[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 66 (Monday, May 13, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3361-S3365]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HEALTH CARE FUNDRAISING
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, Friday's Washington Post reported that
Secretary Sebelius of the Department of Health and Human Services ``has
gone, hat in hand, to health industry [executives], asking them to make
large financial donations to help with the effort to implement
President Obama's landmark health care law. . . . ''
I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the Washington
Post article following my remarks.
The article further said that the ``unusual fundraising push'' comes
after Congress has repeatedly rejected the administration's requests
for additional funds to set up the Affordable Health Care Act. The
article said many of the Secretary's calls have recruited support for
Enroll America, described as the most prominent nonprofit working on
the health care law's implementation. Its president, Anne Filipic--the
article goes on to say--joined the group in January after serving as
White House deputy director for public engagement.
Today, the New York Times included an article by Robert Pear:
``Cabinet Secretary Solicits Large Donations to Publicize Health Care
Law.'' I ask unanimous consent to have that article printed in the
Record following my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. ALEXANDER. In the article, it said:
. . . Ms. Sebelius had made calls soliciting support from
the health care industry, including insurance and
pharmaceutical executives.
. . . . a spokesman for Ms. Sebelius, said she had
suggested that health care executives and others support the
work of Enroll America, a private nonprofit group that shares
the president's goal of securing coverage for people without
insurance.
An insurance executive said that some insurers had been
asked for $1 million [in] donations, and that ``bigger
companies have been asked for a lot more.''
[[Page S3362]]
Administration officials said private donations were needed
because Congress had provided much less money than Mr. Obama
requested to publicize the new law and get people enrolled in
health plans subsidized by the government.
The article further talks about Ms. Filipic. She worked on Mr.
Obama's 2008 campaign. She was deputy executive director of the
Democratic National Committee. She worked in the Obama White House as
deputy director of the Office of Public Engagement. She said her time
is not political in her work for enroll America.
She says:
We are thrilled to be working with Secretary Sebelius and
to have her support.
Several executives who received these calls for money said ``they
were uncomfortable with the discussions because the federal government
has the power to approve or reject the health plans they want to sell
in insurance markets that will be run by federal officials in more than
30 states.''
Secretary Sebelius's fundraising for and coordinating with private
entities helping to implement the new health care law may be illegal,
should cease immediately, and should be fully investigated by Congress.
Later this week, I will be sending a letter, with several of my
colleagues, to the Government Accountability Office asking them to
examine the issue. We will be asking the GAO to examine the amount of
coordination between the Department of Health and Human Services and
Enroll America and whether Secretary Sebelius is trying to do through a
private entity activities that Congress has refused to allow the
Department to do.
Such private fundraising, as these articles describe, circumvents the
constitutional requirement that only Congress may appropriate funds. If
the Secretary and others in her Department are closely coordinating
with the activities of Enroll America, which is headed by the former
White House aide, then those actions may be in violation of the Anti-
Deficiency Act.
The limits of the Anti-Deficiency Act were fully explored by Congress
during the Iran-Contra incident, when Reagan administration official
Oliver North raised funds and directed their spending through private
entities in support of Nicaraguan rebels even though Congress had
refused to appropriate such funds.
This produced a select joint committee of the Congress, including
many of its most distinguished Members--the Iran-Contra joint select
committee. The Senate ranking members were Senator Inouye and Senator
Warren Rudman of New Hampshire. The House leaders were Lee Hamilton and
Dick Cheney, who was the ranking Republican.
The report of the Iran-Contra Joint Select Committee--Senate Report
No. 100-216--at page 413 said:
The constitutional plan--
Referring to the U.S. Constitution--
did not prohibit the President from urging other countries to
give money directly to the Contras.
The rebel group in Nicaragua.
But the Constitution does prohibit receipt and expenditure
of such funds by this government absent an appropriation.
