments.

  I urge all the Senators to vote against the Gregg amendment.
  I reserve the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes.
  Today, the Senate is about to approve a reauthorization of the Older 
Americans Act which keeps faith with the nation's senior citizens. 
These programs provide vital links between senior citizens and their 
communities.
  For seniors who are healthy and active, the act offers community 
service employment opportunities, preventive health services, and 
transportation services. It also supports a range of social activities, 
including congregate meals. The act supports more than 6,400 multi-
purpose senior citizen centers across the country. For those frail 
seniors who lack mobility, it helps to maintain a lifeline to the 
outside world. It provides daily home-delivered meals, in-home care 
services, home-maker services, and transportation to doctors and other 
caregivers, and it supports programs to protect vulnerable seniors from 
abuse and exploitation.
  This legislation reaffirms our commitment to ensuring that older 
Americans continue to receive the services which are so essential to 
their quality of life. This reauthorization should mean increased 
Federal financial support for these very worthwhile programs.
  As part of this legislation, we have also created a National Family 
Caregiver Support Program to help families who care for ill or disabled 
parents or elderly relatives at home. We know how difficult it can 
become for a family when an elderly person needs a high degree of 
continuous care. We know the importance of keeping a frail senior at 
home in a loving environment whenever it is medically possible. This 
new program will provide essential support services to help these 
seniors remain with their loved ones. These families deserve our 
assistance, and this new program will ensure that they receive it.
  Family caregivers will be able to obtain a broad range of support 
services, including respite care, in-home assistance, training in 
caregiver skills, and family counseling, all of which will make a major 
difference for these vulnerable seniors and their families. We have 
authorized $125 million for the first year of this new effort, and we 
anticipate the program will grow in succeeding years. Massachusetts 
families will receive over $3 million dollars to help them care for 
their elderly loved ones.
  The Senior Community Service Employment Program, authorized by title 
V of the act, is the nation's only employment and training program 
aimed exclusively at low-income older persons--and it will have an 
increasingly important role as the Baby Boom generation ages.
  Title V serves over 90,000 low-income elderly persons every year. The 
jobs obtained through this program provide these men and women with 
needed economic support. But it does much more than that. It keeps them 
active and involved in their communities, not isolated at home. It 
provides opportunities to make important contributions to their 
communities and to learn new skills--and it enhances their sense of 
dignity and self-esteem. In this legislation, we have significantly 
strengthened the Community Service Employment Program and provided for 
its much-needed expansion.
  The legislation already addresses the financial accountability of 
title V program operators. It establishes strong new performance 
measures which program operators must meet each year, and provides for 
removal of operators who consistently fail to meet performance 
standards. It sets strict limits on the purposes for which program 
funds can be used, and established a 14-point financial responsibility 
test which every program operator must pass. The Department will have 
ample authority to disqualify those program operators whom it deems 
either untrustworthy or unreliable. The procedures we have established 
are tough and fair. The Gregg amendment is not needed.
  Reauthorization of the Older Americans Act has been co-sponsored by 
over 70 Senators. It is supported by the National Governors' 
Association and by more than forty citizens organizations. It was 
overwhelmingly approved by the House of Representatives yesterday on a 
vote of 405-2. It is the product of a delicate bipartisan and bicameral 
consensus. Any change in the bill at this late date would have the 
effect of killing the reauthorization of the OAA for this session. That 
would be a serious loss for the millions of seniors who depend on this 
program, and are counting on us to reauthorize it. Please oppose the 
Gregg amendment so that we can finally enact this important bill this 
year.
  I think the real test of a civilization is how it honors its elderly 
people, its senior citizens. I think that is a very fair criterion and 
it is one we ought to be reminded about. After all, these are the men 
and women who fought the wars, brought the country out of the 
Depression, and continued to make sacrifices for their children. We 
have enacted legislation historically, with Social Security, to try to 
keep these individuals out of poverty and also a Medicare program to 
address their needs.
  This Older Americans Act is of great importance to millions of our 
senior citizens, to make sure they can live a quality life. It is not a 
prescription drug program. No, it is not, but it does provide vital 
services: Nutrition programs, preventive health care programs, 
transportation programs, feeding programs, in-home delivered meals 
programs. It is something that is really a lifeline for millions of our 
senior citizens. It is an employment program for many of our elderly 
people who want to provide services in local communities in nonprofit 
organizations.
  The amendment before us, the amendment that has been put forward by 
Senator Gregg, brought a matter to the committee that the committee 
considered. I just hope our colleagues listen to the excellent 
presentations of the Senators from Ohio and Vermont, that would 
indicate that on these issues, this legislation responds to those 
questions and does it well.
  This is an opportunity, with the defeat of the Gregg amendment, to 
pass this legislation and be on the road to provide meaningful services 
to our senior citizens. I hope the Gregg amendment will be defeated and 
we will have an overwhelming vote in support of the legislation.
  I yield.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, how much time do I have?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont has 6 minutes 
remaining. The Senator from New Hampshire has 15 minutes remaining.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. I yield 5 minutes to the good Senator from Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of Senate 
passage of the bipartisan Older Americans Act--OAA Amendments of 2000--
H.R.

