[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 157 (Wednesday, October 17, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12955-S12962]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
proceed to the consideration of H.R. 3043, which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A 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.
Amendment No. 3325
(Purpose: In the nature of a substitute)
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask
for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Iowa [Mr. Harkin], for himself and Mr.
Specter, proposes an amendment numbered 3325.
Mr. HARKIN. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of
Amendments.'')
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, we are now on the appropriations bill for
Education, Labor, Health and Human Services, and related agencies.
Before we get into the bill, I want to explain a couple of things. I
will be yielding to my partner, Senator Specter, for his opening
statement. Then I will follow with mine. It is not the usual order.
Usually, the chairman goes first. But Senator Specter is very much
involved in Judiciary Committee hearings today, and he has to return to
that. I will respect that and yield to him in a moment.
I wished to make it clear to our fellow Senators there is a change in
the bill they will now notice, the substitute at the desk. The
amendment Senator Specter and I offered basically strikes the language
in the bill dealing with stem cells. Again, I do this with regret.
Senator Specter and I have worked together for many years to advance
the cause of embryonic stem cell research. In fact, we worked together
on the first bill President Bush vetoed in his first 4 years. That was
our stem cell bill, the only bill he vetoed in 4 years. We then came
back with another stem cell bill this year, and he vetoed that also.
That veto override has not taken place yet.
So together we put some additional language in this bill to further
the cause of trying to break through and get embryonic stem cell
research covered. However, we received a statement of administration
policy from the administration yesterday saying they opposed our bill
for two reasons. It says it includes ``an irresponsible and excessive
level of spending,'' and then it says, ``The administration strongly
opposes provisions in this bill that overturn the President's policy
regarding human embryonic stem cell research.''
I guess in the spirit of compromise, we wanted to show we are willing
to compromise. We are willing to try to meet the President halfway. We
know the President's strong feelings against this; they are misguided,
nonetheless. Plus, the fact that, although not yet before the Senate,
we will have a veto override vote on a stem cell bill he vetoed earlier
this year. I don't know if we will have the votes to override. We may.
With that, we thought we will show our good faith in saying to the
President: OK, we are willing to compromise. We will take that language
out. That is what we have done with the amendment that is at the desk.
We have taken that language out of the bill.
However, on another aspect in terms of the administration saying it
is an irresponsible and excessive level of spending, I will say more
about that in my opening statement, but the fact is, in the last 5
years, under the leadership of Senator Specter, when I was ranking
member, this appropriations bill exceeded the President's budget
request every single year. I thank Senator Specter for that. He
provided great leadership. But the President never once threatened to
veto one of those bills and never did, even though we exceeded his
budget. This year, however, the President has said he is going to veto
it because we exceeded his budget. What is the difference? Because the
Congress changed hands? I don't think Senator Specter or I give a hoot
about that. What we care about is investing in education and health,
job training, biomedical research, all the other good things this bill
does.
I respectfully disagree with the President that it is irresponsible.
I believe it is responsible. We met our budget allocations. We are
within our pay-go limitations. We do not exceed our budget allocation
in this bill whatsoever.
I wished to make that clear for other Senators. We are on this bill.
We have dropped the stem cell language. I did this in consultation with
Senator Specter as a good faith reaching out to the White House to say:
We are willing to compromise. So we will take it out, but we are going
to stand firm on our funding levels because they are reasonable. They
are within our budget allocation. They don't bust the budget.
I yield the floor to my partner in this for many years, Senator
Specter, for his opening statement. I know he has to get back to the
Judiciary Committee. I will return and make my opening statement at
that time.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and note for the record
that the other Senator from Pennsylvania is presiding. I do not use the
term ``junior Senator'' because Senator Casey is so distinguished, I
wouldn't want to have any suggestion of limited status.
We are taking up now the appropriations bill which has no rival for
greater importance to America. Others may stand alongside it as equals,
but when you deal with the Nation's health and education and labor, job
safety, job training and medical research, the Centers for Disease
Control, and Head Start, we deal with the fundamentals of governmental
involvement for the general welfare as recited in the Constitution.
Health is our No. 1 capital asset. Without going into any details
[[Page S12956]]
on that, I know that in depth from personal experience. Without your
health, you can't do anything. But similarly, or about as important, is
an education, to be able to do something productive and constructive.
We have submitted a bill which we believe fairly addresses the needs
of the country and is not excessive in its expenditures. Last year's
bill for this committee was $144.8 billion. The President has come in
with a budget request of $141.3 billion. That is $3.5 billion less than
last year. If one figures in inflation, we are looking at about a $7.2
billion cut. We simply can't accommodate that and do the Pell grants,
the education funding, the title I funding, the President's program on
Leave No Child Behind or the National Institutes of Health. We are out
of fat. We are through tissue. We are to the bone and beyond.
The National Institutes of Health are the crown jewels of the Federal
Government, maybe the only jewels of the Federal Government. Enormous
strides have been made in combating the major ailments of our society--
heart disease, cancer, Alzheimer's, and Parkinson's--but in FY06 there
was a $50 million cut on the National Cancer Institute, which I won't
call scandalous or outlandish, I will say it is inappropriate. This
year we have added in this budget only $1 billion. When I say ``only,''
at $20 billion, raising it to $29.9, that doesn't keep up with the cost
of inflation. There are many grants which are now being turned away by
NIH.
We had a vote last night on a motion to recommit the bill on
Commerce-Justice-Science. I voted against recommitment and made a brief
floor statement that to send the bill back to committee to come back
with the President's figure would constitute a surrender of the
congressional responsibility to appropriate.