This prohibition may not lawfully be evaded by use of a
nominally private entity, if the entity is in reality an arm
of the government and the government is able to direct how
the money is spent.
The report also said:
Congress's exclusive control over the expenditure of funds
cannot legally be evaded through the use of gifts or
donations to the executive branch. Were it otherwise, a
president whose appropriation requests were rejected by
Congress could raise money through private sources or third
countries for armies, military actions, arms systems or even
domestic programs.
Let me read this again. This is the joint committee:
Were it otherwise, a president whose appropriation requests
were rejected by Congress could raise money through private
sources or from third countries for armies, military actions,
arms systems or even domestic programs.
That is page 412, page 413 of the Iran-Contra joint select committee
report.
Friday's Washington Post reported that the Secretary's spokesman said
Sebelius is working with private entities on ``our mission'' of
implementing health care law activities, although Congress has refused
to appropriate more funds. If the Department of Health and Human
Services closely coordinates with Enroll America and with other such
entities, then the analogy with Iran-Contra is strong.
It is hard for me to see the difference. There is a difference in
where Oliver North got his money in 1985, 1986, and 1987 with Iran-
Contra. Some of it came from the hostages-for-arms sale. But the
question is not as much where the money comes from--although in this
case the Secretary may be raising it from people she regulates, which
could also be illegal--the question is where the money is going. In the
case of Iran-Contra, the money was going to a private entity,
supporting a rebel army in Nicaragua, in contravention of the Boland
amendment passed by Congress. In other words, Congress had said no, and
the administration did it anyway.
That is precisely, it seems to me, what is happening here. Congress
has said: No, we are not going to appropriate any more money--or as
much as you want--to implement the health care law. And the Secretary
appears to be raising money from people she regulates, to give it to
private entities with whom she coordinates, to do what Congress has
refused to do.
The problem with that, first, is the Constitution of the United
States gives the power of the purse to the U.S. Congress, in Article I.
No. 2, there is a Federal law that says you cannot do through private
entities what Congress has refused to do. That is called the Anti-
Deficiency law. And, No. 3, there are some Federal laws about raising
money from people you regulate for whatever purpose.
The Secretary's activities may violate those Federal laws prohibiting
raising private funds from those she regulates. Federal law permits a
narrow band of private fundraising activities, but this has always been
interpreted very narrowly.
This would not be the first violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act by
the Secretary's HHS. The General Accountability Office found HHS in
violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act three times last year.
I am most concerned that the Secretary's actions reflect a deep
disregard, running throughout the administration, for the
constitutional role of the elected representatives in the legislative
branch.
We saw it in the President's decision in January of 2012 to bypass
the Senate's role of advice and consent and make appointments--recess
appointments, which are authorized by the Constitution--at a time when
the Senate said it was not in recess. A Federal court quickly ruled
these appointments were unconstitutional, because the Senate was not in
recess, but the individuals continue to show up at the National Labor
Relations Board and pretend they have the authority to issue decisions.
We see this in a number of executive orders the President has used to
circumvent Congress on issues as important as immigration enforcement
and in the number of czars whose responsibilities are intended for
roles that need the Senate's advice and consent.
We see it at the Department of Education, where the Secretary is
turning a simple waiver authority in No Child Left Behind into a
conditional waiver with the Secretary using his authority to make
decisions that should be made by Congress or should be made locally by
State and local governments.
The HHS Secretary's actions may follow an administration pattern, but
in this case it is in a pattern that appears it may be illegal and it
demands investigation.
So I will be, as I said, with other Members of Congress, later this
week, sending a letter to the Government Accountability Office, asking
them to look at these facts.
Mr. President, I wish to read a few paragraphs from the Iran-Contra
report that was issued by the Joint Select Committee in the late 1980s:
The Constitution contemplates that the Government will
conduct its affairs only with funds appropriated by Congress.
