[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 21, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1239-S1241]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MAKING FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003--
Continued
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
following Senators be added as cosponsors to the LIHEAP amendment just
adopted: Senators Grassley, Specter, Lieberman, Kohl, Baucus, and
Lincoln.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. COLLINS. I thank the Chair.
Mr. President, Senator Jack Reed and I have offered an amendment that
provides for the immediate release of $300 million in funds for the Low
Income Home Energy Assistance Program, also known as LIHEAP.
I thank the chair and ranking member of the Labor-HHS Appropriations
Subcommittee, Senators Specter and Harkin, for their efforts in support
of this critical program. Despite the extremely difficult fiscal
constraints facing our Nation, Senators Specter and Harkin have managed
to provide $1.7 billion in regular-year LIHEAP funds in the Omnibus
Appropriations Act. This is $300 million more than the administration's
request.
Unfortunately, while the bill before us provides more regular LIHEAP
funds than the administration requested, the total funding, which
includes both regular funding and emergency funding, is considerably
less than was provided in fiscal year 2002. In fact, total LIHEAP
funding in this bill falls $300 million below the total funding
provided in fiscal year 2002. It is also $300 million below the total
funds provided in the Labor-HHS appropriations bill which passed the
Senate Appropriations Committee on July 18, 2002, by a vote of 29 to 0.
Mr. President, the amendment that Senator Reed of Rhode Island and I
have offered would provide for the immediate release of an additional
$300 million for low-income heating assistance by designating emergency
funds provided in the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2001 as
regular-year funds for fiscal year 2003.
For that reason, our amendment is fiscally responsible. Because these
funds were already made available, our amendment does not increase
total spending in the omnibus appropriations bill. These are funds that
were already approved. The effect of our amendment is for this $300
million to be released immediately.
Some might argue that these funds should not be released unless the
President declares an emergency. Anyone who thinks that we don't
currently have an emergency in home heating assistance should visit
with a low-income family in Houlton, ME. Houlton recently experienced
the coldest temperature of any place in the lower 48 States. A few days
ago, temperatures in Houlton were 19 degrees below zero. Tonight, the
forecast, with windchill, is for the temperature range to be from 20 to
40 below in some parts of my home State. When the temperature is that
cold, and you do not have money in your budget to heat your home, that
is an emergency.
Adding to the problem of exceptionally cold winter weather, energy
prices have escalated dramatically. The cessation of oil exports from
Venezuela, as well as the prospect of a war in the Middle East, have
pushed the price of crude oil up by nearly $6 per barrel in the last
month. Home heating oil inventories are near 5-year lows, and prices
are 20 percent higher than last winter. The Energy Information
Administration predicts that home heating oil prices could rise 45
percent by the time winter is over. The price of natural gas, kerosene,
and other fuels are facing similar pressures.
In addition to a cold winter and high energy prices, we are also
facing difficult economic times. Unemployment has reached an 8-year
high. In Maine, as in many States, low-income and unemployed workers
are struggling. Just last week, Great Northern Paper, the largest
employer in northern Maine, filed for bankruptcy and laid off its
workforce of more than 1,000 employees.
In short, we are facing a ``perfect storm'' of high energy prices,
exceedingly cold weather, and a difficult economy. With little prospect
for a quick resolution of the crises in Iraq and Venezuela, continued
forecasts for a cold winter, and the dubious prospects for a very quick
economic rebound, all of us living in cold weather climates will face
challenges in order to heat our homes this winter.
This combination of factors strains everyone's pocketbook, but, of
course, it places a particular burden on seniors living on limited
incomes and on our low-income families. These families already carry a
higher energy burden than most Americans. They can spend up to 20 or 25
percent of their entire income just paying their home energy bills. No
one should have to choose between heating their homes or putting food
on the table, having prescriptions in the medicine cabinet, or even
staying in their homes altogether.
Experience has shown, however, that pressures to pay energy bills and
the inability to pay have resulted in increased medical expenses for
our elderly, malnutrition for our children, and even homelessness. As
an indicator of just how difficult this winter has been in my home
State, let me tell you that 10,000 more people in Maine have applied
for low-income heating assistance this year compared to last year.
Unfortunately, even as the need has increased, the amount of
assistance has declined. In Maine, the average household benefit has
seen a steady decline over the last four winters. In the winter of 1999
to 2000, the average LIHEAP benefit for a Maine family was $491. The
next year, it had fallen to $433. By last winter, the number had
further declined to $358. Fortunately, with the approval of the Reed-
Collins amendment, we can reverse this decline or at least ensure that
more Maine families will be helped; otherwise, low-income Maine
families struggling to heat their homes will only receive between $330
and $350 this winter, not nearly enough to help.
