[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 57 (Wednesday, May 8, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4075-S4077]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Daschle):
  S. 2484. A bill to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security 
Act to reauthorize and improve the operation of temporary assistance to 
needy families programs operated by Indian tribes, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the American 
Indian Welfare Reform Act of 2002, an important step in improving the 
lives of this country's Native Americans. I am glad to be joined by 
Senators Johnson and Daschle in this effort.
  In 1996 we enacted a sweeping welfare reform law. It was a long-past-
due fundamental change and ended a failed system for helping low-income 
families in America. I was a strong supporter of that law. This year, 
we are reauthorizing it. As we in the Finance Committee have reviewed 
the evidence I have been struck by how successful it has been. The 
ranks of those dependent on welfare in this country has been reduced by 
half in just five years. There is more to be done, of course. Child 
poverty has declined but not by as much as the fall in the welfare 
caseload, for example. I am at work with my Finance Committee colleague 
Senator Grassley on comprehensive legislation to renew and improve the 
1996 law.
  One important aspect of the 1996 law which is often overlooked is 
that it didn't just devolve authority to States, it also permitted 
Indian tribes to operate their own welfare programs for the first time. 
The new welfare program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, TANF, 
is very flexible. Tribes can take advantage of that flexibility to 
design culturally-appropriate programs to move people from welfare to 
work. This is smart policy and is consistent with the important value 
of tribal sovereignty. I support it.
  My own State of Montana is home to several tribes and I have given 
much thought to how we can build upon the provisions of the 1996 
welfare law to help them and their members. Too often in Montana, and 
elsewhere, poverty has an Indian face. The numbers are cold and hard. 
According to the Census Bureau, 25 percent of American Indians live in 
poverty, more than twice the national poverty rate. The average 
household income for Indians in 2000 was only 75 percent of that of the 
rest of Americans. This is simply not right. We must do better. Welfare 
reform needs to work for everyone.
  Luckily, the provisions of the 1996 law provide a good start. Now we 
must build upon them. The legislation I introduce today, the product of 
extensive dialogue and consultation, does that in several important 
ways.
  First, more than 30 tribes, including the Confederated Salish-
Kootenai and Fort Belknap tribes of Montana, have taken advantage of 
the opportunity to operate their own TANF programs. This bill contains 
provisions to help those tribes improve their programs. For example, 
tribes operating TANF are not eligible for the TANF high performance 
bonus or the TANF contingency fund while state TANF programs are. This 
oversight is rectified by this bill.

  Second, there are many tribes interested in operating TANF programs 
which do not believe the current set-up allows them to do so. They want 
to exercise their sovereignty and adapt their program to better fit the 
needs of their people. We should help them do so. To that end, I 
proposed creating a new grant fund to improve tribal governmental 
capacity. We have funded State administrative capacity for decades, 
helping states buy computer systems and train workers. We should do the 
same for tribal human services administration. Under this bill, a tribe 
which wants to operate TANF but needs to upgrade its computers to do it 
could receive the funding it needs, which will enable it to take over 
TANF.
  Third, there are some tribes not interested in running a TANF program 
or a long time from being able to do it. Their low-income families will 
continue to receive assistance from State programs. I have included 
provisions to facilitate State-tribe dialogue in these cases so that 
the state can better understand the unique circumstances of each Indian 
reservation. We must ensure all Indian families are able to get help 
when they need it.
  Finally, there is the all-important issue of economic development. A 
General Accounting Office review of Census Bureau data found that 25 of 
the 26 counties in the U.S. with a majority of American Indians had 
poverty rates ``significantly'' higher than average. Welfare reform is 
about moving people to work. On most of our Indian reservations there 
is simply far too little work to be had. Like everyone else, Indians 
want to work. We need to do better in giving them the opportunity.
  This legislation provides tribes with an expanded authority to issue 
bonds, which will encourage additional economic activity on 
reservations, such as housing construction. This means more jobs, as 
well as a better quality of life. It also includes grants to help 
tribes improve their own economic development strategies. Tribes with 
uniform commercial codes and effective micro-enterprise programs can 
see more business activity on their lands. This bill helps tribes helps 
themselves. We need to let Indians find their own way to prosperity, 
not impose top-down strategies. But we must make sure they have the 
tools to get there.
  This is an important bill. It includes other key provisions. One is a 
fine bill originally introduced by Senators Daschle and McCain to allow 
tribes to receive direct Federal reimbursement for operating foster 
care programs. Another provision funds research on tribal welfare 
reform programs so we can learn what works as well as providing funds 
for ``peer-learning'' so that tribes can learn from one another. I am a