[[Page S11093]]

782. This bill passed the House yesterday with the overwhelmingly 
bipartisan vote of 405-2. The Senate companion bill S. 1536 has 72 
cosponsors. H.R. 782 is a bipartisan, bicameral agreement to 
reauthorize the OAA. It is built on the strong foundation of S. 1536 
and the bipartisan compromises reached by the HELP Committee in that 
bill. It also has the overwhelming support of the aging community. H.R. 
782 is well worthy of your support.
  This bill long overdue. It keeps our promise to older Americans to 
retain and strengthen current OAA programs, but is also provides new 
innovations and accountability to further improve the Act. It will 
ensure that the Older Americans Act continues to meet the day-to-day 
needs of our country's older Americans and the long range needs of our 
aging population.
  The highlight of this bill is the creation of the national Family 
Caregiver Support Program. This program will provide respite care, 
training, counseling, support services, information and assistance to 
some of the millions of Americans who care for older individuals and 
adult children with disabilities. it also will help grandparents who 
care for grandchildren. This program has strong bipartisan support, 
will get behind our nation's families, and give help to those who 
practice self-helped.
  Today our families are the backbone of the long term care system in 
this country. Currently about 12.8 million adults need assistance from 
others to carry out activities of daily living, such as bathing and 
feeding. By 2030 there will be about 21 million people over the age of 
70 needing care. More than half of the elderly that do not currently 
receive help do not expect to have help in the future.
  One in four adults currently provides care for an adult with a 
chronic health condition. The economic impact of caregiving is 
staggering. A recent study found that on average, workers who take care 
of older relatives lose $659,139 in wages, pension benefits, and Social 
Security over a lifetime. Further, it is estimated that the national 
economic value of informal caregiving was $196 billion in 1997.
  Many of us have personally cared for sick or aging parents or other 
relatives and understand firsthand the strains and stresses facing 
caregivers. We know that adult children are most often the providers of 
care for seniors. This is the sandwich generation with moms and dads 
caring for their own children and their own parents. They have full-
time jobs at the office and then they come home to full time jobs of 
caring for other family members.
  My sisters and I cared for my mother when she was ill. We were 
fortunate. We all lived relatively close to my mother and could share 
caregiving responsibilities. But may families may be scattered across 
the country and find it more difficult to ensure that older members of 
their family are cared for properly. In addition, as our population 
ages, many people are living longer. We now see 80-year-old spouses 
caring for each other. We can see 70-year-old daughter caring for her 
90-year-old mother.
  The National Family Caregiver Support Program will help caregivers 
across the country care for their older relatives, grandparents care 
for grandchildren, and older individuals care for adult children with 
disabilities. It is a vital new innovation in this bill. It will meet 
the day-to-day needs of countless families across the country. We must 
pass this bill to create this program to help families.
  When many Americans think of how the Federal Government helps our 
country's older Americans, they think of Social Security and Medicare. 
But what many Americans do not realize is the vital role that the Older 
Americans Act plays in meeting the day-to-day needs of seniors in this 
country. In this bill we maintain core programs in this Act that help 
our seniors.
  Some of the most well known OAA programs are congregate and home-
delivered meals. OAA provides about 240 million meals to over 3 million 
older persons. About half of these meals are provided in congregate 
settings and the other half are provided to frail older persons in 
their homes. These meal programs are vital to seniors.

