[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 106 (Thursday, July 17, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9593-S9598]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. CORZINE (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg):
  S. 1422. A bill to provide assistance to train teachers of children 
with autism spectrum disorders, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise to introduce along with Senator 
Lautenberg the Teacher Education for Autistic Children, TEACH, Act of 
2003, legislation that will highlight the needs of autistic children by 
bringing more qualified teachers into the classroom, helping families 
receive the support and services they need for their children, and 
helping ensure vocational programs to assist people with autism 
transition from school to work are functioning as intended.
  Autism is a developmental disability characterized by atypical, often 
repetitive behaviors and deficits in social and communication skills. 
Though it is difficult to determine an exact number, some researchers 
believe that an astounding 1 out of 250 of our Nation's children are in 
some way affected by this disorder.
  Perhaps even more alarming is the fact that the number of children 
diagnosed with some form of autism has increased significantly 
throughout the country over the past decade. Take my State for 
example--according to the New Jersey Department of Education in 1991, 
there were 241 children in our schools who had been diagnosed with 
autism. By 2001, that figure had risen to 3,984, a staggering increase 
of 1,548 percent.
  While the cause of autism and its cure are unknown, we are aware that 
the best treatment for these children is early intervention from 
qualified teachers. The TEACH Act of 2003 would go a long way in 
improving services for these children by providing teachers with the 
necessary training and helping school districts in hiring qualified 
autism teachers.
  Specifically, the TEACH Act authorizes $15 million a year for five 
years to provide education or professional development training for 
current teachers or students who want to be special education teachers, 
teachers' aides, or other professionals who work with autistic 
children.
  The TEACH Act also establishes a loan forgiveness program for 
qualified teachers of autistic children to help them pay off college 
loans or loans associated with taking continuing education courses 
related to autism. This incentive of up to $20,000 to help pay off 
college loans will go a long way in attracting more qualified 
individuals into special education.
  The bill also includes provisions that establish State Autism 
Ombudsman Offices that would act as clearinghouses for families who are 
seeking information on services, education, and other resources to help 
their children achieve the full and happy lives they deserve. It also 
creates a national Task Force to evaluate and make recommendations 
regarding best practices for the education of autistic children.
  Finally, this legislation requires a joint Department of Labor/
Department of Education study to evaluate existing vocational programs 
available for people with autism in order to ensure that such 
individuals have access to quality jobs and their own independence.
  The TEACH Act will go a long way to help autistic families by giving 
their children the opportunity to achieve the highest quality of life. 
I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, which has 
the power to improve thousands of lives.

[[Page S9594]]

  I ask unanimous consent that the text of my legislation be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1422

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Teacher Education for 
     Autistic Children Act of 2003'' or the ``TEACH Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. TRAINING OF SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHERS WITH EXPERTISE 
                   IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to such 
     sums as are otherwise authorized to be appropriated for 
     ``Special Education-Personnel Preparation to Improve Services 
     and Results for Children with Disabilities'', there are 
     authorized to be appropriated for ``Special Education-
     Personnel Preparation to Improve Services and Results for 
     Children with Disabilities'', for each of the fiscal year 
     2004 through 2008, $15,000,000--
       (1) to provide technical assistance grants to develop 
     standards for training teachers with respect to the provision 
     of education for children with autism spectrum disorders 
     (ASD) and to integrate such standards into the existing 
     training infrastructure;
       (2) to train special education teachers with an expertise 
     in autism spectrum disorders; and
       (3) to provide preservice or professional development 
     training of personnel to be special education teachers, aides 
     of such teachers or other paraprofessionals providing 
     teaching assistance, special education administrators, or 
     staff specialists (such as speech-language pathologists and 
     school psychologists) with an expertise in autism spectrum 
     disorders.
       (b) Availability.--Amounts appropriated pursuant to the 
     authorization of appropriations under subsection (a) are 
     authorized to remain available until expended.

     SEC. 3. IMPROVING RESULTS FOR CHILDREN WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM 
                   DISORDERS.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to such 
     sums as are otherwise authorized to be appropriated to carry 
     out subpart 1 of part D of the Individuals with Disabilities 
     Education Act, there are authorized to be appropriated for 
     each of the fiscal years 2004 through 2008 $5,000,000 for 
     competitive grants under subpart 1 of part D of such Act to 
     assist State educational agencies, in cooperation with other 
     appropriate entities, to improve results for children with 
     autism spectrum disorders (ASD).
       (b) Availability.--Amounts appropriated pursuant to the 
     authorization of appropriations under subsection (a) are 
     authorized to remain available until expended.

