[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 147 (Tuesday, November 8, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H9982-H9987]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FAIR ACCESS FOSTER CARE ACT OF 2005
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
Senate bill (S. 1894) to amend part E of title IV of the Social
Security Act to provide for the making of foster care maintenance
payments to private for-profit agencies.
The Clerk read as follows:
S. 1894
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 ``Fair Access Foster Care Act
of 2005''.
SEC. 2. FOSTER CARE MAINTENANCE PAYMENTS TO PRIVATE FOR-
PROFIT AGENCIES.
Section 472(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
672(b)) is amended by striking ``nonprofit'' each place it
appears.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Herger) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
McDermott) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 1894, the Fair Access
Foster Care Act of 2005. This legislation has recently passed the
Senate by unanimous consent.
S. 1894 makes a technical change that will ease the administration of
payments to families who assist foster children. It does so by
permitting the transmission of foster care maintenance payments through
any agency that assists families caring for foster children in licensed
settings. Current law prevents the transmission of these payments
through private for-profit agencies.
As we have come to learn, public and private agencies that assist
families who serve foster children play a pivotal role in promoting
child safety and well-being.
{time} 1145
While we allow States the flexibility to determine what agencies can
best serve children, current law creates administrative burdens that
deter the transmission of Federal funds through private for-profit
agencies. This legislation would rectify that inequity, ensuring that
all public and private agencies that assist families caring for foster
children are treated in the same way.
Mr. Speaker, S. 1894 is identical to bipartisan legislation
introduced by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), and I thank him
for his work on this legislation. The legislation is supported by the
American Public Human Services Association and the Child Welfare League
of America. The Congressional Budget Office has informally estimated
that the cost of this legislation would be insignificant.
Mr. Speaker, everyone agrees our Nation's children's welfare system
is in need of improvement. Unfortunately, this change will only relieve
one small facet of a much larger set of administrative burdens that
today too often get in the way of ensuring child safety. This
legislation is an important step in the right direction, and we must
continue to pursue broader reforms in our Nation's child protection
programs.
I thank all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their
support of today's legislation. I urge all Members to support this
bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, this bill, the Fair Access Foster Care Act, makes a
minor technical change designed to broaden the agencies that can
recruit and reimburse foster families to include private welfare
agencies. The CBO, Congressional Budget Office, concludes that this
modification would impact only ``isolated cases'' within the child
welfare system. So it is not any big step forward.
In short, we should not give the American people the false impression
that we are actually facing the urgent and unattended needs for
countless vulnerable children in this country, because we simply are
not. ``Fair Access'' in the title still will not bring any access for
over half of the abused and neglected children in America today. Over
half of America's most vulnerable children are not merely left behind,
they are left out of access, and that simply is not fair.
[[Page H9983]]
Make no mistake, we know how to fix it. We could start by investing
in prevention, providing sufficient resources for States to work with
families to prevent child abuse and neglect. We could start by
investing in the people on the front lines; we would do something about
the fact that the average tenure of a caseworker in the foster care
system is less than 2 years.
We could start by investing in families. We could remove the
obstacles in current law that prevent foster children from receiving
Federal help if they are in the care of a relative because their
parents' home is not safe.
We could start by investing in compassion. Thousands of children are
among the victims of Hurricane Katrina, but we ignore pleas for help in
spite of what we know to be true. Study after study shows that child
abuse and neglect rises in the months immediately after natural
disasters, particularly hurricanes; that is happening today in
Louisiana. But Republicans and the administration pretend to be deaf
and blind to the truth.
Mr. Speaker, I have a letter dated September 22, 2005, from the State
of Louisiana. In it the State's Child Welfare Director asks the Bush
administration for the same assistance that New York City received
after 9/11, to meet the needs of abused and neglected children. And
that is not all. The Governor of Louisiana has asked us to help them
keep foster children in safe and stable settings and provide services
like mental health treatment to counteract the trauma these children
endured. Louisiana's leaders asked the administration to partner with
them to prevent child abuse and to keep children and their families
safely together.
Who can forget the President going down to Louisiana and saying, We
will do everything we can to help the people affected by this disaster?
Louisiana has asked us to be an extended family in a time of need,
Americans helping Americans. But 6 weeks later, the Governor is still
waiting for an answer to that letter.