  A national evaluation of the nutrition program shows that, compared 
to the total elderly population, nutrition program participants are 
older and more likely to be poor, to live alone, and to be members of 
minority groups. The report found that the program plays an important 
role in the participants' overall nutrition and that these meals are 
the primary source of daily nutrients for these seniors. For every 
Federal dollar spent, the program leverages on average $1.70 for 
congregate meals, and $3.35 for home-delivered meals. A hot lunch at a 
senior center could be the only hot meal some seniors get each day.
  Congregate meals also provide an opportunity for seniors to get out 
of their homes and socialize with other older persons in their 
community. After a meal, seniors may stay on for other activities. A 
meal can lead to a spirited game of bingo, ping-pong, pool, a dance 
class, or an exercise class. These kinds of activities keep older 
Americans more active and engaged which can help them live longer and 
live better. Home-delivered meals allow the frail elderly to enjoy a 
nutritious hot meal in the comfort of their own home. It can help keep 
seniors in their own home rather than having to live in an institution.
  We also maintain important protective services for seniors such as 
legal assistance, the long-term care ombudsman, and elder abuse 
prevention activities. Legal assistance helps seniors with everything 
from writing a will to guardianship issues to assistance with housing 
to accessing Social Security benefits.
  The long-term care ombudsman is the only OAA program that focuses 
solely on the needs of institutionalized persons. A senior in a nursing 
home or that senior's family can contact a local long-term care 
ombudsman if they are concerned about the quality of care their family 
member is receiving in a nursing home. The ombudsman is a neutral third 
party that investigates and helps resolve complaints about quality of 
care. This is an invaluable resource for seniors to help ensure that 
they get the best care possible.
  The Act also provides for elder abuse prevention programs. OAA helps 
coordinate elder abuse prevention programs and combat crimes against 
seniors. It helps train professionals who serve seniors to help them 
better recognize signs of abuse and help seniors who are victims of 
abuse. OAA helps increase public awareness about elder abuse both among 
seniors and in the community at large.
  We keep innovation and new ideas flowing by maintaining a separate 
and distinct Title IV for Research and Demonstration Projects, which is 
where innovative programs like the eldercare locator got started. We 
recognize the importance of the White House Conference on Aging to the 
aging community, and require the President to call such a conference 
before the end of 2005. Past White House conferences have brought forth 
innovative new ideas and created new programs to better serve seniors.
  We maintain strong support for transportation services, which are 
critically important to seniors in our rural areas. I know this can be 
especially important in areas like Western Maryland and the Eastern 
Shore where seniors may have to travel further to the grocery store or 
a doctor's appointment or to their nearest senior center. And we retain 
core provisions of the law, like minority targeting language. That 
language ensures that OAA services are directed to those who need them 
the most. However, we acknowledge that unmet need can exist in rural 
areas, so we have included provisions to help improve the delivery of 
services to older individuals in rural areas.
  At the same time, we recognize the need to strengthen certain 
programs in the Act and increase accountability. We have focused 
efforts on strengthening accountability and improving the Senior 
Community Service Employment Program or title V.

  This program provides part-time community service jobs to low-income 
seniors. It gives them a steady source of income that they need for 
rent, groceries, medical care, and utilities. Most of the seniors 
participating in the program are older women whose work histories 
include working in the home, domestic work, caring for their children 
and grandchildren, or part-time unskilled employment. Many have not 
finished high school. Few have pensions, and Social Security or 
supplemental security income may be the

[[Page S11094]]