     SEC. 4. EXPANDED LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM FOR TEACHERS OF 
                   AUTISTIC CHILDREN.

       (a) Program.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Education (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall carry out a 
     program of assuming the obligation to repay, pursuant to 
     subsection (c), a loan made, insured, or guaranteed under 
     part B of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 or 
     part D of such title (excluding loans made under sections 
     428B and 428C of such Act or comparable loans made under part 
     D of such title) for any borrower who--
       (A) is employed, for 3 consecutive complete school years, 
     as a full-time special education teacher of autistic 
     children;
       (C) satisfies the requirements of subsection (d); and
       (D) is not in default on a loan for which the borrower 
     seeks forgiveness.
       (2) Award basis; priority.--
       (A) Award basis.--Subject to subparagraph (B), loan 
     repayment under this section shall be on a first-come, first-
     serve basis and subject to the availability of 
     appropriations.
       (B) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in 
     providing loan repayment under this section for a fiscal year 
     to student borrowers who received loan repayment under this 
     section for the preceding fiscal year.
       (3) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to prescribe 
     such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the 
     provisions of this section.
       (b) Loan Repayment.--
       (1) Eligible amount.--The amount the Secretary may repay on 
     behalf of any individual under this section shall not 
     exceed--
       (A) the sum of the principal amounts outstanding (not to 
     exceed $5,000) of the individual's qualifying loans at the 
     end of 3 consecutive complete school years of service 
     described in subsection (a)(1)(B);
       (B) an additional portion of such sum (not to exceed 
     $5,000) at the end of each of the next 2 consecutive complete 
     school years of such service; and
       (C) a total of not more than $20,000.
       (2) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to authorize the refunding of any repayment of a 
     loan made under part B or D of title IV of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965.
       (3) Interest.--If a portion of a loan is repaid by the 
     Secretary under this section for any year, the proportionate 
     amount of interest on such loan which accrues for such year 
     shall be repaid by the Secretary.
       (c) Repayment to Eligible Lenders.--The Secretary shall pay 
     to each eligible lender or holder for each fiscal year an 
     amount equal to the aggregate amount of loans which are 
     subject to repayment pursuant to this section for such year.
       (d) Application for Repayment.--
       (1) In general.--Each eligible individual desiring loan 
     repayment under this section shall submit a complete and 
     accurate application to the Secretary at such time, in such 
     manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may 
     require.
       (2) Years of service.--An eligible individual may apply for 
     loan repayment under this section after completing the 
     required number of years of qualifying employment.
       (3) Fully qualified teachers in public elementary or 
     secondary schools.--An application for loan repayment under 
     this section shall include such information as is necessary 
     to demonstrate that the applicant--
       (A) if teaching in a public pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, 
     elementary, middle, or secondary school (other than as a 
     teacher in a public charter school), has obtained State 
     certification as a teacher (including certification obtained 
     through alternative routes to certification) or passed the 
     State teacher licensing exam and holds a license to teach in 
     such State; and
       (B) if teaching in--
       (i) a public pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, or elementary 
     school, holds a bachelor's degree and demonstrates knowledge 
     and skills for teaching children with autism spectrum 
     disorders; or
       (ii) a public middle or secondary school, holds a 
     bachelor's degree and demonstrates a high level of competency 
     for teaching children with autism spectrum disorders, 
     through--

       (I) a high level of performance on a rigorous State or 
     local academic subject areas test; or
       (II) completion of an academic major specializing in autism 
     or severe disabilities with a concentration in autism 
     spectrum disorders.

       (4) Teachers in nonprofit private elementary or secondary 
     schools or charter schools.--In the case of an applicant who 
     is teaching in a nonprofit private pre-kindergarten, 
     kindergarten, elementary, or secondary school, or in a public 
     charter school, an application for loan repayment under this 
     section shall include such information as is necessary to 
     demonstrate that the applicant has knowledge and skills for 
     teaching children with autism spectrum disorders, as 
     certified by the chief administrative officer of the school.
       (e) Treatment of Consolidation Loans.--A loan amount for a 
     consolidation loan made under section 428C of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965, or a Federal Direct Consolidation Loan 
     made under part D of title IV of such Act, may be a qualified 
     loan amount for the purpose of this section only to the 
     extent that such loan amount was used by a borrower who 
     otherwise meets the requirements of this section to repay--
       (1) a loan made under section 428 or 428H of such Act; or
       (2) a Federal Direct Stafford Loan, or a Federal Direct 
     Unsubsidized Stafford Loan, made under part D of title IV of 
     such Act.
       (f) Additional Provisions.--
       (1) Prevention of double benefits.--No borrower may, for 
     the same service, receive a benefit under both this section 
     and subtitle D of title I of the National and Community 
     Service Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12571 et seq.).
       (2) Definition of teacher of autistic children.--The term 
     ``teacher of autistic children'' means an individual who 
     provides instruction to children who have been diagnosed by a 
     physician or a psychologist as having an autism spectrum 
     disorder.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may 
     be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2004 through 2008.

