[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 149 (Thursday, November 1, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11340-S11344]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002--Continued
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that there be 30 minutes for debate
equally divided in the usual form in relation to the Kyl amendment
regarding impact aid prior to a vote in relation to the amendment, with
no second-degree amendments in order prior to the vote.
[[Page S11341]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
H.R. 3061 is now pending before the Senate. The Senator from Arizona
is recognized to offer an amendment.
Amendment No. 2075
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Arizona [Mr. Kyl], for himself and Mr.
McCain, Mr. Domenici, and Mrs. Hutchison, proposes an
amendment numbered 2075.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place add the following:
``Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no
appropriation contained in this Act for the purposes of
school repair or renovation of state and local schools shall
remain available beyond the current fiscal year unless
assistance under such program is provided to meet the
renovation or repair needs of Indian schools and schools
receiving Impact Aid or under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Defense or the Bureau of Indian Affairs prior
to making such assistance available to other schools:
Provided further, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Act, the Secretary of Education is not authorized to expend
or transfer unexpended balances of prior appropriations
appropriated for the purposes of school repair or renovation
of state and local schools to accounts corresponding to
current appropriations provided in this Act: Provided,
however, that such balances may be expended and so
transferred if the unexpended balances are used for the
purpose of providing assistance to meet the renovation or
repair needs of Indian schools and schools receiving Impact
Aid or under the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense or
the Bureau of Indian Affairs prior to making such repair or
renovation assistance available to other schools.''.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I note that this amendment is cosponsored by
the distinguished Senator from New Mexico, my colleague from Arizona,
Mr. McCain, and the Senator from Texas, Mrs. Hutchison. It is an
amendment which we have debated before but which I now present as the
appropriate time for getting this done.
This amendment would make it very clear that the Federal Government
from now on must give absolute priority to Indian military and impact
aid schools when it allocates funds for school renovation or repair.
The amendment establishes this priority by directing the Secretary of
Education to direct any school construction funds not expended in a
given fiscal year only to those categories of schools that fall within
the exclusive responsibility of the Federal Government; namely, the
impact aid schools, Department of Defense schools, and Bureau of Indian
Affairs schools.
This priority would apply to unexpended funds from fiscal years 2001
and 2002.
As I said, this debate is not a new one. The question before us is,
should the Federal Government concentrate on meeting its fundamental
existing obligations or should we define our mission as finding new
things for the Federal Government to do first?
Most aspects of primary and secondary education have traditionally
been, and remain, the responsibility of States and local school
districts. But there are certain facets of elementary and secondary
education in this country that are the clear and only responsibility of
the Federal Government. Those are the education of our Indian children,
the children on reservations, and the so-called impact aid schools.
Yet proponents of finding new things to do with Federal education
dollars propose branching out into new areas and ignoring this
fundamental Federal obligation to, first of all, take care of these
kids' educational needs.
So under this bill, the way it is written right now, without my
amendment, for the first time the Federal Government begins building
schools, which is a State responsibility, while ignoring the obligation
to the Indian children and the children on American military bases.
The Federal Government has a huge unmet obligation to address the
infrastructure needs of schools administered under the auspices of the
BIA, as well as those schools impacted by the presence, within their
taxing jurisdictions, of Federal installations through the program
known as impact aid.
Yet by extending this unauthorized school construction program--and I
note ``unauthorized''--the money in this Labor-HHS bill has never been
endorsed by the Senate on a recorded vote. The language in the bill
would entangle the Federal Government in the business of building and
repairing local schools, while leaving the existing needs on the
Federal reservations unmet.
Impact aid provides funds for school facility repair and renovation,
especially on, as I said, the schools that are largely on Indian lands.
All told, impact aid assists 1,600 schools serving 1.2 million
federally connected children. In addition, the Department of Defense
operates 70 schools nationwide.
Impact aid construction has not been fully funded since 1967. The
result is a huge backlog of projects estimated to exceed $2 billion.
These numbers only hint at the grim reality faced by students and
teachers in these impacted districts.
A school board member in a military impact aid district told
Education Week that some districts conducted so much of their business
in portable classrooms and aging buildings that they ``more closely
resemble prison camps than schools.''