I would like to say a word about the history of the LIHEAP funds that
our amendment addresses. The Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2001
provided an extra $300 million in LIHEAP funds in order to help low
income families deal with high energy prices. Report language
specifically directed that at least $150 million of these funds were to
be used to address unmet needs resulting from high energy prices. The
other half of the money was directed to be used to meet the most
critical needs arising from energy cost increases and increases in
unemployment, among other things.
I have been working for the better part of 2 years to secure the
release of these funds. On August 13, 2001, I joined Senator Reed,
Senator Kennedy, and a number of my colleagues in sending a letter to
the President requesting the release of the very same $300 million in
emergency funds from the fiscal year 2001 supplemental appropriations
bill. On September 10, 2001, I again joined many of my colleagues in
sending a letter to OMB director Mitch Daniels requesting the immediate
release of these funds. On October 26, 2001, 17 Senators joined Senator
Reed and me in a letter to the Senate Minority and Majority leader
requesting legislative language to require the release of these funds.
On October 30, 2001, I offered an amendment to the fiscal year 2002
Labor, Health and Human Services appropriations bill expressing the
sense of the Senate that these funds should be released immediately.
That amendment was supported by Senators Specter and Harkin and passed
the Senate as part of the fiscal year 2002 Labor-HHS bill.
[[Page S1240]]
On February 12, 2002, I joined my colleague Senator Snowe in sending
a letter to the President again requesting the release of these same
funds. On September 23, 2002, Senator Reed and I were joined by Senator
Specter, Senator Harkin, and 35 of our colleagues in a letter to the
President requesting the release of $200 million in emergency funds
that were made available as part of the fiscal year 2002 Labor-HHS
Appropriations Bill. These funds expired without ever being spent.
Finally, on December 23, 2002, half of our colleagues joined Senator
Reed and me in sending a letter to the administration requesting a
total of $2 billion in fiscal year 2003 funding--which is the same
amount made available by combining the $300 million in my amendment
with the $1.7 billion already in the bill.
The LIHEAP program is essential in helping many low-income families
get through the winter months. This has been an unusually cold winter.
This has been a year where home heating prices have soared. This has
been a year where the economy has been difficult. The combination of
those three factors calls out for us to provide this additional
assistance.
I am very pleased that our colleagues have joined together with an
overwhelming vote. I hope very much this provision will be retained in
the final conference report.
Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to talk about
the HUD/VA appropriations bill contained in the omnibus package
currently under consideration by the Senate. I want to commend Senators
Mikulski and Bond for recognizing the importance of providing Americans
with the opportunity to live in decent, safe, and affordable housing.
However, despite their efforts, housing programs suffer from a lack of
adequate funding in this bill.
The Appropriations Committee faced tough choices in revising their
fiscal year 2003 bills, due to the decision to cut domestic programs
substantially across the board. Senate appropriations were forced to
cut almost $10 billion from their earlier spending decisions for fiscal
year 2003. More than $1 billion of this cut comes from critical housing
programs. While the Senate bill before us today is far superior to the
House appropriations bill, it does not provide adequate resources. Now
is not the time to cut $1 billion from the social safety net. Over
100,000 people lost their jobs last month, and unemployment continues
to be high. Working families deserve our support, and instead of
providing it to them, we continue to cut programs that help people
provide for their families.
While the administration is asking us to provide a tax cut of $674
billion, primarily for the wealthiest Americans, over $1 billion in
funding is being cut from programs that help low-income families afford
housing. The problem of affordable housing has become a crisis for many
working families all across America. According to a recent study, 14
percent of families pay over half of their income in rent or live in
substandard housing. The significant gap between the wages of low-
income workers and housing costs makes evident that housing assistance
is necessary for many working families. On average, a family in this
country needs to earn almost $15 an hour to afford a modest two-bedroom
apartment. This is almost three times the minimum wage.
When millions of American families are unable to afford decent and
safe housing, the consequences are serious and far-reaching. When
children do not have stable home environments, their health suffers as
does their educational attainment. In addition, housing assistance can
help people transition from welfare to work. Recent studies have found
that people leaving welfare who receive housing assistance retain
employment for longer and make more than those who do not receive such
assistance. Unfortunately, this bill does not do enough to ensure that
working and elderly families in this country can afford safe and decent
housing.
Just last week, HUD announced that housing authorities around the
country will be facing drastic cuts in their operating funding. These
cuts are due to HUD's error in estimating public housing needs. Because
of HUD's mistake, there was a $250 million shortfall in the operating
fund in fiscal year 2002. Upon learning of this shortfall, HUD
indicated that it would seek additional funding from Congress.