By resorting to funds not appropriated by Congress--indeed
funds denied the executive branch by Congress--Administration
officials committed a transgression far more basic than a
violation of the Boland Amendment.
That was the amendment that said you cannot use Federal dollars to
support rebels in Nicaragua.
The power of the purse--
Continued the joint select committee. This was written at a time when
we had a Democratic Congress.
[[Page S3363]]
The power of the purse, which the Framers vested in
Congress, has long been recognized as ``the most important
simple curb in the Constitution on Presidential Power.'' The
Framers were determined not to combine the power of the purse
and the power of the sword in the same branch of government.
. . . The constitutional process that lodges control of
government expenditures exclusively in Congress is the
Anti-Deficiency Act, which prohibits an officer of the
United States from authorizing an expenditure that has not
been the subject of a Congressional appropriation or that
exceeds the amount of any applicable appropriation.
Thus, the Anti-Deficiency Act provides:
An officer or employee of the United States Government may
not make or authorize an expenditure or authorization
exceeding an amount available in an appropriation or fund for
the expenditure or obligation; or involve [the] government in
a contract or obligation for the payment of money before an
appropriation is made unless authorized by law.
I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record following my
remarks these excerpts from the joint committee's report; and I refer
the Record to Article I, Section 8 and Article 1, Section 9 of the
Constitution, which says:
No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in
Consequence of Appropriations made by Law. . . .
Then two other things. One is the purported authority that the
Secretary's spokesman is citing for her actions in raising money. I
have not seen the authority for raising money from people she
regulates. But 42 U.S.C. section 300u-1(a) talks about grants and
contracts for research programs, and says:
The Secretary is authorized to conduct and support by grant
or contract (and encourage others to support) research in
health information and health promotion, preventive health
services, and education in the appropriate use of health
care. Applications for grants and contracts under this
section shall be subject to appropriate peer review.
This small section relates to support for contracts for research and
information programs in the form of grants or contracts. The
parenthetical, ``encourage others to support'' has to be read as
encouraging others to support such programs. It is far-fetched to say
it gives the Secretary authority to encourage third parties to give
money to nonprofits providing ObamaCare information that the Department
of Health and Human Services cannot fund directly because Congress has
refused to appropriate.
This small section and the words in parenthesis cannot amend the
Constitution of the United States and invalidate Article I. This
section cannot supersede the Anti-Deficiency Act, according to the
language of the Joint Committee. There is obviously a way to have
appropriate public-private contracts. We have them all throughout
government, public-private associations to try to improve our country.
We do that with HIV/AIDS, we do it with a whole variety of things.
When I was Education Secretary, I worked with the first President
Bush to set up the New American Schools Development Corporation, which
encouraged a private corporation headed by former New Jersey Governor
Tom Kean, which would raise money to create models for private schools.
Then later on President Bush 1 asked Congress to do some things in
support of those schools. All of us encouraged that, but that was quite
different. That was an effort that would be typical of many public-
private partnerships in which the Federal Government is involved, where
in this case we said we want to encourage the support of model schools.
Here is a private corporation that is doing that. We encourage that.
Congress was not objecting to that. Congress has not said: You cannot
do that. Congress has not been asked to vote on an appropriation for
the New American Schools Development Corporation. Congress had not
said: You cannot do that.
So that would be true with dozens, may be hundreds of public-private
partnerships between the Federal Government and private organizations
for the same goal. But what we are talking about, and why the analogy
between what Secretary Sebelius is doing and what Oliver North was
doing in the Reagan administration in the late 1980s is so strong, is
because in each case the money seems to be raised privately and spent
through private entities for a function for which Congress has refused
to appropriate money.
It is not so much where the money came from, it is more where the
money is going. The Constitution itself, in Article I, makes it
absolutely clear no one can appropriate dollars for a Federal program
other than the Congress of the United States. A subterfuge that goes
around that, seeks to go around that by raising private money, putting
it in private entities for the same purpose that Congress has either
refused to appropriate money for or said that you cannot do, that is
outside the Constitution. It is not allowed by the Constitution of the
United States, and it is against the Anti-Deficiency Act.