only source of income for the majority of participants. They count on 
their check from this program to pay their bills.
  Seniors also receive valuable training and skills that enable them to 
get unsubsidized jobs in the public and private sectors. This is 
especially important in today's right labor market. Increasingly, 
employers are looking to older workers to fill jobs traditionally not 
held by older Americans.
  Title V also gives something back to communities. Seniors in this 
program serve meals in senior centers and drive the vans to help 
seniors get to their local senior center for a hot lunch. They work in 
schools and hospitals and day care centers. They make a difference in 
their communities and their work does not go unnoticed.
  We have taken a number of steps to increase accountability. We 
establish performance measures. If an organization or a state fails to 
meet these standards and improve its performance, other entities will 
get the opportunity to competitively bid for a portion or all of the 
original organization or entity's grant. We establish a minimum amount 
that must be spent on enrollee wages and fringe benefits. We clarify 
the way organizations must define and report their costs so that there 
is no room for ambiguity. We codify responsibility tests and new 
criteria for grantee eligibility. We require a broad and open planning 
process so that areas of greatest need within a State are served as 
efficiently as possible.
  While I believe that overall the current grantees are performing very 
well, these provisions will help ensure that seniors get the high 
quality services they deserve. They also strengthen the entire SCSEP 
program and do not target one particular grantee.
  This bill strikes a good balance between recognizing the need for 
additional resources to support OAA programs and protecting the most 
vulnerable seniors and their access to services. It specifically 
authorizes seniors to make voluntary contributions--donations--for all 
OAA services. The bill also allows states to require cost-sharing for a 
limited number of services such as transportation, respite care, and 
personal care. A long list of services is exempt from cost sharing, 
such as the meals program, information and assistance, and ombudsman. 
It also provides guidance to states and protections to help ensure that 
seniors are not discouraged from seeking services because of cost-
sharing.
  I also want to note the strong need for increased funding for Older 
Americans Act programs. Very few OAA programs have seen increased 
funding in recent years, yet there is a growing need for services. I 
strongly support full funding of the new National Family Caregiver 
Support Program, but other OAA programs must also receive needed 
increases in funding. I strongly urge my colleagues on the 
Appropriations Committee and in the Senate leadership to do as much as 
possible to increase funding for these valuable programs in the final 
days of this Congress and in the future. I look forward to working with 
you to do that.
  I want to thank Senator DeWine, Chairman of the Aging Subcommittee, 
for his sincere dedication to reauthorizing the OAA and willingness to 
work in a bipartisan manner to accomplish this. Thank you to Senator 
Jeffords for his strong leadership in moving this bill through the 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee and all the way 
through until enactment. Senator Kennedy also deserves credit for this 
bill--he continues to be a tireless advocate for the OAA and the people 
it serves. I want to thank the Senate staff that have worked so hard on 
this legislation: Sean Donohue, Hollis Turnham, Karla Carpenter, Jeff 
Teitz, Abby Brandel, and Rhonda Richards. I can not think of any better 
way to celebrate the 35th anniversary of the OAA in 2000 than by 
enacting this long-awaited bipartisan reauthorization of the Older 
Americans Act.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from Maryland has 
expired.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I urge adoption of the bill and defeat 
of the Gregg amendment.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I yield the remainder of my time to the 
Senator from Ohio.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized 2\3/4\ 
minutes.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I think it has pretty much been said. I 
ask my colleagues to defeat the Gregg amendment and to pass the Older 
Americans Act. This is a bill that needs to pass. It is a bill that is 
sponsored by 73 Members of this body. It is a bill that is supported by 
the National Governors' Association which urges us to pass the bill. I 
have a letter from the Southern Governors' Association, signed by all 
the Southern Governors, including Governor Bush from Texas, as well as 
Governor Bush from Florida.
  Governor Bush from Florida has been very instrumental in working with 
us on this bill and is a very strong proponent and advocate of the bill 
because he understands what a difference it will make.
  I reiterate, the concerns my colleague from New Hampshire has raised, 
and I know he will speak in a moment, are valid concerns. We have taken 
them into consideration. We have incorporated them into this bill. We 
congratulate him on the work he has done. This bill is a better bill 
because of what Judd Gregg has done.
  We are now, though, at the point where we have incorporated those 
reforms. This is a reform-minded bill. This is a bill that will make a 
difference. This is a bill that will change the status quo. We are now 
faced with the prospect of either passing this good bill and sending it 
on to the President of the United States or, if we adopt the Gregg 
amendment, killing the bill and seeing the status quo remain because 
that is what will happen.
  None of the reforms my colleague wants to see take place will take 
place if we kill this bill. It will not be one of them. We will 
continue to muck along. We will continue to move along as we have year 
after year with the status quo and with no reforms at all. If you are 
for reforms, you have to vote against the Gregg amendment and then vote 
for final passage.
  I thank the Chair and thank my colleagues.


