[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 162 (Friday, December 16, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13777-S13778]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       LABOR--HHS APPROPRIATIONS

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to oppose the fiscal year 
2006 Labor, HHS, Education and related agencies conference report.
  As my colleagues know, this is the second conference report to come 
out of the Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee this year. This bill, which 
passed the House yesterday by two votes, represents a failure by the 
leadership of this Congress to adequately fund health, education, and 
workforce programs.
  The first conference report--the one defeated by the House--contained 
drastic cuts to existing programs like the title VII health professions 
programs and No Child Left Behind.
  So what is different between the bill before us today and the one 
that failed? Does the second conference report restore the harmful cuts 
to health and education that were supported by the Republican 
leadership in the House and Senate? Does the bill contain even one 
dollar more than the bill that was defeated by the House?
  The answer to those questions is no.
  The first conference report included $201 million worth of cuts to 
rural health programs identified by the National Rural Health 
Association. The bill before us restores a few of these programs but it 
still retains $137 million, or 68 percent, worth of those cuts.
  The bill before us restores a provision costing $90 million that 
would have prohibited Medicare and Medicaid from covering prescription 
drugs for erectile dysfunction.
  And how does this bill pay for these provisions? It is not with new 
money but, rather, with $120 million that was designated for the Public 
Health and Social Services Emergency Fund for pandemic flu preparedness 
and $60 million that was supposed to go to the Centers for Medicare and 
Medicaid Services' administrative account for implementation of the new 
Medicare prescription drug benefit.
  At a time when seniors are struggling to understand and sign up for 
the new Medicare drug benefit, this bill cuts the account needed to run 
Medicare's 1-800 help line, run its Website Medicare.gov, conduct 
outreach and provide technical assistance to millions confused seniors.
  And at a time when public health experts across the globe are warning 
countries to act now to prepare for a pandemic influenza, this bill 
cuts $120 million in pandemic flu preparedness funding.
  In total, this bill cuts health funding by $466 million.
  That includes a cut of $185 million for the Bureau of Health 
Professions title VII programs, making it harder to recruit and retain 
qualified health professionals, and the elimination of nine vital 
health programs including trauma care, rural emergency medical 
services, the geriatric education centers, health education training 
centers, and the health community access program.
  In California, the elimination of the geriatric education program 
will eliminate funding for the Northern California Geriatric Education 
Center at the University of California San Francisco, the only source 
of Federal funding for geriatric education from the Bay Area to Oregon.
  It provides a less than 1 percent increase in funding the National 
Institutes of Health, the smallest percentage increase to NIH since 
1970. This bill cuts the number of new research grants that NIH can 
fund by 355, from 9,612 to 9,257.
  Last September, 91 of my colleagues joined me in sending a letter to 
President Bush supporting the administration's goal of eliminating 
cancer death and suffering by 2015. The wholly inadequate funding for 
NIH in this bill dims the hope of reaching this 2015 goal.
  The conference report harms all working American families.
  First, the conference report slashes the Office of Disability 
Employment Policy to $20 million, close to half of the funding in 
fiscal year 2005. The disabled community will no longer have the 
training, employment, and education needed to earn a decent wage. This 
is a community that already faces a 68 percent unemployment rate.
  Second, reducing job training programs, dislocated worker assistance, 
and employment services by $530 million will make it close to 
impossible for dislocated workers to re-enter the workforce. This is 
particularly appalling given the recent bankruptcy and layoff 
announcements by Delta, Northwest, and General Motors, just to name a 
few.
  Lastly, the reduction in trade adjustment assistance will leave 
workers to fend for themselves when industries change and jobs shift 
oversees. This is vital to the Nation's economic stability. The fast-
moving pace of innovation requires that we have a flexible workforce 
provided with the training needed to transition to the next 
opportunity. Reducing this type of program will leave American workers 
behind.
  The ability to work is the path to financial independence, economic 
stability, and the key to earning a better life. This conference report 
shamefully denies that opportunity to dislocated and disabled workers 
wanting to earn a better life.
  And finally, this bill hurts our Nation's schools, educators, and 
students.
  It cuts total Federal education funding by $59 million for the first 
time in over a decade.
  Within education, No Child Left Behind is significantly cut by $779 
million or 3 percent that will ultimately result in an estimated $3 
million loss for California schools.
  Furthermore, this bill shortchanges the authorized funding level for 
No Child Left Behind programs by $13.1 billion.
  This major cut and underfunding is being done when the required math 
and reading performance levels under the law are increasing for school 
districts and schools are struggling to find the funds necessary to 
meet the law's requirements.
  This bill also fails to provide any increase to the Pell grant 
student aid award of $4,050 for the fourth year in a row, even though a 
$100 increase was promised in the budget resolution.
  Federal Pell grants are the cornerstone of our need-based financial 
aid system ensuring that all students have access to higher education.
  Pell grants help over 5.3 million low- and middle-income students 
attend college, over 500,000 of them in California.
  There could not be a worse time for freezing student's financial 
grant aid as the costs of attending a 4-year public college or private 
college have dramatically increased both nationwide and in California.
  According to the College Board, the average cost nationwide of 
attending a public university for 1 year has increased 66 percent to 
$5,132 within the last 10 years, and yet Pell grant aid continues to 
remain stagnant.
  This bill also drastically cuts other important education programs, 
such as Even Start literacy programs that help disadvantaged children 
and their parents increase their English skills are cut by 56 percent, 
from $200 million to $100 million; education technology State grants 
are cut by 45 percent, from $496 million to $275 million; and State 
grants for keeping schools safe and drug free are cut by 20 percent, 
from $437 million to $350 million.
  The bill before us shortchanges American families, and I believe 
America can do better. The cuts in this bill for vital health, 
education, and workforce programs are a direct result of the agenda of 
this administration and

