[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 124 (Tuesday, October 5, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H8094-H8100]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SAFE AND TIMELY INTERSTATE PLACEMENT OF FOSTER CHILDREN ACT OF 2004
Mr. HERGER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 4504) to improve protections for children and to hold States
accountable for the orderly and timely placement of children across
States lines, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 4504
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 ``Safe and Timely Interstate
Placement of Foster Children Act of 2004''.
SEC. 2. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.
(a) Finding.--The Congress finds that the Interstate
Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) was drafted more
than 40 years ago, is outdated, and is a barrier to the
timely placement of children across State lines.
(b) Sense of the Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the States should expeditiously revise the ICPC to
better serve the interests of children and reduce unnecessary
work, and that the revision should include--
(1) limiting its applicability to children in foster care
under the responsibility of a State, except those seeking
placement in a licensed residential facility primarily to
access clinical mental health services; and
(2) providing for deadlines for the completion and approval
of home studies as set forth in section 4.
SEC. 3. ORDERLY AND TIMELY PROCESS FOR INTERSTATE PLACEMENT
OF CHILDREN.
Section 471(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
671(a)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (23);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (24) and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(25) provide that the State shall have in effect
procedures for the orderly and timely interstate placement of
children; and procedures implemented in accordance with an
interstate compact approved by the Secretary, if
incorporating with the procedures prescribed by paragraph
(26), shall be considered to satisfy the requirement of this
paragraph.''.
SEC. 4. HOME STUDIES.
(a) Orderly Process.--
(1) In general.--Section 471(a) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 671(a)) is further amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (24);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (25) and
inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(26) provides that--
``(A)(i) within 60 days after the State receives from
another State a request to conduct a study of a home
environment for purposes of assessing the appropriateness of
placing a child in the home, the State shall, directly or by
contract--
``(I) conduct and complete the study; and
``(II) return to the other State a report on the results of
the study, which shall address the extent to which placement
in the home would meet the needs of the child; and
``(ii) in the case of a home study begun on or before
September 30, 2006, if the State fails to comply with clause
(i) within the 60-day period as a result of circumstances
beyond the control of the State (such as a failure by a
Federal agency to provide the results of a background check,
or the failure by any entity to provide completed medical
forms, requested by the State at least 45 days before the end
of the 60-day period), the State shall have 75 days to comply
with clause (i) if the State documents the circumstances
involved and certifies that completing the home study is in
the best interests of the child; except that
``(iii) this subparagraph shall not be construed to require
the State to have completed, within the applicable period,
the parts of the home study involving the education and
training of the prospective foster or adoptive parents;
``(B) the State shall treat any report described in
subparagraph (A) that is received from another State or an
Indian tribe (or from a private agency under contract with
another State) as meeting any requirements imposed by the
State for the completion of a home study before placing a
child in the home, unless, within 14 days after receipt of
the report, the State determines, based on grounds that are
specific to the content of the report, that making a decision
in reliance on the report would be contrary to the welfare of
the child; and
``(C) the State shall not impose any restriction on the
ability of a State agency administering, or supervising the
administration of, a State program operated under a State
plan approved under this part to contract with a private
agency for the conduct of a home study described in
subparagraph (A).''.
(2) Sense of the congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that each State should--
(A) use private agencies to conduct home studies when doing
so is necessary to meet the requirements of section
471(a)(26) of the Social Security Act; and
(B) give full faith and credit to any home study report
completed by any other State or an Indian tribe with respect
to the placement of a child in foster care or for adoption.
(b) Timely Interstate Home Study Incentive Payments.--Part
E of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 670-679b)
is amended by inserting after section 473A the following:
``SEC. 473B. TIMELY INTERSTATE HOME STUDY INCENTIVE PAYMENTS.
``(a) Grant Authority.--The Secretary shall make a grant to
each State that is a home study incentive-eligible State for
a fiscal year in an amount equal to the timely interstate
home study incentive payment payable to the State under this
section for the fiscal year, which shall be payable in the
immediately succeeding fiscal year.
``(b) Home Study Incentive-Eligible State.--A State is a
home study incentive-eligible State for a fiscal year if--
``(1) the State has a plan approved under this part for the
fiscal year;
``(2) the State is in compliance with subsection (c) for
the fiscal year; and
``(3) based on data submitted and verified pursuant to
subsection (c), the State has completed a timely interstate
home study during the fiscal year.
``(c) Data Requirements.--
``(1) In general.--A State is in compliance with this
subsection for a fiscal year if the
[[Page H8095]]
State has provided to the Secretary a written report,
covering the preceding fiscal year, that specifies--
``(A) the total number of interstate home studies requested
by the State with respect to children in foster care under
the responsibility of the State, and with respect to each
such study, the identity of the other State involved; and
``(B) the total number of timely interstate home studies
completed by the State with respect to children in foster
care under the responsibility of other States, and with
respect to each such study, the identity of the other State
involved.
``(2) Verification of data.--In determining the number of
timely interstate home studies to be attributed to a State
under this section, the Secretary shall check the data
provided by the State under paragraph (1) against
complementary data so provided by other States.