He went on to say: ``Our troops are in Bosnia and those are the kinds
of schools their kids''--that is, the children of war-torn Bosnia--
``are in.''
The Military Impacted Schools Association has estimated it would take
$310 million to meet facilities needs in their members' districts.
The situation for Indian impacted schools is even more dire.
According to a 1996 study by the National Indian Impacted Schools
Association, a typical district of this type had more than $7 million
in facilities needs.
It is important to reiterate that these federally impacted districts
cannot rely on the local property tax base to fund repairs and
construction, unlike nearly all of the districts that would receive the
funds appropriated under this bill.
The superintendent of one district in my State, for example, reports
that his jurisdiction contains exactly four taxpayers. I know in one of
the counties in my State, where I had to help because of the large
amounts of Federal land, only 1 percent of the land--and most of the
taxing comes from property taxes--was non-Federal land in this
community; in fact, only 3 percent in the entire county. Most States do
not have that problem.
But since the Federal Government has the obligation of educating
these kids, then it is important for us to ensure that the priority for
construction be given to these districts. The facilities, as I said,
are in dire straits on our Indian reservations, which educate about
50,000 Indian students. The education of Indian children, which
includes the provision of safe and adequate facilities, is a specific
trust responsibility of the United States and is codified in numerous
treaties and acts of Congress.
Nobody who believes in keeping our treaty obligations to Native
Americans can vote against this amendment because its purpose is to
ensure that we meet the obligations of these treaties.
According to testimony from the Director of the Office of Indian
Education Programs, half of the schools within the jurisdiction of the
Bureau of Indian Affairs have exceeded their useful lives of 50 years
and more than 20 percent are over 50 years old.
No fewer than 96 schools need to be entirely replaced. Many students
lack access to computer and science labs, gym facilities, and other
basic resources.
At least one school in my State lacks even a library and basic dining
facilities.
The Committee on Indian Affairs estimates it would take $2.1 billion
to address these schools' current repair and renovation needs.
I am pleased that President Bush has made it a priority to address
the construction needs of Indian and impact aid schools. But that will
only occur if we can adopt the amendment that I have proposed.
The President's fiscal year 2002 budget proposal provided for a
significant increase in impact aid construction. This is the first step
toward keeping the promise that we made to our Native Americans.
By passing my amendment, the Senate will make it clear that Congress
[[Page S11342]]
shares this commitment and will put existing Federal obligations ahead
of proposals to involve the Federal Government in areas that can and
should be addressed by States and local governments.
For those colleagues who want to know where the major impact of this
is, I will candidly tell you, my State of Arizona is one of the States
of major impact because of the large number of Indian students we have
in Arizona and the large number of students being educated in
affiliation with military bases.
Other States, however, that are also very heavily impacted and that
would be benefited significantly by this amendment are the States of
New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Missouri, and
Nebraska. Those are, candidly, the States that receive the most
benefit. But almost every State would, in some respect, benefit by the
allocation of these funds on this priority basis.
Mr. President, I am going the reserve the remainder of my time to see
if there is any response to my amendment. I will be happy to reply to
any points that any of my colleagues may have if there is any objection
to it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I am beginning to wonder where my friend
from Arizona was a couple hours ago. I ask him, where was he? Senator
Inhofe of Oklahoma just came to this Chamber 3 hours ago and offered an
amendment which was approved by the Senate. The Senator from Arizona
raised no objection, none. None of his staff came to me to raise an
objection.
And what did the Inhofe amendment do? It reduced the funding for
impact aid construction. It transferred the money to basic support
payments.
Three hours ago we voted unanimously, as a Senate, to reduce impact
aid construction. Now the Senator from Arizona comes to this Chamber
and wants to increase impact aid construction. I ask, where was he 3
hours ago? Why didn't he oppose the Inhofe amendment?
I think what that shows is really what the Senator from Arizona is
after: They want to undo what the Senate did earlier by a vote of 54-
45; that is, to provide renovation and construction money for schools
all over America.
Mr. JOHNSON. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. HARKIN. I do not have much time, but I am delighted to yield.