[[Page S4076]]

strong supporter of welfare reform. We need to make sure it works for 
everyone. This bill does not.
  I ask unanimous consent that a summary of the legislation be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the summary was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

        The American Indian Welfare Reform Act of 2002--Summary


                              I. Findings

       The Federal Government bears a unique trust responsibility 
     for American Indians. Despite this responsibility, Indians 
     remain remarkably impoverished. According to the Census 
     Bureau, 25.9 percent of American Indians live in poverty, 
     more than twice the national poverty rate. The average 
     household income for Indians in 2000 was only 75 percent of 
     that of the rest of Americans. In some States with 
     substantial Indian populations the welfare caseload has 
     become increasingly Indian because it has been harder for 
     Indians to leave welfare for work. A General Accounting 
     Office review of Census Bureau data found that 25 of the 26 
     counties in the U.S. with a majority of American Indians had 
     poverty rates ``significantly'' higher than average. Further, 
     many Indian tribes are located in isolated rural areas, far 
     from economic opportunity. Welfare reform has not brought 
     enough change to Indian Country.


                  II. The Tribal TANF Improvement Fund

       The 1996 welfare reform law permits tribes to opt to 
     operate their own Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, 
     TANF, programs. A new Tribal TANF Improvement Fund of $500 
     million, to be available for five years, would be created to 
     build upon these programs and allow more tribes to start 
     them. It would have four parts:
       Tribal Capacity Grants.--State governments have benefitted 
     from decades of federal investment in their administrative 
     capacity, particularly in their information management 
     systems. $225 million of the Fund would be reserved for 
     grants to improve tribal human services program 
     infrastructure, with a priority for management information 
     systems and training. Tribes applying to operate TANF would 
     be given priority. Tribes already operating TANF or applying 
     to operate IV-E foster care programs with direct federal 
     funding would also be eligible for grants. HHS would be 
     required to assure that tribes of all sizes received funding 
     and to maximize the number of tribes which receive funding. 
     Tribes would be eligible for one grant per year.
       Adjusted Tribal TANF Grants.--Tribes which take over 
     operation of TANF often experience significant increases in 
     caseload as poor families apply for help for the first time 
     because they are more comfortable asking assistance from the 
     tribe or simply because they are more able to access 
     services. Yet tribal TANF allocations are based on estimates 
     of Indians served by state programs in 1994, which can leave 
     the tribe facing funding levels which are too low. To better 
     support families in tribal TANF programs, $140 million of the 
     fund would be reserved for grants to tribal TANF programs 
     where the tribe can demonstrate it has a significantly higher 
     true caseload than originally estimated. Tribes with cash 
     assistance caseloads two years after beginning operation of a 
     TANF no program which are 20 percent higher than originally 
     estimated would be eligible for additional funding. The 
     funds would be allocated proportionate to a tribe's size 
     and service population as well as the caseload increase, 
     on the basis of a formula to be determined by HHS in 
     consultation with tribes. The funding level would be $35 
     million per year, from FY 2004-2007.
       Tribal TANF MOE Incentive.--A key factor in tribes being 
     able to operate TANF programs has been the willingness and 
     ability of states to contribute funding as part of the 
     broader state maintenance of effort, MOE, requirement. To 
     encourage states to do this, up to an additional $120 million 
     would be available for ``rebates'' of TANF funds to states 
     which provide MOE support to tribal TANF programs. For each 
     $1 in MOE funds provided, the federal government would 
     provide an additional 30 cents in TANF funding to the state. 
     If funding is insufficient, HHS would provide pro-rata 
     funding to ensure each state contributing MOE receives a 
     share of the incentive funds.
       Technical Assistance.--HHS would receive $15 million to 
     provide technical assistance to tribes. At least $5 million 
     on these funds would be reserved to support peer-learning 
     programs among tribal administrators and at least $7.5 
     million would be reserved for grants to tribes to conduct 
     feasibility studies of their capacity to operate TANF.