``(d) Timely Interstate Home Study Incentive Payments.--
``(1) In general.--The timely interstate home study
incentive payment payable to a State for a fiscal year shall
be $1,500, multiplied by the number of timely interstate home
studies attributed to the State under this section during the
fiscal year, subject to paragraph (2).
``(2) Pro rata adjustment if insufficient funds
available.--If the total amount of timely interstate home
study incentive payments otherwise payable under this section
for a fiscal year exceeds the total of the amounts made
available pursuant to subsection (h) for the fiscal year
(reduced (but not below zero) by the total of the amounts (if
any) payable under paragraph (3) of this subsection with
respect to the preceding fiscal year), the amount of each
such otherwise payable incentive payment shall be reduced by
a percentage equal to--
``(A) the total of the amounts so made available (as so
reduced); divided by
``(B) the total of such otherwise payable incentive
payments.
``(3) Appropriations available for unpaid incentive
payments for prior fiscal years.--
``(A) In general.--If payments under this section are
reduced under paragraph (2) or subparagraph (B) of this
paragraph for a fiscal year, then, before making any other
payment under this section for the next fiscal year, the
Secretary shall pay each State whose payment was so reduced
an amount equal to the total amount of the reductions which
applied to the State, subject to subparagraph (B) of this
paragraph.
``(B) Pro rata adjustment if insufficient funds
available.--If the total amount of payments otherwise payable
under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph for a fiscal year
exceeds the total of the amounts made available pursuant to
subsection (h) for the fiscal year, the amount of each such
payment shall be reduced by a percentage equal to--
``(i) the total of the amounts so made available; divided
by
``(ii) the total of such otherwise payable payments.
``(e) 2-Year Availability of Incentive Payments.--Payments
to a State under this section in a fiscal year shall remain
available for use by the State through the end of the next
fiscal year.
``(f) Limitations on Use of Incentive Payments.--A State
shall not expend an amount paid to the State under this
section except to provide to children or families any service
(including post-adoption services) that may be provided under
part B or E. Amounts expended by a State in accordance with
the preceding sentence shall be disregarded in determining
State expenditures for purposes of Federal matching payments
under sections 423, 434, and 474.
``(g) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Home study.--The term `home study' means a study of a
home environment, conducted in accordance with applicable
requirements of the State in which the home is located, for
the purpose of assessing whether placement of a child in the
home would be appropriate for the child.
``(2) Interstate home study.--The term `interstate home
study' means a home study conducted by a State at the request
of another State, to facilitate an adoptive or relative
placement in the State.
``(3) Timely interstate home study.--The term `timely
interstate home study' means an interstate home study
completed by a State if the State provides to the State that
requested the study, within 30 days after receipt of the
request, a report on the results of the study. The preceding
sentence shall not be construed to require the State to have
completed, within the 30-day period, the parts of the home
study involving the education and training of the prospective
foster or adoptive parents.
``(h) Limitations on Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) In general.--For payments under this section, there
are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary--
``(A) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
``(B) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;
``(C) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
``(D) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2008.
``(2) Availability.--Amounts appropriated under paragraph
(1) are authorized to remain available until expended.''.
(c) Repealer.--Effective October 1, 2008, section 473B of
the Social Security Act is repealed.
SEC. 5. REQUIREMENT TO COMPLETE BACKGROUND CHECKS BEFORE
APPROVAL OF ANY FOSTER OR ADOPTIVE PLACEMENT
AND TO CHECK CHILD ABUSE REGISTRIES; SUSPENSION
AND SUBSEQUENT ELIMINATION OF OPT-OUT.
(a) Requirement To Complete Background Checks Before
Approval of any Foster or Adoptive Placement and To Check
Child Abuse Registries; Suspension of Opt-out.--
(1) Requirement to check child abuse registries.--Section
471(a)(20) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 671(a)(20))
is amended--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``on
whose behalf foster care maintenance payments or adoption
assistance payments are to be made'' and inserting
``regardless of whether foster care maintenance payments or
adoption assistance payments are to be made on behalf of the
child'';
(ii) in each of clauses (i) and (ii), by inserting
``involving a child on whose behalf such payments are to be
so made'' after ``in any case''; and
(iii) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii); and
(B) by adding ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) provides that the State shall--
``(i) check any child abuse and neglect registry maintained
by the State for information on any prospective foster or
adoptive parent and on any other adult living in the home of
such a prospective parent, and request any other State in
which any such prospective parent or other adult has resided
in the preceding 5 years, to enable the State to check any
child abuse and neglect registry maintained by such other
State for such information, before the prospective foster or
adoptive parent may be finally approved for placement of a
child, regardless of whether foster care maintenance payments
or adoption assistance payments are to be made on behalf of
the child under the State plan under this part;
``(ii) comply with any request described in clause (i) that
is received from another State; and
``(iii) have in place safeguards to prevent the
unauthorized disclosure of information in any child abuse and
neglect registry maintained by the State, and to prevent any
such information obtained pursuant to this subparagraph from
being used for a purpose other than the conducting of
background checks in foster or adoptive placement cases;''.