Article I gives us that responsibility and the authority. If we are
going to accept the President's figure, then why don't we start there
and leave us to fill in the blanks. But so that the record will contain
a statement on legislative process, if anybody is watching on C-SPAN 2,
coming to these bills, the one today on Labor, Health and Human
Services, and Education and coming to the bill which we passed last
night on Commerce-Justice-Science, it is an elaborate, painstaking
process. There are hearings. There are deliberations. There are
meetings. Then there is what is called a markup in the subcommittee. We
go through the budget.
Meanwhile, staff has worked diligently on it. If it was generally
known how hard the staff works, people would be amazed. They say if you
asked: How many people in Washington in the Federal Government work?
that most people would respond about half. The fact is, this is a very
difficult job, especially for staff. Senators work too. So do House
Members. Without going into that, though, we did not come up with these
figures and pull them out of the air. They were worked through very
carefully.
The bill which was passed yesterday had some increases which were
very vital increases. They were increases on law enforcement which
America needs. For example, the appropriation for the Federal Bureau of
Investigation was increased by $383 million over the preceding year.
The Community Oriented Policing Services, the program known as COPS,
to get additional law enforcement officers on the street, was increased
by $1.639 million. That means that America is being better protected.
It goes to the local governments. It is seed money. They hire
additional police. The Federal allocation does not last long. Then it
is our expectation they will keep the police.
State and local law enforcement assistance was increased by $163
million. I refer to that only briefly to give you some idea as to what
we did yesterday and why it seemed to me to be inappropriate to refer
it back to committee, which means we would take the President's figure,
which was about $3.2 billion lower, in another subcommittee worked
under the distinguished leadership of Senator Mikulski and Senator
Shelby. If we are to discharge our responsibilities under the
Constitution, we have to stand by our guns as to what we want to do.
Now, I am not saying the figure on yesterday's bill is not to be
modified. The President has set the tone on that when he vetoed the
SCHIP bill. Congress came in at $35 billion over 5 years, and the
President came in at $4.8 billion. Then he said he was willing to
negotiate. There are some in the Congress who do not want to negotiate,
who want to let the program lapse because it would be politically
disadvantageous to the President if there is no continuation of the
program for children's health.
Well, I do not think that will happen. I do not think that should
happen. Because if some Members of Congress stand in the way of
negotiations and a compromise, people will find out about it and it
will be a political detriment to those who stand in the way of
negotiations.
So as I said last night on the Senate floor, if you have the Senate
bill on Commerce, Justice and Science higher than the President's
figure by $3.2 billion, let's negotiate, just like the President said
on SCHIP.
On this bill, we are prepared to negotiate. The first line of
negotiation has already been announced by Senator Harkin, and that was
in response to a Statement of Administration Policy issued today from
the Executive Office of the President:
The Administration strongly opposes provisions in this bill
that overturn the President's policy regarding human
embryonic stem cell research.
Well, Senator Harkin and I have considered this issue very carefully,
and we have decided, much against our preference, to accede to what the
President has strongly opposed. We do this in the context--not that we
agree with the President, because we strongly disagree with him--but we
would like to get this bill passed, and we are prepared to compromise.
This stem cell issue is one which is very near and dear to me. We
found out about the potential for stem cells in November of 1998. Ten
days, two weeks later--I chaired the subcommittee--we had hearings. We
had 20 hearings on it. The research has shown me that these stem cells
are a tremendous potential for curing the maladies of the world. We
have 400,000 of them that are frozen that are going to be thrown away.
This is a long, involved subject, but in a nutshell, we are going to
have Federal funding of stem cell research. It is a matter of when, not
a matter of whether or if. It will happen. It will happen.
So in removing this provision from the bill, I do it with great
reluctance and great regret. But I do it after consultation with the
groups, the advocacy groups for stem cell research. They have been
consulted. They are in the middle of all this, and they understand the
reasons for it. They also understand if we pursue this, there will be a
great many amendments which could pass and be harmful to the interests
of the health of this country and to what the advocacy groups are
seeking to accomplish.
So we come to a bill which I think America needs. It is worth
pointing out that our bill is substantially under the bill passed by
the House of Representatives. We have come in at $152.1 billion. The
House of Representatives has come in at 154.2 billion. So they are $2.1
billion higher than we are. But this is our best judgment as to what
ought to be done.
If anybody disagrees with it, Senators have the right to come to the
floor and offer amendments, if they want to reduce the funding. We are
prepared to listen. And we are prepared to negotiate with the
President. But I am not prepared to take the figure the President has
automatically. I am not prepared to do that. If we are going to do
that, there is no reason to have the hearings and the meetings and the
markup and the full committee and the laborious work we go through. If
we are going to take the President's figure, it may as well come out of
the White House as to what they are doing, if all we are left to do is
fill in the blanks. I think it would be a dereliction of duty for us
not to come forward with our conclusions on what appropriations are
necessary for these three major Departments.
At the present time we are proceeding here, we have started the
confirmation proceedings of Judge Michael Mukasey. I was there earlier
this morning, and I have to return there. So I will be taking care of
my duties here as best I can. Since I am not twins,
[[Page S12957]]
there will be someone else here to take over on the occasions when I
cannot be here. But I did want these views to be expressed, and there
is a long, erudite statement prepared by extraordinary staff, Bettilou
Taylor--some call her the 101st Senator, but I think that diminishes
her standing--and Sudip Parikh.
So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that statement be printed
in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Floor Statement--Senator Arlen Specter
FY 2008 LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS
BILL
Mr. President, the Labor, Health and Human Services and
Education bill before the Senate today totals $152.1 billion,
an increase of $7.3 billion over the FY'07 level and $10.8
billion over the President's budget. The bill that passed the
House of Representatives contains $154.2 billion, an increase
of $2.1 billion over the Senate.
The funds contained in this bill address this nation's
public health problems and continue to strengthen our
biomedical research, assure a quality education for America's
children, and offer opportunities for individuals seeking to
improve job skills.