   III. Tribal TANF High Performance Fund and Contingency Fund Access

       There are separate sources of funding within TANF that 
     tribes do not have the ability to access. To better support 
     tribal TANF programs, three percent of the current TANF 
     ``high performance'' bonus, or $6 million/year, would be 
     reserved for distribution to tribal TANF programs. The 
     criteria would be determined by HHS through consultation with 
     tribes, but should involve effectiveness in moving TANF 
     recipients into employment and self-sufficiency. In addition, 
     $25 million of the $2 billion TANF Contingency fund would be 
     reserved for tribal TANF programs operating in situations of 
     increased economic hardship. The criteria for tribal access 
     to the Contingency Fund would also be determined by HHS 
     through consultation with the tribes, but would include a 
     worsening economic condition and loss of reservation 
     employers. In addition, current restrictions on the use of 
     ``carryover'' TANF funds would be eliminated, permitting 
     tribes to spend prior year TANF funds with just as much 
     flexibility as current year TANF funds.


                        IV. Economic Development

       There are three elements in the bill to stimulate more 
     economic activity on economically-depressed reservations.
       Expanded Tribal Authority To Issue Tax-Exempt Private 
     Activity Bonds.--Currently, tribes have a limited authority 
     to issue private activity bonds for ``essential'' 
     governmental functions and for certain manufacturing-related 
     purposes. This provision would allow bonds to be used for 
     residential rental properties and qualified mortgage 
     bonds, spurring construction. In addition, tribes could 
     allocate authority for financing businesses that would 
     qualify as enterprise zone businesses if the reservation 
     were a zone. All property financed would have to be on the 
     reservation of the issuing tribal government and qualified 
     tribal governments would have to have an unemployment rate 
     of at least 20 percent. Casinos and certain other forms of 
     businesses could not be financed by the bonds. The 
     authority would be for calendar years 2003-2007, and up to 
     $10 million total would be available for each qualifying 
     tribe.
       Tribal Development Grants.--A key part of tribal economic 
     development is the investment climate on the reservation. 
     Tribes with clear legal codes and which encourage micro-
     enterprise activities are more likely to generate economic 
     growth. To facilitate this, the Administration for Native 
     Americans within HHS would receive $50 million to distribute 
     in grants to tribes, tribal organizations and non-profit 
     organizations to provide technical assistance to tribes in 
     the areas of: development and improvement of uniform 
     commercial codes; creating or expanding small business or 
     micro-enterprise programs; development and improvement of 
     tort liability codes; creating or expanding tribal marketing 
     efforts; for-profit collaborative business networks; and 
     telecommunications.
       Job Access and Reverse Commute Grants.--A lack of 
     transportation often hinders tribal economic development. To 
     help address this need, tribes would be made directly 
     eligible to receive Job Access and Reverse Commute grants 
     from the federal Department of Transportation, which would 
     permit tribes to pursue innovative TANF strategies around 
     transportation. A tribal set-aside of 3 percent would be 
     established in the program. Matching funds could be provided 
     by tribes on an in-kind basis or with other federal funds, 
     such as TANF.


                    V. Tribal Job Training Programs

       There are currently two tribal job training programs, the 
     NEW program and Welfare-to-Work grantees. To simplify and 
     better co-ordinate programs, a new Tribal Employment Services 
     Program, TESP, would be created in the Department of Labor by 
     combining the two programs. It would be funded at $37 million 
     annually and distributed to current Tribal NEW and Welfare-
     to-Work grantees as well as new applicants. TESP funds could 
     be used for employment training efforts for those on, or at-
     risk of being on, public assistance. Tribes could also use 
     the funds to assist non-custodial parents of children on, or 
     at risk of being on, public assistance. To encourage state-
     tribal partnerships, TANF funds transferred to tribal TESP 
     programs would be governed by TESP rules, not TANF rules. The 
     bill also clarifies that the single plan, single budget, and 
     single reporting requirements of PL 102-477 should be 
     respected.


                         VI. Tribal Child Care

       The availability and quality of child care is basic to the 
     success of welfare reform. Tribal welfare reform efforts are 
     no exception. The tribal set-aside within the Child Care 
     Development Block Grant, CCDBG, would be increased to 5 
     percent to better support tribal welfare reform programs. HHS 
     would be required to go through a negotiated rulemaking 
     process, in consultation with tribal representatives, to 
     determine an equitable allocation of funds among tribes. In 
     addition, each tribe receiving CCDBG funding would develop 
     their own health and safety standards, subject to approval of 
     HHS. Tribal child care programs would have additional 
     authority to use funds for construction and renovation.


