[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 17, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H7898-H7935]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that, during
consideration of H.R. 3043 pursuant to House Resolution 547, the Chair
may reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for electronic voting under
clause 6 of rule XVIII and clauses 8 and 9 of rule XX.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 547 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 3043.
[[Page H7899]]
{time} 1601
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 3043) making appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health
and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, with Mrs.
Tauscher in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Walsh) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, this bill, more than any other, determines
how willing we are to make the investment necessary to assure the
future strength of this country and its working families. We strengthen
the country when we strengthen our families. We strengthen our country
when we invest in workers to have the most competitive workforce in the
world.
The decisions we make in any one year are not decisive. But if we do
not think in long term, if we do not recognize the kind of country we
will be in 10 years, we will not make the investments necessary to
prepare for that world and we will be shortchanging the future of every
American.
Because he has chosen to put his desire to give $50 billion in tax
breaks to those make $1 million a year, and his desire to spend $140
billion on Iraq ahead of those investments, the President has chosen to
cut those investments by this bill by more than $7.5 billion in real
terms.
This bill rejects most of those cuts because we cannot disinvest in
the country's future without hurting national security and the future
of every American family. Instead of cutting $7.5 billion, as the
President requested, we eliminate or cut 41 programs, saving $1.1
billion. We then increase investments in critical programs by about
$4.5 billion in real terms, or 2.8 percent over last year, after
adjusting for inflation and population change.
Now, why do we do that? Because in 10 years there will be 27 million
more Americans, 12 million more seniors needing health care, 2.7
million more kids in elementary and secondary school, 2.2 million more
students in college, 11 million more Americans will be without health
insurance, unless we wise up and wake up and change our policies. And
within 7 years, half of the Nation's job growth will be in occupations
requiring higher education skills.
To meet those challenges, with this bill we target modest increases
to crucial high priority activities to attack deficits in worker
training, deficits in health care, deficits in education access.
On a bipartisan basis, without a dissenting vote, we've provided $450
million above the President's inadequate request for Title I to help an
additional 155,000 disadvantaged students. Instead of wiping out every
student aid program except Pell and Work Study, we rejected the
President's cuts and raised the maximum Pell Grant by $650 over the
last year to help over 5 million students go to college.
We reversed the 3-year decline in Federal support for special
education. Mr. Walsh, the ranking member of this subcommittee, has
taken a leadership role in that regard.
We reversed the President's cuts in teacher training. We provided new
after-school opportunities for 163,000 more students.
On health care, nobody has ever come up to me at home and said,
``Obey, why don't you guys get your act together and cut cancer
research?'' But that's exactly what Congress did the last 2 years,
cutting NIH research grants by over 500 grants. Well, we've stopped
that.
In January, we reversed the President's cuts and this bill adds
another $1 billion above the President's request, which would again cut
research grants.
We have also included a package of five initiatives to put health
care within the reach of more than 2 million additional Americans; $200
million to expand access to health and dental care at community health
centers, $75 million to help States expand health coverage for targeted
populations, $50 million to help States provide affordable health
insurance for 200,000 people who are medical high risks and cannot get
insurance from the private market, $20 million to help trade impacted
workers benefit from the Health Coverage Tax credit, and added funding
to help Medicare beneficiaries to get health insurance counseling.
Because of high energy prices, we have added $880 million to the
President's request for low income heating assistance, reversing half
the cut Congress and the President made last year.
To discourage abortions, instead of lecturing, we provide a $1.4
billion package of incentives to provide real world help to women
through expanded Head Start, child care, domestic violence programs,
maternal and child health care, family planning and abstinence
programs.
To help workers, we reverse the President's cuts in a range of
workforce training programs. We also provide a $100 million increase
above the President to help reduce Social Security claims backlogs and
to keep more Social Security offices open.
Now the President claims that this bill amounts to runaway spending.
Fact: From 1980 to today, domestic appropriations, as a percentage of
total national income, have declined hugely. The President's budget
would cut them to a level 48 percent below the 1980 level, and by 2012,
to a level 57 percent below 1980. That's hardly runaway growth. That is
a steady bleed of America's quality of life and America's future.
For the President to borrow $1.2 trillion to pay for tax cuts, and
$600 billion to pay for Iraq, including another $140 billion next year,
and then pretend that this modest 2 percent difference with him is the
cause of fiscal irresponsibility is sheer nonsense, and many
enlightened Republicans know it.
These investments are not just fiscally responsible, they are
necessary for the future health and strength of the Nation.
One other point. We will today hear complaints about earmarks in this
bill. Let us be clear, the last time Congress was in Democratic hands
there were no earmarks in this bill. Under Republican rule, they
exploded from zero to over 3,000.
This bill has cut back the dollar level for earmarks to half the
level in the 2006 bill. Exactly two-tenths of 1 percent of the total
funding in this bill go for congressionally directed earmarks.
And let me also point out that the amount of dollars in spending
directed by the Congress is a tiny fraction of the amount directed by
the Administration. First, for instance, the Administration in this
bill requests specific earmarks, $10 million for Reach Out and Read,
$10 million for Teach for America, $9 million for the Points of Light
Foundation, $4.5 million for America's Promise, $1.7 million for the
Mind and Body Institute, $1.4 million for the YMCA.
On top of that, in 2006 alone, the Health and Social Services
Department directed spending of $1.9 billion through 21,000 contracts
that were less than fully competed. That alone is more than seven times
the amount of congressionally directed spending in this bill.
In the Labor Department, 90 percent of discretionary funding for the
High Growth Job Training Program was spent on a noncompetitive basis.
The Office of Inspector General found that the Education Department
strong-armed State and local school districts to select textbooks from
favored publishers. Madison, Wisconsin, in my own State, lost its $2
million Reading First grant because they refused to purchase texts from
an inferior program. Yet, the most thoroughly evaluated programs, like
Success for All and Reading Recovery, were frozen out by the program
administrators.
ABC reported that one publisher with good connections at the White
House saw its corporate net worth rise from $5 million to $360 million,
with a little help from their friends.
The Office of Inspector General has made criminal references to the
Justice Department, and we have cut Reading First until the
Administration changes its ways.
So I would simply say, Madam Chairman, spare us the Administration's
sanctimony about earmarks or directed spending, and please spare us the
pretense that this bill has anything to do
[[Page H7900]]
with the fiscal mess this country faces. It is a disciplined set of
investments. Virtually every Republican amendment in committee did not
seek to cut funding, rather it sought to increase it.
I appreciate the bipartisan support for the bill in committee. I
appreciate the partnership with Mr. Walsh, the ranking member.
People who have reviewed it most closely, Republicans and Democrats
alike, know this bill is responsible and disciplined.
Just one comparison. The Administration's defense request, even
without counting the $140 billion in new money that they're asking for
in their supplemental, that defense bill is still $43 billion above
last year, which is at least four times as large as the difference
between the committee and the Congress on this bill.
I would urge every Member who thinks about this country's future to
support this bill.
[[Page H7901]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.001
[[Page H7902]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.002
[[Page H7903]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.003
[[Page H7904]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.004
[[Page H7905]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.005
[[Page H7906]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.006
[[Page H7907]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.007
[[Page H7908]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.008
[[Page H7909]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.009
[[Page H7910]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.010
[[Page H7911]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.011
[[Page H7912]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.012
[[Page H7913]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.013
[[Page H7914]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.014
[[Page H7915]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.015
[[Page H7916]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.016
[[Page H7917]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.017
[[Page H7918]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.018
[[Page H7919]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.019
[[Page H7920]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.020
[[Page H7921]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY07.021
[[Page H7922]]
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
I'd like to begin my remarks by thanking Chairman Obey for his
willingness to accommodate many of the programmatic requests that we
made. I appreciate his attention to the concerns important to my
constituents and to my State.
As you know, this is a very complex and demanding bill, and Chairman
Obey's staff has done a fine job supporting him in this task. I also
would like to recognize Steve Crane and Anne Marie Goldsmith from the
minority office for their attention to detail in this legislation.
Let's make no mistake. This bill spends a great deal of money,
approximately $6.5 billion more than last year in discretionary
funding. But this bill addresses many of the most critical issues
confronting our Nation--our families' health care, our children's
education, our retirement security and our own workplace protection and
job training needs.
If I were chairman, and I had this allocation, I'm not sure I would
have written the bill a whole lot differently.
Specifically, this bill provides needed increases for community
health centers. It advances my long-time efforts to advance funding for
graduate medical education, of which my State, New York, trains 20
percent of the doctors in the Nation. So it is of critical importance
to our teaching hospitals. And also the need for our Nation's poison
control centers.
It funds important biomedical research, telemedicine and electronic
medical records, which in the long run will dramatically reduce the
cost of medical expenses.
{time} 1615
It recognizes the need to provide seniors and those on fixed incomes
with assistance paying high utility bills through the LIHEAP program.
It continues Republican-led efforts to boost Federal funding for
elementary and secondary education in support of the No Child Left
Behind bill and also supporting programs for youth at risk. And thanks
to my committee colleagues' support, the bill includes my amendment to
boost funding for special education.
As most of you know, when the Individuals with Disabilities in
Education Act passed in 1977, Congress authorized annual Federal
expenditures of 40 percent to help cover the cost of education for
children with special needs. But in 1995 the Federal Government paid
only 7.8 percent of those costs for our children with disabilities.
That puts an additional burden on our local school districts. If we are
only paying about 8 percent of the cost, that means they are forced to
cover the other 92 percent instead of the 60 percent that we had told
them they would have to cover. With this increase, we will provide just
under 18 percent of the cost in 2008, or about half of our commitment.
At least it is progress in the right direction.
This increased Federal support is important. Back in my home State of
New York, the instructional expense for regular education for a student
in 2003 and 2004 was $8,177 per student. For a special education
student that cost was about double, $17,600. This bill boosts the
maximum Pell Grant award to make a college education more attainable
for more Americans, and it supports initiatives for senior health and
wellness.
I am grateful to Chairman Obey for including funds to take care of
the health needs of those who responded heroically, and in many cases
putting their own health and lives at risk, to the September 11
terrorist attacks in New York City.
And I thank the chairman for responding to my request and attending
to an issue of growing importance to more and more young American
families: the emerging threat of food allergies. Food allergies more
and more are affecting families across the country, and nobody really
understands what is going on, why these allergies are occurring, but
they do put these young people's lives at risk. This bill provides a
new line of funding for research and outreach to parents of children
with food allergies. While it is only a small amount of money that is
necessary for the effort this year, the impact it will have is
dramatic.
In addition, I have some concerns with the additional $2 billion in
advance funding that was provided by the Budget Committee. My concern
is that advance funding can cause serious problems if future
allocations for this bill are not as robust.
With that said, again I would like to congratulate Chairman Obey and
his staff for what I think on the whole is a well-written bill. I want
to reiterate my appreciation for his willingness to work with us.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
I would also like to take this time to thank all of the staff people
who worked on this bill, most especially Rob Nabors, Christina
Hamilton, John Daniel, Lesley Turner, Kirstin Brost, Cheryl Smith, Sue
Quantius, Nicole Kunko, Muftiah McCartin, Teri Bergman, Andria Oliver,
Beth Chaney, Steve Crane, Anne Marie Goldsmith, Ron Anderson, and the
associate staff as well. We certainly could not have put together the
bill without them, and without them we would be making a whole lot more
mistakes than we are likely to make today.