Mr. JOHNSON. I ask my colleague, does it seem odd--and I speak as
someone who has been very committed to impact aid schools in my State--
that some people would have voted earlier to spend billions of dollars
in tax relief that went into the hands of people already millionaires,
and then to come to us today to tell us the only way we can help repair
and build impact aid schools is to take it from other schools that are
in desperate need of school construction and repair? Does it seem to
the Senator that the goal here is an ideological issue to make sure
that somehow the Federal Government does not get into the business of
assisting school districts with school construction and that is what
seems to be the end product of this amendment?
Mr. HARKIN. I thank my friend from South Dakota for pointing that
out. I am glad I yielded to him. I had not thought of it that way.
The Senator is absolutely right. This is an attempt by my friend from
Arizona to try to undo what we did earlier and then, as the Senator
pointed out, to take money from some poor schools and put it into
certain poor schools. That is what he is trying to do.
I don't know. I cannot believe the Senator is really serious about
this. First of all, last year, Congress approved $12.8 million for
impact aid construction.
This year, with the leadership of my good friend from Pennsylvania,
Senator Specter, and I and others on our committee, we raised that from
$12.8 million to $68 million. Last year, impact aid construction was
$12.8 million. We raised it to $68 million in our bill. The Inhofe
amendment earlier knocked it down to $35 million. That is still three
times more than what we spent last year. I am proud of that increase.
We fought hard for it.
But I ask the Senator from Arizona, where was he 3 hours ago, to come
over here and fight against the Inhofe amendment?
I am proud that we stuck up for impact aid schools and school
construction. Again, last year, Senator Specter and I, in conference--I
say this to all Senators who are here or may be watching on their
sets--carved out of our construction money $75 million for impact aid
construction. We will be happy to do that again in conference to make
sure our Indian schools and impact aid schools can get some of this
money. I wish now that maybe we had opposed the Inhofe amendment and
maybe the Senator from Arizona would have helped us round up some
votes. That was $68 million.
Under the wording of the amendment of the Senator from Arizona, there
are 10 States that have applied for school renovation and repair money.
The money has not gone out yet. His amendment would say: You are not
going to get it. That is money we appropriated last year. Those States
are Alaska, Arizona, California, District of Columbia, Georgia, New
Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, South Carolina, and Utah. All those
States would have the money taken away. I hope Senators understand that
when they come over here to vote.
Again, this is nothing more than a bald face attempt to undo what the
Senate did earlier today when we said, I thought very loudly, 54 votes
to 45 votes, that we wanted to provide school construction money. I
can't speak for my friend from Pennsylvania, but we did carve out the
money last time. When we get into conference, we will try to undo what
Senator Inhofe did earlier and try to get that money back up to the
level at which we initially agreed upon in our committee on a
bipartisan basis, which was $68 million.
I am certain we could at least carve out that much more for Indian
schools. We did it last year, and I am sure we can do it again this
year.
I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, how much time remains for Senator Harkin?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 8\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. SPECTER. I ask the Senator to yield me 4 minutes.
Mr. President, I join the chairman of the subcommittee in opposing
the amendment by the Senator from Arizona. I believe that impact aid is
very important, beyond any question.
We have the responsibility, as proponents of this bill, to make a lot
of allocations. We try to do it as fairly as we can, recognizing all of
the priorities which are present.
Senator Harkin pointed out that we raised impact aid from $12.5
million last year to $68 million. It is difficult to follow all the
matters. Another Senator approached us and has raised a concern. I made
a statement that there would be an effort made in conference--that is
always uncertain--to put back some of the money which was transferred
by the amendment by the Senator from Oklahoma, Mr. Inhofe.
As Senator Harkin has already noted, last year we did make an
allocation from school construction money. Basically, this is a dispute
about the role of the Federal Government in school construction.
We had a very spirited debate on the amendment by the Senator from
New Hampshire, Mr. Gregg, earlier today. A margin of 54-45 on a hotly
contested issue is a fairly decisive margin.
It is my view that we will try to improve the position of impact aid
which the Senator from Arizona wants once in conference, but the
allocations which we have made here, taking the bill as a whole,
represent a fair allocation.
In dealing with a budget of this size, we have had relatively few
amendments offered signifying relatively little opposition to the
priorities which were established first by the chairman and the ranking
member and then by the full subcommittee and then by the full
committee.
I oppose the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, might I inquire as to how much time I have
remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 6 minutes, 45 seconds.