(2) Suspension of opt-out.--Section 471(a)(20)(B) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 671(a)(20)(B)) is amended--
(A) by inserting ``, on or before September 30, 2004,''
after ``plan if''; and
(B) by inserting ``, on or before such date,'' after ``or
if''.
(b) Elimination of Opt-out.--Section 471(a)(20) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 671(a)(20)), as amended by subsection (a) of this
section, is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)--
(A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking
``unless an election provided for in subparagraph (B) is made
with respect to the State,''; and
(B) by adding ``and'' at the end of clause (ii); and
(2) by striking subparagraph (B) and redesignating
subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).
SEC. 6. COURTS ALLOWED ACCESS TO THE FEDERAL PARENT LOCATOR
SERVICE TO LOCATE PARENTS IN FOSTER CARE OR
ADOPTIVE PLACEMENT CASES.
Section 453(c) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
653(c)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (3);
(2) by striking the period and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) any court which has authority with respect to the
placement of a child in foster care or for adoption, but only
for the purpose of locating a parent of the child.''.
SEC. 7. CASEWORKER VISITS.
(a) Purchase of Services in Interstate Placement Cases.--
Section 475(5)(A)(ii) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
675(5)(A)(ii)) is amended by striking ``or of the State in
which the child has been placed'' and inserting ``of the
State in which the child has been placed, or of a private
agency under contract with either such State''.
(b) Increased Visits.--Section 475(5)(A)(ii) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 675(5)(A)(ii)) is amended by striking ``12'' and
inserting ``6''.
SEC. 8. HEALTH AND EDUCATION RECORDS.
Section 475 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 675) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(C)--
(A) by striking ``To the extent available and accessible,
the'' and inserting ``The''; and
(B) by inserting ``the most recent information available
regarding'' after ``including''; and
(2) in paragraph (5)(D)--
(A) by inserting ``a copy of the record is'' before
``supplied''; and
(B) by inserting ``, and is supplied to the child at no
cost at the time the child leaves foster care if the child is
leaving foster care by reason of having attained the age of
majority under State law'' before the semicolon.
[[Page H8096]]
SEC. 9. RIGHT TO BE HEARD IN FOSTER CARE PROCEEDINGS.
(a) In General.--Section 475(5)(G) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 675(5)(G)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``an opportunity'' and inserting ``a
right'';
(2) by striking ``and opportunity'' and inserting ``and
right''; and
(3) by striking ``review or hearing'' each place it appears
and inserting ``proceeding''.
(b) Notice of Proceeding.--Section 438(b) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 638(b)) is amended by inserting ``shall have in effect
a rule requiring State courts to notify foster parents, pre-
adoptive parents, and relative caregivers of a child in
foster care under the responsibility of the State of any
proceeding to be held with respect to the child, and'' after
``highest State court''.
SEC. 10. COURT IMPROVEMENT.
Section 438(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
629h(a)(1)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (C); and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(E) that determine the best strategy to use to expedite
the interstate placement of children, including--
``(i) requiring courts in different States to cooperate in
the sharing of information;
``(ii) authorizing courts to obtain information and
testimony from agencies and parties in other States without
requiring interstate travel by the agencies and parties; and
``(iii) permitting the participation of parents, children,
other necessary parties, and attorneys in cases involving
interstate placement without requiring their interstate
travel; and''.
SEC. 11. REASONABLE EFFORTS.
(a) In General.--Section 471(a)(15)(C) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 671(a)(15)(C)) is amended by
inserting ``(including, if appropriate, through an interstate
placement)'' after ``accordance with the permanency plan''.
(b) Permanency Hearing.--Section 471(a)(15)(E)(i) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 671(a)(15)(E)(i)) is amended by inserting ``,
which considers in-State and out-of-State permanent placement
options for the child,'' before ``shall''.
(c) Concurrent Planning.--Section 471(a)(15)(F) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 671(a)(15)(F)) is amended by inserting ``,
including identifying appropriate out-of-State relatives and
placements'' before ``may''.
SEC. 12. CASE PLANS.
Section 475(1)(E) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
675(1)(E)) is amended by inserting ``to facilitate orderly
and timely in-State and interstate placements'' before the
period.
SEC. 13. CASE REVIEW SYSTEM.
Section 475(5)(C) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
675(5)(C) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``, in the case of a child who will not be
returned to the parent, the hearing shall consider in-State
and out-of-State placement options,'' after ``living
arrangement''; and
(2) by inserting ``the hearing shall determine'' before
``whether the''.
SEC. 14. USE OF INTERJURISDICTIONAL RESOURCES.
Section 422(b)(12) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
622(b)(12)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``develop plans for the'' and inserting
``make'';
(2) by inserting ``(including through contracts for the
purchase of services)'' after ``resources''; and
(3) by inserting ``, and shall eliminate legal barriers,''
before ``to facilitate''.
SEC. 15. GAO STUDY ON CHILD WELFARE BACKGROUND CHECKS.