Madam Chairman, I reserve balance of my time.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, at this time I yield such time
as he may consume to my distinguished leader on the committee, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis).
Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Chairman, I want to express my
appreciation to both Chairman Obey and my ranking member, the gentleman
from New York, for the cooperative spirit in which they worked to
produce this bill, a very difficult bill in the final analysis. With
that, I would like to say to Mr. Obey I very much appreciate his
ongoing cooperation as we try to work on all the bills in the
appropriations process this year to make some sense out of a very
difficult year. I would also like to express my deep appreciation for
the fabulous work done by the staff of this committee.
And having gone that far, Madam Chairman, let me say that the fiscal
year 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education and Related
Agencies bill, Labor-HHS, reflects a fundamental difference in opinion
on the level of funding necessary to support the Federal Government's
role in education, health and workforce programs. Regardless of that
disagreement, House Republicans agree that many of the programs funded
in this bill are vitally important. The majority party would have the
public believe otherwise.
In fact, House Republicans have shown the American people over the
past 12 years that we recognize the importance of these programs. With
history as our witness, we have demonstrated our commitment not in
words but in action.
It should not be forgotten that it was House Republicans who
demonstrated a commitment to fundamental research by doubling the
budget of National Institutes for Health. It was House Republicans who
bolstered the discretionary budget for the Department of Education by
72 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars.
Even with our unquestionable dedication to the programs in this bill
over the last 12 years, Republicans stand accused by the Democratic
majority of shortchanging fundamental research, shortchanging
education, and according to the rhetoric of the day, shortchanging our
very future. This rhetoric diminishes all that we do as elected
officials, and it does not serve the Congress or our country well.
The primary difference is that Republicans believe that we must
balance the benefits of these worthwhile programs with the fact that
the American taxpayer must pay for them.
I know that Chairman Obey feels very strongly about the Labor-H bill.
He is now working two full-time jobs as chairman of the full committee
and chairman of this subcommittee. He has also devoted one-half of the
$20 billion or so increase over the President's budget request in the
fiscal year 2008 302(b) allocation to the priorities contained in this
bill.
The fiscal year 2008 Labor-H bill is $10.2 billion over the
President's budget request and $6.6 billion over the fiscal year 2007
enacted level. Chairman Obey has said repeatedly that it is necessary
[[Page H7923]]
to increase the subcommittee allocation dramatically to make up for the
past funding shortfalls. But I remind the chairman that these programs
have grown by $85 billion over the last 13 years.
When Labor-HHS Chairman Neil Smith, a Democrat, presented his bill in
1994, total discretionary budget authority totaled $65 billion. If he
had predicted in 1994 that this very same bill, which largely covers
the same agencies today as it did then, would increase by $85 billion
over the next 13 years, the chairman of the full committee, who
happened to be David Obey, probably would not have believed it.
By any objective standard, whether you are Jerry Lewis or David Obey,
$85 billion is a healthy increase, and today the committee is poised to
spend an additional $10.2 billion under the mistaken notion that
throwing money at our Nation's problems will cause them to fade away.
While many of these programs are popular on both sides of the aisle,
a $10.2 billion increase is not without consequence, particularly when
this bill contains what can rightly be considered lower priority and
duplicative programs. For example, the committee-reported bill provides
$420 million in 2-year advance appropriations for the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting. Most objective observers will agree that providing
these resources may be nice to do, but it hardly measures up to
providing health care services to the poorest of Americans in terms of
its priority.
Furthermore, there are a host of programs in the bill that duplicate
activities that are funded elsewhere, not just in this bill but in
other appropriations bills as well. For example, this legislation
continues three programs that deal with violence prevention; one in the
Labor Department, another in the Department of Health and Human
Services, the third in the Department of Education. There are
additional programs within the jurisdiction of the Department of
Justice that serve exactly the same purpose. Little real oversight was
conducted to ferret out unnecessary and wasteful spending on these
duplicative programs.
Yet another example is the funding the bill provides within the
Administration for Children and Families for community economic
development. According to this very committee report, these funds are
intended to support employment, training, and business development
opportunities for low-income residents in poor communities. Services
that are already provided by the Department of Labor, the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, and the Economic Development
Administration.
Surely the majority party could have met the very highest priority
needs in this bill such as community health care centers or programs
providing funding to educate youngsters living in poverty by
eliminating duplicative programs or curtailing spending on lower
priorities. Instead of making the tough choices between high- and low-
priority programs or eliminating the duplication, this bill takes the
easy way out: just spend more money.
The budget resolution adopted by the Democrat majority earlier this
year and the appropriations bills that we are now considering spend
some $23 billion more than the President requested. As we move forward
with consideration of the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bills,
Members of Congress ought to be aware that the average additional
burden on the individual taxpayer to finance the spending spree
outlined in the majority's budget will amount to roughly $3,000 to the
individual taxpayer, $3,000.
I know it is difficult for many Members to oppose substantial
increases in these popular programs; however, I remind Chairman Obey
and our colleagues that these increases are not without consequence.
Make no mistake about it. Excessive spending will force the American
taxpayer to shoulder the burden of this extra spending. And if past is
prologue, we will continue to pass this debt along to future
generations.
As we complete consideration of our work this week, the House will
have approved an additional $20.4 billion in spending above the
President's budget request for the next year. This level is $36.4
billion above the fiscal year 2007 enacted level.
So where is the Appropriations Committee in terms of getting its work
done this year? It is July 17 and the House has five bills left to
complete. The Senate has yet to take any of its bills to the floor and
likely will not this month. Based on the present pace in both bodies, I
have grave concern about our ability to complete our work this year
through the regular order process.
Chairman Obey is fond of pointing out that the process in the House
this year has been delayed by having to complete action on the fiscal
year 2007 bills. It is no surprise that he often fails to mention the
role that the Senate played in this equation. The Senate failed to
complete its work last year, and today history is repeating itself.
It is ironically unfortunate that the same type of legislative train
wreck is likely to occur again this year. The scenario is becoming more
and more apparent with each passing day. While it is only July, if past
experience is any guide, a warning is in order. Once again the Senate
is showing absolutely no inclination or ability towards moving
appropriations bills, setting up the inevitable end-of-the-year omnibus
strategy.
My colleagues, it has not yet been stated in so many words, but this
is, or soon will become, the strategy to complete our work this year.
And mark my words, not only will most of our appropriations bills end
up in an omnibus, it will be a well-adorned Christmas tree filled with
plenty of legislative goodies, perfectly timed to coincide with the
holidays.
{time} 1630
I want to be very clear about this, an omnibus is absolutely the
wrong and fiscally reckless approach to completing this year's work. It
would inflate the budget deficit, reward bad behavior, and negate any
semblance of fiscal discipline demonstrated by this body in recent
years.
Short of passing our conference reports individually, the best
alternative would be to once again pass a clean year-long continuing
resolution at the current rate of fiscal year 2007 levels, and without
Member projects. That is, of course, an undesirable option. But if at
the end of the process the House and the Senate cannot complete their
work in a responsible fashion, passing a clean CR will be the best
option remaining to complete this year's work.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).
Mrs. LOWEY. Thank you to Chairman Obey, Ranking Member Walsh, and
their staff for their hard work in crafting this bill.
At the start of the year, Chairman Obey asked us to consider not only
the challenges of today, but those of the year ahead, and I believe the
bill does just that. The bill addresses the appalling reality that 46
million people in this country lack health insurance by providing a
$200 million increase for community health centers, $75 million for
grants for States to develop plans to cover their uninsured, $75
million for States to create insurance pools for high-risk individuals.
Furthermore, recognizing that one of the best ways to keep women
healthy is to provide them with access to high-quality family planning
services and other preventative health care, the bill provides a $27
million increase to the Title X family program for low-income women.
The bill acknowledges that millions of students are shut out of
college for financial reasons or lack of preparation in the early years
and increases the maximum Pell Grant award by $200, restores proposed
cuts to supplemental education grants, and increases both GEAR UP and
TRIO.
The bill provides desperately needed relief to after-school programs
by increasing 21st Century Community Learning Centers by $125 million.
As a result of the Republican-controlled Congress level funding this
program for more than 5 years in a row, thousands of children,
including more than 34,000 in New York could lose these programs if
this increase isn't approved quickly.
At a time when we're on the cusp of finding cures for some of the
world's most devastating diseases, this bill increases our investment
in biomedical research, and the bill provides a $700
[[Page H7924]]
million increase for NIH which would allow for hundreds of new research
grants.
However, I would be remiss if I didn't express my disappointment that
the mark also includes an increase by the same amount for abstinence-
only programs when there is mounting evidence questioning the accuracy
of some of the curriculum taught in those programs.
We all agree that we must teach our children that abstinence is the
best way to prevent pregnancy and STDs. We should all also agree that
abstinence-until-marriage programs must provide children with the most
medically accurate information available. Unfortunately, study after
study has found that many of these programs teach inaccurate and even
harmful information to our young people.
I also hope to work with Chairman Obey as the bill moves through the
legislative process to reverse the potential damage of the large
Workforce Investment Act reduction that was passed during Committee
markup. If these cuts are enacted, New York could lose approximately
$28 million in worker training funds.
Despite these two concerns, this bill--for the first time in a number
of years--takes big steps towards addressing some of our nation's most
pressing challenges. I am proud to support it, and I encourage my
colleagues to do the same.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I now yield 4 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), former chairman of the
committee.
(Mr. REGULA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. REGULA. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the fiscal year 2008
appropriations bill for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human
Services, Education, and related agencies.
As you know, I chaired the subcommittee responsible for providing the
funding in this bill for the previous 6 years, and I am pleased to
provide my support today. The bill provides Federal funds that touch
every American. And it's important in serving as the backbone for our
medical research, job training, and key education programs at all
levels of learning.
I do want to compliment Chairman Obey and Ranking Member Walsh on the
excellent job they did in crafting this legislation. Within the bill's
allocation, they have targeted increased dollars in key areas that I
strongly support.
First, as we continue to ask for more in the performance of our
teachers and students under the No Child Left Behind Act, we continue
to maintain the vital role the classroom teacher plays in student
achievement. I am extremely pleased that the bill funds the Teacher
Incentive Fund, a program that awards teachers for student achievement
at $99 million.
Next, our Nation's future economic success depends on an educated
population. An education that ends at high school no longer suffices in
our globally competitive world. Therefore, I strongly support the
increase in the Pell Grant for students, which reaches a new high of
$4,700 in this bill.
Our Nation's biomedical research effort has made great strides since
we doubled the funding for the National Institutes of Health during my
tenure and led by our previous speaker in years past.
I am pleased that the bill will build on NIH funding in our continued
attempts as a Nation to seek treatments and cures for the debilitating
diseases that strike us, our family and friends.
Next, I talked about our competitive global economy, and I support
funding to assist our current workers in improving their skills through
the Department of Labor's employment and job training programs that are
passed through to our local communities for use directly in these
communities and for Jobs Corps, which gives our young people a second
chance to participate in the workforce in society.
I could go on highlighting the numerous programs in the bill that
impact Americans. But let me close by expressing my support for the
increase in funding for the administrative costs for the Social
Security Administration.
While the benefits Americans receive for Social Security or
disability support are provided through mandatory spending, without
good people and a sufficient staff to process these claims, the program
would not run. Therefore, I support the $400 million increase in
funding for the SSA administrative cost. Americans deserve effective
and efficient responses to their claim requests. And with that funding,
I'm hopeful the SSA will continue to improve and shorten its response
times.