Children remain vulnerable, without fair access, in fact, without any
access. As bad as this is, the Republican leaders want their Members to
make things even worse. Sometime soon, in fact, the notice on my
BlackBerry says on Thursday, the House will consider what is known as
the Budget Reconciliation Act. As it stands now, Republican leaders
intend to cut resources dedicated to children in foster care.
Cut, let me say it again so the Members can remember it: Cut the
resources for children. They intend to reduce the number of children in
low-income families eligible for Federal foster care. They intend to
reduce the reimbursement for the oversight of foster care for children
who live with relatives. And the Republican leaders intend to cut case
management and rehabilitative services provided to foster children
through the Medicaid program. If they get their way, Republican leaders
will take away hundreds of millions of dollars in services for abused
and neglected kids and give it away in tax cuts for the rich.
Fair access is a false hope under this Republican leadership. They
would like to zero out the problem as if all these kids who need us
will simply vanish.
I am not going to let that happen. Not today, not tomorrow, not the
day when the so-called budget reconciliation bill comes to the floor.
It is a kid-buster bill, and America is better than that. Ask anyone in
Louisiana. Ask anyone in America. It is time to fund some compassion.
It is time to care for Americans. Americans, not Iraqis, not Afghanis,
not anybody else, Americans who need us to help them.
We are making a technical correction today that will benefit a few
kids, but Republican leaders need to make a titanic correction in
reconciliation or we will all go down with the ship of state. A
majority party that is deaf and blind to meeting the needs of our most
vulnerable children is a party that has been in power too long.
Mr. Speaker, not even the very rich would fault you and us for
putting the children first. Do it while they still have a future we can
save.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The material previously referred to is as follows:
Department of Social Services,
Office of Community Services,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, September 22, 2005.
Re addressing Hurricane Katrina's impact on Louisiana Child
Welfare Services.
Amy Grissom, LMSW,
Program Specialist, Admin. for Children and Families, Dallas,
Texas.
Dear Ms. Grissom: the purpose of this letter is to outline
requests for waivers of certain activities and for budgetary
assistance in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. As you are
aware, the catastrophic effect of Hurricane Katrina has
dramatically impacted the activities the Louisiana Department
of Social Services, and diminished the extent to which the
Office of Community Services can implement pre-Katrina
initiatives. Coupled with these effects, the state is
experiencing significant changes in the public role expected
of the Office for the foreseeable future as Louisiana
continues its recovery and support of impacted families,
children, and communities.
We note that ACF Information Memorandum ACYF-CB-IM-05-06
provides for notice to states of flexibility in regards to
title IV-E funds that can assist and protect/support
hurricane victims. We seek meaningful ways now to
operationalize that offer of provision of flexibility through
these requests. The following requests are proposed after
considerable thought and assessment of the changing impact of
Hurricane Katrina on Louisiana statewide, for Louisiana
clients and providers, and on the Office of Community
Services. The requests are grouped under two broad
categories: Procedural Waivers and Requests and Budgetary
Requests.
The requests are as follows:
Procedural Waivers and Requests
Title IV E Claims for Foster Home Care Licensing Status. Licensed Child
Care Institutions (Residential Facilities and Day Care Programs)
1. As foster homes, residential care institutions, and
child-care institutions are due for relicensing, we propose
to grant provisional status for up to one year provided there
is documentation that the licensure record contains no
concerns about the home in the previous year period. We also
ask to provisionally license these providers in foster
families/child care institutions who may have been
temporarily displaced to another state.
Rationale: This will ease the requirements for families
being re-licensed. Louisiana Office of Community Services is
asking to make claims through Title IV E for such cases, for
a one-year period. We want the ability to make claims for
full federal participation for such activities for one year
with provisionally licensed homes and facilities.
2. For new applicant homes, we propose to grant provisional
licenses to new homes for the next four months that are in
the process of being studied. This would preclude the need to
have the health department and fire inspections since those
are currently backlogged in many parts of the state.
Rationale: We propose this in order to expedite an increase
of available new foster home providers to assist with the
care of children coming into state custody as a result of the
Hurricane.
3. We propose to grant provisional licenses to displaced
foster families and provide maintenance payments, medical
cards, etc., for foster chi1dren in those households as
needed.
Rationale: We want to be able to quickly provisionally
license displaced families so that they can provide foster
care services.