(a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall conduct a study of background checks that are performed
for the purpose of determining the appropriateness of placing
in a foster or adoptive home a child who is under the custody
of a State. The study shall review the policies and practices
of States in order to--
(1) identify the most common delays in the background
clearance process and where in the process the delays occur;
(2) describe when background checks are initiated;
(3) determine which of local, State, or Federal (such as
FBI) background checks are used, how long it takes, on
average, for each kind of check to be processed, which crimes
or other events are included in each kind of check, how the
States differ in classifying the crimes and other events
checked, and how the information revealed by the checks is
used in determining eligibility to act as a foster or
adoptive parent;
(4) examine the barriers child welfare agencies face in
accessing criminal background check information;
(5) examine the use of the latest information-sharing
technology, including electronic fingerprinting and
participation in the Integrated Automated Fingerprinting
Information System;
(6) identify the varied uses of such technology for child
welfare purposes as opposed to criminal justice purposes; and
(7) recommend best practices that can increase the speed,
efficiency, and accuracy of child welfare background checks
at all levels of government.
(b) Report to the Congress.--Within 12 months after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of
the United States shall submit to the Committees on Ways and
Means and on Education and the Workforce of the House of
Representatives and the Committees on Finance and on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate a report which
contains the results of the study required by subsection (a).
SEC. 16. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.--Except as otherwise provided in this
section, the amendments made by this Act shall take effect on
October 1, 2004, and shall apply to payments under parts B
and E of title IV of the Social Security Act for calendar
quarters beginning on or after such date, without regard to
whether regulations to implement the amendments are
promulgated by such date.
(b) Elimination of Opt-Out.--The amendments made by section
5(b) shall take effect on October 1, 2006, and shall apply to
payments under part E of title IV of the Social Security Act
for calendar quarters beginning on or after such date,
without regard to whether regulations to implement the
amendments are promulgated by such date.
(c) Delay Permitted If State Legislation Required.--If the
Secretary of Health and Human Services determines that State
legislation (other than legislation appropriating funds) is
required in order for a State plan under part B or E of title
IV of the Social Security Act to meet the additional
requirements imposed by the amendments made by a provision of
this Act, the plan shall not be regarded as failing to meet
any of the additional requirements before the 1st day of the
1st calendar quarter beginning after the first regular
session of the State legislature that begins after the date
of the enactment of this Act (or, in the case of the
amendments made by section 5(b), the 1st day of the 1st
calendar quarter beginning after the first such regular
session that begins after the effective date of such
section). If the State has a 2-year legislative session, each
year of the session is deemed to be a separate regular
session of the State legislature.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Herger) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).
General Leave
Mr. HERGER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
to include extraneous material on the subject of the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. HERGER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in support of H.R. 4504, the Safe and Timely Interstate
Placement of Foster Children Act of 2004. I am pleased to be a
cosponsor of this bipartisan legislation sponsored by the distinguished
majority leader from Texas (Mr. DeLay). I thank him for introducing
this important legislation and for his dedication and efforts to ensure
foster and adopted children are better protected.
Madam Speaker, since November 2003, the subcommittee that I chair has
conducted numerous hearings examining the Nation's child protection
system. We have heard testimony from more than 45 witnesses who all
agree on one important point, our current system fails to protect
children and, therefore, needs improvement. The legislation before us
today is an important first step in our effort to ensure children are
not needlessly lingering in foster care. This legislation would
encourage States to expedite the safe placement of foster and adoptive
children into homes across State lines. Currently, these placements
take an average of 1 year longer than placements within a single State,
delaying permanency with loving families for thousands of children.
H.R. 4504 would establish deadlines for completing home studies that
assess whether the home is appropriate for a child. The legislation
also authorizes up to $10 million in each of fiscal years 2005 through
2008 for incentive payments to the States for home studies completed in
a timely manner. In addition, the bill includes provisions to better
ensure safety for children and foster and adoptive homes and to give
foster parents and relative caregivers a right to be heard and notice
of any court proceedings held concerning a child in their care.
I thank my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, for their support
of our efforts to move this bill. I urge all my colleagues to join me
in voting for this legislation so that we can ensure children are
placed with loving families in a timely and safe way.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H8097]]
{time} 1600
Mr. CARDIN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, when a child in foster care is waiting for a loving
home, they should not have to wait an extra year to be placed in that
home solely because it exists in another State.
Unfortunately, that is exactly what happens in many cases today. The
interstate placement of foster children is too often delayed by
bureaucratic red tape, the lack of communication, differing standards
among States, insufficient resources, and sometimes just plain
indifference. The truth is that when one is dealing with an out-of-
state placement, a particular State does not give it the same attention
it does to a placement within its own State. I therefore support this
legislation to encourage States to expedite the appropriate placement
of children across State lines.
The bill before us calls upon States to update a compact that
dictates the process for interstate placement, and it requires States
to expeditiously conduct home studies for children coming from other
States.
Concluding these home studies, which evaluate whether prospective
foster or adoptive parents can provide a safe and caring home for a
child, has been one of the primary barriers to placing children across
State lines.