Again, this is a very good bill. I congratulate my colleagues on the
subcommittee for their work in bringing it before us today. I urge my
colleagues in the House to support this bill.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, may I inquire as to how much
time is remaining?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York has 10 minutes; the
gentleman from Wisconsin has 17 minutes.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson).
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I want to thank the Chair for the time.
Madam Chairman, I rise to voice my strong support for H.R. 4033, the
Labor-HHS bill. There is no bill that Congress produces on an annual
basis that has such a profound impact on everyday people's lives like
this bill.
I want to congratulate Chairman Obey and the subcommittee staff on
the product that is before us today. I also want to thank Ranking
Member Walsh and the minority subcommittee staff working with us to
produce this bill.
I think former Labor-HHS Chairman Ralph Regula said it best when he
described this bill as the ``people's bill.'' And I want to commend the
gentleman for his statement in support of this product.
This might seem obvious, but your view depends on where you stand.
From where I stand, I see an America today where the overall
unemployment rate is 4.5 percent. For African Americans it's 8.5
percent. The average life expectancy is 77.6 years. For African
Americans it is 69.2. Sixty-three percent of white students graduate
from college. For African Americans, it's 43 percent. These numbers
represent real problems for real people that need real solutions, not
tax cuts and amendments to cut 1 percent and .5 percent across the
board. This bill is a solution that illustrates how Congress can solve
real problems.
We've heard from the other side already language like ``wrong,''
``fiscally and recklessly irresponsible.'' The entire debate about
earmarks is to divert our attention away from these very real problems
that this bill seeks to solve.
Specifically, this bill includes a $43 million nominal increase for
Job Corps, projecting the administration's proposal to cut 4,310
student training slots. The administration's request for CDC would have
reduced funding for our primary health activities by $159.4 million,
cutting childhood immunizations, State and local public health
emergency preparedness, and efforts to combat chronic diseases such as
diabetes and heart disease and emerging infection.
Madam Chairman, I encourage Members to look at the facts around this
bill and to be supportive.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I now yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from Florida, a member of the subcommittee, Dr. Weldon.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise to speak about an amendment that was introduced by me in the
committee, and overwhelmingly adopted by the committee by voice vote.
And I rise mainly to address the concerns being raised by members of
the American Academy of Pediatrics and other members sending letters to
the Congress from the public health community.
Let me state from the outset, as a physician, I strongly support
vaccinating children and adults. Indeed, I gave a lot of vaccines.
Immunizing kids against the flu is a particularly good idea. It
prevents the kids from getting the flu, but it also, because children
have bad personal hygiene and they tend to spread the flu around if
they get it, by vaccinating kids and preventing them from getting the
flu you actually prevent adults from getting the flu.
Certainly I believe the American Academy of Pediatrics is a great
organization, as are the public health officials who do the work in
administering these vaccines, even though they are complaining about my
amendment.
[[Page H7925]]
Let me just state from the outset, my amendment simply implements the
policy that the American Academy of Pediatrics established in 1999,
when they stated, The Public Health Service, the American Academy of
Pediatrics and vaccine manufacturers agree that thimerosal-containing
vaccines should be removed as soon as possible. My amendment does
nothing more than implement that policy.
Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative that is toxic. If I
brought some thimerosal to this Chamber, spilled it on that table, we
would have to evacuate the Chamber. That is how toxic it is.
Now, in 1999, the manufacturers, in coordination with the AAP, the
CDC and the drug industry, removed all of the mercury from all of the
childhood vaccines in 18 months. They removed it from the DPT and the
hepatitis B. Eighteen months after adopting that policy in 1999, all of
the pediatric vaccines had been produced and manufactured without any
mercury in them. And then in 2004, a decision was made to add flu
vaccine to the vaccine scheduled for children. And since that time it
has been very difficult for me to get the American Academy of
Pediatrics and the CDC and the manufacturers to take this issue
seriously and get the mercury out of the childhood vaccines.
And let me just also add, this is a bipartisan issue. I have a bill
that I've introduced with Representative Carolyn Maloney from New York
to get all this mercury out. There are many Democrats and many
Republicans on this bill.
Now, some of the people who are opposing my amendment are actually
claiming that children who were not vaccinated last year who got the
flu died, and if there's not enough flu vaccine available, that more
children may not get vaccinated and there may be more deaths. I would
like to just simply point out that one of the issues here is public
confidence in the vaccine program, and that many of these parents who
didn't get their kids vaccinated maybe didn't get their kids vaccinated
because they were concerned about the mercury in the flu vaccine. And,
indeed, you might ask the question of the deaths that occurred last
year, might some of them not have occurred if we had a mercury-free
vaccine on the market?
Now, I want to refer to this chart briefly because I think this
basically says it all.
In 2004, we were producing a little bit over 80 million doses of flu
vaccine, and today we're producing over 130 million doses. But yet,
officials have made no attempt to increase the amount of mercury-free
vaccine that is being produced in this country. Mind you, the Europeans
are producing more than enough mercury-free to vaccinate their kids.
They have figured out how to do it. Mind you, I said earlier 18 months
was all it took to get the mercury out of all of the other childhood
vaccines. And why, after all these years, year after year, they say
they want to get the mercury out of the childhood vaccines and they're
not doing it. They're got getting it out of the flu vaccine. And they
can do it and they will do it.
What this really boils down to, my colleagues, is an issue of
leadership. CDC, AAP, the public health community has not exercised
proper leadership on this issue, and it falls to us to do the right
thing.
The language that I put in this bill is not covering this flu season,
it's covering next flu season. They have more than a year to address
this issue. I think they can. And that's why I put that language in the
bill.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard).
(Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD asked and was given permission to revise and
extend her remarks.)
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this bill,
and I commend Chairman Obey and Ranking Member Walsh for their strong
leadership in crafting this bipartisan legislation.
Our commitment to expand access to health care and other essential
human services is reaffirmed in this bill by restoring funding to
programs that put health care within the reach of an additional 2
million Americans.
For example, under the provisions of this bill, community health
centers can provide an additional one million medically underserved
Americans with primary and preventive care.
{time} 1645
Education funding levels in this bill also demonstrate our deep-
seated commitment to investing in educational opportunity for all
America's children. For example, this bill helps level the playing
field for disadvantaged minority students by beginning, finally, to
provide adequate resources for title I. The bill reinvests in the
American workforce by restoring funding to critical education and job
training programs that have been neglected in recent years. In
particular, the bill provides a much needed increase to America's
migrant and seasonal farmworkers who are the backbone of the
agricultural industry.
Finally, on the issue I have worked on for many years, I am
particularly gratified that the committee has provided funds for the
STOP Underage Drinking programs. This recently enacted initiative will
go a long way toward reducing the crises of underage drinking in our
country and the tragic consequences it has on our youth and society as
a whole.
I look forward to continuing to work with our Democratic leadership
and my colleagues in the House to move our Nation closer to the goal of
ensuring every American has access to quality health care, every
student has a real chance to succeed, and every worker is given the
tools to prosper.
Madam Chairman, in closing, I thank Chairman Obey for his hard work
and for his commitment to improving the lives of Americans. I extend my
gratitude to Cheryl Smith and the rest of the subcommittee staff for
their dedication and commitment as well.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the former Governor.
Mr. CASTLE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Chairman, I would just like to make two brief points, perhaps
to Chairman Obey, about this bill that concern me, although I think the
bill is well done. I am basically supportive of it.
The first is something which the President has vetoed, the stem cell
research legislation. Back in August of 2001, he signed an order which
allowed 21 different stem cell lines to be developed. There was a lot
of discussion that in this particular bill that we could have actually
updated that date from 2001 until 2007.
There have been 400 private lines developed since that time; that is,
without any Federal dollars whatsoever. They could have been used for
research by anybody if indeed we could have had it approved in this
legislation. As a result of that, I drafted an amendment to do just
that. But I have been informed that it will not be in order if I were
to present it, so I will not present it.
I think this is a missed opportunity. I say to the chairman, because
he was supportive of the stem cell research, that my judgment is we
should do everything in our power to be able to enhance and to further
that research in America. This was an opportunity which is
unfortunately lost.
The other point I would like to make also deals with health, which is
a matter of great concern to all of us, obviously, and that is the
increase in NIH research. Basically, when you boil it all down, the
increase here is 1.9 percent. It has been widely discussed that it's
2.6 percent. But this includes $900 million to the global HIV/AIDS fund
that will be transferred immediately to the Department of State. It
will not go directly into research.
The amount which is left is 1.9 percent, which would be almost the
smallest increase for NIH in 38 years. We will lose length and quality
of life to disease and disability. New research opportunities will go
unfunded. The number of new therapies will continue to decline. Flat
funding may discourage, along with the embryonic stem cell research
going by the boards, the best and brightest young scientists remaining
in the United States. Another year of failure to provide sustained,
strong growth and Federal support for medical research is a problem.
Madam Chairman, I would hope before it is all said and done that we
can address these two issues.
[[Page H7926]]
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy).
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam Chairman, I want to rise and congratulate the
gentleman from Wisconsin, Chairman Obey, as well as Ranking Member
Walsh for their good work on this bill.
This bill, Madam Chairman, does a great deal in rejecting the
President's cuts that would have provided $7.6 billion below last
year's level in programs vital to protecting our Nation's health and
education system.
This bill today, instead, provides a 3 percent increase over last
year in areas such as family intervention, early learning, education
and health care access. Let me tell you what that means. That means
that we can help make a difference in averting the kinds of problems
that will come later on, because now we will invest in prevention.
Programs such as the SAMHSA, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration program, and Starting Early Starting Smart, which
invests in family intervention, are so crucial. We know from the
Adverse Childhood Experiences Study that the Kaiser Foundation did that
families that are in crisis produce children that are at higher risk
for not only delinquency but for drug abuse, for HIV, and for greater
health care problems.
In this bill, we provide funds to go towards those families so that
we can reach those parents. If we reach those parents, we reach those
children. That, my friends, is what real family values are all about;
it is reaching out to the families in this country in order to reach
the children of this country. If we reach these children, they will be
able to grow and prosper, and we as a Nation will be even stronger for
it.
Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman for the work that he has done in
helping to build a stronger safety net for the children of this
country. It will make our country an even stronger place for all of us
to live.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I reserve my time.
Mr. OBEY. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE. Madam Chairman, let me thank the chairman and our ranking
member and our staff for their very diligent and brilliant work,
really, in crafting this bipartisan bill. As a new member of the
committee and the subcommittee, it has been a true honor to work with
the chairman and our staff and our ranking member on this bill.
I must tell you, we had our work cut out for us because of the deep
draconian cuts that the President proposed and because of the
President's priorities of tax cuts for the rich and the invasion and
occupation of Iraq. I am pleased that this bill rejects most of those
cuts and makes the kinds of investments that recognize that an educated
and skilled workforce and a healthy population are the backbone of our
national security.
Let me highlight a few of these investments.
First, in the area of education, this bill invests in strengthening
our minority-serving institutions by providing a $249.5 million for our
Historically Black Colleges and Universities, which is an $11.4 million
increase over FY 2007 levels, and also we increased by $4.5 million
above FY 2007 the President's request for our Hispanic-serving
institutions.