Child and Family Services Plan and Program Improvement Plan
We request that the Program Improvement Plan be suspended
for a period of 12 months from September 1, 2005 until August
31, 2006, without potential financial penalties. We seek
relief for a one-year period from PIP reporting and related
activities except those that interface with the PIP and that
the Office undertakes relative to Hurricane Katrina relief
efforts. If granted, we propose to renew PIP implementation
on June 1, 2006 with the report interval to resume 45 days
after August 31, 2006 (approximately on October 15, 2006).
Restarting the PIP after the year period may require a
renegotiation of the PIP (or at least a realignment or
revision of much of the PIP content) before beginning and we
propose that approach as well.
Rationale: There has been a dramatic data base shift that
has and is occurring for Louisiana families, reporting
regions, and children in care. For instance, the largest
metropolitan area has been severely impacted and is now and
for the next year period (at least) likely to be the smallest
region of the state. Further, our Office is now impacted by
the new demands for different services for the population and
provider base to help implement services. The service
capacity in the Orleans Region, which previously was the
largest metropolitan area, is changed dramatically.
2. We propose that the 5-Year Child and Family Services
Plan be suspended for one year through September 2006,
without potential financial penalties. We seek relief from
reporting on objectives for a one-year period.
Rationale: If granted, we propose to resume implementation
on October 1, 2006 for year two initiatives, goals,
objectives, and due dates. Essentially, year two of the 2005-
2009 CFSP wi1l functionally become year three of the CFSP.
Title IV E Program Improvement Plan
3. We propose that the previously negotiated time frames
for the title IV-E Program Improvement Plan be extended for
six
[[Page H9984]]
additional months, that the objectives presently due on
November 8, 2005 would then be due on May 8, 2006. We further
request that those time frame objectives due on February 8,
2006 would be due on August 8, 2006. This request would
make the title IV-E PIP extended to an 18-month PIP rather
than a 12 month PIP.
Rationale: The Office of Community Services task force work
efforts to revise the residential licensing regulations have
been suspended as state Licensing, the Office of Youth
Development, and this Office now have staff attending to
Hurricane Katrina issues, and much of the subsequent IV-E PIP
outcomes are predicated on the completion of tasks due on
November 8, 2005. The title IV-E PIP involved large
participation and input from the Orleans area, this area is
now uninhabited.
Judicial Review
4. We request presumptive title IV-E eligibility during the
period of 72 hours prior to the evacuation through the time
when evacuated courts in the impacted disaster areas resume
normal functioning.
Rationale: The Department is seeking relief from these
reviews for two reasons: the change in governmental role and
expectation and the eliminated capacity to conduct reviews in
the disaster impacted areas of Orleans and Jefferson Region.
ACYF-CB-IM05-06 clearly acknowledges that areas ``may not
have court systems that are fully functioning.'' Courts such
as those formerly functioning in Orleans and Jefferson
Parishes have now been closed for five weeks, and cannot have
retroactive ``'alternative procedures'' for judicial
determinations regarding contrary to the welfare and
reasonable efforts. In the absence of either our staff or
courts having access to case documentation, we may not even
know for whom we need to obtain these judicial
determinations, much less what the removal circumstances
were, e.g., we have no way of knowing how many children were
in care pending continued custody hearings.
5. We request a waiver of administrative review/case review
requirements pursuant to ACYF-CB-IM-05-06
Rationale: This is provided for in the referenced
memorandum.
Budgetary Requests
The following listing contains issues related to recovery
from Hurricane Katrina's impact on the State of Louisiana
Department of Social Services, Office of Community Services
to adequately operate as the public child welfare agency
statewide.
1. Social Service Block Grant (SSBG) Funding--We are
requesting a 35% increase in the present funding. This is
requested in order to keep foster care placements stable.
Rationale: Needed to support foster and adoptive placements
and residential treatment within as well as outside of the
state. Entire communities in the severely affected areas of
Louisiana (and neighboring states as well) will need
extensive supports and services to stabilize and sustain
adequate placement resources and to meet on a service
continuum the needs of vulnerable children and families in
the rebuilding period. Residential placements in Louisiana
are currently funded by state and the SSBG, and not by title
IX as is common in other states. Many of these supports
will be directed at recruitment of additional foster home
providers.
2. An additional federal funding allocation for clothing,
personal items in the form of an special appropriated
allocation for all foster children from Hurricane Katrina
affected areas.
Rationale: Rationale is the same as above. Children and
families in the displaced areas will need this as well.