At this time, I want to take this opportunity to thank the
distinguished Chairman of the Subcommittee, Senator Tom
Harkin, for his hard work. This bill is not an easy one to
maneuver through the subcommittee and full committee and it
is a major accomplishment getting it to the floor for
consideration.
Some of the key funding levels in the bill include:
$29.9 billion for the National Institutes of Health, $1
billion over FY'07
$4 million for Embryo Adoption
$2.170 billion for Ryan White AIDS programs
$75 million for mentoring programs
$300 million for Family Planning programs
$100 million for Mentoring Programs
$12 million for a Cord Blood Stem Cell Bank
$2 million for administering asbestos claims
$1.1 million for mesothelioma registry and tissue bank
$220 million to continue construction projects at the
Centers for Disease Control
$2.161 billion for Low Income Home Energy Assistance
$200 million for Children's Hospital Graduate Medical
Education
$2.3 billion for Community Health Centers
$102 million for Healthy Start
$7.1 billion for Head Start
$828.5 million for Worker Protection Programs
$5.25 billion for Job Training Programs
$13.9 billion for Title I Grants to Disadvantaged Students
$11.2 billion for Special Education State Grants
$14.5 billion for Pell Grants to support a maximum grant of
$4,310
$313.4 million for Gear Up
$43.5 million for youth offender programs
$420 million for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting,
in addition
Let me discuss in detail the major elements of this bill:
MEDICAL RESEARCH
The bill before the Senate contains $29.9 billion for the
National Institutes of Health. The $1 billion increase over
the FY'07 level will continue the important work of thousands
of researchers across this nation. These additional funds are
critical in catalyzing scientific discoveries that will lead
to a better understanding in preventing and treating the
disorders that afflict men, women, and children in our
society.
Each year, the Labor-HHS Subcommittee holds numerous
hearings on medical research issues. Testimony is heard from
the NIH Institute Directors, medical experts, patients,
family members, and advocates asking for increased biomedical
research funding to find the causes and cures for autism,
Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury,
muscular dystrophy, ALS, AIDS, diabetes, heart disease, and
the many cancers affecting millions of Americans. But the
diseases I just mentioned are the ones that everyone knows.
However, there are a number of orphan diseases, those
affecting 200,000 people or less, that are just as important
but not often talked about. Research also needs to be
specifically focused on orphan diseases such as spinal
muscular atrophy, Ataxia's, Batten disease, fibromyalgia,
Fragile X and spina bifida.
CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is the lead
Federal agency for protecting the health and safety of
Americans at home and abroad. To address these needs the bill
includes $6.4 billion for programs at the CDC. The CDC's
ability to respond quickly to address this nation's health
concerns has been proven over the last several years. Within
minutes of the September 11 attack, CDC set up an emergency
operations center and began to deploy supplies and staff,
issuing health alerts and responding to State needs. CDC
redirected more than 2,000 staff to focus their resources on
the anthrax crisis to identifying the disease and ensuring
that health professionals were properly trained in
recognizing the signs of anthrax. During the gulf coast
hurricanes, the CDC staff was on the ground to assess and
mitigate the infectious disease risk to residents of flooded
areas. Last June, CDC also quickly identified a patient with
a drug resistant strain of TB and took steps to isolate the
patient and protect the American public. The Committee has
included $1.7 billion to improve this nation's research
capacities and to detect and control emerging infectious
disease threats in the U.S. and around the world. The
Committee has included $220 million to continue the
renovation of the CDC facilities in Atlanta. With the funds
provided in FY'08, we will only need one more year of funding
to complete the modernization of the CDC campus.
PANDEMIC INFLUENZA PREPAREDNESS
Although press attention regarding pandemic influenza has
waned, the threat of a pandemic influenza resulting in
millions of deaths worldwide remains high. The Committee has
included $888 million for pandemic influenza preparedness
activities. These dollars are to purchase pre-pandemic
vaccine stockpiles, spur vaccine development, purchase
antivirals, and for the development of diagnostic tests. The
remaining dollars are for on-going pandemic preparedness
activities within the Department of Health & Human Services
and the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention.
MENTORING
In this nation it is estimated that more than 772,500
juveniles are members of gangs, dropout rates in some school
districts exceed 60% and the direct and indirect cost of
youth violence exceeds $158 billion a year.
Mentoring programs have proven to steer children away from
gangs, violence and crime. Studies show that mentored
children are less likely to start using drugs and alcohol or
commit violent acts. They are also more likely to graduate
from high school and go on to a higher education.
Unfortunately, the demand for mentors far exceeds the supply.
To address these concerns the bill includes $75 million,
including $50 million to support mentoring programs for
children who are at risk of failing academically, dropping
out of school, or involved in criminal or delinquent
activities. These funds will be awarded to local education
agencies and non-profit community-based organizations to
support mentoring programs. Also included is $25 million
targeted to areas with the highest dropout rates and schools
designated as persistently dangerous. Funds will be used to
increase the number of mentors, identify children at an early
age and link them with mentors to provide support before
children get involved in criminal behavior.
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION
This Subcommittee has always been concerned about mine
safety, but the many accidents in recent years have sharpened
the Subcommittee's focus.
The regulations governing mine safety have evolved slowly
from primitive beginnings in 1891. In the 1930's, well over
2300 people were dying annually in mining accidents. In 1941,
Congress established the forerunner of the Mine Safety and
Health Administration. The passage of the Mine Act in 1977
established MSHA, placed it in the Department of Labor, and
established the current regulatory framework. The Congress
amended the Mine Act in 2006 to strengthen its safety
provisions in response to the recent incidents. Within the
total provided, the bill includes $330.1 million for the Mine
Safety and Health Administration, including $2 million for
mine rescue and recovery activities. This is an increase
of $16.5 million over the FY'07 level. The increase will
be used to accelerate the implementation of the MINER act
to improve health and safety conditions for miners.