     SEC. 5. REPORT ON AUTISM EARLY INTERVENTION ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Report.--Section 613 of the Individuals with 
     Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1413) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(k) Report on Autism Early Intervention Activities.--
       ``(1) In general.--A local educational agency that receives 
     assistance under this part for a fiscal year shall prepare 
     and submit to the Secretary a report that contains a 
     description of the activities referred to in paragraph (2) 
     carried out in the preceding fiscal year.
       ``(2) Information.--The activities referred to in this 
     paragraph are the following:
       ``(A) Activities carried out by the agency to ensure that 
     students who exhibit symptoms of autism spectrum disorders 
     (ASD) are referred to appropriate experts for diagnosis.
       ``(B) Appropriate training provided by the agency, or on 
     behalf of the agency, of personnel of the agency and schools 
     of the agency to carry out the activities described in 
     subparagraph (A).
       ``(3) Definition.--In this subsection, the term `autism 
     spectrum disorders' has the meaning given the term in section 
     9 of the Teacher Education for Autistic Children Act of 
     2003.''.
       (b) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary of Education shall 
     provide technical assistance to local educational agencies 
     that receive assistance under part B of the Individuals with 
     Disabilities Education Act to assist such agencies comply 
     with the reporting requirement under section 613(k) of such 
     Act (as added by subsection (a)).

[[Page S9595]]

     SEC. 6. TASK FORCE ON AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Education, acting 
     through the Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 
     Rehabilitative Services, shall establish and provide 
     administrative support for a Task Force on Autism Spectrum 
     Disorders (ASD) (in this section referred to as the ``Task 
     Force'').
       (b) Duties.--The Task Force shall--
       (1) conduct a review of minimum standards relating to the 
     provision of special education for children with autism 
     spectrum disorders and provide recommendations to improve or 
     otherwise strengthen such standards;
       (2) conduct a review of the effectiveness of existing 
     educational models used with respect to the provision of 
     special education for children with autism spectrum 
     disorders; and
       (3) conduct an evaluation of programs carried out by State 
     and local educational agencies to train teachers with respect 
     to the provision of special education for children with 
     autism spectrum disorders and provide recommendations to 
     improve and expand such programs.
       (c) Composition.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Education, acting through 
     the Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 
     Rehabilitative Services and in consultation with the Director 
     of the National Research Council (or the Director's 
     designee), shall appoint members of the Task Force as 
     follows:
       (A) Not less than two members shall be representatives from 
     national autism organizations.
       (B) Not less than one member shall be an individual with an 
     autism spectrum disorder or a parent (or legal guardian) of 
     such an individual.
       (C) Not less than two members shall be teachers with 
     experience in working with children with autism.
       (D) Not less than two members shall be appropriate officers 
     or employees of the Department of Education.
       (E) Not less than two members shall be appropriate officers 
     or employees of the Department of Health and Human Services 
     (to be appointed in consultation with the Secretary of Health 
     and Human Services).
       (2) Compensation.--
       (A) Rates of pay.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     members of the Task Force shall be paid at the maximum rate 
     of basic pay for GS-14 of the General Schedule for each day 
     during which they are engaged in the actual performance of 
     duties of the Task Force.
       (B) Prohibition of compensation of federal employees.--
     Members of the Task Force who are full-time officers or 
     employees of the United States may not receive additional 
     pay, allowances, or benefits by reason of their service on 
     the Task Force.
       (C) Travel expenses.--Each member of the Task Force shall 
     receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, in accordance with applicable provisions under 
     subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code.
       (d) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for each of 
     the subsequent four calendar years, the Task Force shall 
     prepare and submit to the Secretary of Education a report 
     that contains the results of the reviews and evaluations 
     conducted pursuant to subsection (b) and a description of the 
     recommendations proposed pursuant to such subsection.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this section $500,000 for fiscal years 2004 through 
     2008.
       (2) Availability.--Amounts appropriated pursuant to the 
     authorization of appropriations under paragraph (1) are 
     authorized to remain available until expended.