3. Chafee Independent Family Living Program--we are
requesting 35-40% increase in the allocation for the Chafee
Program.
Rationale: A large number of the Independent Living
programs were in the disaster impact areas and were pre-
Katrina providing a large variety of independent living and
young adult services as well as a large number of the
provider base were located in New Orleans. Supervised
apartments were destroyed or severely damaged as well as
furnishings, clothing, and other critical items were lost.
New supervised apartment housing wi11 have to be developed
and will cost more to the state.
4. Additional funding for foster care reunification
services and supports through title IV-B, parts 1 and 2 is
requested. This is requested for a two-year period. Further,
the state is asking assistance in regards to the required
match for these funds. There is no state funding
appropriation for the additional matching funding. The state
is asking for a federal waiver for the requirement for state
matching participation for any increase in these funding
sources for services.
Rationale: Children and their biological parents may be
separated by significant distances for an extended or
indefinite period of time. Pursuant to federal and state
child welfare law, states will remain responsible for making
reasonable efforts to reunify those children with their
families so long as that is the case plan goal. It is
noteworthy that approximately one third of the total foster
homes in the state were in the Katrina impacted areas.
Louisiana does not have a sufficient number of alternative
placement resources to replace these children. Children taken
into custody in other states will need to be returned to
Louisiana and this will result in increased strain on the
limited number of available foster homes. Special provisions
for recruitment and licensure are sought. It is anticipated
also that as the weeks ensue that there wi11 be increases in
the number of child abuse reports resulting in a further
increase in the need for foster care placement resources. Due
to the devastation in three major regions of state foster
care population; there will be few families in those areas
who will be able to consider fostering or adopting children.
This will impact the requirements the state will labor under
for requirements for proximity of placement to parents.
Additionally, part 2 of title IV-B provides for promoting
safe and stable families. This too requires expansion to
expand access to mental health assessment and placement
assessment services for children and families and to increase
support to foster parents through service providers such as
family resource centers. Title IV-B, part 2, which has been
so instrumental over the past decade of providing for
services to prevent removal and provide assistance with
reunification, must now be allowed to address for the next 12
months (at minimum) issues of posttraumatic stress in foster
children, adjustment counseling for families, grief and loss
counseling, social, mental health, and placement assessments,
and to put in place services to address other Katrina mental
health and crisis recovery impacts of the disaster effects on
families and children involved in child welfare in the state.
5. Request for approval of random moment sampling
procedures for cost allocation of administrative and other
costs associated with service delivery. The state is
requesting that we continue to use the June 30, 2005 random
moment samples for the quarter ending September 30, 2005 and
for the foreseeable future (at least one year) until
statistics can be reasonably obtained from and for disaster
areas.
Rationale: The state has no statistical capacity for random
moment sampling for the three storm impacted disaster
regions. Random moment sampling cannot be conducted in these
areas. Using the June 30, 2005 sample is our last pre-Katrina
milepost for these statistics.
6. Request for special assistance from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to provide for FEMA
related replacement costs for replacement of items of foster
children that were lost in the storm. The state is asking for
ACF assistance with FEMA to organize a quick and easy method
for foster parents to submit and receive reimbursements or
payments for the items of foster children that were lost
during the storm and subsequent evacuation.
Rationale: These are costs that FEMA may be able to
reimburse by special arrangement. An innovative foster parent
special reimbursement ``track'' is envisioned to assist these
families in any state they have relocated to due to
evacuation from the disaster areas. Expedited reimbursement
to lessen the recovery burden on foster children is the aim
of this request.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit these requests to
your office. We would welcome any questions or comments. A
prompt reply would be appreciated.
Sincerely
Marketa Garner Gautreau,
Assistant Secretary.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I thank the gentleman from Washington for his support for this
legislation. I appreciate the concern expressed across the aisle, but
the concern is not valid. It is important that we accurately explain
the policy included in the spending reform bill, what it will do.
This legislative fix would not alter Federal eligibility for foster
care and adoptive assistance. Instead, it would ensure that every State
uses the same eligibility criteria for receipt of Federal payments.
Promoting child safety and well-being must remain the goal of these
programs. And Federal law must be applied evenly in all States. We are
doing just that with this policy fix.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr.
Cole), who is the author of this legislation.
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S.
1894, the Fair Access Foster Care Act of 2005.