                         VII. Equitable Access

       Many American Indians are--and will continue to be--served 
     by state TANF programs. States will be required to consult 
     with tribes within their borders on TANF state plans. Under 
     current law, States are required to provide ``equitable 
     access'' to services for Indians. State and tribal TANF plans 
     would be required to describe how ``equitable access'' is 
     provided to encourage better state-tribal co-operation. HHS 
     would also be required to include in the annual TANF report 
     to Congress state-specific information on the demographics 
     and case load characteristics of Indians served by state TANF 
     programs.
       In addition, HHS would be required to convene a new 
     advisory committee on the status of non-reservation Indians. 
     Too little is known about how these Indians are faring. The 
     committee is to make recommendations for ensuring these 
     Indians receive appropriate assistance. The committee would 
     include Federal, State, and tribal representatives as well as 
     representatives of Indians

[[Page S4077]]

     not residing on reservations. A majority of those on the 
     committee should be representatives of Indians not residing 
     on reservations. GAO would also be required to conduct a 
     study of the demographics of Indians not residing on 
     reservations, including economic and health information, as 
     well as reviewing their access to public benefits.


                           VIII. Joblessness

       As acknowledged by the 1996 welfare law, the federal time 
     limit on assistance is not an appropriate policy on Indian 
     reservations with severe unemployment. This provision would 
     be adjusted so that the time limit will not apply during 
     months where the joblessness is above 20 percent, provided 
     that TANF recipients are not in sanction status. In addition, 
     in these areas of high joblessness, states would have 
     flexibility to define work activities required for TANF 
     participants, provided the recipient is participating in 
     activities in accordance with an Individual Responsibility 
     Plan and the state has included information in its state plan 
     describing its policies in Indian Country areas of high 
     joblessness. Tribal TANF programs already have flexibility in 
     work activity definition.


                         IX. Alaska provisions

       The 1996 provision limits the ability of tribes in Alaska 
     to design and operate programs. These provisions involving 
     differential treatment for Alaskan Natives, such as those 
     requiring tribal TANF programs to be ``comparable'' to the 
     state program, would be removed.


                     X. Tribal Foster Care Programs

       Due to a long-standing oversight, tribes are not allowed to 
     receive direct federal reimbursement when they operate foster 
     care programs to take care of abused and neglected children. 
     The provisions of S. 550, the Daschle-McCain legislation to 
     rectify this oversight and allow tribes to receive direct 
     federal funding to operate foster care programs, are 
     included.


                  XI. Food Stamps, Medicaid, and SCHIP

       Tribes operating TANF programs would be given clear 
     authority to perform eligibility determination for Food 
     Stamps, Medicaid, and SCHIP. Quality control measures in each 
     program would apply to tribes making such decisions, although 
     states and tribes may negotiate separate agreements on these 
     measures.


                     XII. Child Support Enforcement

       HHS would be required to promulgate final regulations 
     concerning tribal child support programs within one year of 
     enactment.


                XIII. Social Services Block Grant, SSBG

       When funding for SSBG exceeds $2.4 billion in a year, $10 
     million plus 2 percent of all funds beyond $2.4 billion is 
     reserved for tribes. All tribes operating social service 
     programs would be eligible for a share. HHS is required to 
     develop a distribution formula through a consultation process 
     with the tribes.


                             XIV. Research

       $2 million would be provided to HHS for research on tribal 
     welfare programs and efforts to reduce poverty among American 
     Indians in general. To expend the funds, HHS would first have 
     to issue a planned course of research and consultation with 
     the tribes. Research funding applicants which propose to 
     include tribal governments and tribal colleges in their work 
     would have priority.


                       XV. Faith-Based Initiative

       The HHS Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives 
     would be required to convene an advisory committee of Indians 
     expert in social services and the spiritual aspects of 
     traditional Indian cultures. This committee shall issue a 
     report within 18 months of enactment with ``best practices'' 
     advice for tribal and state TANF administrators.
                                 ______