                           Amendment No. 4343

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire has 15 minutes 
remaining. All time controlled by Senator Jeffords has expired. The 
Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, first, I appreciate the kind words that have been 
expressed relative to my efforts on this bill. They are minor compared 
to the efforts of the Senator from Ohio and the Senator from Maryland 
who have worked very hard.
  The underlying bill is a strong bill. Remember, we are talking about 
a 5-year authorization. We are not talking about 1 day, 2 days, 1 year, 
or 2 years. We are talking about 5 years. We are talking about 
continuing the status quo for another 5 years on this piece of 
legislation.
  This amendment is about good government. The amendment is: Are you 
for language which says that a grantee that misuses the funds can be 
disciplined by the Department of Labor? It is that simple. It is 
generic. If the Department of Labor determines that a grantee misuses 
funds, this gives the Department of Labor the capacity to do something 
about that.
  As I talked about earlier today, we have an example of one of the 
grantees, the National Council of Senior Citizens, which has grossly 
misused funds, which set up a slush fund of $6 million, which spent 
over $10 million basically to pay for expenses for insurance, which 
were insurance organizations operated by the same people who ran the 
National Council of Senior Citizens, which has had an audit in the 
years 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998, all of which audits 
have shown it has misused funds.
  If we do not adopt this amendment, that organization will continue to 
get $64 million a year, will continue to misuse those funds, and the 
Department of Labor will not have the authority to act against that 
organization in anything that is even conceivably a reasonable 
timeframe. Under this bill, as it is presently structured, the fastest 
timeframe in which the Department of Labor can act against an 
organization which has acted in the manner in which this organization 
has acted is 3 years. Even then it is not an issue because there is no 
language for activity for misuse of funds. They would have to raise it 
to a level of

[[Page S11095]]

criminal or fraudulent activity, which is a standard that is very hard 
to prove.
  It is very obvious that American tax dollars are not being used for 
the purposes of employing senior citizens, which should be our goal. I 
am asking for some extremely reasonable good government language to be 
inserted into this bill. The only argument I have heard today against 
this language is essentially that, if this little amendment goes in, 
this bill dies.
  I say to my colleagues, that is absurd on its face. We are not 
leaving here very soon. Regrettably, I wish we were leaving here today. 
A lot of us wish we were leaving here today, but we are not. I happen 
to know of three major pieces of legislation which are not going to be 
completed today. They probably are not going to be completed tomorrow. 
It is a fairly safe bet that we are going to be back next week. In 
fact, I can almost guarantee it. I can say that with some authority 
because I happen to chair one of the committees which has jurisdiction 
over one of these pieces of legislation, the Commerce-State-Justice 
appropriations bill. That bill is not going to be completed today, and 
it is probably not going to be completed this week, and probably we 
will be back next week.
  The same is true of the Labor-HHS bill, and the same is true of the 
tax bill. We know we are going to be able to take this amendment, send 
it back to the House, have it passed, and come back here and pass the 
whole bill.
  If that is the reason this language is being opposed, it is 
inaccurate. This language can be inserted, this bill can be reformed 
and it can be corrected, and the bill can be brought back to us and 
passed.
  The House of Representatives passed this bill overwhelmingly. This 
language is not debilitating to the bill. It is an attempt to make the 
bill function as it should.
  What should it do? It should make sure that when we give $350 million 
a year to agencies without requiring them to bid on the programs, when 
we give them an entitlement that says, you get this money; you just 
walk up to the window and we give it to you, at least those agencies 
should be required not to misuse the money; that those agencies should 
be required to spend the money for the purposes of employing senior 
citizens, not for the purpose of creating a slush fund, not for the 
purpose of financing a Teamsters Union election, not for the purpose of 
financing a campaign against a Senator, not for the purpose of creating 
an insurance vehicle which benefits the underlying agency. It should be 
that those moneys should be used for the senior citizens, to be 
employed under the bill under title V.