This legislation makes a technical change to current law, which will
allow foster care maintenance payments to any public or private agency
that assists families who care for foster children. This will allow
for-profit agencies to operate on the same footing as all other such
agencies, but States will continue to decide which agencies to use
based on their best judgment about what is in the interest of the
children and the families they serve.
The Fair Access Foster Care Act will ease the administrative costs to
States that already elect to work with nonprofit agencies, allowing the
focus and the money to be concentrated on what really matters.
Speaking for my own State, in Oklahoma there are 15 agencies that
provide therapeutic foster care. Five of these agencies operate under a
for-profit business model.
[[Page H9985]]
Mr. Speaker, I will again note that this legislation does not require
any State to contract with for-profit agencies. Individual State
agencies charged with the oversight of custody children will continue
to create their own rules for licensing child-placing agencies within
the State. This legislation is identical to legislation I authored,
H.R. 3008, so I am very grateful that this legislation was scheduled
for consideration.
Mr. Speaker, I want to extend my gratitude to the gentleman from
California (Chairman Herger), the gentleman from Washington (Ranking
Member McDermott), and also to the staff of the Ways and Means
Committee for guiding this bill through the legislative process.
And finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to extend my thanks to my friend,
Dr. Laura Boyd of Norman, Oklahoma. Dr. Boyd and I belong to different
parties and have even been on the opposite sides of each other in
various campaigns over the years, but we have always had the ability to
work together across the aisle when it counted.
Mr. Speaker, Dr. Boyd did a commendable job in raising awareness of
this issue, and she was an effective proponent for this needed change
in the law. She is a very big reason why we are at this point today.
I urge the Members to support the passage of this bill, S. 1894.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Houston, Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished
gentleman for yielding me this time, and I remain very appreciative of
his long-standing interest and support on these important issues
dealing with children.
Let me thank the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) for
his work on this issue and working, of course, as he has indicated, in
a bipartisan way with his constituents back home.
I think it is important to note that those of us who are on this
floor and our colleagues obviously have a great concern for our
children. So this reporting of the truth about the calamity and the
concern about the foster care system in America should not be taken
personally. We should all be moving toward trying to improve the
system. And I rise in support of the Fair Access Foster Care Act of
2005 simply because it is a procedural change that allows a broader
response to the needs of our foster care children.
I happened to have worked in Houston with an outreach committee
cochaired by myself and former Congressman Mike Andrews, who used to be
a member of the Ways and Means Committee; and we worked on recruitment
of foster parents, providing foster parents with more resources. And
this was a decade or so ago. Unfortunately, in 2005 we have the same
concerns dealing with our foster care system. It is, in fact, broken to
a certain extent, and the Fair Access Foster Care Act of 2005 will at
least provide the access to not-for-profits to be able to channel the
care of foster children, therapeutic care, how important that is,
counseling and psychologists and psychiatrists, to build these lives.
But we cannot, Mr. Speaker, deny the fact that more resources are not
needed in recruitment, more resources are not needed to give foster
parents relaxation, R&R, so that they can come back home to take care
of these children. More resources are needed in keeping siblings
together, and, of course, as my colleague from the great State of
Washington said, more resources are needed to stand in the way of child
abuse and neglect.
Might I cite for the Members an article that says ``Record High
Numbers of Children Reported in Foster Care.'' This article reports the
fact that these numbers are growing and growing and growing. Let me
also say that we have seen over the course of 2 months one natural
disaster after another: Hurricane Rita, Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane
Wilma, and the terrible tornado in Kentucky and Indiana. In Hurricane
Katrina alone, the statistics show that 35 percent of those impacted by
Hurricane Katrina will be children.
One of the things that we fail to recite and repeat on the floor of
the House, Mr. Speaker, 1,000-plus individuals died in Hurricane
Katrina. Many of them are the parents of children now still living with
relatives or children that are missing. And the very fact that we have
ignored that dilemma shows that downstream we are going to be facing
huge numbers of children needing foster care.
{time} 1200
In my own congressional district, we have thousands of Hurricane
Katrina survivors. Many of the family members are there taking care of
other people's children or their relative's children.
So the foster care concept or the structure of foster care
unfortunately is a safety net for children who are without any
supervision or not having their needs being taken care of because of
the family dissolution and other problems. This is an important step to
fix the problem to add more people into the system, but this does not,
Mr. Speaker, answer the total question of building a foster care system
to aid those who suffer from neglect and helping out children in these
terrible times.