With regard to helping our low-income students go to college, we have
increased TRIO and GEAR UP, which really do provide first generation
college students the resources to enter and complete college.
With several universities in my district, we have increased the
maximum Pell Grant, which will benefit millions of students which I
know my district truly will benefit from.
On the issue of economic opportunity and a trained, skilled
workforce, this bill reverses deep cuts in workforce training and
requires the Secretary of Labor to provide a plan to address the huge
dramatic disparities in unemployment in the African American and other
communities of color.
We have increased, actually, by $100 million the Ryan White CARE Act,
which, of course, is our HIV and AIDS funding.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I reserve my time.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), who is really not
celebrating her birthday on the same day as the Baltimore Orioles.
Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support
of this bill, which makes needed investments in our family security and
therefore our national security. I want to congratulate Chairman Obey
and Ranking Member Walsh for bringing forward a good bill, a bill that
makes critical investments in America's families and in our country's
future. This is my first year on the Appropriations Committee, and I am
honored to have an opportunity to be part of this subcommittee.
The investments in this bill will affect every family in America.
Today, we ensure our children have an opportunity for quality
education, help families and students afford college, and increase
access to community health clinics.
As Mr. Obey says, this bill is about the country we want to be, and
that is the country we deserve to be.
For too long the Bush administration has been negligent in its
underfunding of education and health care, putting enormous strains on
local governments, on schools and on local taxpayers. Today we move in
a new direction by investing in families, prioritizing what matters:
the education of our students, health care research in diabetes, cancer
and heart disease, job training for those who are affected by our
changing economy and for our returning veterans, energy assistance for
our elderly, and early childhood education.
When we make responsible and necessary investments in our children
and in our communities, we strengthen our families and we strengthen
our Nation by ensuring our global competitiveness.
Once again, I thank Chairman Obey for his leadership on the
committee, for his commitment to strengthening America and bettering
the lives of Americans.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I continue to reserve my time.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman and I thank
Mr. Walsh, the ranking member, for putting such a terrific bill
together that is going to allow our Nation to compete in the global
economy of the 21st century.
This bill makes investments in our kids, this bill makes investments
in our workers, and this bill makes investments in American families.
If our kids and our workers are healthy and educated, then we will be
able to compete in the global economy.
I think it is important, just with this bill, if we look at what is
going to happen next year when these investments hit, when students and
workers are going to get a Pell Grant and it is $500 or $600 or $700
more for them. Tack that on to the education bill last week, where
interest rates will be cut in half. Tack that on to the Energy and
Water appropriations bill, where we are investing in our scientists and
alternative energy research and we are creating new sectors of the
economy so that we can compete in a global economy.
The anxiety that has been felt across this country over the last
couple of years has been profound, and this bill helps address the
challenges that American families have had. By reducing the cost of
education, by making sure that we have community health clinics for
people to go and take their kids, with the SCHIP program, this bill
will have more to do with us being a competitive country in the next
couple of decades, I think, than anything else we could possibly do.
So I would like to thank the chairman and ranking member and say that
this is a bipartisan bill. This came out of the committee with the
unanimous support of Democrats and Republicans, who agree that these
investments needed to be made.
Madam Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman again and thank the
Republicans for their support.
{time} 1700
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I continue to reserve the
balance of my time.
[[Page H7927]]
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).
Mr. HINOJOSA. Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of the fiscal
year 2008 Labor, HHS and Education appropriations bill that is before
us today.
I would like to express my admiration and gratitude to Chairman Obey
and the members of the committee for bringing forward a bill that
reflects our values and our commitment to investing in education.
As the chairman of the Higher Education Lifelong Learning and
Competitiveness Subcommittee, I am pleased to see the significant
increases for student financial aid, for GEAR UP and TRIO programs.
These investments make a real difference, and they have not come a
moment too soon.
Recent reports estimate that by the year 2025, just to keep pace with
our international competitors, the United States would need to produce
an additional 15.6 million college graduates. That translates to
another 781,000 degrees per year. GEAR UP and TRIO help close the
college awareness and readiness gap.
Pell Grants and campus-based student aid programs close the
affordability gap. This legislation coupled with the recently passed
budget reconciliation bill signal that we are serious about ensuring
that our students have the education and the skills they need to
compete.
As chairman of the Education Task Force for the Congressional
Hispanic Caucus, I am particularly heartened to see the commitment in
this bill to increase educational opportunities for Hispanic students.
This legislation reverses the trend of the past of eliminating, cutting
or at best flat-lining the key programs that provide the pillars of
educational support to the Hispanic community. They include migrant
education programs for English language learners, developing Hispanic-
serving institutions, Even Start Family Literacy, GEAR UP, TRIO and
adult education. Together, we call them the Hispanic education action
plan.
In 2006, every single program in the Hispanic education action plan
was reduced. Elections do make a difference.
For 2008, on top of the $1.5 billion increase to the core title I
program in No Child Left Behind, we have over $212 million increases to
the other programs, including a long overdue investment program for
English language learners.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
New York (Mrs. Maloney).
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of
this bill. And in particular, I want to sincerely and deeply thank
Chairman Obey and Ranking Member Walsh on behalf of all New Yorkers and
this Nation for providing the leadership to include for the first time
much-needed money for the health care needs of the heroes and heroines
of 9/11.
These rescue, recovery and cleanup workers selflessly rushed into the
flames of 9/11 to save the lives of others. We lost 3,000 people on 9/
11, but many thousands more lost their health. This bill includes $50
million for their treatment. This is the first time it has been part of
an appropriations bill, and I deeply thank Chairman Obey for working so
hard to make this happen. In the past it has been tacked onto emergency
spending and to the Iraq spending bill, but it is the least we can do
to provide health care to these men and women.
Very importantly, the bill includes detailed language requiring the
administration to develop and submit a long-term comprehensive plan to
address these critical health needs. This is a tremendous step forward.
I thank Chairman Obey.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman of the
committee. I have no further comments other than to say I enjoyed
working with the chairman on this bill and his staff. I think we have a
good work product here.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Frankly, Madam Chairman, I was filibustering in hopes that the
majority leader would arrive, but he is in the middle of a meeting and
can't make it. So let me simply second the comments of the gentleman
from New York. I think this is a good bipartisan product. I think we
can work with the Senate to produce a bill which people on both sides
of the aisle and both sides of the Capitol can support with pride.
Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chairman, I write today in opposition to the Weldon
amendment to the Labor/HHS appropriations bill. This amendment would
prohibit appropriated funds from being used to administer thimerosal-
containing flu vaccine in the 2008-2009 flu season to children under 3.
This legislation is strongly opposed by a number of public health
groups including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American
Public Health Association, the Association of State and Territorial
Health Officials, the National Association of County and City Health
Officials, the Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs, and
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). According to
public health officials, this language would pose real risks to public
health, particularly to the youngest children who are most susceptible
to the serious complications from flu, including death.
The American Academy of Pediatrics, in their letter opposing this
amendment, assures us that there is scientific evidence that ``the
thimerosal in influenza vaccine is not a danger to health.'' The
Institute of Medicine examined all of the available evidence on the
association between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism. In 2004
the I0M issued a report that concluded that the evidence was sufficient
to say that thimerosal-containing vaccines do not cause autism.
Since that time there has been no new compelling evidence that would
change the I0M's conclusion. In fact, because thimerosal has been
removed from all other pediatric vaccines, children in the last 5 years
have received much less thimerosal than they had in the 1990s, and yet
autism rates continue to go up, not down.
The practical impact of the bill would be that the demand for
thimerosal-free vaccine would exceed current production capacity. While
technically the bill would prohibit only the youngest children who get
Vaccines for Children vaccine from getting thimerosal-containing
vaccine, the reality is that the message Congress would be sending to
all parents is that the thimerosal-containing vaccine is less safe than
the thimerosal-free vaccine. It is likely that most, if not all,
parents would demand thimerosal-free vaccine for all of their children.
There are simply not enough doses of thimerosal-free vaccine to meet
that kind of demand and it is unlikely that there would be for at least
several years. Vaccine companies are moving to increase the production
of thimerosal-free vaccines, but doing so requires building new
facilities, or expanding existing facilities, and then going through a
new FDA approval process.
Furthermore, there is currently only one company with a licensed
thimerosal-free product for children under 3. If that company
experienced production problems or delays in its thimerosal-free
product, this would leave us without any vaccine for this population.
Even if there were sufficient vaccine to immunize all children under
3 with thimerosal-free vaccine, we have a private vaccine distribution
system and there would be no way to ensure that each dose of
thimerosal-free vaccine would be matched up with a child under 3. In
recent years there have been shortages of flu vaccine. In order to make
sure that those most susceptible to the flu get vaccinated, CDC has
asked that vaccine be given first to priority groups, including very
young children, the elderly, health care workers, and people with
certain illnesses. Unfortunately, we have seen that this has not worked
very well. There is no reason to believe that the system would work any
better to make sure that the thimerosal-free vaccine goes first to
children under 3.
In fact, there is nothing that would prevent one state from buying up
all of the thimerosal-free vaccine for its population leaving the rest
of the country without vaccine for the youngest children. That could
cost lives. These are the children who are most susceptible to the
serious complications from flu.
I urge Members to consider that this language could harm those very
children the authors are trying to help. By restricting their access to
flu vaccine, they will not prevent a single child from getting autism,
but they may expose children to the very serious risks posed by
influenza.
Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of the Labor,
Health, Human Services and Education Appropriations bill for Fiscal
Year 2008. Overall, this is a very good bill, and I will vote for it.
In this difficult fiscal environment, it provides funding for critical
programs that have been starved by the Administration and the
Republican Congress.
This bill provides significant increases for Education programs
including resources for
[[Page H7928]]
teacher quality, early education and after school programs, and it
provides more for Low Income Home Energy Assistance. It also provides
important resources for preventive health care, for the title IIV and
title IIIV Health professions training programs, and for the Ryan White
program.
While I will support the bill, I am very disappointed that we were
not able to provide more funding for the critical work conducted at the
National Institutes of Health. The NIH embodies our country's hope for
treating or curing debilitating diseases like heart disease,
Alzheimer's, cystic fibrosis, diabetes, cancer and so many other
illnesses that American families battle every day. But scientific
advances don't just occur by accident. They are the result of sustained
investments in research. Unfortunately, since 2003, Republicans flat-
lined the NIH budget, and NIH has lost 13 percent of its research
funding when adjusted for inflation.
I was hopeful that this year we would be able to end that devastating
trend and get the NIH budget back on track by providing the NIH with
significant increases over the rate of inflation.
Although I am disappointed that we were not able to provide more for
NIH this year, I look forward to working with the distinguished chair
and the members of the Appropriations committee in the future to ensure
that we provide our country's premier medical research institution with
the funding it needs to find treatments and cures to our country's most
devastating diseases.
Mr. SIMPSON. Madam Chairman, in accordance with House earmark
reforms, I would like to place into the record a listing of
Congressionally-directed projects in my home state of Idaho that are
contained within the report to the FY08 Labor, Health and Human
Services, and Education Appropriations bill.
I'd like to take just a few minutes to describe why I supported these
projects and why they are valuable to the nation and its taxpayers.
The report contains $300,000 for the Literacy Matters! Program
administered by the Lee Pesky Learning Center in Boise. The Literacy
Matters! Program is aimed at educating new mothers on the importance of
early childhood literacy and math skills and providing them with
resources for educating their children. The funding is used to provide
every mother of a newborn in Idaho with a book created by the Lee Pesky
Learning Center that helps them with teaching early literacy and math
skills. The books are distributed through Idaho hospitals and the
program has been highly successful. This is the second year of federal
funding for the program.