GEAR UP
The bill provides $313.4 million for Gaining Early
Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs. These
funds will be used to assist high schools to help low-income
students prepare for and pursue postsecondary education.
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION
To support health professions training in children's
teaching hospitals, the bill provides $200 million. The
amount provided is a $97 million cut below the FY'07 level.
However, the bill that passed the House contains $307 million
and I will support the House figure during conference
negotiations.
COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS
To help provide primary health care services to the
medically indigent and underserved populations in rural and
urban areas, the bill contains $2.2 billion for community
health centers. This amount represents an increase of $250
million over the FY 2007 level.
SUBSTANCE ABUSE
For prevention and treatment of substance abuse, the bill
includes $3.4 billion, including $2.1 billion for treatment
programs, $197.1 million for prevention and $923.1 million
for mental health programs. The latest estimates indicate
that millions of Americans with serious substance abuse
problems go untreated each year. The amounts provided will
help address the treatment gap.
LIHEAP
The bill provides $2.161 billion for the Low Income Home
Energy Assistance Program
[[Page S12958]]
(LIHEAP) the key heating and cooling program for low income
families in Pennsylvania and states throughout the nation.
Funding supports grants to states to deliver critical
assistance to low income households to help meet higher
energy costs.
AGING PROGRAMS
For programs serving the elderly, the bill before the
Senate recommends $3.3 billion. Including $483.6 million for
the community service employment program to provide part-time
employment opportunities for low-income elderly; $350.6
million for supportive services and senior centers; $217.6
million for the national senior volunteer corps.; $773.6
million for senior nutrition programs; $1.1 billion for
research conducted at the National Institute on Aging; $162.6
million for family and native American caregiver support
programs; and $35 million for the Medicare insurance
counseling program.
AIDS
The bill includes $6.5 billion for AIDS research,
prevention and services. Included in this amount is $2.1
billion for Ryan White programs; $930.4 million for AIDS
prevention at the Centers for Disease Control; $2.9 billion
for AIDS research at the National Institutes of Health; and
$300 million for the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS.
HEAD START
To enable all children to develop and function at their
highest potential, the bill includes $7.1 billion for the
Head Start program, an increase of $200 million over last
year's appropriation.
EDUCATION
To enhance this Nation's investment in education, the bill
before the Senate contains $58.1 billion for discretionary
education programs, an increase of $532 million over last
year's funding level and $1.5 billion more than the
President's budget request.
EDUCATION FOR DISADVANTAGED CHILDREN
The bill includes $13.9 billion, an increase of $1.1
billion for Title I grants to school districts. These
funds will provide services to approximately 15 million
school children in nearly all school districts across the
United states.
IMPACT AID
For Impact Aid programs, the bill includes $1.24 billion.
Included in the recommendation is: $49.5 million for payments
for children with disabilities; $1.1 billion for basic
support payments; and $65.7 million for payments for Federal
property. In addition, $17.8 million is available for
construction activities at certain Impact Aid-eligible
schools.
SPECIAL EDUCATION
For special education state grants, the bill includes $12.3
billion, an increase of $527.5 million more than provided in
FY'07. These funds will help local educational agencies meet
the requirement that all children--ages 3 through 21--with
disabilities have access to a free, appropriate public
education, and all infants and toddlers with disabilities
have access to early intervention services.
READING PROGRAMS
The bill includes $800 million for Reading First State
Grants to implement comprehensive reading instruction to
ensure that every child can read by the end of the third
grade. Also included is $117.7 million for Early Reading
First designed for preschools to enhance the verbal skills,
phonological awareness, letter knowledge and early language
development of children ages 3 through 5. To help struggling
middle and high school students improve their reading skills,
the bill includes $36 million.
21st CENTURY COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS
For community learning centers activities, such as before-
and after-school, recreational, drug, violence prevention and
family literacy programs, the bill includes $1 billion.
TRIO
To improve post-secondary education opportunities for low-
income first-generation college students, the Committee
recommendation includes $858.2 million for the TRIO program,
to assist in more intensive outreach and support services for
low income youth.
CHARTER SCHOOLS AND VOLUNTARY PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE
The bill includes $214.8 million for charter school grants
which help in the planning, development and implementation of
charter schools. Also included is $26.2 million for voluntary
public school choice to expand programs, especially for
parents whose children attend low-performing public schools.
STUDENT AID AND HIGHER EDUCATION
For student aid and higher education programs, the bill
provides $18.4 billion. Pell grants, the cornerstone of
student financial aid is funded at $14.5 billion which will
provide a maximum grant award of $4,310. The bill also
includes $770.9 million for the supplemental educational
opportunity grants, and $980.5 million for the Federal work
study program. Also included are $858.2 million for TRIO
programs and $507.2 million for aid to institutional
development.
JOB TRAINING
In this nation, we know all too well that unemployment
wastes valuable talent and potential, and ultimately weakens
our economy. The bill before us today provides $5.59 billion
for job training programs. This includes $1.65 billion for
the Job Corps; $864.2 million for Adult training; and $1.19
billion for retraining dislocated workers.
CLOSING
There are many other notable accomplishments in this bill,
but for the sake of time, I mentioned just several of the key
highlights, so that the nation may grasp the scope and
importance of this bill.
In closing, Mr. President, I again want to thank Senator
Harkin and his staff and the other Senators on the
Subcommittee for their cooperation.
Mr. SPECTER. Before I yield the floor, I wish to compliment my
distinguished colleague, Senator Tom Harkin. Senator Harkin and I have
worked side by side. Sometimes I have been chairman; sometimes he has
been chairman. I like it better when I am chairman. But I also like it
when he is chairman. We have what we call a seamless transfer of the
gavel.