Mr. Speaker, I speak today in support of S. 1894, the Fair Access
Foster Care Act of 2005. Therapeutic foster care is foster care for
children with special medical, psychological, emotional, and social
needs. These children need comprehensive support and attention,
requiring a great deal of commitment and sacrifice from foster care
parents. Prior to the placement of a child, a potential therapeutic
foster care parent must complete a certification process that involves
a background check, a training program, and at least two homestudies.
Generally therapeutic foster care children are not permitted to
attend daycare and require ``line of sight'' supervision. That is,
therapeutic foster care children must be in view of the foster parents
at all times, except when attending school and other approved
activities.
Recruiting parents to provide therapeutic foster care is a never-
ending job. There are always children waiting for a match to be found.
Therapeutic foster care children stay in crisis shelters for the
transition period, adding a great deal of stress to their lives.
Since 1992, IV-E funds from Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) have gone to partially fund both for-profit and nonprofit
therapeutic foster care providers.
The problem we are facing is that recently, the Oklahoma Department
of Human Services (DHS) realized that due to a technicality, for-profit
agencies are not eligible to receive IV-E funds from HHS. In addition,
other states have come to similar realizations and made arrangements to
avoid noncompliance. Unfortunately, some states are not even aware of
this discrimination. S. 1894 amends the United States code to allow all
therapeutic foster care agencies to receive maintenance payments from
the United States Department of Health and Human Services.
The Congressional Budget Office has indicated that any costs
associated with this legislation would be insignificant. S. 1894 would
amend the United States code to allow all therapeutic foster care
agencies to receive maintenance payments from the United States
Department of Health and Human Services. The Congressional Budget
Office has indicated that any costs associated with this legislation
would be insignificant.
In closing, there are over 500,000 children in foster care today. A
large number of these children require therapeutic care. The business
model of for-profit agencies should not prohibit Title IV-E maintenance
cost reimbursement. Now is not the time to prevent highly qualified
agencies from placing these children in safe homes.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, this bill provides very limited
administrative flexibility, essentially just legalizing what a handful
of States are already doing with foster care. But this tiny finger of
flexibility given with one hand is taken away with both hands from the
same abused and neglected children in the companion legislation that
this same group of Republican leaders has so enthusiastically endorsed
in our committee and which it plans to foist off on the American people
this week.
So extreme is the Republican demand for tax breaks and more tax
breaks and more tax breaks for those at the top of the economic ladder
and the multinational corporations that will not pay their fair share
of the tax burden that Republicans have demanded that the same abused
and neglected children that they say they would help today, would be
the ones to pay the tab for these tax cuts.
Those across America who realize that we need to be doing more for
children who are physically or sexually
[[Page H9986]]
abused by a parent, or merely abandoned without food or support by a
parent who is caught up in a drug habit, need to know that those kids
need more help. They need to know that the companion legislation the
Ways and Means Committee has approved for consideration in the full
House this week would deny those children almost $600 million of
federal support.
Most of this is taken from battered, abused, and neglected children
who found a new home with a loving family member. Think about it: a
grandparent who realizes their child has gone astray and they take
their abused, neglected grandchild back into their family to try to
give them a chance.
The only federal court, an appellate court, that has interpreted our
existing federal foster care law in the case, Rosales v. Thompson,
issued a decision that is so clear that the Bush administration chose
not to appeal it to the United States Supreme Court. However, the Bush
administration has said it will not apply the court's decision to the
law in this country outside a number of Western States. Under the
court's ruling, abused, neglected, and battered children who seek the
safety and stability of a home with grandparents, or other relatives
who are not formally licensed as foster caregivers are eligible to
receive, quite wisely, federal foster care assistance.
The Republicans are now saying we should deny funding to these
grandparents and other relatives that care. The would tear apart tens
of thousands of families and disregard the very purpose of the Adoption
and Safe Families Act, a Federal law that directs a preference be given
to placements with relatives.
For some reason, after endless speeches proclaiming a concern for
``family values,'' the only families that count are those that are
sitting up at the top of the economic ladder, while the families that
have taken in an abused and neglected child are left behind. This
companion bill is the so-called ``reconciliation'' which really ought
to be spelled W-R-E-C-K, ``wreck,'' because it is a wreck for these
tens of thousands of loving and caring families. It is speeding through
this Congress and speaking volumes about how much ``family values''
really count up here.