  That is all this language does. It is benign language. Without this 
language, we will essentially continue a process that allows these 
agencies to come to the window, take the money, and run, without 
adequate accountability. Even more importantly, there will be no 
competition and no performance standards.
  So the language is reasonable. It needs to be included in the bill. 
The timing of this bill is not such that this language is going to kill 
the bill. The momentum for this bill is immense. There is no way that 
this bill will not pass with this language in it if this amendment is 
agreed to. The bill will pass. The bill will be conferenced. The bill 
will be back here. The bill will be voted on before we adjourn as a 
Senate or a Congress. So that debate is inaccurate.
  So I hope that this language, which is a very reasonable attempt to 
address what is regrettably a glaring problem in the delivery of these 
services, will be accepted. I hope people would not vote against 
something so simple as a statement that we should allow the Department 
of Labor to discipline people who misuse tax dollars. To vote against 
that is really to take a position which I think is very hard to defend.
  We are going to vote on this amendment. I would certainly appreciate 
my colleagues not being swayed by the argument that a vote for my 
amendment will bring the bill down because that argument is a red 
herring, in my opinion, because we are going to be here next week and 
we can certainly pass this bill next week. It will pass on a voice vote 
once this amendment is taken. In fact, it will pass by unanimous 
agreement.
  But, rather, I hope my colleagues will be swayed by the fact that if 
we fail to include this amendment, we will continue to have the issue 
of whether or not the dollars we are spending to employ seniors, to 
make their lives better, are, instead, going to be able to be spent to 
benefit some agency in some way that has no relationship to seniors and 
their needs. A good government requires that this type of language be 
put in the bill. Therefore, I ask my colleagues to support the 
amendment.
  Mr. President, I understand that all time on the other side has been 
used; is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. GREGG. I yield back the remainder of my time and suggest the 
absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Smith of Oregon). Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Gregg 
amendment No. 4343. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will 
call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Washington (Mr. 
Gorton), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Grams), the Senator from North 
Carolina (Mr. Helms), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) 
are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
North Carolina (Mr. Helms) would vote ``yea.''
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. 
Feinstein) and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Lieberman) are 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 25, nays 69, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 284 Leg.]

                                YEAS--25

     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Campbell
     Craig
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gramm
     Gregg
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Lott
     Mack
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Thompson
     Warner

                                NAYS--69

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Burns
     Byrd
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Crapo
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     McCain
     Mikulski
     Miller
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Feinstein
     Gorton
     Grams
     Helms
     Lieberman
     Specter
  The amendment (No. 4343) was rejected.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Have the yeas and nays been ordered?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The bill was ordered to a third reading and was read the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the 
question is, Shall the bill pass? The yeas and nays have been ordered. 
The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Washington (Mr. 
Gorton), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Grams), the Senator from North 
Carolina (Mr. Helms), and the Senator from

[[Page S11096]]

Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
North Carolina (Mr. Helms) would vote ``yea.''
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. 
Feinstein) and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Lieberman) are 
necessarily absent.--
  The result was announced--yeas 94, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 285 Leg.]