     SEC. 7. STUDY AND REPORT ON FEDERAL VOCATIONAL TRAINING 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Study.--The Secretary of Education, in conjunction with 
     the Secretary of Labor (hereinafter in this section referred 
     to as the ``Secretaries''), shall conduct a study on the 
     effectiveness of Federal vocational training programs in 
     providing appropriate assistance to individuals with autism 
     spectrum disorders (ASD)
       (b) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretaries shall submit to 
     Congress a report that contains the following:
       (1) The results of the study conducted under subsection 
     (a).
       (2) Administrative and legislative recommendations to 
     improve the effectiveness of Federal vocational training 
     programs in providing appropriate assistance to individuals 
     with autism spectrum disorders.
       (3) Recommendations on appropriate data that should be 
     collected, maintained, and disseminated in order to better 
     monitor the effectiveness of each vocational training program 
     that serves individuals with autism spectrum disorders.

     SEC. 8. STATE AUTISM OMBUDSMAN OFFICES.

       (a) Grants to States.--Of the amount appropriated pursuant 
     to the authorization of appropriations under subsection (d) 
     for a fiscal year, the Secretary of Education shall provide 
     grants to each State that meets the requirements of 
     subsection (b) for the purpose of carrying out this section.
       (b) State Requirements.--A State meets the requirements of 
     this subsection if it establishes and operates (including 
     through the use of funds provided under a grant under 
     subsection (a)) at least one State autism ombudsman office in 
     accordance with this section. The office shall be headed by 
     an individual who shall be selected from among individuals 
     who are members of, or approved by, national, non-profit 
     organizations, including their State and local affiliate 
     organizations, dedicated to addressing, by whatever means, 
     the needs of individuals with autism spectrum disorders or 
     their families or legal guardians.
       (c) Duties of Office.--
       (1) In general.--A State autism ombudsman office 
     established in accordance with subsection (b) shall serve 
     individuals with autism spectrum disorders and their families 
     or guardians as a resource to assist with legal, educational, 
     and family support systems issues, including by advising 
     families or guardians on the process of the individualized 
     education program, interpreting school communications 
     regarding a child who exhibits autistic behavior, proposing 
     alternatives to those proposed by the IEP team, and otherwise 
     mediating between families or guardians of a child with an 
     autism spectrum disorder and officials of local or State 
     public school systems, agencies, or boards.
       (2) Definition.--In this subsection, the term 
     ``individualized education program'' or ``IEP'' means a 
     written statement for a child with a disability that is 
     developed, reviewed, and revised in accordance with section 
     614(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
       (d) Requirements.--A State autism ombudsman office 
     established in accordance with subsection (b) shall--
       (1) coordinate with the State developmental disabilities 
     council, university-affiliated programs, regional resource 
     centers, and other appropriate State entities; and
       (2) operate independently of the State educational agency 
     and local educational agencies within the State.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $8,000,000 for 
     each of the fiscal years 2004 through 2008.

     SEC. 9. DEFINITION.

       In this Act, the term ``autism spectrum disorder'' has the 
     meaning given the term by the Diagnostic and Statistical 
     Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM-IV).

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCONNELL:
  S. 1428. A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being 
brought or continued against food manufacturers, marketers, 
distributors, advertisers, sellers, and trade associations for damages 
or injunctive relief for claims of injury resulting from a person's 
weight gain, obesity, or any health condition related to weight gain or 
obesity; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about abusive 
litigation in America. Unfortunately, a personal injury lawyer's desire 
for a big payday by any theory imaginable is never satisfied, and so I 
come yet again to speak about tort reform--an issue I have worked on 
nearly every year that I have been in the Senate.
  America is blessed with an abundant food supply and an overwhelming 
number of food choices. With so many choices, some of us overdo it. 
That over indulgence, combined with an under indulgence of exercise can 
sometimes have negative health consequences. But most of us take 
responsibility for the amount--and the type--of food we put in our 
mouth, and we accept the consequences of those decisions.
  Personal injury lawyers, however, are now trying to convince 
Americans with expanding waistlines that someone else is to blame for 
their weight problem. And so the latest targets of predatory lawyers 
are the people producing and selling food. That is right. This money-
hungry gang is going after ``Big Food.'' If it were not so frightening, 
it would be funny.
  This is a disturbing turn of events and a further indication of the 
erosion of personal responsibility in America. People claiming their 
weight gain is the fault of the food manufacturers or seller have 
already begun filing lawsuits. Think of the absurdity of that logic. 
How long will it be until those who get speeding tickets begin to sue 
car manufacturers for building a car that people may decide to drive 
too fast?
  Many Americans need to take greater care in what--and how much--they 
eat. But it is also time to curb the voracious appetite of the personal 
injury lawyers and put an end to this ridiculous and costly litigation 
before it gets out of hand
  That is why today I am introducing the Commonsense Consumption Act.
  My bill would prohibit suits against food manufacturers and sellers 
for claims of injury resulting from a person's weight gain, obesity or 
health condition related to weight gain or obesity.
  Any such suit pending on the date of enactment of this bill would be 
dismissed.