[[Page S11343]]
Mr. KYL. I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If no one yields time, time will be charged
equally to both sides.
The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, if no one is speaking, this might be a
good time for a vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, as a matter of courtesy, I was trying to
enable those in opposition to the amendment to continue to speak.
I ask unanimous consent that Senator Allard be added as a cosponsor
to my amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, let me respond to the two questions the
Senator from Iowa asked. The first question was where was I during the
Inhofe amendment. He presumes, I gather, that I opposed the Inhofe
amendment. I didn't oppose the Inhofe amendment. I don't. I guess I
would ask where he was. It was approved on a voice vote unanimously, as
I understand it.
Second, he characterizes my amendment as an attempt to undo what we
already did today. I want to make clear that I will characterize my
amendment as I did in my opening presentation. What we did earlier
today is not what this amendment is all about.
The amendment I presume the Senator from Iowa is referring to is the
amendment offered by the Senator from New Hampshire. That is an
amendment which would have transferred the funds from the program the
Senator from Iowa supports to title I programs. My amendment doesn't
have anything to do with title I programs. My amendment says merely
that the priority in the expenditure of school construction funds--that
is what they are used for: construction, repair, renovation, and so
on--that the priority for that funding be first to the Federal area of
responsibility, the Indian kids, the kids on the military bases, the
impact aid districts; in other words, those children who are the
responsibility for being educated by the Federal Government should have
the first priority in the school construction funds.
I am not trying to undo what we did earlier today. I supported the
Gregg amendment. But what I would prefer to see us do is to say that
the funds that we are going to put forth for construction of schools be
prioritized, and that the first priority be the responsibility of the
Federal Government.
That is for two reasons: No. 1, the States and local school districts
have the ability to fund the construction of the schools that they have
a tax base to fund. As I pointed out, in some of these reservation
areas, be it military reservation or other Federal reservation, there
is not the tax base to support it.
Second, we have a huge unmet obligation. We as Federal legislators
should be ashamed that there is an over $2 billion shortfall in the
funding of Indian school construction. That is our obligation. It is a
treaty obligation.
All I am saying is, we take the Federal obligation, put that at the
top, and then the other schools can be funded. Those are the State and
local schools' responsibilities. Up until last year, the Federal
Government had never paid a dollar for construction of those schools.
Let's keep the priority we should have had in the first place to fund
our obligation first, the Federal schools, and then the rest of the
money could go to the funding of the State and local schools.
I reserve the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, how much time do I have?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 6 minutes.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I still didn't hear the answer to the
question, where he was, and if he opposed the Inhofe amendment or not.
I didn't hear about that. Nonetheless, we do have an obligation to our
Indian schools and our places where we have military bases, that kind
of thing, for impact aid. There is no doubt about that.
Obviously, under the wording of his amendment, there would be no
money left for any other States that don't get any impact aid
whatsoever. Again, we are trying to be fair about this and to answer
the needs of construction all over America.
Let's face it, the American Society of Civil Engineers estimated that
the repair needs of our schools in America are about $187 billion.
And so we are trying to get a billion out nationally. But as I
pointed out and Senator Specter pointed out earlier today, that money
is leveraged. We have experience in knowing how that money is
leveraged. So we might get maybe 7 to 10 times leverage on that. So $1
billion might equal $7 billion to $10 billion in construction in
schools. So it helps, but it is nowhere near what needs to be done all
over this country.
Under the amendment by the Senator from Arizona, there would not be
any money left for anyone. All of the money would go to Indian schools
and to the impact area aid schools, where there are military bases. I
don't think that is what we want to do here.
As I said, we carved out money last time. I have talked to a lot of
my friends who are Native Americans in Indian territory. They were very
appreciative of that money. We carved out $75 million. Quite frankly,
we accepted the amendment of the Senator from Oklahoma. However, it is
my intention, along with the ranking member, to make sure we meet our
obligations again this year in carving it out again in the conference
committee when we go to conference.
The last thing I will mention is that the amendment offered by the
Senator from Arizona is also retrospective. It goes back last year and
takes money from last year that States have already applied for; it
takes that money away from them, too. I hardly think we want to do
that.
Mr. INHOFE. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. HARKIN. I yield to the Senator.