People complain there is a lot of bickering in Washington, DC, and
there is too much infighting. Well, Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter do not
do that. We try to set an example of working together in the public
interest.
May I also add, I do the same thing with Senator Robert P. Casey,
Jr., my colleague from Pennsylvania. We meet frequently and go over the
key issues. When there are major events--we had a big hearing in
Philadelphia on juvenile gang violence. I invited Senator Casey to come
along. He has had some ideas and some programs he has advocated, and he
has invited me.
We went to Pittsburgh to swear in some judges. I made sure it suited
Senator Casey's schedule. People like to see Democrats and Republicans
working together. Senator Casey and I do, and, I say to the Senator
from Iowa, certainly you and I do, Mr. Chairman. So I thank you. I
thank Ellen Murray and Sudip for their extraordinary work.
Mr. HARKIN. I appreciate that.
Mr. SPECTER. There is a story that behind every successful man there
is a surprised mother-in-law. But in the case of Tom Harkin and Arlen
Specter, it is Ellen and Bettilou.
Mr. HARKIN. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I thank my good friend, Senator Specter,
for his very kind words, his generosity of spirit, and respond in kind
that I have said many times to people that during the interregnum when
the Republicans controlled the Senate--I say that jocularly--I was very
fortunate and blessed to have Senator Specter as the chairman of this
committee. He is right, we have worked together very closely over the
years, and I thank him for that very close partnership and working
relationship. He is a great leader in areas of health and education and
medical research and so many other items. So I thank Senator Specter
for that very close working relationship.
I am pleased to bring to the floor the fiscal year 2008
appropriations bill for Labor, Health and Human Services, Education,
and related agencies.
It has been said many times that the Defense appropriations bill is
the bill that defends America. But this appropriations bill, the bill
we have before us--the bill that funds Education and Health and Human
Services and biomedical research and the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention--is the bill that defines America.
This bill funds the most basic, essential, life-sustaining, and
lifesaving services for millions of people in this country, including
the most needy among us. It provides for the education of our children.
It provides health care for many of our poorest citizens. It helps
students from low- and middle-income families afford college. It funds
medical research to help ease human suffering. It gives displaced
workers a chance to get back on their feet.
This bill does define us and says who we are as Americans. Despite
extreme budget constraints, I believe we have produced a good bill. I
wish we could have done more for these programs because we have some
catching up to do. But we also have to be fiscally responsible. This
bill fits within the budget resolution. It conforms to pay-go. It
reflects the priorities of Senators on both sides of the aisle, and it
reflects the values, ideals, and priorities of the American people.
Again, I commend our ranking member, Senator Specter, for his
leadership in helping to craft this bill. As Senator Specter said, we
have had an amazingly productive partnership for
[[Page S12959]]
the last, as I count it, about 17, almost 18 years. As control of the
Senate has switched between the two parties, we have passed the gavel
back and forth, but there has been one constant and that is our shared
commitment to investing in job training, in essential human services,
in education, and cutting-edge biomedical research.
One notable accomplishment of our bipartisan partnership was the
doubling of funding at the National Institutes of Health over a 5-year
period between 1998 and 2003. It started under a Democratic President,
finished under a Republican President. But today, sadly, that
achievement seems like ancient history. Today, it is an achievement in
this bill simply to prevent a cut at the National Institutes of Health
because that is what the President proposed in his budget. The
President proposed a $279 million cut in funding for NIH, in things
such as cancer research, Alzheimer's research, ALS research, and other
lifesaving research being done through NIH.
The National Institutes of Health is just one of the critical
programs in this bill that the President's budget underfunds. Head
Start, special education, job training all would face cuts if the
President had his way.
Overall, for all the programs in this appropriations bill, his budget
request was $3.5 billion below last year's level. Let me repeat that.
The President's budget was $3.5 billion below last year's level--not
below an inflationary increase, below last year's level. So not only
did his budget fail to keep up with inflation, it would take us back.
That is unacceptable.
President John Kennedy once said that ``to govern is to choose''--a
famous line. Well, I tend to agree. Governing is also about setting
priorities. The President has set his priorities. He is just days away
from sending up a supplemental budget request for the war in Iraq. We
hear it to be as much as $190 billion, and he will insist that we
appropriate every single penny. Meanwhile, 2 weeks ago, rejecting pleas
from many members of his own party, he vetoed the SCHIP bill, which
would preserve health coverage for 6 million children nationwide and
cover millions more who are currently uninsured. Now, the President,
with his statement of policy that he sent up yesterday, is threatening
to veto this bill.
So think about it. The President is demanding that we continue to
spend more than $12 billion a month in Iraq on the war, yet he is
threatening to veto this appropriations bill because it spends $11
billion a year more than what he wanted, for 1 year. The President says
he wants $12 billion a month for the war in Iraq, but we shouldn't
spend $11 billion over his budget for 1 full year for all of the other
things we do in education and in health care and in human services.
Under the Constitution, we know that the President proposes, the
Congress disposes. So we in Congress get to set our priorities too. We
also get to choose about governing. Rather than cut the essential
programs and services in this bill, we have chosen in a bipartisan
fashion to provide a very modest increase. So we respectfully disagree
with the President. We believe it is time to make investments in this
country. It is time for the President to put our own needs here at home
first. For 5 years we have poured untold billions of U.S. taxpayers'
dollars into schools, job programs, hospitals, and human services in
Iraq. It is time we looked after those same needs here in America. That
is exactly what we propose to do in this bill.
This bill provides a modest increase of $1 billion for the National
Institutes of Health. That is 3.5 percent. That is less than biomedical
inflation. But the President's budget would slash investments in NIH,
cutting 800 research grants that could lead to cures or treatments for
heart disease, cancer, diabetes, or other diseases ravaging our people.