The legislation attempts to focus States' attention on this problem
by requiring the completion of home studies within 60 days and by
offering financial bonuses for every study that is completed within 30
days.
I want to congratulate and thank the distinguished gentleman from
Texas (Mr. DeLay), majority leader, for bringing this legislation
forward and for working with both sides of the aisle to try to perfect
this bill and to make it one that we hope can be enacted this year.
As a result of those discussions, some important changes have been
made, and let me just point them out. First, the revised legislation
now exempts the training of the foster and adoptive parents from both
the 60- and 30-day home study timetables. Many States help prepare
prospective adoptive and foster parents, and sometimes this training
can take up to 3 months. We want to encourage such efforts; and,
therefore, the new bill does not count training against a home study
requirement and bonus.
Second, we recognize that factors beyond a State's control, such as
waiting for an FBI background check or medical records, can sometimes
prolong the home study process. The revised bill therefore gives States
an additional 15 days, for a total of 75 days, to complete the home
study in such circumstances.
And, finally, the new bill increases the bonuses for home studies
completed within 30 days to $1,500 and clarifies that the $10 million a
year will be authorized for these bonuses for the next 4 years. So the
States can really plan on these new roles.
I should point out that one controversial provision remains in the
bill that is not directly related to the goal of expediting interstate
placements. The bill would eliminate the ability of States to determine
their own standards for placing children with relatives of adoptive
parents who have committed criminal offenses in the past. Mr. Speaker,
my own State already complies with Federal standards in this area; and,
therefore, I am not opposed to that provision in the bill. However, I
understand that New York, California, and seven other States want the
flexibility to make placement decisions on past offenses that may have
happened many years ago. Those nine States now opt out of the Federal
standards, an option that would be eliminated by this legislation.
However, the revised bill does delay the effect of this change for 2
years, giving the States more time to modify those procedures.
Mr. Speaker, we have 500,000 children in foster care of which over
100,000 are ready for adoption. We need to remove barriers between
these children and loving homes, and this bill takes a modest, but
meaningful, step in that direction.
In closing, once again let me compliment the majority leader for
allowing this Congress to focus on the issues of foster children. We
have been able to do that in a bipartisan manner, and we have made some
very constructive changes that have helped our most vulnerable
children, and I congratulate him on this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), majority leader, the author of the
bill.
Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time, and I want to also thank the gentleman from California
(Chairman Herger) and the distinguished gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Cardin), ranking member, for their leadership on this legislation and
in this area. They have worked tirelessly to understand the plight of
abused and neglected children in this country, and we greatly
appreciate the hard work that they have been doing.
I would also like to especially thank the staff from the Committee on
Ways and Means, Matt Weidinger and Christine Devere, for their help on
this bill. Nick Gwyn, from the minority staff, also contributed to this
effort. The Congressional Research Service, Emilie Stolzfus and Karen
Spar, provided technical advice on this bill that was greatly
appreciated. In addition, I also want to thank Barbara Clark and Susan
Orr with the Department of Health and Human Services for their work on
this bill. But I especially want to thank Cassie Bevan on my staff. Dr.
Bevan really shepherded this bill, and she has shown the love that
exhibited in this bill is the exact kind of love that she has for
children that are abused and neglected, the most innocent that are
treated so badly by the adults that should love them and raise them.
Dr. Bevan has done exemplary work in this area with this bill and in
many other areas. And we are grateful to her.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have authored this bill and recommend it
to my colleagues today. This legislation would streamline the system of
which abused and neglected children in America are placed in foster and
adoptive homes across State lines and brings hope to thousands of
children every year who otherwise would spend their precious days in
uncertainty and fear.
For the first time, it will set Federal deadlines for children's
interstate placement to ensure both safety and timeliness by
establishing Federal requirements.
Today in the United States an abused or neglected child who must be
placed in a foster home outside their home State, often with a family
member in another State, waits on average 1 full year longer to be
placed than a child placed in-state. There is simply no justification
for this inefficiency in this day and age. These kids need our help.
Yes, prospective families must be found and screened. Background checks
must be conducted, and the well-being of the child must always, always
be the driving interest.
But an extra year just because a second government bureaucracy gets
involved? An extra year of waiting for a permanent, forever family?
Not anymore, Mr. Speaker. Under this bill before us, once a child is
deemed in need of an out-of-state placement, the State has 60 days to
find the child a foster home or an adoptive home and 14 days to approve
that home. And on top of that, it creates a financial incentive of
$1,500 for States that complete their home study in 30 days.
These abused and neglected children should not be treated like
second-class citizens or lower priorities just because they have to
move out of their home State to be loved. To ensure these children's
safety, this bill will also set Federal requirements for the criminal
background checks States must conduct to screen prospective foster
parents. It will end the ability of States to ``opt out'' of Federal
criminal background requirements to prevent children from ever being
placed into the home of anyone who has had a felony conviction
involving violence or children.
It also provides 2 years for all States to get into compliance with
Federal law so that by October, 2006, every placement in the country
will be done with the same commitment to safety and timeliness.