Then there is the separate question of whether it is appropriate to
raise money from people the Secretary regulates. I am deeply concerned
about this. I hope the Secretary will stop this action. I hope the
public-private partnerships we have throughout government will continue
where they are appropriate, but we need for the executive branch of
government to show proper respect to the people of this country who
elect their Members of Congress.
We are Article I. They are Article II. The purpose of the power of
appropriations is to put a curb on the executive branch. If the
Congress says no, then the executive cannot spend money, nor can the
executive go through a subterfuge of private organizations and private
fundraising in support of the very same objective that Congress has
refused to approve.
In this case, the Secretary seems to say the reason they are doing
that is because Congress has refused to appropriate more money to
implement the health care law. That seems to me to be just admitting a
violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act, admitting a violation of the
proper division of responsibilities in the Constitution.
Yes, Congress has refused to do that, but that is the Congress's
privilege to do that. When the Congress does that, the administration
may not proceed to spend the money the Congress has not authorized,
whether directly through the government or indirectly through private
entities.
Later this week we will be asking the Government Accountability
Office to look into these facts. I am sure we will be hearing more
about it. I would hope in the meantime the Secretary will stop making
the phone calls, stop coordinating with private entities to do things
that Congress has specifically refused to do.
I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record at the end of
my remarks an article published July 8, 1991, ``Bush Sets Up Foundation
to Start Model Schools'' as an example of an appropriate way to have a
public-private partnership or a private enterprise that is encouraged
by the government but not in a way that seeks to do something Congress
has refused to do.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. ALEXANDER. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum
call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. ALEXANDER. I ask unanimous consent to also have printed in the
Record the names of the members of the Iran-Contra select committee.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From The Washington Post, May 10, 2013]
Budget Request Denied, Sebelius Turns to Health Executives To Finance
Obamacare
(By Sarah Kliff)
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has
gone, hat in hand, to health industry officials, asking them
to make large financial donations to help with the effort to
implement President Obama's landmark health-care law, two
people familiar with the outreach said.
Her unusual fundraising push comes after Congress
repeatedly rejected the Obama administration's requests for
additional funds to set up the Affordable Care Act, leaving
HHS to implement the president's signature legislative
accomplishment on what officials have described as a
shoestring budget.
Over the past three months, Sebelius has made multiple
phone calls to health industry executives, community
organizations and church groups and asked that they
contribute whatever they can to nonprofit groups that are
working to enroll uninsured Americans and increase awareness
of the law, according to an HHS official and an industry
person familiar with the secretary's
[[Page S3364]]
activities. Both spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk
openly about private discussions.
An HHS spokesperson said Sebelius was within the bounds of
her authority in asking for help.
But Republicans charged that Sebelius's outreach was
improper because it pressured private companies and other
groups to support the Affordable Care Act. The latest
controversy has emerged as the law faces a string of
challenges from GOP lawmakers in Washington and skepticism
from many state officials across the country.
``To solicit funds from health-care executives to help pay
for the implementation of the President's $2.6 trillion
health spending law is absurd,'' Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah)
said in a statement. ``I will be seeking more information
from the Administration about these actions to help better
understand whether there are conflicts of interest and if it
violated federal law.''
Federal regulations do not allow department officials to
fundraise in their professional capacity. They do, however,
allow Cabinet members to solicit donations as private
citizens ``if you do not solicit funds from a subordinate or
from someone who has or seeks business with the Department,
and you do not use your official title,'' according to
Justice Department regulations.
HHS spokesman Jason Young added that a special section in
the Public Health Service Act allows the secretary to support
and encourage others to support nonprofit groups working to
provide health information and conduct other public-health
activities.