Mr. INHOFE. On this point, I have looked at the Kyl amendment, and
his language affects a different section. Mine is just found in the
section dealing with impact aid under ``basic support.'' Now, the
change in funding came from the construction portion of that section,
which is a different section. That is my understanding, and it would
not make the conference report.
Mr. HARKIN. Also, the amendment of the Senator from Oklahoma reduced
impact aid construction. I don't care what you say. It puts it into the
basic impact aid.
Mr. INHOFE. That is correct.
Mr. HARKIN. That is correct. So this Senator from Arizona wants to
boost up impact aid construction. This is really to take away school
construction money. I don't think we need to talk anymore about it. We
all know what this is about.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I will set the record straight. The Senator
said he didn't get an answer to my question. I was in a briefing during
the Inhofe amendment in S-407 as a member of the Senate Intelligence
Committee on some other matters. I didn't object to the Inhofe
amendment. Like the Senator from Iowa, I was willing to have it
approved on a unanimous vote. The Senator from Oklahoma has explained
that it deals with a different section of the bill. That is irrelevant.
There is one central question before us. I ask my colleagues to focus
on this carefully. Until last year, there had never been a thought that
the Federal Government would begin building schools that had always
been the responsibility of our States and the local school districts.
There was never a thought that we would do that. Our school
construction effort was always targeted to our one area of
responsibility--the kids on the military reservations, Indian
reservations, and the other Federal impact aid areas. That was our
responsibility, and it remains our responsibility now.
But what we are now proposing to do is to take the school
construction money and distribute it all around the country to States
and local school districts. I am sure there is a lot of good politics
in that, Mr. President, but it is the wrong policy for those of us at
the Federal Government level who have a responsibility to these other
children. We are not meeting that responsibility.
If we were building the schools on the Indian reservations or taking
care of these military children, that would be one thing. I have
pointed out that we were failing miserably in that responsibility. I
ask colleagues, how can we sit here and blithely spend over $900
million on schools around the country that could just as easily be
built by the
[[Page S11344]]
taxpayers of those jurisdictions, while ignoring our responsibility to
the very kids who are our responsibility and whom the States and local
governments can't take care of.
What sense does that make? How does that make us feel at night when
we go to bed and say we have done a good thing today--violating
treaties with our Native Americans and denying the kids of the people
we put in harm's way serving in the military the kind of education
other kids get because we want to sprinkle that money around the
country rather than putting it in the area of responsibility that we in
the Federal Government have.
That is horrible public policy. The only way to set it right is to
reorder the priorities and put back as the first priority our
responsibility of funding the schools in the military and for the
Indian reservations, and that would remain our top priority for school
construction. To do that, we need to vote yes on the Kyl amendment. I
urge colleagues to do that.
I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada is recognized.
Order of Procedure--votes
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order
to request the yeas and nays en bloc on the two conference reports.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. I ask for the yeas and nays on both conference reports.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays are ordered.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time, and
I move to table the Kyl amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona has 47 seconds.
Mr. KYL. I will yield back my time. I am sorry we have to confuse the
issue by moving to table it. In view of that, the proper vote here now
is a ``no'' vote to table the Kyl amendment. I yield back my time.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the first vote
be the normal 15 minutes and the subsequent two be 10-minute votes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I move to table the Kyl amendment and ask
for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions)
and the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Hagel) are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Clinton). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 57, nays 41, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 319 Leg.]
YEAS--57
Akaka
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Breaux
Byrd
Cantwell
Carnahan
Carper
Chafee
Cleland
Clinton
Collins
Corzine
Craig
Crapo
Daschle
Dayton
Dodd
Durbin
Edwards
Ensign
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Harkin
Hollings
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Landrieu
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Mikulski
Miller
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sarbanes
Schumer
Shelby
Smith (OR)
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Torricelli
Wellstone
Wyden
NAYS--41
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Campbell
Cochran
Conrad
DeWine
Domenici
Dorgan
Enzi
Fitzgerald
Frist
Gramm
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Helms
Hutchinson
Hutchison
Inhofe
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nickles
Roberts
Santorum
Smith (NH)
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Voinovich
Warner
NOT VOTING--2
Hagel
Sessions
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. HARKIN. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was
agreed to.
Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________