                                YEAS--94

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bryan
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Miller
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Feinstein
     Gorton
     Grams
     Helms
     Lieberman
     Specter
  The bill (H.R. 782) was passed.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. SANTORUM. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. LOTT addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Bennett). The majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I withdraw my pending motion to proceed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion is withdrawn.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, it gives me great pleasure that the 
Senate has passed the Older Americans Act Amendments of 2000. This year 
is the 35th anniversary of the Older Americans Program. Since 1965, the 
Act has provided a range of needed social services to our Nation's 
senior citizens. It is the major vehicle for the organization and 
delivery of supportive and nutrition services to older persons, and it 
has grown and changed to meet our citizens' needs. In 1972, we created 
the national nutrition program; in 1978, we established a separate 
title for Native Americans; and in 1987, we authorized programs to 
prevent elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation. The Act has been 
reauthorized 12 times, most recently in 1992. Reauthorization 
legislation was considered in the 104th and 105th Congresses but did 
not pass due to controversy about a number of proposals. But those 
controversies were addressed and the Senate has voted unanimously to 
pass this Act and provide our elderly with desperately needed help.
  The Older Americans Act programs play a vital role in all our 
communities. Because of the Older Americans Act, millions of nutritious 
meals are delivered each year to the generation that served our country 
in World War II. It funds the operations of senior centers and other 
supportive services to enhance the dignity and independence of the 
Nation's elders; and it provides part-time employment opportunities to 
tens of thousands of senior citizens. Indeed, virtually all of our 
Nation's elderly are benefitting from the Act. However, more could be 
done to help our senior citizens and their families. This is why we are 
here to pass the Older Americans Act Amendments of 2000.
  I want to commend all of the members of the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions for their work and contributions in this 
effort. Senator DeWine and Senator Mikulski led the way on this 
reauthorization effort early in this Congress. Beginning on March 3, 
1999, the Subcommittee on Aging held a series of hearings, receiving 
testimony from over 30 witnesses. The first hearing presented 
Subcommittee members with an overview of the various Older Americans 
Act programs. Subsequent Subcommittee hearings covered other important 
issues, including elder abuse, supportive services, State and local 
views, longevity in the workplace, and long-term family caregiver 
programs. In March, 1999, we were very fortunate to hear testimony from 
Ms. Reeve Lindbergh of St. Johnsbury, Vermont. She spoke to our 
Committee about the unacceptable problem of elder abuse which confronts 
some of our most fragile elders. Then, in April, we heard from another 
Vermonter, Mr. John Barbour, who serves as the Director of the 
Champlain Valley Agency on Aging, in Winooski, Vermont. He alerted the 
Committee to changes needed in the nutritional programs outlined in 
Title III of the Act.
  This bill improves the Older Americans Act in several key areas. For 
example, Title I sets out broad policy objectives related to income, 
health, housing, long-term care, employment, retirement, and community 
services that will improve the lives of all older Americans. 
Modifications under this title establish a Federal definition of ``in-
home services'' and give both State units and area agencies on aging 
the ability to include locally significant in-home services in their 
service definition.
  Title II identifies the Administration on Aging as the chief Federal 
agency advocate for older persons and also establishes the Eldercare 
Locator Service and Pension Rights and Counseling as ongoing programs.
  Significant modifications have been made to Title III, grants for 
State and community programs. One of the most important aspects of this 
Act is the establishment of the Grassley-Breaux National Family 
Caregiver Support Program. According to the 1994 National Long Term 
Care Survey, there are more than 7 million informal caregivers--
including spouses, adult children, other relatives, and friends who 
provide day-to-day care for most of our Nation's elders. The National 
Family Caregiver Program authorizes $125 million in Federal assistance 
to help families care for their elderly by providing a multifaceted 
system of supportive services, including information, assistance, 
counseling, and respite services. Moreover, it will help older 
individuals who are caring for relative children, such as their 
grandchildren. According to the United States Census Bureau, in 1997, 
almost 4 million children were living in homes maintained by their 
grandparents. This program will also extend to older folks who are 
caring for their adult children with mental retardation and 
developmental disabilities.
  Other changes to this title clarify the role of area agencies on 
aging with respect to case management, information and referral 
services, and also strengthen their obligations to coordinate volunteer 
programs and efforts with other community organizations providing 
similar services. In addition, the interstate formula allotments are 
updated, with appropriations being tied to minimum-growth hold harmless 
amounts, so that no State receives less than it did in FY 2000.
  Title V authorizes community service employment for older Americans 
to provide part-time community service jobs for unemployed, low-income 
persons 55 years old and over. There will be 1.4 million more low-
income persons over the age of 55 in the year 2005 than there were a 
decade earlier, and many of them will continue working. Employment 
obtained through this program provides these workers with needed 
economic support. It keeps them active and involved in their 
communities, and it provides them with the opportunity to make 
important contributions to their communities, learn new skills, and 
enhance their sense of dignity and self-esteem.
  The changes made in Title V by this bill are a critical part of this 
legislation, because they strengthen and modernize the Senior 
Employment Program. To begin, the purpose statement is amended to 
stress economic self-sufficiency and to increase the number of 
placements in public- and private-sector unsubsidized employment. The 
employment program is integrated with the Workforce Investment Act, 
including one-stop delivery systems and participant assessments and 
services, while the program itself and the administrative costs are 
codified. Also, under this title, the State Senior Employment Services 
Plan is established which provides Governors with greater 

[[Page S11097]]

influence and responsibility concerning the allocation of job slots. 
The newly established State Plan ensures for the first time a planning 
process with broad participation by representatives from State and area 
agencies on aging; State and local workforce investment boards; public 
and private non-profit providers of employment services; businesses and 
labor organizations; and other aging network stakeholders.