Let us just be real clear about what we are talking about here. These
children have not known the kind of lives
[[Page H8098]]
they were meant to lead. They have been abused and neglected by the
very people who are supposed to love them the most. They have been
beaten, malnourished, terrorized, and in many cases sexually abused.
Things have gotten so bad in their lives that the State has been forced
to step in to offer the child protection.
A family has volunteered to create a loving home for this child, and
yet because of bureaucratic inefficiency and out-of-touch policies,
these children are left to suffer alone with their fear and their
bruises for another lost year of their young lives. Unacceptable.
Unacceptable.
This bill will get these children out of their personal hells and
into the arms of a loving family quickly and safely. Sixty days is more
than enough to make necessary background checks and to ensure the
quality of the prospective foster or adoptive parents, as evidenced by
the widespread support for this legislation among groups dedicated to
the protection of abused and neglected children like the National
Foster Parent Association, the National Association of Psychiatric
Health Systems, the Consortium for Children, the National Council for
Adoption, and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.
The people closest to the movement to reform the foster care system
in America support this bill, Mr. Speaker. Current law allows children
in need of an out-of-state placement to wait an extra year to find a
family and does not ensure that ultimate placement is safe.
Current law is a cruel and callous insult to these children and the
responsibility of the Nation to care for them. Current law, Mr.
Speaker, must change. And if it does not and Congress adjourns without
acting and an abused and neglected child dies in a State that has opted
out of the Federal system, our failure to act will be the reason.
So I urge my colleagues not to let things reach that point. Act now
in the interest of abused and neglected children who are today just
hoping for a chance to hope. Give them that chance, Mr. Speaker, and
support this legislation.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), a member of the Committee on
Ways and Means.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from
California (Mr. Herger) for bringing this legislation to the floor
today.
Often this close to an election, we waste a lot of time on nonsense
aimed to affect the election. But today's bill is really important
because it aims to improve the chances of foster children to find
permanent homes more quickly. This bill provides incentives to States
that quickly place out-of-state children into permanent homes. But it
also penalizes States that place children too slowly.
I am concerned that there may be situations where the delays in
placement are caused by Federal agencies, not by State mismanagement;
and I would like to ask the gentleman from California to engage me in a
brief colloquy.
Since the bill calls for a government study to look at the reasons
for delays in conducting background checks on prospective adoptive and
foster parents, is it the gentleman from California's intention to work
with me and my colleagues to address any barriers that the study finds
especially at the Federal level?
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington for
his support of this important legislation.
And as he has mentioned, the legislation requests that GAO study the
reasons for delays in conducting background checks, and I am very
interested in what the GAO has to say on these issues given the
importance of completing home studies in a timely manner so children
may quickly, but safely, be placed into permanent homes. I hope we can
continue to work together to explore these issues, building on what the
GAO reports to us.
I thank the gentleman for his interest in this important issue and
for his support of the legislation before us.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his response.
We look forward to working with him.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Camp), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means and
the Human Resources Subcommittee.
Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this
time, and I also want to thank the distinguished gentleman from Texas
(Mr. DeLay), majority leader, for his long record of leadership on
foster care issues as well as on this particular legislation today.
This time of year I often get asked: What am I proud to have
accomplished as a Member of Congress? And I am sure many of my
colleagues get the same question. For me it is an easy question to
answer. It is our work on adoption issues and moving children in foster
care into safe, permanent, loving homes.
Together we have accomplished a lot for abandoned children, and today
we can do even more. It is odd to think that after years of work on
this issue, bringing regularity to international adoptions, providing
greater incentives to adopt older and special needs children, helping
new parents with the enormous financial cost to giving a young child a
new lease on life, that something as simple as a State boundary line is
delaying kids from finding true happiness and the unconditional love of
a mother and father.
H.R. 4504, the Safe and Timely Interstate Placement Act of 2004, is a
bipartisan piece of legislation that will expedite the safe placement
of foster and adoptive children into permanent homes across State
lines. Currently, these placements take more than 1 year longer than
placements within a State's borders. We should not, and cannot, allow
that to continue.
This legislation takes a commonsense approach to helping our Nation's
foster children. It sets reasonable deadlines for completing and
responding to interstate home studies and provides financial incentives
for meeting those deadlines.
{time} 1615
It also ensures children are protected by requiring all States to
follow Federal criminal background check procedures for perspective
foster and adoptive parents.
This is good policy. It will help children find the family they
deserve. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 4504.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Watson).
Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on behalf of the
30,000 youth in the Los Angeles County foster care system. The goal for
our foster care system is to find a permanent, loving family for each
child and to ensure their well-being.
The focus of this bill is interstate placement, an excellent way to
place children with relatives. This bill will help to achieve this
goal. But my concern is this: after 2 years, H.R. 4504 would eliminate
an opt-out provision for FBI background checks for all States.
The California County Welfare Directors Association concurs that this
provision presents a problem for my home State of California, which
already performs more rigorous background checks than required by the
Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children. The 9/11 Commission
has told us the FBI is already having difficulty performing background
checks for homeland security needs. States cannot rely on the
overburdened FBI to accelerate interstate placements of children. Our
foster care children would have to compete with criminals and
terrorists for time.