Unfortunately, HUD never asked for these funds. Instead, HUD will use
fiscal year 2003 funds; to make up for the shortfall. This means that
we are starting out with a $250 million cut in the program this year.
This cut will leave housing authorities with no choice but to
scale back their programs, lay off staff and put off needed repairs.
HUD should request, and we should provide additional funding to make
sure that families in public housing are adequately housed. In
addition, HUD must provide as much funding as possible to PHAs under
the current budget situation. Housing authorities are currently
receiving only 70 percent of their funding. This is an unnecessary and
irresponsible cut. Even assuming a loss of $250 million from fiscal
year 2003 funds, HUD should be able to provide at least 90 percent of
operating costs to public house authorities. If HUD intends to fund
public housing at higher levels later in the year, as they have
announced, they should do so now, thereby helping PHAs avoid
unnecessarily cutting off assistance to needy families.
In addition to under-funding the public housing operating account,
the HUD appropriations bill cuts $160 million from the Public Housing
Capital Fund, which is used to repair and modernize public housing.
Over 1.5 million families reside in public housing, housing that is
generally safe and decent. However, this older housing stock is in need
of constant maintenance. Capital needs in public housing grow by $2.3
billion every year, and the backlog of needed capital repairs is over
$20 billion. If we do not adequately fund the Public Housing Capital
Fund, this backlog will continue to grow, threatening the homes of 1.5
million American families and the Federal Government's substantial
investment in this housing.
While I strongly oppose the cuts in the public housing program, there
are some important provisions contained in this bill that I
wholeheartedly support. This bill fixes a serious problem created by
the House Committee and ensures that Section 8 housing vouchers, a
critical housing resource, are not lost. The House appropriations bill,
H.R. 5605, will result in the immediate loss of over 125,000 vouchers
and will lead to the continued loss of housing vouchers over time.
Though the bill before us today cuts funding from the voucher program,
it does so in a way that guarantees that all vouchers in use will be
funded, and ensures that housing authorities can serve as many families
as possible with the vouchers they are allocated. This is an important
provision, and I want to commend Senators Bond and Mikulski for
including this in the HUD/VA appropriations bill.
I am also pleased that the Senate retains $100 million in interest
reduction payments for housing uses. Unfortunately, the House bill
complies with the administration's request to rescind this $100 million
which should be used to rehabilitate affordable housing. Given the
great need for housing around the country, it is remarkable that we
would rescind funding which could be used to increase housing
opportunities. The Senate bill rightly requires that HUD use these
funds to modernize affordable housing. Unfortunately, HUD has refused
to take any action to use these IRP funds for their intended purpose,
and I urge HUD to quickly comply with congressional intent and
distribute these needed dollars.
Affordable, stable housing is the bedrock of stable, vibrant
communities. Unfortunately, too many Americans find themselves in
precarious housing situations in neighborhoods of despair. The
continued cuts to housing programs supported by the current
administration will hurt the millions of Americans who live in public
housing or received housing vouchers, and the millions more Americans
who are in need of housing assistance. These cuts will be felt all
around the country. I hope that the administration will recognize this
and the growing housing needs around the country and I urge them to
fully fund Federal housing programs in the fiscal year 2004 budget. I
am also hopeful that the Senate bill, which ensures the viability of
the housing voucher program, prevails at conference with the House.
democracy programs
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the ranking member of the Foreign
Operations Subcommittee and I intended to
[[Page S1241]]
include the following section in the report accompanying the FY 2003
Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs
appropriations bill. I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the
Record following the remarks of the Senator from Vermont.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. LEAHY. My friend from Kentucky and I agreed to include this
section in the report, but we regret that it was not included before
the report hit the printing presses. It is our hope and expectation
that it be considered as if included in the fiscal year 2003 Foreign
Operations report, as originally printed in the Record last week.
Exhibit 1
Democracy Oversight and Coordination
The Committee strongly supports programs and activities
that advance democracy and freedom abroad, and has included
funding in this Act for specific democracy programs it
believes are important to United States security interests.
The Committee believes that democracy promotion abroad can be
an effective bulwark against terrorism, if properly
established and implemented.
However, the Committee remains concerned with the
inconsistent application of democracy programs by State and
USAID, and the apparent lack of coordination of these
programs within, and between, the agencies. For example,
while the Committee applauds State's comprehensive review of
Middle East democracy programs, it is perplexed by its lack
of leadership and support for the advancement of democracy in
Burma.
In order to address these concerns, the Committee
recommends that State and USAID jointly conduct a
comprehensive review of democracy programs, and consider
centralizing oversight and coordination within the Bureau of
Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. The Committee will review
the progress made in this endeavor as it considers action on
the fiscal year 2004 foreign operations appropriations bill.
____________________