This project was requested by the Lee Pesky Learning Center in Boise,
Idaho.
The report contains $300,000 for the Idaho Caring Foundation's
program to provide dental services to low-income, uninsured children
who would otherwise have no access to such services. The program will
provide access to needed dental care for 600 low-income, uninsured
children throughout Idaho. Eligible children will be identified by
working in partnership with Idaho schools, health departments, Head
Start programs, and YMCA programs. Dental services will be provided by
over 90 dentists who are Caring Foundation providers, providing oral
health services for reduced fees. Federal funding is only a portion of
the total costs of the program. As a dentist, I understand the
importance of proper dental hygiene at a very young age. Serious health
and self esteem problems can quickly evolve if dental hygiene is
neglected early in a child's development. This is an outstanding
program that enjoys my complete support. This is the second year of
federal funding for the program.
This project was requested by the Idaho Caring Foundation in Boise,
Idaho.
The report contains $250,000 for the Discovery Center of Idaho's new
facility. The funding will assist with efforts initiated by the
Discovery Center and the J.R. Simplot Foundation to build a new model
of a ``hands-on'' science center to captivate the attention of and
inspire tomorrow's leaders and innovators. The 70,000 square foot
Center will be founded on three core strengths, inspiring stories of
innovation including Mr. Simplot's story, iconic collection of working
steam tractors and DCI's expertise in igniting curiosity, through
interactive science exhibits and programs. The center will be a
resource for the region, with particular interest in serving rural
areas to help break the myth that innovation is a new urban
phenomenon--that ingenuity is found wherever and whenever an observant
creative human being has a problem to solve. This is a tremendous
opportunity to create a new approach to bridging the gap in science and
technology education. The $250,000 federal investment is a very small
portion of what is expected to be a $40,000,000 project.
This project was requested by the Discovery Center of Idaho in Boise,
Idaho.
The report contains $200,000 for the College of Southern Idaho's Pro-
Tech Training Program which partners with local agencies and companies
to identify training needs in the community and provide for those needs
by training talented Idaho students. The College partners with other
agencies to identify training needs and to identify potential
candidates for employment. The most recent of these ventures are the
training programs that were established for Dell Computers and its call
center in Twin Falls. In addition, data provided by Region IV of the
Idaho Economic Development Agency indicate that manufacturing will be a
leading employment area in the Magic Valley with over 250 new jobs
expected over the next two years.
This project was requested by the College of Southern Idaho in Twin
Falls, Idaho.
The report contains $200,000 for St. Luke's Hospital's Children's
Health Services Expansion. The Children's Health Services Expansion
project provides essential growth in capacity for Pediatric Medical/
Surgical, Pediatric Intensive Care, Neonatal Intensive Care, Pediatric
Oncology, and Pediatric Surgical Suites and support areas, to meet the
needs of the rapidly growing population in the hospital's service area.
The hospital is spending millions on the expansion and federal funds
will represent only a small portion of the project's total costs. This
is the fourth year of federal funding for this program.
The project was requested by St. Luke's Regional Medical Center in
Boise, Idaho.
The report contains $200,000 for Teton Valley Hospital and
Surgicenter's Revitalization Project. Teton Valley Hospital &
Surgicenter, a 13-bed Critical Access Hospital, provides an emergency
room and a full scope of primary care services to the residents in and
around Teton Valley, a rural community of just over 7,000 residents,
nestled against the Teton Mountains in Southeast Idaho and Western
Wyoming. Its population has grown by more than 99% over the past 15
years, ranking it in the top two fastest growing counties in Idaho for
the last six years. This population growth has seriously strained the
resources of the hospital and necessitated the revitalization project.
Federal funds represent only a portion of the project's total costs.
This project was requested by Teton Valley Hospital & Surgicenter in
Driggs, Idaho.
The report contains $200,000 for Madison County Memorial Hospital.
Madison County Memorial Hospital services a growing area encompassing
five counties and quite simply has outgrown its facilities. Increased
capacity for obstetrics (Madison County Memorial Hospital has more
births than any other hospital of its size in the State of Idaho and
possibly the nation) and inpatient and outpatient surgeries are needed.
The size of this project is 70,000 sq. feet of new construction and
85,000 sq. feet of remodeling, with an overall budget of $49 million
and an equipment budget of over $7 million. Federal funding will be
used for necessary medical equipment for the expanded and remodeled
facility and represents a very small portion of the overall funding for
this project.
This project was requested by Madison County Memorial Hospital in
Rexburg, Idaho.
The report contains $400,000 for a Community Detox Center in Boise,
Idaho. The need for a detox facility is both pressing and long-
standing. According to a 2002 study by Boise State University's Center
for Health Policy, rates of drug and alcohol abuse are worse in the
Treasure Valley than in the rest of Idaho. Over 17,000 individuals in
Ada and Canyon Counties were deemed at-risk for substance dependence in
2000, and the region severely lacks beds for detox patients,
particularly those on limited incomes. To fill this void, hospital
emergency rooms are acting as de facto drug and/ or alcohol detox
centers which adds to rising health care costs. The proposed facility
is a 24-hour medically monitored alcohol and drug sobering station and
36-bed detox center for indigent patients treated by a professional,
qualified staff. Typical stays for sobering will be 12 hours and
typical stays for detoxification will be 5-6 days; following sobering
and/or detoxification, patients will be referred to appropriate
education and treatment programs.
This project was requested by the United Way of Treasure Valley in
Boise, Idaho.
The report contains $200,000 for the Advanced Clinical Simulation
Laboratory at Idaho State University. This funding will be used to
develop an Advanced Clinical Simulation Laboratory (ACSL) to strengthen
nursing education, practice and research in Idaho. The ACLS will enable
students, faculty, and practice partners to become actively involved in
clinical simulation learning and conducting research related to student
learning, effectiveness of clinical education models and improving
patient care outcomes. The ACSL will also provide a research and
practice laboratory for nurse faculty and clinical educators to learn
and update knowledge about clinical educational models and teaching
with technology.
This project was requested by Idaho State University in Pocatello,
Idaho.
The report contains $200,000 for Idaho SySTEMic Solution: Plant Early
for STEM
[[Page H7929]]
Learning (science, technology, engineering, and math) at Boise State
University. Idaho SySTEMic Solution is a nationally relevant, hands-on,
project-based STEM learning system (science, technology, engineering,
and math) designed to spur achievement and confidence among elementary-
age learners and their teachers. Key project components will include:
(1) a comprehensive teacher training model that includes a one-week
summer institute and ongoing site-based follow-up training to boost the
ability and confidence of elementary teachers; (2) implementation into
demographically diverse schools (grades 1-5/6, urban to suburban to
rural, multicultural) of curriculum-aligned learning lab systems that
have been shown to improve student scores in math, science, and
technology; and (3) research and evaluation of results in accordance
with Idaho and national assessment standards to maximize the
effectiveness of transplanting this solution to other U.S. states.
This project was requested by Boise State University in Boise, Idaho.
I appreciate the opportunity to provide a list of Congressionally-
directed projects in my region and an explanation of my support for
them: (1) $300,000 for Early Literacy Matters, Lee Pesky Learning
Center; (2) $300,000 for Idaho Caring Foundation Dental Project; (3)
$200,000 for Children's Health Services Expansion; St. Luke's Regional
Medical Center; (4) $400,000 for Community Detox Center, United Way of
Treasure Valley; (5) $200,000 for Advanced Clinical Simulation
Laboratory, Idaho State University; (6) $200,000 for Idaho SySTEMic
Solution, Boise State University; (7) $200,000 for Madison County
Memorial Hospital Revitalization Project; (8) $200,000 for College of
Southern Idaho Pro-Tech Program, College of Southern Idaho; (9)
$200,000 for Teton Valley Hospital Revitalization Project, Teton Valley
Hospital; (10) $250,000 for the Discovery Center of Idaho Expansion,
Discovery Center of Idaho.
Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Madam Chairman, I strongly
support this bill to fund the departments of Labor, Health & Human
Services, and Education.
I commend Chairman Obey and his staff on their hard work and
dedication in putting together a bill that addresses the most pressing
needs of American families, including their health and safety and the
education of their children. I especially thank the Chairman for his
efforts to increase funding for school counselors. This bill provides
over $61 million for school counseling programs, a 77% increase over
last year's funding. This historic investment will expand counseling in
middle and high schools across the nation.
School counseling is a profession often treated as an afterthought in
school improvement efforts. But counselors play a critical role,
especially in high schools. High school is a transition period into
adulthood and the world of work. As students make this transition, many
lose their way and drop out. But a good counselor can help a student
find the right path. No matter how many credits a student is behind or
how many personal challenges she might face, counselors can help
students at risk develop a plan, access the right help, and graduate on
time.
Individual attention and follow-up from a counselor can help turn
around students' lives. Additional counselors, particularly at the
middle and high school levels, will be instrumental in helping schools
improve their graduation rates and achieve other goals of No Child Left
Behind.
Again, I thank the gentleman for his commitment to the education of
our young people, and I encourage all my colleagues to support this
bill.
Mr. HONDA. Madam Chairman, I rise today to express my support for
this bill and my deep appreciation for the leadership of Chairman Obey
in the crafting of this bill, the work of the committee staff, and the
spirit of bi-partisanship that has marked our subcommittee and full
committee proceedings on this bill.
Since being elected to Congress, I have worked hard to become a
member of this committee and I find it especially gratifying to have
had the opportunity to work on this bill. As Mr. Obey is fond of
saying, this is the people's bill. It funds the programs which are
critical to the health and welfare of millions of my fellow Americans
and I feel honored to be a part of taking this country in a new
direction.
By rejecting the President's request that we cut critical labor,
health, and education programs by $7.5 billion, and instead investing
in targeted, carefully considered increases, this bill shows the
American people Congress is serious about preserving and improving the
social fabric of our nation.
Although I am disappointed that we were unable to more significantly
increase the federal commitment to IDEA, I am glad that the committee
protected the program from the President's proposed $291 million cut. I
am particularly proud of the increases the bill makes to Title I--
education for the disadvantaged, Title VII--health professions
diversity programs, and CDC's Division of Viral Hepatitis.
The more than $4 billion increase in education funding contained in
this bill is desperately needed if we are to continue to lead the world
in the decades to come. Our students must have solid educational
grounding to succeed in college but just as importantly, they must have
the means to afford college. The $2 billion increase in Pell grants
will go a long way toward making college a reality for many students.
As many of my colleagues know, I have been deeply involved in the
effort to bring awareness to the problem of healthcare disparities.
Communities of color suffer disproportionately from disparities in
healthcare coverage, quality, and outcomes. The investments being made
by this bill in Title VII Health Professions programs, particularly the
increase in the diversity programs, are vital to increasing the
pipeline of minority health professionals in underserved communities.
Finally, I would like to highlight the funding crisis that faces
CDC's Division of Viral Hepatitis. The budget for this Division has
remained almost flat since fiscal year 2002 and this has resulted in a
serious curtailment of the Division's programs. There are an estimated
30 million people in the United States affected by a liver or liver
related disease. Asian Americans face a near epidemic, with 1 out of 10
Asian American and Pacific Islanders infected with chronic hepatitis B.