[[Page S13778]]

the leadership in Congress: to pass tax cuts and reconciliation bills 
that actually worsen the deficit, all the while doing nothing to 
address the long-term fiscal picture of entitlement spending.
  As an appropriator, I recognize that tough decisions have to be made. 
However, the policy choices of this administration have put Members of 
this body in the position of having to vote on the elimination of 
health programs for the poorest and sickest of Americans and for cuts 
to education programs for low-income students. I reject that choice and 
believe we must rebalance our priorities.
  The choice we should be making today is to improve our healthcare 
safety net, to fully fund our schools, and to help American workers 
find the path to financial independence and economic stability.
  This conference report fails Americans on all those fronts, and I 
urge my colleagues to reject it.
 Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I strongly oppose the fiscal year 
2006 Labor-HHS appropriations conference report because it undermines 
many of our Nation's highest priorities and jeopardizes our most 
vulnerable citizens and communities.
  We have all heard the dire warnings about the avian flu pandemic. We 
know that we need to invest adequate resources to develop vaccines, 
stockpile medicines, and better prepare at the local, State, and 
Federal levels. That is why the Senate passed Senator Harkin's 
amendment. Yet this conference report left out those vital funds and, 
in doing so, left us far less equipped to deal with a pandemic.
  We know we must invest in the critical research that uncovers the 
secrets behind our greatest killers, saving the health and lives of our 
citizens. Yet this bill increases funding for the National Institutes 
of Health, NIH, by less than one percent, the smallest increase since 
1970. Make no mistake: this will lead to cuts in the number of new 
research grants funded by NIH.
  We know we have to invest in the education of our children at every 
level of schooling. We know our school districts, and our children, are 
being asked to meet tougher standards. Yet this conference report cuts 
education for the first time in a decade. No Child Left Behind, NCLB, 
programs have been cut 3 percent, now leaving them $13 billion below 
the authorized level. Fewer children will be served by afterschool 
programs, which keep our children safe after school and improve their 
academic performance. At a time when the costs of college are 
skyrocketing, this bill once again freezes Pell grants, which help low-
income students afford a college education.
  Now, this bill doesn't just cut critical funds; it also adds 
provisions that endanger our neediest citizens. None is more troubling 
to me than the Weldon amendment. I am extremely disappointed that the 
conference report rejected the real conscience clause in the Senate 
bill and instead included the House bill's sweeping and dangerous 
refusal clause.
  Unlike the Senate language authored by Senator Specter and Senator 
Harkin, the provision in this conference report is not a conscience 
clause. It never mentions religion or morals. It forces States to 
choose between losing billions of dollars in funding or enforcing 
Federal and State laws ensuring reproductive health information and 
services for women. And it could have devastating consequences, 
including further endangering women in emergency situations, allowing 
doctors to be gagged, hurting victims of rape and incest, and seriously 
undermining state sovereignty.
  Mr. President, if we want to really meet the great challenges we face 
in our country, we must reject this bill. The American people deserve 
better and we, as Senators, can certainly do better.

                          ____________________