Foster care youth need to be placed in safe, loving homes. I would
ask, Mr. Speaker, to give the Congress the opportunity to revisit this
mandatory background check provision before the 2-year reprieve is over
so that States like California can continue with their more rigorous
background checks. I will work with the author to maybe have a
provision that would do that.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza), one of the cosponsor of this
legislation.
Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4504 sponsored by
the House majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay). As
Members
[[Page H8099]]
from opposing sides of the political spectrum, I praise the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. DeLay), and I could not be more proud to be here today
in support of a common goal, moving our Nation's most precious children
into safe and permanent homes.
As an adoptive parent myself, I have seen firsthand the glaring
problems our foster care system is currently facing. At any given time
in the United States, there are roughly 500,000 children in foster
care, moving from placement to placement, often living out of a
suitcase, in hopes that one day a loving family will welcome them into
their home.
H.R. 4504, the Safe and Timely Placement of Foster Children Act,
addresses one specific, yet extremely important, aspect of the system,
interstate adoptions. Often an impediment to a foster child's placement
in a permanent home happens when a child from one State is being
adopted by a family in another State. The State where the family
resides must complete a home study in order to verify that the
placement is safe, secure, and ready for the new child. Often these
types of home studies are a low priority for the State where the
adoptive family resides and can lead to delays of months and even years
in the adoption process.
This legislation we are considering today would establish a 60-day
deadline for completing an interstate home study. If a State completes
the home study within 30 days, this bill would authorize a $1,500
incentive payment for the completed home study to be used for adoption-
related expenses.
The children that this bill seeks to help are needy, neglected
children without a voice who desperately want to have a home, something
all of us take for granted. They want to go to the same school with the
same friends for more than a few months at a time. They want someone to
tuck them in at night and help them with their homework. They want to
stop living out of a black plastic garbage bag that doubles as a
suitcase. They want a real home, and they want to be loved.
Over the years I have met with numerous kids from all over the
country who are in various stages of foster care. I have heard great
stories where children were reunited with their biological parents or
are placed in loving, caring adoptive homes, like my own children are.
But I have also heard other stories that have just made me sick to my
stomach.
One young boy I met at a school for foster children in my district
told me the story of his life that seemed quite fitting for this debate
today. He had been placed in foster care at an early age and had been
moved in and out of seven different homes up and down the State of
California. As you can imagine, he grew jaded and resentful from the
harsh life he was forced to live.
Finally he, was placed with a family that saw through his rough
exterior and who wanted to adopt him. This young boy was convinced that
he had finally found a real home with devoted parents. Soon after he
was placed in this foster family, however, the father was transferred
to North Carolina and the family was forced to move. Unfortunately,
they could not get the paperwork processed between California and North
Carolina in order to facilitate the adoption, so this young boy was
left behind and is now residing in a group home.
It is our job as Members of Congress to be a voice for these children
and make sure their dreams are realized. We owe it to them to
streamline the adoptive process and make Federal law work for positive
outcomes. If that means requiring States to get their act together,
then so much the better.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer).
Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4504,
the Safe and Timely Interstate Placement Act of 2004. I congratulate
the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) and the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Cardin) as well for bringing this very important piece of
legislation to the floor of the House in what might be one of our last
weeks in session here. I also want to congratulate the majority leader
for the passion he has brought to this issue as well.
We have had many discussions about the plight of those children that
do not have a safety net under them, particularly foster children, and
foster children that could be eligible for adoption as well.
I began my career after law school as an assistant district attorney,
and I was assigned to juvenile court. In those days in Alabama we were
to assist the welfare department with issues of removal of children. I
learned more than I ever wish I had to learn about children that were
in foster care, vulnerable children, abused children, physically
abused, sexually abused, and often both as well.
What I found out the hard way, though, is that the system does not
protect those children. The bureaucracies work against what we can do
to place and protect those children. I got actively involved with the
Foster Parents Association down there in north Alabama, and their
frustrations with the bureaucracy were many.
This piece of legislation today accomplishes just about everything
that we need to accomplish. It deals with the placement of children
across State lines, and the bureaucracies have worked against that. My
colleagues have pointed out how much longer it takes to place those
children.
This legislation as well speaks to States that have opted out of
Federal requirements. There should be criminal background checks. There
should be restrictions on who is eligible to adopt children. Most
States are not doing those background checks, and consequently most of
those States are not protecting children the way they should. So this
makes this uniform.
Another important issue that is covered in this legislation is it
authorizes up to $10 million through fiscal year 2008 for incentive
payments to the States for $1,500 for each interstate home study
completed within 30 days. It wants to force the States to do those home
studies quicker.
Mr. Speaker, this is a good piece of legislation, it should not be
controversial, and our Members should support it.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would just urge my colleagues to support
this very important bill, and I compliment the manner in which it was
handled in this body, improving the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Cardin), and all of the gentlemen and gentlewomen we have worked with
on this bipartisan legislation. The legislation we are considering
today is an important step that will ensure timely and safe homes for
children.