Included in the bill's 7.8 percent increase to the Centers for Disease
control, is a $1 million increase for the Division of Viral Hepatitis.
This appropriation begins a long overdue reversal of the inadequate
budgets given to this Division since fiscal year 2002 and I would like
to thank Chairman Obey for acknowledging the need to rectify this
situation.
Again, I would like to thank Chairman Obey, Ranking Member Walsh, and
all my other colleagues on the committee for their hard work and urge
my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. OBEY. I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment that he has
printed in the designated place in the Congressional Record. Those
amendments will be considered read.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3043
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Departments of
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and related
agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and
for other purposes, namely:
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
training and employment services
(including rescissions)
For necessary expenses of the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 (``the Act''), and the Women in Apprenticeship and
Nontraditional Occupations Act of 1992, including the
purchase and hire of passenger motor vehicles, the
construction, alteration, and repair of buildings and other
facilities, and the purchase of real property for training
centers as authorized by the Act, $3,579,530,000, plus
reimbursements, is available. Of the amounts provided:
(1) For grants to States for adult employment and training
activities, youth activities, and dislocated worker
employment and training activities, $2,994,510,000 as
follows:
(A) $864,199,000 for adult employment and training
activities, of which $152,199,000 is available for the period
July 1, 2008, to June 30, 2009, and of which $712,000,000 is
available for the period October 1, 2008, through June 30,
2009.
(B) $940,500,000 for youth activities, which shall be
available for the period April 1, 2008, through June 30,
2009.
(C) $1,189,811,000 for dislocated worker employment and
training activities, of which $341,811,000 is available for
the period July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009, and of which
$848,000,000 is available for the period October 1, 2008,
through June 30, 2009: Provided, That notwithstanding the
transfer limitation under section 133(b)(4) of such Act (29
U.S.C. 2863(B)(4)), up to 30 percent of such funds may be
transferred by a local board if approved by the Governor.
(2) For federally administered programs, $483,213,000 as
follows:
(A) $282,092,000 for the dislocated workers assistance
national reserve, of which $2,600,000 is available on October
1, 2007, of which $67,492,000 is available for the period
July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009, and of which
$212,000,000 is available for the period October 1, 2008,
through June 30, 2009: Provided, That up to $125,000,000 may
be made available for Community-Based Job Training
[[Page H7930]]
grants: Provided further, That funds provided to carry out
section 132(a)(2)(A) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 2862(A)(2)(a)) may
be used to provide assistance to a State for State-wide or
local use in order to address cases where there have been
worker dislocations across multiple sectors or across
multiple local areas and such workers remain dislocated;
coordinate the State workforce development plan with emerging
economic development needs; and train such eligible
dislocated workers: Provided further, That funds provided to
carry out section 171(d) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 2916 (d)) may
be used for demonstration projects that provide assistance to
new entrants in the workforce and incumbent workers: Provided
further, That $2,600,000 shall be for a noncompetitive grant
to the National Center on Education and the Economy, which
shall be awarded not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(B) $56,381,000 for Native American programs, which shall
be available for the period July 1, 2008, through June 30,
2009.
(C) $83,740,000 for migrant and seasonal farmworkers under
section 167 of the Act (29 U.S.C. 2912), of which $78,740,000
is for formula grants (of which not less that 70 percent
shall be for employment and training services) and $5,000,000
is for migrant and seasonal housing (of which not less than
70 percent shall be for permanent housing), which shall be
available for the period July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009.
(D) $60,000,000 for YouthBuild activities under section
173A of the Act (29 U.S.C. 2918a), which shall be available
for the period April 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009.
(E) $1,000,000 for carrying out the Women in Apprenticeship
and Nontraditional Occupations Act (29 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.),
which shall be available for the period July 1, 2008, through
June 30, 2009.
(3) For national activities, $101,807,000, which shall be
available for the period July 1, 2008, through July 30, 2009,
as follows:
(A) $68,746,000 for ex-offender activities, under the
authority of section 171 of the Act (29 U.S.C. 2916),
notwithstanding the requirements of sections 171(b)(2)(B) or
171(c)(4)(D) of such section, of which not less than
$48,000,000 shall be for youthful offender activities.
(B) $28,140,000 for Pilots, Demonstrations, and Research
(notwithstanding the requirements of sections 171(b)(2)(B) or
171(c)(4)(D) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 2916(b)(2)(B) or
(c)(4)(D)), of which $10,000,000 shall be for grants to
address the employment and training needs of young parents.
(C) $4,921,000 for Evaluation under the authority of
section 172 of the Act (29 U.S.C. 2917).
Amendment Offered by Mr. Mc Keon
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. McKeon:
Page 2, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $43,746,000)''.
Page 5, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $43,746,000)''.
Page 5, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $43,746,000)''.
Page 6, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $48,000,000)''.
Page 63, line 4, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $8,484,000)''.
Page 77, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $75,000,000)''.
Page 77, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $75,000,000)''.
Page 87, line 5, after the first dollar amount and after
the second dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by
$22,770,000)''.
Mr. McKEON (during the reading). Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
California?
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, my amendment would restore much-needed
funding to the highly successful Reading First program.
In 2001, Members of both parties committed to implementing
scientifically based reading instruction, through Reading First, as the
foundation of an effort to provide a high-quality education in every
school. Six years later, it is clear that the program is working, but
not without some internal challenges.
Indeed, Reading First has received a great deal of attention over the
last several months, and for good reason. An investigation into the
program by the Department of Education's Inspector General uncovered
real problems in the agency's implementation and management of the
program. And the Education and Labor Committee has followed with
appropriate, thorough, and bipartisan oversight to ensure that those
problems are addressed.
In spite of this, we have heard from the majority that it intends to
cut some $600 million from this program, roughly 60 percent of its
overall annual budget, until problems identified by the Inspector
General have been addressed. That's particularly interesting since
these problems have been and are being addressed both by the Department
of Education itself and through proposed legislation.
Since last September, the Department has responded to the
investigation of its Inspector General and to our committee's oversight
of Reading First by making a number of significant changes to improve
the administration of the program. In fact, at the committee's
oversight hearing of this program, the Inspector General acknowledged
that the Department has accepted his recommendations and begun
implementing them to reform the program.
Among the steps taken by the Department in the wake of this
investigation include: Replacing the internal Reading First program
management; reconstituting a key peer review panel used in the program
to ensure fairness and more openness in its review processes; and
providing additional guidance to contractors and subcontractors to
enhance the objectivity and effectiveness of their services.
In order to codify many of these recommendations made by the
Inspector General and reform steps taken by the Department earlier this
year, I joined my committee colleague, Mr. Castle, in introducing the
Reading First Improvement Act. Instead of slashing funding for this
highly successful program, I call on my friends on the other side of
the aisle to enact this legislation to ensure permanent and long-
standing reform to Reading First.
To date, the bill has seen no action, not in subcommittee, not in
full committee, and not on the floor. To think that we are cutting this
program's budget by more than 60 percent when a measure to reform it is
sitting right before us demonstrates how truly politically driven the
majority's actions are on Reading First and continue to be.
Nonetheless, it is clear to any fair-minded person that the
management problems of Reading First are in the past. What is equally
clear is that Reading First, despite past problems, has been an
unqualified success for the students it is intended to serve. Indeed,
my friend, the distinguish chairman of our committee said during our
oversight hearing of Reading First earlier this year, ``The purpose of
this hearing is not to evaluate the effectiveness or strengths or
weaknesses of the Reading First program. I support the Reading First
program, as do many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.''
Statistics bear out the chairman's and my own continued support for
Reading First. For example, data released earlier this year shows that
in Reading First schools, the percentage of first graders meeting or
exceeding proficiency on fluency outcome measures increased by 14
percentage points, from 43 to 57 percent, from 2004 to 2006, with the
percentage of third graders increasing by 7 percent during the same
period of time.
And a 2006 Center on Education Policy survey found that 97 percent of
school districts which reported increases in student achievement
indicated that Reading First was a key reason for this progress.
Madam Chairman, rather than taking into consideration this data and
the improvements that the Department has made in its implementation of
Reading First, the majority has decided it is better to make a
political statement against the administration than to provide the
critical resources needed to continue to address the needs of our most
disadvantaged young students.
By finding some $75 million in savings through reducing
administrative costs at the Department of Health and Human Services and
implementing programs for prisoners that the President did not request
funding for, while keeping intact his faith-based prisoner reentry
initiative, my amendment restores some of these resources.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I rise to oppose the amendment.
Madam Chairman, I have a great deal of respect for the gentleman who
just offered the amendment, but I have to say this is exactly the wrong
thing for the Congress to do at this time.
The gentleman's amendment tries to restore $75 million to probably
the most troubled program in this bill. As the gentleman has indicated,
we have had six different audits by the Office of Inspector General. He
has discovered that the Department of Education
[[Page H7931]]
tried to steer billions of dollars in Reading First funds for the
purchase of certain reading textbooks and assessments in order to
benefit favored publishers and individuals. I don't think the Congress
ought to stand for that.
I would also point out that the OIG found out that the Department of
Education administrators improperly promoted commercial reading
programs in potential violation of Federal law. And this did not just
occur in my own State, as I mentioned earlier in my remarks, it
occurred in Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey.
States in districts with programs that were not on the Department's
preferential list were either rejected for grants or pressured to
change their methods, even though some argued, as did my own State,
that their programs met the law's standard.
What is most ironic is this is supposed to be a peer reviewed
program, and yet the programs that have demonstrably shown the best
performance levels were frozen out of the program, including Bob
Slaven's program at Johns Hopkins that has generally been reviewed as
one of the best in the country. Yet, they were virtually invited out
the door by the DOE.
In addition to the fact that we certainly should not be rewarding the
administration for the way they have handled this program, the
gentleman seeks to finance this program by taking $43 million out of
job training for ex-offenders. We cannot afford to have criminals
reentering society with inadequate job training that provides them with
incentives to renew their lives of crime.
{time} 1715
We need to provide as much training as possible, and the gentleman
scales that back dramatically.
And, lastly, I must confess I'm a bit confused. In the full
committee, I accepted an amendment from Mr. Peterson, a valued member
of our subcommittee, who wanted to add $25 million for vocational
education above my mark. I accepted it because I thought he made a good
case. Now we're being asked to take out $23 million of the money that
Mr. Peterson successfully added in the subcommittee. I don't think
that's a wise thing to do.
There will be plenty of time in conference to restore funding for
Reading First, provided that the administration and provided that the
agency demonstrates that it's shaped up and it's no longer following
the same habits. But at this point, you have the same contractors still
in place, you have the same conflicts still at large, and I don't think
under these circumstances that this Congress wants to support the kind
of shenanigans that we've seen in that Reading First program. And, on
behalf of the integrity of the taxpayers' dollar, I would urge a ``no''
vote on the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
The amendment was rejected.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Of the amounts made available under this heading in Public
Law 107-116 to carry out the activities of the National Skill
Standards Board, $44,000 is rescinded.
Of the unexpended balances, including recaptures and
carryover, remaining from funds appropriated to the
Department of Labor under this heading for fiscal years 2006
and prior years, $335,000,000 is rescinded.
community service employment for older americans
To carry out title V of the Older Americans Act of 1965,
$530,900,000, which shall be available for the period July 1,
2008, through June 30, 2009.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I would like to engage the chairman of
the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and
Related Agencies in a colloquy.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate all your efforts in bringing this bill
forward and thank you for your continued support of the Nation's
chartered schools, which increase the academic achievement of our
Nation's most low-income students. I wanted to clarify the committee's
intent to fund the Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities
program, which received $36.6 million last year. This year, the
committee chose to increase funding to the Charter School Grant program
and folded the Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities program
into this larger program.