Sebelius is working ``with a full range of stakeholders who
share in the mission of getting Americans the help they need
and deserve,'' Young said. ``Part of our mission is to help
uninsured Americans take advantage of new, quality affordable
insurance options that are coming thanks to the health law.''
Young said that Sebelius did not solicit for funds directly
from industries that HHS regulates, such as insurance
companies and hospitals, but rather asked them to contribute
in whatever way they can.
But the industry official who had knowledge of the calls
but did not participate directly in them said there was a
clear insinuation by the administration that the insurers
should give financially to the nonprofits.
Meredith McGehee, policy director for the nonpartisan
Campaign Legal Center, which researches government ethics
issues, said she was troubled by Sebelius's activities
because the secretary seemed to be ``using the power of
government to compel giving or insinuate that giving is
going to be looked at favorably by the government.''
The success of the Affordable Care Act largely hinges on
whether enough people sign up for insurance coverage. If only
a small number of sick people participate, premiums would
spike.
But spreading information about the law to the 30 million
uninsured Americans has been a struggle, partly because there
isn't enough money to fund the effort, HHS officials have
argued.
The Affordable Care Act included $1 billion to be used in
overall implementation of the law. Congressional Budget
Office projections, however, estimated that federal agencies
will need between $5 billion and $10 billion to get the law
up and running over the next decade. And because many states
have refused to partner with the federal government in
setting up the law, the burden on HHS has grown.
HHS has repeatedly requested additional funds from Congress
to assist in the implementing but has been turned down.
After Congress rejected a request in March for nearly $1
billion in additional spending for fiscal 2013, the White
House asked for $1.5 billion for fiscal 2015 to set up and
run dozens of exchanges that will provide Americans options
for health insurance. The new marketplaces will launch in
October for open enrollment.
``We requested additional money . . . but we didn't receive
any additional funding for the exchanges,'' Ellen Murray,
HHS's assistant secretary for financial resources, said last
month at a budget briefing. ``So we've had to come up with a
Plan B. We've been working very hard to develop that.''
In 2012, budget documents show that HHS pulled hundreds of
millions of dollars from programs not specifically earmarked
for the Affordable Care Act's implementation.
On top of that, the agency announced Thursday that it would
use $150 million in Affordable Care Act funds meant to build
additional community health centers to train thousands of
health-care outreach workers at facilities that already
exist.
``Investing in health centers for outreach and enrollment
assistance provides one more way the Obama administration is
helping consumers understand their options and enroll in
affordable coverage,'' Secretary Sebelius said in a
statement.
Many of Sebelius's calls have gone to current supporters of
Enroll America, the most prominent nonprofit group working on
the health care law's implementation, an HHS official said.
Its president, Anne Filipic, joined the group in January
after serving as the White House's deputy director for public
engagement.
``We all have a lot of work to do between now and the
Marketplace opening in October,'' Filipic said in a
statement. ``That's why it's so important that the public,
private and non-profit sectors are coming together to educate
consumers about the opportunities that will be available to
them later this year. Secretary Sebelius recognizes how
important the work Enroll America is doing and we're thrilled
to be working with her.''
Health insurers plan to run their own outreach campaigns
alongside the work of the Obama administration. They have a
vested interest in recruiting Americans to enroll in their
specific products rather than those of their competitors.
``As open enrollment gets closer, health plans will be
engaged in a variety of innovative outreach activities,''
spokesman Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for the trade
association America's Health Insurance Plans, said.
____
[From The New York Times, May 12, 2013]
Cabinet Secretary Solicits Large Donations To Publicize Health Care Law
(By Robert Pear)
Washington--Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and
human services, has solicited sizable donations from the
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and H&R Block, the tax
preparation service, as part of a multimillion-dollar
campaign to ensure the success of President Obama's health
care law, administration officials said Sunday, even as a
leading Senate Republican raised questions about the legality
of her efforts.