[[Page S9596]]

  Let me be clear. This bill does not provide widespread legal immunity 
for the food industry. It only provides protection from abusive suits 
by people seeking to blame someone else for their poor eating habits.
  This bill would not affect lawsuits against food manufacturers or 
sellers that knowingly and willfully violate a Federal or State statute 
applicable to the manufacture and sale of food.
  This bill would not apply to lawsuits for breach of contract or 
express warranty. And this bill would not apply to claims related to 
``adulterated'' food.
  I should mention that Representative Ric Keller has introduced 
similar legislation in the House. His bill, entitled the Personal 
Responsibility in Food Consumption Act has received a hearing and has 
attracted a significant number of cosponsors. My bill is worded a bit 
differently than Representative Keller's but I believe it is safe to 
say that both bills aim for the same result: an end to these absurd 
lawsuits.
  Just a few years ago, the whole idea of blaming, and suing, someone 
else for your own eating habits was comical.
  In fact, in August of 2000 the satirical publication ``The Onion'' 
carried a spoof news story entitled ``Hershey's Ordered To Pay Obese 
Americans $135 Billion.''
  The story began: In one of the largest product-liability rulings in 
U.S. history, the Hershey Foods Corp. was ordered by a Pennsylvania 
jury to pay $135 billion in restitution to 900,000 obese Americans who 
for years consumed the company's fattening snack foods.
  The article continued by saying: [The five-state class-action suit 
accused Hershey's of ``knowingly and willfully marketing rich, fatty 
candy bars containing chocolate and other ingredients of negligible 
nutritional value.'' The company was also charged with . . . 
artificially ``spiking'' Their products with such substances as 
peanuts, crisped rice, and caramel to increase consumer appeal.

  That story was humorous in August of 2000. It is not funny any 
longer. Personal injury lawyers are now attempting to turn that 
satirical story into reality.
  We have seen press reports that just a few weeks ago a group of more 
than a hundred money-hungry lawyers and activists met in Boston to plan 
strategy for suing food manufacturers and sellers.
  As I mentioned, some of these personal injury lawyers have already 
started suing. We have seen suits against restaurants, suits against 
cookie makers, and there are more to come.
  One lawyer has reportedly sent letters to restaurants telling them to 
meet his demands or he will sue. This same trial lawyer ring-leader has 
also threatened to sue local school districts and even individual 
members of the school board. Have these lawyers no shame?
  But perhaps these lawyers have finally bitten off more than they can 
chew. When they sue come big corporation, most people probably do not 
pay much attention. But when you start dragging the local school board 
members into court and forcing them to spend thousands and thousand of 
tax dollars defending against frivolous claims, well as we say in 
Kentucky that is a horse of a different color.
  When Americans hear what these lawyers are up to I do not think they 
are going to like it. I know the voters in Kentucky are not interested 
in seeing more abusive lawsuits about obesity, and they certainly are 
not interested in paying more at the cash register in order to finance 
some personal injury lawyers' extravagant lifestyle.
  These lawsuits are expensive to defend and the lawyers know that. The 
lawyers are not really interested in consumers, they are looking for a 
settlement, a big settlement, that will make them rich and enable them 
to clog the courts with more frivolous cases.
  Make no mistake about it. These lawsuits seek only to fatten personal 
injury lawyers' wallets. And that will result in higher food prices for 
consumers.
  It is time to stop this abuse now and it is time to remind people 
that personal responsibility is the issue here. People must take 
responsibility for their actions.
  As one weight loss guru said on CNN earlier this year when he was 
asked about obesity suits against restaurants:
  There is always going to be greasy, fried, salty, sugary food. It is 
up to the individual to walk in and say, I don't want those fries 
today. I have 40 pounds to lose. It is not the fault of the fast food 
people, and anyone who's trying to sue the fast food places needs a 
therapist, not an attorney. You have to make your own decisions. That's 
what the freedom in America is all about.
  Never in my wildest dreams did I think I would be quoting Richard 
Simmons on the Senate floor, but he has perfectly summed it up pretty 
well, as I just described.
  Making your own decisions is what freedom is all about. And with 
freedom comes responsibility. We have the freest society on the planet, 
but folks need to start exercising some responsibility with their 
freedom. Do not blame others for your bad habits. You are responsible 
for what you put in your mouth, and parents are responsible for what 
their children put in their mouth. It is that simple. The plaintiff's 
bar may not like that fact, but it is truly that simple.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CHAFEE (for himself and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 1429. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to 
provide States with options for providing family planning services and 
supplies to individuals eligible for medical assistance under the 
medicaid program; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined today by Senator 
Feinstein in introducing the Family Planning State Empowerment Act of 
2003. This legislation would provide States with a mechanism to improve 
the health of low-income women and families by allowing States to 
expand family planning services to additional women under the Medicaid 
program.
  The Federal Government currently reimburses States for 90 percent of 
their expenditures for family planning services under Medicaid, due to 
the importance of these for low-income women. This reimbursement rate 
is higher than for most other health care services.
  Generally, women may qualify for Medicaid services, including family 
planning, in one of two ways: they have children and an income level 
below a threshold set by the State, ranging from 15 to 86 percent of 
the Federal poverty level; or they are pregnant and have incomes up to 
133 percent of the poverty level, federal law allows states to raise 
this income eligibility level to 185 percent, if they desire. If a 
woman qualifies because of pregnancy, she is automatically eligible for 
family planning services for sixty days following delivery. After those 
sixty days, the woman's Medicaid eligibility expires.
  If States want to provide Medicaid family planning services to 
additional populations of low-income women, they must apply to the 
Federal Government for a so-called ``1115'' waiver. These waivers allow 
States to establish demonstration projects in order to test new 
approaches to health care delivery in a manner that is budget-neutral 
to the Federal Government.
  To date, these waivers have enabled eighteen States to expand access 
to family planning services. Most of these waivers allow states to 
extend family planning to women beyond the sixty-day post-partum 
period. This allows many women to increase the length of time between 
births, which has significant health benefits for women and their 
children. For this reason, an Institute of Medicine report recommended 
that Medicaid should cover family planning services for two years 
following a delivery.
  Some of the waivers allow States to provide family planning to women 
based solely on income, regardless of whether they qualify for Medicaid 
due to pregnancy or children. In general, States have used the same 
income eligibility levels that apply to pregnant women, 133 percent or 
185 percent of the poverty level, creating continuity for both family 
planning and prenatal care services. These expanded services also help 
states reduce rates of unintended pregnancy and the need for abortion.
  My State of Rhode Island was one of the first States to obtain one of 
these waivers, and has had great success with it in terms of preventing 
unintended