Charter schools are public schools created by teachers, parents and
other community stakeholders to educate students of all backgrounds and
educational abilities. In exchange for greater accountability for
student achievement, these schools are free from many local and State
regulations. This flexibility and accountability has allowed
individuals with nontraditional backgrounds to create cultures that
have made charter schools top academic performers, often in some of the
Nation's largest urban centers. Because of this unique approach to
education, demand for these schools has been remarkable over the last
decade.
Unlike other local school districts, however, public charter schools
cannot levy property or other taxes for building and infrastructure.
Thus, public charter schools must pay for their facilities from their
operating budgets, which are smaller than those received by their
conventional K-12 peers. In fact, locating suitability facilities
remains the greatest challenge faced by charter schools.
The Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities program provides
vital assistance to help charter schools meet their local facility
needs. Under this program, funds are provided on a competitive basis to
public and nonprofit entities, and consortia of those entities, to
leverage other funds and help charter schools obtain school facilities
through such means as purchase, lease and donation. Grantees may also
use grants to leverage funds to help charter schools construct and
renovate school facilities.
Was it the intent of the chairman to continue funding for the Credit
Enhancement for Charter School Facilities program, as part of the
Charter School programs and at their fiscal year 2007 levels?
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McKEON. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his question.
Yes, it was our intent to fund both the Credit Enhancement for
Charter School Facilities program within the larger Charter School
Grant program at their fiscal year 2007 levels, not to eliminate the
credit enhancement program. We consolidated the programs for
administrative efficiency and fully expect the Secretary of Education
to continue funding for existing charter school programs from this
single line item.
Mr. McKEON. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his
clarification and again appreciate his continued support for charter
schools.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
federal unemployment benefits and allowances
For payments during fiscal year 2008 of trade adjustment
benefit payments and allowances under part I of subchapter B
of chapter 2 of title II of the Trade Act of 1974, and
section 246 of that Act; and for training, allowances for job
search and relocation, and related State administrative
expenses under Part II of subchapter B of chapter 2 of title
II of the Trade Act of 1974, $888,700,000, together with such
amounts as may be necessary to be charged to the subsequent
appropriation for payments for any period subsequent to
September 15, 2008.
state unemployment insurance and employment service operations
For authorized administrative expenses, $85,945,000,
together with not to exceed $3,256,669,000 which may be
expended from the employment security administration account
in the Unemployment Trust Fund (``the Trust Fund''), of
which--
(1) $2,510,723,000 from the Trust Fund is for grants to
States for the administration of State unemployment insurance
laws as authorized under title III of the Social Security Act
(including $10,000,000 to conduct in-person reemployment and
eligibility assessments in one-stop career centers of
claimants of unemployment insurance), the administration of
unemployment insurance for Federal employees and for ex-
service members as authorized under sections 8501-8525 of
title 5, United States Code, and the administration of trade
readjustment allowances and alternative trade adjustment
assistance under the Trade Act of 1974, and shall be
available for obligation by the States through December 31,
2008, except that funds used for automation acquisitions
shall be available for obligation by the States through
September 30, 2010, and funds used for unemployment insurance
workloads experienced by the States through September
[[Page H7932]]
30, 2008, shall be available for Federal obligation through
December 31, 2008;
(2) $10,500,000 from the Trust Fund is for national
activities necessary to support the administration of the
Federal-State unemployment insurance system;
(3) $23,203,000, together with $702,680,000 from the Trust
Fund, is for grants to States in accordance with section 6 of
the Wagner-Peyser Act, and shall be available for Federal
obligation for the period July 1, 2008, through June 30,
2009;
(4) $32,766,000 from the Trust Fund is for national
activities of the Employment Service, including
administration of the work opportunity tax credit under
section 51 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the
administration of activities, including foreign labor
certifications, under the Immigration and Nationality Act,
and the provision of technical assistance and staff training
under the Wagner-Peyser Act, including not to exceed
$1,228,000 that may be used for amortization payments to
States which had independent retirement plans in their State
employment service agencies prior to 1980;
(5) $52,985,000 is to provide workforce information,
national electronic tools, and one-stop system building under
the Wagner-Peyser Act and shall be available for Federal
obligation for the period July 1, 2008, through June 30,
2009; and
(6) $9,757,000 is to provide for work incentive grants to
the States and shall be available for the period July 1,
2008, through June 30, 2009:
Provided, That to the extent that the Average Weekly Insured
Unemployment (``AWIU'') for fiscal year 2008 is projected by
the Department of Labor to exceed 2,786,000, an additional
$28,600,000 from the Trust Fund shall be available for
obligation for every 100,000 increase in the AWIU level
(including a pro rata amount for any increment less than
100,000) to carry out title III of the Social Security Act:
Provided further, That funds appropriated in this Act that
are allotted to a State to carry out activities under title
III of the Social Security Act may be used by such State to
assist other States in carrying out activities under such
title III if the other States include areas that have
suffered a major disaster declared by the President under the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act: Provided further, That funds appropriated in this Act
which are used to establish a national one-stop career center
system, or which are used to support the national activities
of the Federal-State unemployment insurance or immigration
programs, may be obligated in contracts, grants, or
agreements with non-State entities: Provided further, That
funds appropriated under this Act for activities authorized
under title III of the Social Security Act and the Wagner-
Peyser Act may be used by States to fund integrated
unemployment insurance and Employment Service automation
efforts, notwithstanding cost allocation principles
prescribed under the Office of Management and Budget Circular
A-87.
Mr. HONDA. Madam Chairman, I would like to engage in a colloquy with
both the chairman and ranking member on a recent CMS proposed national
coverage decision on ESAs.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HONDA. Madam Chairman, I'd like to thank the chairman and ranking
member for this opportunity.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, has proposed a
national coverage decision memorandum for the use of erythropoiesis
stimulating agents, ESAs, in cancer and related neoplastic conditions.
Recent concerns have been raised by both CMS and the Food and Drug
Administration about the use of ESAs in treating anemia that results
from chemotherapy.
The FDA is currently conducting its own scientific review of the
issues. These concerns may be valid for many patients treated with
ESAs, but as the FDA noted, they do not apply to all individuals
treated for chemotherapy-induced anemia or bone marrow failure
diseases.
I would ask the chairman to work with me during conference to
preserve the Senate language requesting that CMS delay finalizing the
proposed decision memo for ESAs for non-renal disease indications until
after the FDA has completed its current scientific review.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HONDA. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I understand the gentleman's concern, and
I'm surprised that CMS would consider issuing a final decision when the
FDA has not completed its scientific review. I would certainly be happy
to work with the gentleman during conference on the issue.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HONDA. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. WALSH of New York. Madam Chairman, I'm also concerned about the
matter raised by the gentleman from California. I understand that the
Senate Appropriations Committee has included some language dealing with
this issue in its committee report. I can assure the gentleman that
we'll continue to work on this matter as we conference the bill.
Mr. HONDA. Thank you. I thank the chairman and ranking member.
Madam Chairman, I yield back my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
In addition, $40,000,000 from the employment security
administration account of the Unemployment Trust Fund shall
be available to conduct in-person reemployment and
eligibility assessments in one-stop career centers of
claimants of unemployment insurance: Provided, That not later
than 180 days following the end of the fiscal year 2008, the
Secretary shall submit an interim report to the Congress that
includes available information on expenditures, number of
claimants assessed, and outcomes from the assessments:
Provided further, That not later than 18 months following the
end of the fiscal year, the Secretary of Labor shall submit
to the Congress a final report containing comprehensive
information on the estimated savings that result from the
assessments of claimants and identification of best
practices.
advances to the unemployment trust fund and other funds
For repayable advances to the Unemployment Trust Fund as
authorized by sections 905(d) and 1203 of the Social Security
Act, and to the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund as
authorized by section 9501(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1954; and for nonrepayable advances to the Unemployment
Trust Fund as authorized by section 8509 of title 5, United
States Code, and to the ``Federal unemployment benefits and
allowances'' account, to remain available until September 30,
2009, $437,000,000.
In addition, for making repayable advances to the Black
Lung Disability Trust Fund in the current fiscal year after
September 15, 2008, for costs incurred by the Black Lung
Disability Trust Fund in the current fiscal year, such sums
as may be necessary.
program administration
For expenses of administering employment and training
programs, $88,451,000, together with not to exceed
$82,049,000, which may be expended from the employment
security administration account in the Unemployment Trust
Fund.
Employee Benefits Security Administration
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses for the Employee Benefits Security
Administration, $142,925,000.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
pension benefit guaranty corporation fund
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation is authorized to
make such expenditures, including financial assistance
authorized by subtitle E of title IV of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 4201 et
seq.), within limits of funds and borrowing authority
available to such Corporation, and in accord with law, and to
make such contracts and commitments without regard to fiscal
year limitations as provided by section 104 of the Government
Corporation Control Act (31 U.S.C. 9104), as may be necessary
in carrying out the program, including associated
administrative expenses, through September 30, 2008, for such
Corporation: Provided, That none of the funds available to
the Corporation for fiscal year 2008 shall be available for
obligations for administrative expenses in excess of
$411,151,000: Provided further, That to the extent that the
number of new plan participants in plans terminated by the
Corporation exceeds 100,000 in fiscal year 2008, an amount
not to exceed an additional $9,200,000 shall be available for
obligation for administrative expenses for every 20,000
additional terminated participants: Provided further, That an
additional $50,000 shall be made available for obligation for
investment management fees for every $25,000,000 in assets
received by the Corporation as a result of new plan
terminations, after approval by the Office of Management and
Budget and notification of the Committees on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Employment Standards Administration
salaries and expenses
(including rescission)
For necessary expenses for the Employment Standards
Administration, including reimbursement to State, Federal,
and local agencies and their employees for inspection
services rendered, $434,397,000, together with $2,111,000
which may be expended from the Special Fund in accordance
with sections 39(c), 44(d) and 44(j) of the Longshore and
Harbor Workers' Compensation Act: Provided, That the
Secretary of Labor is authorized to establish and, in
accordance with section 3302 of title 31, United States Code,
collect and deposit in the Treasury fees for processing
applications and issuing certificates under sections 11(d)
and 14 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C.
211(d)
[[Page H7933]]
and 214) and for processing applications and issuing
registrations under title I of the Migrant and Seasonal
Agricultural Worker Protection Act (29 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).
Amendment Offered by Mr. Kline of Minnesota
Mr. KLINE of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Kline of Minnesota:
Page 13, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,016,000)''.
Page 25, line 22, after each dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
Mr. KLINE of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, my amendment is very simple.
The committee bill cuts the Office of Labor Management Standards,
known as OLMS, down to fiscal 2006 levels. My amendment would restore
just over $2 million to get this enforcement agency back to its fiscal
2007 level. To offset the increase for OLMS, we have reduced the
International Labor Organization earmark from the International Labor
Affairs Bureau by the requisite amount.
What is OLMS and why I am taking to the floor of the House to make a
$2 million adjustment in this small agency? That's a fair question.