  The remaining sections have also been modified. Title IV, training, 
research, and discretionary projects and programs, authorizes the 
Assistant Secretary for Aging to award funds for training, research, 
and demonstration projects in the field of aging. This Act consolidates 
the demonstration programs from 18 to 10 categories, including sections 
on violence against older Americans, rural health, computer training, 
and transportation. Title VI, grants to Native Americans, authorizes 
funds for social and nutrition services to older Indians and Native 
Hawaiians. The modifications by this Act authorize the Family Caregiver 
Support Program for tribal organizations. Then, a provision is added 
under Title VII, vulnerable elder rights protection activities, which 
authorizes funds for activities that protect the rights of the 
vulnerable elderly. The new provision requires that ombudsman programs 
coordinate with ``law enforcement'' agencies.
  I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the many other 
individuals and organizations that have contributed to this effort. In 
addition to leadership Senator DeWine and Senator Mikulski, Senator 
Kennedy contributed his long experience to this effort. He helped us 
find the middle ground and solutions to many thorny issues. Senator 
Gregg was instrumental in focusing the Committee's attention on the 
much-needed reforms in the employment services program, and the program 
is much strengthened by his work. Senator Hutchinson was especially 
active on these efforts to address the employment and services needs of 
the rural elderly.
  Among the groups in the network of aging organizations, special 
recognition must go to the National Council of Older Americans and the 
National Association of State Units on Aging for their insight in 
proposing a compromise to the employment services program. AARP, with 
the leadership of Horace Deets, undertook the difficult task of seeking 
consensus among the many aging organizations. Green Thumb tirelessly 
educated members of Congress about the importance of these aging 
populations, especially those members representing rural 
constituencies. The Leadership Council of Aging Organizations, 
currently being chaired by the Committee to Preserve Social Security 
and Medicare, provided a continuous forum for many issues to be 
addressed. Others contributing to this effort include the National 
Caucus on Black Aging, the National Association of Area Agencies on 
Aging, and Meals on Wheels. Finally, the Administration on Aging, 
headed by Jeanette Takamura, provided ongoing leadership and continuous 
expert support in strengthening these programs.
  Many of our staff deserve considerable recognition for their 
dedicated work. Daphne Edwards in the Office of the Legislative Counsel 
worked tirelessly on countless drafts of this legislation. Carol 
O'Shaughnessy of the Congressional Research Service lent her counsel, 
as well as her years of experience with aging programs, to this bill. 
Abby Brandel and Rhonda Richards of Senator Mikulski's office, and 
Jeffrey Teitz of Senator Kennedy's staff, worked diligently to reach 
accords on many of these difficult issues. Alan Gilbert with Senator 
Gregg provided invaluable guidance on the employment services program. 
Kate Hull, of Senator Hutchinson's staff, also dedicated many hours of 
effort to the final product. Recognition is deserved especially by 
Karla Carpenter, the staff director of the Aging Subcommittee, who with 
Senator DeWine developed the framework for this modernization bill and 
who stuck with the effort to see it finished. Finally, on my own staff, 
I want to acknowledge and commend the efforts of Hollis Turnham and 
Sean Donohue. Hollis came to my office as the Senator John Heinz Fellow 
on Aging, and her extensive experience with these programs was 
invaluable to the completion of the bill. Hollis brought with her years 
of experience in serving our Nation's elders and a full knowledge of 
just how the Older Americans Act affects our older Americans. After 
several years of trying, this effort to reauthorize the Older Americans 
Act could have gone astray at countless points over these past two 
years. Therefore, much credit must go to Sean Donohue, whose focus, 
experience, and sheer tenacity guided this successful effort.
  In summary, our bill goes a long way to improving supportive, 
employment, and nutritional services for the elderly. This legislation 
updates the Older Americans Act, making it more relevant and useful to 
our country's senior citizens. All of these individuals have worked 
hard to develop innovative strategies to strengthen and modernize the 
Older Americans Act, and I know that through these efforts our Nation's 
elders will be better served by this legislation.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, the reauthorization of the Older 
Americans Act which just received the Senate's unanimous approval is 
the product of a two-year bipartisan effort. Earlier today, I said 
Senators Jeffords, DeWine, Mikulski, and I share a common commitment to 
preserving and strengthening these programs, which have done so much to 
improve the lives of millions of senior citizens. I commend my three 
colleagues for their tremendous leadership in fashioning this 
legislation.
  Now, I would like to recognize the members of our staffs who did the 
work that made this bill possible: Rhonda Richards and Abby Brandel 
from Senator Mikulski's office, Karla Carpenter from Senator DeWine's 
office, Sean Donohue, Hollis Turnham and Mark Powden from Senator 
Jefford's office, and Jeffrey Teitz, Michael Myers, and Jerry Wesevich 
from my office. We assigned them an extremely difficult task. Efforts 
to reauthorize the Older Americans Act had failed in the last two 
Congresses. This year, at each point when the differences appeared too 
wide, these individuals found a creative way to bridge the divide. They 
managed to build the consensus which has enabled this legislation to 
pass both the House and Senate so overwhelmingly.

                          ____________________