[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 74 (Friday, June 7, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E983]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               H.R. 4737

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JAMES H. MALONEY

                             of connecticut

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, June 6, 2002

  Mr. MALONEY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 
4737 in its current form. The bill the proponents have brought to the 
floor today is totally inadequate in regard to family child care. H.R. 
4737 puts families in an entirely untenable position between their 
desire and need to work, on the one hand, and their need for quality 
child care during their working hours, on the other hand. In addition, 
the bill places very costly, unfunded mandates on the states.
  Currently, an estimated 15 million children in America who are 
eligible for child care assistance lack coverage because states do not 
have the financial resources. Many states are facing budget deficits 
arising from the recession of 2001-2002. In my home state of 
Connecticut, for example, the government is already experiencing a 
deficit in excess of $500 million dollars, and, accordingly, child care 
assistance for low-income families who have been off welfare for 2 or 
more years has already been frozen. Even worse, as of June 1, 
Connecticut will no longer be able to provide child care assistance to 
families just leaving welfare. Regardless of income, they will not 
receive any child care assistance at all.
  The unfunded mandates created in this bill add to the states' child 
care burden without providing the resources required to meet this 
critical need. Indeed, the child care funding in H.R. 4737 is barely 
enough to keep up with inflation, never mind provide for the roughly 35 
percent increase in work hours called for in this bill.
  CBO estimates that the unfunded mandates in this bill will require 
states to spend an additional $11 billion dollars over the next 5 
years. Of that $3.8 billion dollars is mandated for child care--four 
times more than the proponents are willing to provide. Connecticut's 
share will be $66.5 million over 5 years, substantially adding to 
Connecticut's deficit.
  The bill's proponents may say that they support child care, but their 
rhetoric is meaningless when they don't provide the necessary 
resources.
  Without providing more money for child care, this bill will:
  Keep families and states from meeting the new welfare requirements.
  Keep children from reaching school ready to learn.
  Keep families from getting and keeping jobs.
  Keep increasing state deficits and financial problems.
  And, most regrettably, keep families from getting off and staying off 
welfare--defeating the very purpose of this legislation.
  Work is critically important, and I support strengthening the welfare 
work requirements, just as I supported the original passage of welfare 
reform in 1996. That's not the issue. The issue is: more work requires 
more child care. All working parents know that you can't keep a job 
without also having child care. Yet that's what the proponents of this 
bill ask families, and our states, to do.
  My motion to recommit would help more working families afford quality 
child care, so that parents can be employed and their children can 
learn. Specifically, this motion to recommit adds an additional $11 
billion over 5 years to meet the unfunded mandates of this bill. This 
will allow states to provide child care for the approximately 80 
percent of eligible families who are currently on waiting lists, and it 
will allow states to provide child care for the families who will be 
moving to work or expanding their work hours under this legislation.
  I support strengthening work requirements, but we must provide 
families with appropriate child care resources to allow parents to 
increase their time at work without leaving a child home alone.
  I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this motion to recommit, so that 
the bill can be returned to us containing the child care funding it, 
our families, and our states, so clearly need.

                          ____________________