Without this amendment, the OLMS will have to cut staff. OLMS is the
agency within the Department of Labor's Employment Standards
Administration that enforces the Labor Management Reporting Disclosure
Act of 1959. This Federal statute was championed by then-Senator John
F. Kennedy and enacted as an outcome of the McCollum hearing on labor
racketeering.
Then-Senator Kennedy knew, as we affirm today, that rank-and-file
union members deserve the right to know how their unions were spending
and investing their members' dues money; that their unions' books were
clean; and that elections for union officers would be fair and free of
intimidation or scandal.
Do labor unions need a government watchdog? Apparently so. Since
2001, OLMS has helped obtain 750 convictions and restitution of over
$70 million for union members in criminal cases of embezzlement and
election irregularities.
Some of my colleagues may dismiss these monetary results as just
small change compared to the billions of assets held by labor unions,
but they miss the point. Stealing from your fellow union members is
against the law, regardless of whether the theft is $10,000 or
$100,000. And anywhere in the country but Washington, D.C., $10,000 is
a lot of money.
OLMS functions like the Securities and Exchange Commission for labor
unions. Why should rank-and-file union members not be protected in the
same way as individual shareholders of corporations? Senator Paul
Sarbanes agreed. During the debate on the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation in
2002, he argued that if union financial disclosure and accountability
was already required by law and wasn't being funded, he suggested that
the Department of Labor request the money from Congress.
Madam Chairman, DOL is not only being denied the increase it asked
for; it is being cut to the bone. Federal law requires financial
transparency and disclosure from corporations, pension plans, lobbyists
and Members of Congress. Why would we not enforce the one law on the
books that enables rank-and-file union members to review the financial
expenditures of their unions?
I find it ironic, Madam Chairman, that the House Financial Services
Appropriations Subcommittee provided $3.1 million over the
administration's budget request for the SEC, while OLMS was being cut
below fiscal year 2007 levels. Clearly, we put a high priority on
corporate accountability. We need to put the same high priority on
union accountability.
Although this is a modest amendment, it will enable this enforcement
agency within the Department of Labor to maintain its audit program and
other activities under the Labor Management Reporting Disclosure Act. I
cannot believe that this House would say to union members throughout
America that we do not support your right to know and your right to
union integrity.
I urge all Members to vote for this amendment.
Mr. OBEY. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. OBEY. Let me say simply say, Madam Chairman, that the fund that
the gentleman seeks to increase has been increased by 33 percent in
terms of resources just over the last 4 years, and staffing for that
same agency has been increased by over 25 percent. That is hardly
starving an agency.
I would also point out that at the same time you've had those large
increases, the wage and hour division, which is supposed to enforce
protection for workers on minimum wage, overtime and child labor laws,
will have seen its staffing drop by over 12 percent since 2001, and the
staff level at the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, which
protects workers from unfair employment practices by Federal
contractors, will have dropped by 23 percent.
So it seems to me that what the gentleman's amendment does is to
enrich the one portion of the Labor Department which has been doing
very well, thank you, and they have been doing very well while other
portions of the Labor Department that are supposed to focus on
protecting workers have, in fact, been starved.
The Department's own budget justifications for the large increase
that they've requested states that the acceptability rate for unions in
meeting labor management reporting and disclosure reporting
requirements is at 96 percent.
{time} 1730
The goal for fiscal 2008 is to raise this to 97 percent. I'd say if
you are getting 96 percent, that's an A. At least it was when I went to
school. Things may have changed since then.
Let me also say that the place that this funding was taken from, in
order to finance this increase is especially pernicious. The
administration itself has asked for an 81 percent reduction in the
International Labor Account. That is the program that is used in order
to protect workers from having to compete against slave labor and child
labor.
I don't think that you help workers by weakening that program. We are
simply trying to restore funding in that program that the President
cut, and I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of Mr. Kline's
amendment to restore funding for the Labor Department's Office of Labor
Management Standards to its fiscal year 2007 level.
A column published in Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal noted
today that Congress has added $935 million to President Bush's fiscal
year 2008 budget request for the Department of Labor. Within that
budget increase are individual funding increases for every single
enforcement agency within the agency; that is, except for one.
The appropriations measure before us cuts the Office of Labor
Management Standards' budget $2 million below its fiscal 2007 funding
level and more than $10 million below the President's budget request
for the office this year.
Identifying OLMS as the only enforcement office at the Department of
Labor to have its budget cut is significant. In fact, it was clearly
singled out by design.
Why? Perhaps it's because the office has had such great success in
protecting rank-and-file union members. Consider this, since 2001, OLMS
has helped obtain over 750 convictions and restitution of over $70
million in criminal cases of embezzlement, election irregularities and
violations of union members' rights.
Last week, for example, a union financial secretary in Michigan
pleaded guilty to falsifying union reports. Earlier this year, a former
union president in Texas was sentenced to 6\1/2\ years in prison for
embezzling dues paid by hard-working union members. These are the types
of results Congress expected when it passed the Labor Management
Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959.
This law makes clear that a union member must have access to union
financial records and has the right to recover misappropriated union
assets on
[[Page H7934]]
behalf of the union when the union fails to do so itself.
Nearly 50 years later, and with more than 15 million American workers
contributing a portion of every paycheck they earn to labor
organizations, we should demand nothing less than what we demanded in
1959. Indeed, Congress expects the Securities and Exchange Commission
to protect the interests of shareholders, and so too must we expect the
OLMS to protect the interests of rank-and-file union members.
The amendment before us would restore $2 million to the OLMS budget,
bringing it back to the fiscal year 2007 level and ensuring it has the
resources its needs to safeguard union transparency and accountability.
Indeed, if my colleagues believe, as I do, that transparency is the key
protection against financial misconduct, then we should take OLMS off
the political chopping block by restoring its funds.
I thank my Education and Labor Committee colleague, Mr. Kline, for
offering the amendment.
I urge my colleagues to join me in support of it.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Rhode Island is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam Chairman, I find it very ironic from the other
side that they are so outraged about these cuts. This is an account
within the Department of Labor that has seen a 33 percent increase over
the last several Congresses, a 33 percent increase within this specific
account of the Department of Labor.
Now let's put that in perspective to what the Republicans put into
other accounts within the Department of Labor. I seem to recall the
International Child Labor Inspection in the last several Congresses was
cut repeatedly over the last several Congresses, up to 87 percent.
This is the International Labor Organization's duty to oversee child
labor standards to ensure that our competitors are not using children
in the conduct of labor when competing with us and our manufacturing
process. Yet it was good enough for us to cut 87 percent of the
inspection for child labor, but good enough for us to increase the 33
percent.
Now we hear a complaint that somehow it's not good enough for us to
just, since the account has done very well, to just keep it as it's
going. Now there is a big outrage about this.
I might add, where was the outrage when the 12 percent cut was for
the wage and hour department? Where was that? I didn't hear any
outrage. Where was the outrage for the compliance for the contractors?
I didn't hear any outrage for that.
It's just interesting, when we hear these complaints about where the
cuts are, let's find out where the priorities really are. I think we
are hearing them. They are not with the children and child labor. They
are not with the workers and the wage and hour inspections, and they
are not with the contractors and making sure that they are protected on
the job.
They are here going after, once again, people who are trying to earn
a living. I think that's a very clear set of priorities in this
Department of Labor account.
Mr. PUTNAM. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. PUTNAM. Madam Chairman, I think the gentleman from Rhode Island
must have misspoken when he said we were here to ``go after the
workers.''
I want to commend the gentleman from Minnesota for sponsoring this
amendment which, to the contrary, seeks to protect American union dues-
paying workers.
We live in an era of instant information, almost universal access to
information. We are in a period, a legislative period on the heels of
Sarbanes-Oxley, which brought unprecedented new auditing requirements
and penalties for noncompliance for publicly traded companies.
We live in a legislative era of McCain-Feingold, which brought
unprecedented penalties, accountability, auditing to public office
holders who accept campaign contributions to seek elective office, but
then have to disclose to a greater detail than ever before, and subject
to greater limits than ever before, for the sole purpose of having the
public understand who was supporting that particular campaign.
So in this era, in this trend of greater openness, greater
accountability, easier access for the public to be able to understand
how their money is being spent, and who is the money behind
individuals, behind candidates, behind corporations, enter the
Democratic appropriations bill which guts the ability for America to
understand who is behind the money in big labor and how are individual
hard-working chemical workers', steelworkers', teachers',
manufacturers' dues being spent by those public unions and private
unions?
Here is an amendment that takes the level of this agency's funding.
It doesn't freeze it, it doesn't cut it by single digits. It takes it
all the way back to the 2006 level and is a 20 percent cut.
My friend and colleague from Minnesota seeks to correct that
situation by replacing the money that otherwise would be going to a
United Nations organization and puts it to help American workers.
American taxpayers understand how American union dues are being spent.
This agency has a proven track record. It gets results. This
amendment allows it to continue on that path of auditing and getting
results so that they can do better than the 4\1/2\ percent audit rate,
which was all they were able to muster under the existing funding
levels that they had been enjoying.
Union members have a right to know how their dollars are being spent.
Union Members have a right to know how their dollars are being spent,
and clearly the curiosity is there. There is a proven track record of
them seeking to know how their dollars are being spent.
In fact, there were over 760,000 hits on the OLMS Web site just for
that purpose, an average of over 2,100 hits per day for people seeking
the information that will not be available at the desired rate and at
the desired accuracy if this amendment is not adopted. It is critical
that we adopt the Kline amendment so that hard-working men and women
across America can see how their hard-earned dollars are being spent.
Why, in this era of greater openness, for political candidates, for
executives, for publicly traded companies, why in this era of ever more
complicated regulations, ever more detailed tax returns, are we letting
unions off the hook? There is a trend here.
It began on this House floor over great resistance on this side of
the aisle, rolled back fundamental privacy, the fundamental right to a
secret ballot that hard-working union members had been enjoying, that
hard-working Americans had been enjoying when they decided they want to
unionize. Here we find ourselves today taking an additional step, and
it's wrong.
Adopt the Kline amendment.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.
Mr. KENNEDY. Let me just say to the gentleman from Florida, I find it
curious that he says he is standing up for workers, because he must not
recall his party gutting workers' overtime pay. I don't know whether he
recalls that his party was for flex time.
Make sure every worker out there understands the Republican Party
passed flex time. That means that your overtime pay, America, is gone.
They passed it. They are not for working people. They said, if you work
overtime, that it wasn't counting as overtime pay, and that that
overtime pay towards your pension didn't get calculated to your
overtime pension. So don't say you are on the side of workers.
I suppose that when you were for OSHA reform, that you are for
workers, right? Reform in your view meant inspection was voluntary.
That's really standing up for workers, making it so that the employer,
all they had to do is, you know, check their own book to say whether
they were protecting workers' heads or not from scaffolding or for
those chemical plants that you mentioned, whether they were safe or
not.
They didn't have to worry about covering their tracks. They didn't
have any tracks to cover any more under
[[Page H7935]]
your bill for OSHA reform. As far as other bills, NLRB, forget it. You
guys threw that out the window with the TEAM Act. There is no
negotiating for unions.
So don't stand up here and talk about how you guys like to protect
workers under this phony premise that you want to see more transparency
and compliance. That's just a lot of hogwash.
In terms of international labor standards, if you don't understand
the connection between slave labor abroad and workers here at home, I
am sorry, you don't understand globalization.
____________________