This is a very exciting time in biomedical research. We are reaping the
benefits of the Human Genome Project. It would be unconscionable and I
think totally irresponsible to short-circuit this progress by cutting
the funding for NIH. So we have, as I said, provided a modest increase
of $1 billion for NIH in this bill.
In this bill, we increase funding for Head Start by $200 million. I
wish it were more. It should be more. We are just beginning to make up
for the tens of thousands of children who have been lost to the program
because of stagnant funding over the last several years. The
President's budget would cut Head Start funding by $100 million. So the
President's budget cuts it by $100 million; we increase it by $200
million. The President's budget would cut thousands more children from
the rolls of Head Start; ours would add to it. That is the difference.
We believe the President's approach is unacceptable.
In this bill, we provide an additional $457 million for special
education. Again, it really ought to be more, and I will explain what I
mean by that. If we accepted the President's budget, it would cut
special education by $291 million.
When IDEA passed--the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act--
when it passed the Congress--I guess it was about 30 years ago; yes, it
has been about 30 years--when we passed the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act, we committed ourselves, we committed the
Federal Government to paying up to 40 percent of the additional cost of
educating kids with disabilities in our schools. Now, consider this:
Prior to that time, most kids with disabilities were shunned aside.
They were sent to State institutions, warehoused, and many of them
never even went to school. But because of a decision--and I say to the
Senator sitting in the chair, it was a Pennsylvania case, PARC,
Pennsylvania Association of Retarded Citizens v. Pennsylvania, a
landmark case.
From that case, it was decided that if a State decided to provide a
free public education for all its children, if it decided to do that,
it could not then discriminate against kids with disabilities in
providing that free, appropriate public education. Well, that then led,
of course, to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act that
passed the Congress. In that, we said: We are going to help. We think
States should do this. States are mandated to do this under the
Constitution, but we are going to help. So we are going to try over the
years to build this up to where we provide at least 40 percent of the
additional funding to mainstream kids with disabilities in our public
schools.
Where are we? Under President Bush, we are going backward. Two years
ago, the Federal Government got up to 18 percent of this additional
funding for kids with disabilities. We got up to 18 percent 2 years
ago. In the last fiscal year, the Federal share dropped to 17 percent.
If the President gets his way with his budget in 2008, we will be down
to 16 percent. We have had a number of amendments on this floor, sense-
of-the-Senate resolutions, to get this up to 40 percent. Republicans
and Democrats have voted for this. Yet the President's budget is taking
us in the opposite direction, and that, of course, again is
unacceptable. When we don't pick up the tab, when we don't do our share
and our part in providing for special education, who gets stuck with
the bill? Local property taxpayers. The States have to increase and
keep increasing the share of local property taxes to pay for this.
Again, that is unacceptable.
Turning now to college education, we all know the cost of a college
education is rising. It hits all of us pretty hard. It hits all middle-
class families and anyone who wants to get a college education.
Obviously, it hits the poorest families the hardest. This bill provides
an increase of more than $800 million for Pell grants over last year--
Pell grants, so that our poorest students have a chance to get a higher
education. Building on that increase we put in the bill earlier,
Senator Kennedy and Senator Enzi, the chair and ranking member of the
authorizing committee on education, wrote a budget reconciliation
bill that raises the maximum Pell grant award from $4,310 to $4,800.
That is a boost of almost $500 a year for the neediest students--the
largest increase in more than 30 years. But under the President's
budget, the increase would be less than half that--about $230 a year.
So again, our bill would increase that and provide for $800 million
more for Pell grants over last year.
One other item which is something of importance to every Senator is
this bill increases funding for administering Social Security by $125
million above the President's request. Now, why is that important? I
will bet my colleagues
[[Page S12960]]
every Senator here and their State offices have been getting all kinds
of cases coming in from people who have disability claims, but they are
backlogged, backlogged, backlogged. They wait months and months,
sometimes years, to get their disability claims administered. Well,
this increase would allow us to make a dent in that backlog of
disability claims. Again, we ought to be even more aggressive in
reducing the backlog. But make no mistake, if we accept the President's
budget, the Social Security Administration would have to institute a
hiring freeze and the backlog of claims would skyrocket. It is bad
enough the way it is right now, but under the President's budget, it
would be unacceptable. So our bill would provide $125 million more for
Social Security to begin to reduce the disability claims backlog.
I think one of the most disturbing problems with the President's
budget is it is kind of a total disregard, I would say, for the needs
of our poorest people, the poorest citizens of our country. Just
consider three programs that serve low-income children and families in
this country. The three programs are the LIHEAP program, which is the
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, the Community Services Block
Grant Program, and the Social Services Block Grant Program. Let's look
at those three. These all serve the lowest income people in our
country.
The President's budget would cut LIHEAP by $379 million despite
predictions of record energy prices this winter. This cut would force
States to lower their benefits or serve fewer low-income individuals,
many of whom are elderly and poor, many who are going without medical
care, some cutting down on their food and other necessities in order to
pay their heating bills.
Then, the two block grants I mentioned, the community services block
grant and the social services block grant, many of the States tie these
together to provide essential services for our most disadvantaged
people in this country.
The community services block grant is a key safety net, providing
assistance in areas such as job training, housing, and emergency food
aid. This bill increases funding for the community services block grant
by just a modest $40 million. The President's budget eliminated--the
President's budget didn't just cut community services block grants,
they zeroed it out--all $630 million zeroed out.
The other block grant, the social services block grant, addresses
some of our country's most vital human services needs, such as
protecting children from abuse and neglect, caring for homeless
seniors, providing services to children and families with severe
disabilities, to mention just a few. The President's budget slashed the
social services block grant by 30 percent. Our bill says no.
The President has already cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans. We
are not going to decimate programs for the poor at the same time.
Enough is enough.
