[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 52 (Tuesday, April 1, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4633-S4635]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Johnson, Mr. 
        Campbell, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Inouye, and Mr. Akaka):
  S. 751. 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 re-introducing the American 
Indian Welfare Reform Act, an important step in improving the lives of 
this country's Native Americans. I originally introduced this bill last 
year and worked to include important elements of it in the welfare 
reform reauthorization bill approved by the Finance Committee. 
Unfortunately, we did not finish work on welfare reform 
reauthorization. So I am again offering this bill, with some 
improvements based on advice from tribes and other experts. I am glad 
to be joined by Senators Daschle, Johnson, Campbell, Bingaman, Inouye, 
and Akaka.
  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 continue to work to reauthorize 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 plan to work with my Finance 
Committee colleague Senator Grassley on comprehensive legislation to 
renew and improve the 1996 law.
  One often overlooked important aspect of the 1996 law 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, 25.9 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. 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, 
under current law, 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 
who 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 
propose 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. There is also an important provision to allow States the 
same flexibility in designing welfare-to-work programs on high 
unemployment reservations that tribes gain when they operate TANF 
programs. 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 
strong supporter of welfare reform. We need to make sure it works for 
everyone. This bill does that.
  I ask unanimous consent that a summary of the legislation be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the additional material was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

           Summary of the American Indian Welfare Reform Act


                              1. 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 some Indians face 
     substantial barriers in moving from welfare to 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. Tribal

[[Page S4634]]

     Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, TANF, programs have 
     demonstrated remarkable success in moving Indians from 
     welfare to work. Tribal governments have not been afforded 
     equal opportunity to administer foster care and adoption 
     assistance programs. Welfare reform has not brought enough 
     change to Indian Country.


                  2. 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 5 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. $185 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, applying to 
     operate IV-E foster care programs with direct federal 
     funding, and operating the new consolidated tribal job 
     training program 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 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, by region, 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 $160 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 50 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 
     of these funds would be reserved to support peer-learning 
     programs among tribal administrators and at least $5 million 
     would be reserved for grants to tribes to conduct feasibility 
     studies of their capacity to operate TANF.


  III. Tribal TANF High Performance Bonus 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, 3 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, $50 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, loss of reservation employers, or a loss 
     of state match funding. 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 four 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 2004-
     2008, 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.
       Transportation Grants. A lack of transportation also often 
     hinders individual Indians from moving from welfare-to-work. 
     This need is particularly acute given the remote nature of 
     many reservations. To assist Indians in acquiring reliable 
     automobiles, a $10 million per year grant program would be 
     created, beginning in FY 2004. Tribes would be given priority 
     in receiving grants to create car ownership assistance 
     programs. This program is based on a proposal originally put 
     forward by Senator Jeffords.


                    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 and 
     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 the base funding 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 caseload 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 not residing on reservations. A 
     majority of those on the committee would 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

[[Page S4635]]

     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 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. 331, 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

       Up to 10 tribes operating TANF programs could receive 
     waivers to perform eligibility determinations and/or operate 
     Food Stamps, Medicaid, and the State Children's Health 
     Insurance Program, SCHIP, as well. Matching requirements 
     could be waived but not program integrity requirements. In 
     addition, the programs would remain consistent with state 
     rules. However, tribes would be able to demonstrate their 
     ability to operate these programs and to serve low-income 
     Indian families better.


                     XII. Child Support Enforcement

       HHS would be required to promulgate final regulations 
     concerning tribal child support programs within one year of 
     enactment. In addition, HHS would be required to submit a 
     report to Congress on the most appropriate ways of including 
     tribal programs in the methodology of determining child 
     support incentive payments.


            XIII. ``Break the Cycle'' Demonstration Program

       Inter-generational poverty is a frequent occurrence on 
     Indian reservations. In an effort to reach the children of 
     TANF recipients, a ``Break the Cycle'' demonstration program 
     would be created. Up to 10 tribes would receive grants to 
     develop programs aimed at ensuring children of TANF 
     recipients complete high school or receive G.E.D.s. The 
     tribes would submit proposals involving mentoring, tutoring, 
     altering TANF rules, or teen pregnancy prevention towards 
     this goal, and could collaborate with States. It would be 
     authorized at $20 million per year for FY 2005-2008.


                XIV. Social Services Block Grant (SSBG)

       SSBG is an important source of flexible funding to address 
     the needs of the elderly, disabled, and low-income families. 
     But tribes do not currently receive SSBG funds. Under this 
     bill, 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.


                              XV. Research

       While there have been a handful of important initial 
     studies of welfare reform in Indian Country, much remains 
     unknown about how it has impacted Native Americans. 
     Therefore, $2 million would be provided to HHS for research 
     on tribal welfare programs and efforts to reduce poverty 
     among American Indians in general. These funds could also be 
     used to assist tribes in collecting data. 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.
                                 ______