To say that the Republicans would literally take food from the mouths
of babes to fund tax breaks for the rich might sound like partisan
rhetoric, but if you watch this Congress this week, that is exactly
what you will see.
This very year, President Bush's Office of Management and Budget
rated the federal child support program among the highest and most
efficient programs in the Federal Government; and yet, in the same bill
in which they plan to take away about $600 million from families caring
for abused and neglected children, they plan to deny federal support
for child support enforcement, as amazing as that might seem.
There has been a 75 percent increase in child support collections
from deadbeat dads since fiscal year 1996, adding up to $21.2 billion,
a big figure, but it translates, just like these monies for the foster
families, into hundreds of thousands of small amounts that put food on
the table and allow kids to have the clothes to go to school.
Apparently, the folks that are running this place, the Administration
and the House of Representatives do not know what it is like to be a
single mom out there trying to get kids through school or to be a
single grandmother having to start a second family to care for a
grandchild while trying to keep them out of trouble and struggling to
put food on the table. A few hundred dollars a month--whether it is
from a deadbeat dad or through this foster care program for abused and
neglected families--can make a big difference. That little bit of money
makes the difference between a child who has a future and a child who
ends up just like the abused and neglected parent that placed them in
this horrible situation.
And, in the same bill that is a companion to this, House Republicans
go even farther than cutting off support for programs that address
deadbeat dads and abused and neglected children, they also cut child
care funding to the tune of about $500 billion. Those funds are cut
from those who are struggling to get off welfare and will result in
270,000 fewer children of poor working families being able to get
access to child care in the next 5 years.
This Republican reduction in our federal investment in children will
cost us millions and billions of dollars in the long run, but, most
importantly, it will deny too many children in this country the
opportunity to achieve their full, God-given potential. It is wrong.
And while this minor piece of uncontested legislation ought to be
approved today, we need to reject this attempt by extremists in this
Congress to place all the burden of their fiscal mismanagement on the
most vulnerable people in our society.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) brought out a
harmless little bill here today, and some may wonder why we have taken
so much time to whale away on the Budget Reconciliation Act which is
coming down the road.
The fact is that this issue of child welfare is an issue that we have
absolutely neglected in this House, and we are talking about the whole
issue of child care.
This one little bill here has the title, which is the part that
offends me: ``Fair Access to Foster Care Act.'' Well, advertising like
that would be out of order, because that is misrepresenting what this
is about. This is a technical corrections bill. But the Republicans
want to come out here, and everything is a PR piece: ``Fair Access to
Foster Care.'' You do not intend to give to anyone. You are not giving
it in this bill. You are not going to give it on Thursday in the
reconciliation bill. There is simply no concern about foster children
in this Republican leadership.
When they send people like the gentleman from California (Mr.
Herger), a good, solid citizen, out here to defend this as ``fair
access to foster care,'' people will say, well, I voted for the Fair
Access to Foster Care bill, as though voting for a title meant
something.
Mr. Speaker, this administration is 6 weeks without picking up a pen
and signing a letter to help the kids in Louisiana. That is a President
who is leaving people behind. That is a Congress who is leaving
children behind. You are not going to get away from it with the Fair
Access to Foster Care Act.
I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this bill. We will continue
this discussion on Thursday when we have the Budget Reconciliation Act.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments on the other side
of the aisle. However, almost none of what was just discussed has
anything to do with what is on the floor today. The bill before us is a
good one and one every Member should support. Members will soon have a
chance to support needed spending reforms to reduce deficits and help
balance the budget. That should be a goal for all of us.
But what we hear today from the other side of the aisle is what we
always hear: one, ``no'' on any savings in Federal programs; and, two,
``no'' on commonsense reforms; but, three, ``yes'' on raising taxes on
the American people. Unfortunately, it is just the same old liberal
wine in the same old bottles.
Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us today is an important step
towards improving our Nation's child protection programs. It would
ensure that all public and private agencies that assist families who
care for foster children are treated in the same manner. It is good
legislation and would help States focus their efforts on promoting
child safety and well-being.
I would like to again thank my colleagues for their work in this
area, and I urge all Members to support this legislation.
General Leave
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on subject of the bill now under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simmons). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by
[[Page H9987]]
the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 1894.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will
be postponed.
____________________