So the bill we have before us invests in job training and employment
services programs to help Americans develop the skills they need to
find work. The President's budget cut job-training programs by $1
billion; that is, from $3.6 billion last year, he would cut it to $2.6
billion. This bill rejects that. This bill also provides $483 million
for community services jobs for older Americans. The President's
request was $350 million, which would have actually cut a lot of
seniors from the program, seniors who are already working in that
program.
America's working families also count on the Labor Department to
ensure that their workplaces are safe and that employers comply with
labor laws. Unfortunately, the President has consistently underfunded
the agencies that enforce these laws. Since 2001, OSHA--that is the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration--has lost almost 10
percent of its enforcement staff because of the President's budgets.
This bill charts a new course. We invest $12 million over last year to
rebuild OSHA staffing.
When I describe the funding choices in this bill as ``investments,''
I choose my word carefully. It is a simple fact that when we invest in
these programs, we save money in the long run and our country saves
money in the long run. When the Minneapolis bridge collapsed this
summer, we all talked about the large costs of failing to invest in our
infrastructure, our physical infrastructure, our roads, our bridges,
our highways, our rails.
Well, what about failing to invest in our human infrastructure, our
people? What can be more important than that investment? We know some
things. We know that early childhood education pays many dividends
later on in life and saves us money. We know that quality K-12
education pays big dividends. We know that enabling kids to go to
college and not be burdened with a lot of debt pays off with big
dividends. We know that adding community health centers pays off, pays
dividends by preventing emergency care and disability down the road. We
know that job training pays big dividends by getting workers who are
laid off of jobs--maybe they have gone overseas--retrained and equipped
for new kinds of jobs so they can be productive, taxpaying citizens.
All of what I mention pays huge future dividends.
I said earlier that this bill defines America. It is important that
this bill defines America as a compassionate nation, a nation that
invests in its future, a nation, as the late Senator Hubert Humphrey
used to say, that meets the needs of those at the beginning of life,
those in the twilight of life, and those in the shadows of life.
Again, I ask, how can we continue to pour endless billions of dollars
into Iraq--more than $12 billion a month now, and counting--and yet we
cut funding for the basic essential services here at home for our most
needy citizens? This is a case of seriously misplaced priorities. We
are doing our best to correct it in the bill before us today.
Obviously, we have not been able to do everything we want or need to
do, but this bill reflects the priorities of Senators on both sides of
the aisle, and, as I said, we stayed within our budget allocation.
Again, given all of this, I am genuinely saddened that the President
has already pledged to veto the bill. I really cannot believe the
President wants us to cut funding for cancer research and other
lifesaving research through the NIH. I cannot believe the President
wants to cut children from the rolls of Head Start. I cannot believe
the President wants to eliminate the community services block grant,
which is a basic life support for many of our neediest citizens. I
cannot believe the President wants to cut funding for home heating
assistance for poor elderly. Yet the President's budget would require
all of these cuts to essential programs and services. It would be
unconscionable.
So all I can assume is that the President is getting very bad advice.
Perhaps his advisers have told him to veto this bill to score some
political points--whatever that might be. If so, it is bad advice
because there is not an ounce of extravagance in the bill. It meets the
essential needs of the American people in terms of education, health
and human services, and job training. It passed out of committee 26 to
3. You cannot get much more bipartisan than that.
I might again point out, as I did earlier, that over the last 5
years, this appropriations bill--again, it was under the leadership of
Senator Specter, and I was ranking member--every year was above the
President's request. Not once did the President threaten to veto it.
Well, this year, some games are being played. The President's budget
slashes all these programs. We come in to replenish the money and put
it in and to give modest increases, all within our budget allocation,
but for the first time in 6 years the President says he is going to
veto it. What is the difference? Is the only difference now that the
Democrats are now in charge? Because, as I said, every year, Senator
Specter's bill was higher than the President's request, but he never
threatened to veto one of those bills and he never did. This year, he
says he will. It sounds to me like the last Karl Rove tactic before he
left town. This sounds like a Rove tactic.
I say to the President that he is gone, he is history--bad history,
but he is history. Now, Mr. President, do the right thing. Do what we
have for the last 5 years and work with Congress. We are willing to
meet you halfway, as I said earlier.
One of the objections in the President's veto threat, which he sent
down
[[Page S12961]]
here yesterday and I have here, was that he opposes overturning the
President's policy regarding human embryonic stem cell research. All
right. We took it out, even though Senator Specter and I and our
committee feel very strongly about this. We have had hearings and
hearings on this since 1998. Under Senator Specter's leadership, we
have passed legislation to overturn the President's policy. I think we
got, if I am not mistaken, about 66 votes in the Senate to do that. I
think I am right on that. So, again, we feel strongly about that, as
strongly as the President may feel about it, but in the spirit of
compromise and getting our bill done and moving it ahead, we decided to
take it out, and we did.
So I hope that in the next 24 hours the White House will listen to
the debate and they know what is going on and they have their people up
here; this is no secret--I hope the President will revisit this, and I
would like to see a new Statement of Administration Policy coming down
saying: You did, in good will, take out the stem cell thing, and that
was half of our objection. We will meet you halfway and accept the bill
as you have it.
Mr. President, that would be the good thing to do. I still am hopeful
that the President will do that. There is really no justification now
for vetoing this bill. If we are over what he wanted, we have been over
what he wanted for the last 5 years and he never vetoed the bill. So I
hope the President will send down a new statement of policy and that
they will support this bill because I think the bill is going to have
big support here. It passed committee 26 to 3. If I am not mistaken,
those three votes were opposed to the stem cell provisions we had in
the bill. Had they not been there, we would have had a unanimous vote
in committee.
I think this bill will get a big vote here on the Senate floor. It
would be helpful and would ease things and would, I believe, lift a lot
of the contentiousness that goes on around town here if the President
would come out and say: OK, we will meet you halfway; you took that
out, so we will take the bill as it is. That would make things go very
smoothly.