[[Page S9597]]

pregnancies and improving public health in general. Rhode Island's 
waiver has averted 1,443 pregnancies from August 1994 through 1997, 
resulting in a savings to the state of $14.3 million. In addition, 
Rhode Island's waiver has assisted low-income women with spacing-out 
their births. The number of low-income women in Rhode Island with short 
inter-birth intervals, becoming pregnant within 18 months of having 
given birth, dropped from 41 percent in 1993 to 29 percent in 1999. The 
gap between Medicaid recipients and privately insured women was 11 
percent in 1993, compared with only 1 percent--almost negligible--in 
1999. As these statistics show, these waivers are extremely valuable 
and serve as a huge asset to the women's health, not only to my 
constituents but to constituents in the thirteen other states who 
currently benefit from these waivers.
  Unfortunately, the waiver process is extremely cumbersome and time 
consuming, taking up to three years for States to receive approval from 
the federal government. This may discourage States from applying for 
family planning waivers, or at the very least, delay them from 
providing important services to women.
  Our bill would rectify this problem by allowing States to extend 
family planning services through Medicaid without going through the 
waiver process. Eliminating the waiver requirement will facilitate 
State innovation and provide assistance to more low-income women.
  This bill will allow States to provide family planning services to 
women with incomes up to 185 percent of the Federal poverty level. For 
low-income, post-partum women, States will no longer be limited to 
providing them with only sixty days of family planning assistance. 
States may also provide family planning for up to one year to women who 
lose Medicaid-eligibility because of income.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important 
legislation, and ask unanimous consent that the text of legislation be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1429

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Family Planning State 
     Empowerment Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. STATE OPTION TO PROVIDE FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES AND 
                   SUPPLIES TO INDIVIDUALS WITH INCOMES THAT DO 
                   NOT EXCEED A STATE'S INCOME ELIGIBILITY LEVEL 
                   FOR MEDICAL ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--Title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 1935 as section 1936; and
       (2) by inserting after section 1934 the following:


    ``state option to provide family planning services and supplies

       ``Sec. 1935. (a) In General.--Subject to subsections (b) 
     and (c), a State may elect (through a State plan amendment) 
     to make medical assistance described in section 1905(a)(4)(C) 
     available to any individual whose family income does not 
     exceed the greater of--
       ``(1) 185 percent of the income official poverty line (as 
     defined by the Office of Management and Budget, and revised 
     annually in accordance with section 673(2) of the Community 
     Services Block Grant Act) applicable to a family of the size 
     involved; or
       ``(2) the eligibility income level (expressed as a percent 
     of such poverty line) that has been specified under a waiver 
     authorized by the Secretary or under section 1902(r)(2)), as 
     of October 1, 2003, for an individual to be eligible for 
     medical assistance under the State plan.
       ``(b) Comparability.--Medical assistance described in 
     section 1905(a)(4)(C) that is made available under a State 
     plan amendment under subsection (a) shall--
       ``(1) not be less in amount, duration, or scope than the 
     medical assistance described in that section that is made 
     available to any other individual under the State plan; and
       ``(2) be provided in accordance with the restrictions on 
     deductions, cost sharing, or similar charges imposed under 
     section 1916(a)(2)(D).
       ``(c) Option To Extend Coverage During a Post-Eligibility 
     Period.--
       ``(1) Initial period.--A State plan amendment made under 
     subsection (a) may provide that any individual who was 
     receiving medical assistance described in section 
     1905(a)(4)(C) as a result of such amendment, and who becomes 
     ineligible for such assistance because of hours of, or income 
     from, employment, may remain eligible for such medical 
     assistance through the end of the 6-month period that begins 
     on the first day the individual becomes so ineligible.
       ``(2) Additional extension.--A State plan amendment made 
     under subsection (a) may provide that any individual who has 
     received medical assistance described in section 
     1905(a)(4)(C) during the entire 6-month period described in 
     paragraph (1) may be extended coverage for such assistance 
     for a succeeding 6-month period.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     apply to medical assistance provided on and after October 1, 
     2003.

     SEC. 3. STATE OPTION TO EXTEND THE POSTPARTUM PERIOD FOR 
                   PROVISION OF FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES AND 
                   SUPPLIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 1902(e)(5) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(e)(5)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``eligible under the plan, as though'' and 
     inserting ``eligible under the plan--
       ``(A) as though'';
       (2) by striking the period and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) for medical assistance described in section 
     1905(a)(4)(C) for so long as the family income of such woman 
     does not exceed the maximum income level established by the 
     State for the woman to be eligible for medical assistance 
     under the State plan (as a result of pregnancy or 
     otherwise).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     apply to medical assistance provided on and after October 1, 
     2003.

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Chafee to 
introduce a bill to give States the flexibility to provide family 
planning services to low-income women who do not qualify for Medicaid.
  Under current law, in order to qualify for family planning services 
provided by the Medicaid program, a women would either have to have 
children and an income level below a threshold set by the State, 
ranging from 15-86 percent of the Federal poverty level, or be pregnant 
and have an income up to 133 percent of the poverty level; Federal law 
allows States to raise this income eligibility level to 185 percent, if 
they desire.
  If a woman qualifies because of pregnancy, she is automatically 
eligible for family planning services for 60 days following delivery. 
After those 60 days, the woman's Medicaid eligibility expires.
  If a State wants to provide Medicaid family planning services to 
additional populations of low-income women, they must apply to the 
Federal Government for a waiver. Currently, 18 States have waivers 
approved by the Federal Government. The waiver process is extremely 
cumbersome and time consuming, often taking up to three years to 
receive approval from the Federal Government.
  This bill would once and for all allow States to provide crucial 
family planning to low-income women under the Medicaid program. It 
would eliminate the waiver process for these services and would give 
authority back to the States to determine what populations of low 
income women they want to provide family planning services to.

  California currently receives $100 million annually, until 2004, as 
part of its five-year waiver to provide family planning services to low 
income women. with these funds, California provides services to more 
than 900,000 women each year.
  The State estimates that because of these services, at least 50,000 
unintended pregnancies are prevented each year.
  In addition to contraceptives, the family planning funds are used for 
sexually transmitted disease screening and treatment, HIV screening and 
counseling, basic infertility services and pregnancy testing and 
counseling.
  Officials involved in the program estimate that for every $1 invested 
in family planning, $3 are saved in pregnancy and health-care related 
costs.
  In California, it is estimated that providing low-income women with 
access to family planning will save the State more then $900 million 
over the course of the five-year waiver.
  I believe this legislation is more important now than ever.
  Each year, approximately 3 million pregnacies, or about half of all 
pregnancies, are unintended. Increasing access to family planning 
services could help avert these 3 million unintended pregnancies and 
all the decisions and costs associated with either continuing or 
terminating a pregnancy.
  Family planning services give women the necessary tools to space the 
births