It also has the support of the Bush administration, which today
issued a statement of administration policy. This statement says the
following: ``The administration supports House passage of H.R. 4504.
This bill would help speed up the interstate adoption process so that
children could be placed in permanent, loving homes more quickly by
authorizing the Department of Health and Human Services to make
incentive grants to States that complete timely interstate home
studies.
``The administration is particularly pleased that the House bill
includes a provision that eliminates the ability of States to opt out
of requirements to conduct criminal background checks on foster and
adoptive parents.''
Mr. Speaker, I thank the administration for their support, and I urge
all my colleagues to join us in support of this legislation.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be here today
to support the ``Orderly and Timely Interstate Placement of Foster
Children Act of 2004.'' This act amends the Social Security Act to
require each State to have procedures for orderly and timely placement
of children, in foster care or for adoption.
In addition, this bill directs the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to make incentive grants to States that complete timely
interstate home studies. It also revises requirements for checking of
child abuse registries to eliminate an opt-out provision.
Because of this act, we will allow access to the Federal parent
locator service to courts in foster care or adoptive placement cases.
It also provides for consideration of out-of-state placements in
permanency hearings, case plans, and case reviews.
As chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I have dedicated a
significant portion
[[Page H8100]]
of my congressional services to this issue of children. Children
entering foster care are often in poor health. Compared with children
from the same socioeconomic background, they have much higher rates of
serious emotional and behavioral problems, chronic physical
disabilities, birth defects, developmental delays, and poor school
achievement according to Child Welfare Statistical Fact Book.
In my state of Texas we have a Child Population of 5,629,200. There
are 17,103 in state care; 6,002, or 30.5 percent, are African American
children. African American children, who made up less than 16 percent
of all children under age 18, accounted for 38 percent of foster
children in 2001, a total of 204,973.
White children, who made up 62 percent of American children,
accounted for 37 percent of foster children. Hispanic children, who
made up 18 percent of U.S. children, accounted for 17 percent of foster
children.
Alcohol and drug abuse are factors in the placement of more than 75
percent of the children who are entering foster care. Children who lose
their parents to AIDS are another group in need of foster care. In
addition, increasing numbers of children who are HIV infected are in
foster care.
An estimated 80,000 healthy children will be orphaned by AIDS in the
next few years, with approximately one-third of that number expected to
enter the child welfare system. Some conservative estimates are that
about 30 percent of the children in care have marked or severe
emotional problems.
According to a GAO study, 58 percent of young children in foster care
had serious health problems; 62 percent had been subject to prenatal
drug exposure, placing them at significant risk for numerous health
problems.
Children in foster care are three to six times more likely than
children not in care to have emotional, behavioral and developmental
problems including conduct disorders, depression, difficulties in
school, and impaired social relationships.
The health care children receive while in foster care is often
compromised by insufficient funding, poor planning, lack of access,
prolonged waits for community-based medical and mental health services,
and lack of coordination of services as well as poor communication
among health and child welfare professionals.
The Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) worked with the American
Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) to develop standards for the health of
foster children. However, many child welfare agencies lack specific
policies for children's physical and mental health services and state
Medicaid systems rarely cover all of the services these children
require.
We need a more comprehensive, inclusive health care system to protect
our Nation's foster children. To begin with, all children entering
foster care should have an initial physical examination before or soon
after placement. This examination should focus on identifying acute and
chronic conditions requiring expedient treatment, so the condition does
not worsen or become unmanageable. It is better for the child, for the
foster parent, and for state Medicaid programs to urge an early
diagnosis and treatment.
All children in foster care should receive comprehensive mental
health and developmental evaluations, either before placement or soon
after. Although they live with a family, the child in foster care
requires physical, developmental, and mental health status monitoring
more frequently than children living in stable homes.
Finally, child welfare agencies and health care providers should
develop and implement systems to ensure the efficient transfer of
physical and mental health information among professionals who treat
children in foster care. The ability to communicate about medical
histories and previous problems will make diagnosis and treatment
easier and more affordable, and also provide the child with a more
complete medical background.
We in Congress can see that more is done to hold social services
accountable for maintaining the health and well being of these
children. We can work to have more funds efficiently spent on the
federal level to help these children. These are our most precious
resource of the future, let us come together to work to protect it.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R.
4504. There are currently approximately 540,000 children in foster care
in our country. In my home state of Illinois, 5 percent of our
children, approximately 28,460 children are in foster care. The number
of kids in foster care has doubled from 1987 to 2004. Nearly half of
today's population of foster kids are under the age of ten.
I commend the gentleman from Texas, Mr. DeLay for this legislation.
The idea of providing an opportunity for children who could not
experience family life, to give them the opportunity to have the well-
being, the nurturing of a family rather than being institutionalized or
as a ward of the State is of tremendous value. I simply want to add my
voice in support of it.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4504, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to improve
protections for children and to hold States accountable for the safe
and timely placement of children across State lines, and for other
purposes.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________