Again, we look forward to the consideration of the bill on the floor
this week. We want to use our time productively. I encourage Senators,
if they have amendments, to bring them to the floor in a timely fashion
today so we can complete our work and get the bill to conference as
soon as possible.
Senator Reid said on Monday that we would stay in this week--and
Saturday, if necessary--to finish this important bill. Well, I have
placed all my plans on hold. I intend to be here, if necessary, Friday
and Saturday--or Sunday, if necessary--to finish this vitally important
bill. I take the leader at his word that we will be here Friday and
Saturday if we need to be. However, if Senators come over today and
offer amendments today and tomorrow, hopefully, we can finish this bill
in a timely manner. Again, Mr. President, we are on the bill, and I
hope Senators will come over and offer their amendments.
Mr. President, on August 2, 2007, by a vote of 83 to 14 this Senate
approved S. 1, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007.
The President signed the legislation on September 14, 2007. This ethics
reform legislation will significantly improve the transparency and
accountability of the legislative process.
Pursuant to the new rule XLIV, it is required that the chairman of
the committee of jurisdiction certify that certain information related
to congressionally directed spending be identified and that the
required information be available on a publicly accessible
congressional Web site in a searchable format at least 48 hours before
a vote on the pending bill. In addition, Members who request such items
are required to certify in writing that neither they nor their
immediate family have a pecuniary interest in the items they requested,
and the committee is required to make those certification letters
available on the Internet. The information provided includes
identification of the congressionally directed spending and the name of
the Senator who requested such spending. This information is contained
in the committee report numbered 110-107, dated June 29, 2007, and has
been available on the Internet for 8 weeks. The Member letters
concerning pecuniary interests are also available on the Internet.
I am submitting for the Record the certification by the chairman of
the Committee on Appropriations, Senator Byrd. I ask unanimous consent
to have it printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Senator BYRD. I certify that the information required by
Senate Rule XLIV, related to congressionally directed
spending, has been identified in the Committee report
numbered 110-107, filed on June 27, 2007, and that the
required information has been available on a publicly
accessible congressional website in a searchable format at
least 48 hours before a vote on the pending bill.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence
of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Menendez). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
CIA Inspector General
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, there was discussion on the floor this
morning about intelligence matters. I wanted to spend a few minutes to
discuss a matter of bipartisan concern in the Senate. What I am talking
about is the very troubling development that came to light last week
indicating that the head of the CIA, General Hayden, has decided to
launch an investigation into the Agency's inspector general.
I and others--and I particularly commend Senator Bond, our vice
chairman of the committee, for his excellent statement on this matter--
are very concerned about this new development. It is particularly
important that the inspector general of the Central Intelligence Agency
function with independence. Because our work by its very nature--
entrusted with those secrets essential to protect our country's
security--has to be done in private and is classified, we need an
independent inspector general to ensure accountability.
Because of a development such as this, I think this can have a
chilling effect on the independence of the inspector general at the
Central Intelligence Agency.
The Congress created these inspector general positions for a reason,
and that is to ensure accountability, to ensure Government efficiency.
Virtually all of the agencies have these key positions and, of course,
it is their job to report findings to the Congress.
Perhaps General Hayden is concerned about the work of Mr. Helgerson,
the inspector general for the Agency. There is an appropriate process
for bringing up those concerns. If the head of the Central Intelligence
Agency is concerned about how the CIA inspector general is doing his
job, he ought to bring them to the President's Council on Integrity and
Effectiveness.
It is my view that particular body has been handling complaints
against inspectors general, and it is my view they are doing their job
well and appropriately. But to have an investigation such as this, in
my view, is going to interfere with the inspectors general
independence. If the Director of the CIA is ordering investigations
into the inspector general's activities and plans to ``suggest
improvements'' for the inspector general to consider, my view is that
can undermine the inspector general's independence.
I do not want to see inspectors general intimidated. That is the
bottom line here, and I do not want the Director of the CIA interfering
with the extraordinarily important activities of the inspector general
at the Agency.
Let me also state that my concern is part of a view that there has
been a pattern at the Agency of being less than transparent. I and,
again, senior Members of this body, particularly Senator Bond and
Senator Roberts, have worked very closely and in a bipartisan way to
ensure that the inspector general's report on the role of the Agency in
the runup to 9/11 was going to be made public. I can tell you that,
unfortunately, General Hayden fought that bipartisan effort every step
of the way.
The fact is, it was a balanced effort. The particular recommendations
of the
[[Page S12962]]
inspector general were modest in nature. They did not require that
anybody be fired or cavalierly dismissed. It called for what is known
as an accountability board, something, again, to ensure that the
watchdogs are in place to protect this country's security and do it in
a fashion that is committed to the American principles of transparency
and openness.
I have written Admiral McConnell who, of course, is the head of the
national intelligence community, and asked him to direct General Hayden
to cease and cease immediately the investigation that is now going on
into the work of the inspector general at the Central Intelligence
Agency.
It is my view that people who know they are doing the right thing are
not afraid of oversight. It is time for the head of the intelligence
community, Admiral McConnell, to put an end, and an immediate end, to
General Hayden's attempt to muzzle the CIA's inspector general.
I wrap up by saying, again, we are not talking about a matter that is
partisan. Senator Bond, who has been so cooperative on these matters
relating to accountability and transparency, said it very well. Senator
Bond said the inspector general had done great work. In his statement
on this matter, Senator Bond noted that the Agency regrettably has a
track record of resisting accountability.
So that is what this is all about. The ball is now in Admiral
McConnell's court. It is my hope that in the next few days, Admiral
McConnell will direct General Hayden to cease this investigation into
the work of the CIA's inspector general.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
____________________