[[Page S9598]]

of their children, which improves women's health and reduces rates of 
infant mortality.
  Medicaid family planning is also cost effective. For every $1 
invested in family planning, $3 are saved in pregnancy and health care-
related costs.
  Family planning and reproductive health services are much more than 
just accessing contraceptives. Services provided include screening and 
treatment for sexually transmitted diseases and HIV, basic inferility 
services and pregnancy testing and counseling. Women can receive pap 
smears and breast exams, which are crucial to detecting cervical and 
breast cancer.
  Low income women deserve access to family planning and reproductive 
health services. And States should not have to ask the Federal 
Government for permission to use Medicaid funds to provide these 
essential services.
  We can afford to shut the door on those who cannot otherwise afford 
family planning and reproductive health services.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MURKOWSKI:
  S. 1430. A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a 
study of the Baranov Museum in Kodiak, Alaska, for potential inclusion 
in the National Park System; to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, the Erskine House in Kodiak, AK, which 
houses the Baranov Museum, is one of a very few Russian period 
structures remaining in the Western Hemisphere. It is of great 
historical significance not only for this reason, but also because it 
is the only surviving structure known to have been associated with both 
the Russian America Company and the Alaska Commercial Company, the 
pillars of Russian and early American administration of Alaska.
  The Erskine House/Baranov Museum is owned by the City of Kodiak and 
operated by the Kodiak Historical Society. It is a popular visitor 
attraction in Kodiak. Its collections include artifacts from the 
Russian American Company and the Alaska Commercial Company and also 
include Alaska Native, Russian and other cultural exhibits. I am told 
that the structure, although it has had many owners, maintains much of 
its original historic integrity.
  The Erskine House was designated a National Historic Landmark on June 
2, 1962. Shortly thereafter the National Park Service initiated 
consideration of including this important property in the National Park 
System. On February 11, 2000, the Department of the Interior formally 
sought funds from Congress to study the possible inclusion of the 
Erskine House in the system. The Congress responded by earmarking 
$250,000 in fiscal year 2002 appropriations for he Erskine House, some 
of which could be used to conduct the study and the remainder for 
preservation and maintenance of the facility.
  I am sad to report that the National Park Service has not initiated 
this study. The National Park Service has indicated that it cannot 
initiate the study without the express direction of Congress and that 
congressional intent to do so cannot be inferred from the language of 
the appropriation. However, the good news is that a sufficient portion 
of the $250,000 appropriation remains unexpended and I understand that 
it is available to be expended on the study. The expenditure of funds 
on the study will not interfere with plans to spend other portions of 
the $250,000 appropriation to rehabilitate the structure. The City of 
Kodiak and the Kodiak Historical Society have expressed support for the 
study. What we need is for Congress to authorize the study.
  The legislation that I am introducing today would do just that. It 
directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of the Erskine 
House/Baranov Museum for the purpose of determining the suitability and 
feasibility of designating the museum as a unit of the National Park 
Service. I would like to see this study proceed with all deliberate 
speed. Accordingly, the legislation also requires that the Secretary 
report to appropriate committees of the Congress on the findings of the 
study and the Secretary's conclusions and recommendations within one 
year of the date upon which this legislation is enacted.
  I want to commend the City of Kodiak and the Kodiak Historical 
Society for their loving care of this important structure. Perhaps this 
excerpt, from a July 7, 2003 letter that I received from Stacey 
Becklund, Director of the Kodiak Historical Society states it best, and 
I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the excerpt from the letter was ordered to 
be printed in the Record, as follows:

       The [Erskine House and the Baranov Museum] are some of 
     Kodiak's most cherished treasures. both assets have matured 
     through labors and love of staff, volunteers and members of 
     the community. We, at all levels of government and community, 
     will benefit from a thorough and accurate study to assess the 
     future ownership of this structure.

  I am privileged to lend my voice to the voices of the people of 
Kodiak, many of whom believe that this very important historic site is 
a national treasure, as well as a local one. I hope that this 
legislation will receive expeditious consideration.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1430

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Baranov Museum Study Act''.

     SEC. 2. STUDY AND REPORT.

       (a) Study.--The Secretary of the Interior (referred to in 
     this Act as the ``Secretary'') shall conduct a study of the 
     Baranov Museum in Kodiak, Alaska, to determine the 
     suitability and feasibility of designating the museum as a 
     unit of the National Park System.
       (b) Criteria.--In conducting the study under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary shall use the criteria for the study of 
     areas for potential inclusion in the National Park System 
     under section 8 of Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-5).
       (c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives and 
     the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a 
     report that describes--
       (1) the findings of the study; and
       (2) any conclusions and recommendations of the Secretary.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     this Act.

                          ____________________