The foundation is expected to contribute as much as $10
million, while H&R Block is expected to make a smaller
donation of about $500,000, the officials said.
The senior Republican on the Senate health committee,
Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, said the fund-raising
``may be illegal.'' He likened it to efforts by the Reagan
administration to raise money for rebels fighting the leftist
government of Nicaragua in the 1980s, after Congress had
restricted the use of federal money. Aides to Mr. Alexander
said Sunday that he would ask the Government Accountability
Office, an investigative arm of Congress, to examine the
propriety of the Obama administration's fund-raising efforts.
The Department of Health and Human Services said that Ms.
Sebelius's actions to supplement money appropriated by
Congress were proper and would continue, despite criticism
from Republicans. After first denying that administration
officials had engaged in fund-raising, the department
confirmed Friday that Ms. Sebelius had made calls soliciting
support from the health care industry, including insurance
and pharmaceutical executives.
Jason Young, a spokesman for Ms. Sebelius, said she had
suggested that health care executives and others support the
work of Enroll America, a private nonprofit group that shares
the president's goal of securing coverage for people without
insurance. Several people who received solicitations said
that current and former administration officials had
suggested seven-figure donations.
An insurance executive said that some insurers had been
asked for $1 million donations, and that ``bigger companies
have been asked for a lot more.''
Administration officials said private donations were needed
because Congress had provided much less money than Mr. Obama
requested to publicize the new law and get people enrolled in
health plans subsidized by the government.
The Johnson Foundation describes itself as the largest
philanthropy devoted exclusively to public health. H&R Block
sees a large role for itself in helping low- and middle-
income people apply for tax credits that can be used to buy
private health insurance.
While Ms. Sebelius asked for support from health care
executives, she did not make ``a direct fund-raising appeal''
to entities regulated by the government, Mr. Young said. In
any event, he said, under a decades-old federal law, the
secretary can encourage support for private nonprofit
entities promoting public health.
The president of Enroll America, Anne Filipic, worked on
Mr. Obama's 2008 campaign, became an aide to Ms. Sebelius,
was later deputy executive director of the Democratic
National Committee and then worked in the Obama White House
as deputy director of the Office of Public Engagement. But a
former Obama administration official, who spends time raising
money or Enroll America, said its work was ``not political.''
In an interview, Ms. Filipic said, ``We are thrilled to be
working with Secretary Sebelius and to have her support.''
Ms. Filipic refused to say how mut money had-been raised
through the efforts of Ms. Sebelius, refused to disclose the
budget of Enroll America, and refused to say if the group had
been requesting million-dollar donations. Mr. Young, the
spokesman for Ms. Sebelius, said that her fund-raising
efforts began in March, around the third anniversary of the
signing of the health care law.
Insurance executives said they supported the president's
goal of maximizing enrollment in the new health care program
and encouraging healthy people under 40 to sign up, so
insurers would not be stuck with a pool of older, less
healthy subscribers. But several executives said they were
uncomfortable with the discussions because the federal
government has the power to approve or reject the health
plans they want to sell in insurance markets that will be run
by federal officials in more than 30 states.
Ronald F. Pollack, the executive director of Families USA,
a liberal-leaning consumer group, is the founder and chairman
of Enroll America. He said that he raised $7 million for the
organization in the last two years, and that the group had
collected substantially more than $7 million in more
donations this year. He confirmed that ``there
[[Page S3365]]
have been solicitations in excess of $1 million.''
Health care executives said they were reluctant to make big
contributions for several reasons, including the fact that
insurers are required to pay more than $100 billion in new
taxes over the next 10 years to help defray the cost of
expanded coverage. Drug companies must pay new fees totaling
$34 billion over the same period.
____
Excerpts of report of the Congressional Committees
Investigating the Iran-Contra Affair, Chapter 27, pp 411-413
``The Constitution contemplates that the Government will
conduct its affairs only with funds appropriated by Congress.
By resorting to funds not appropriated by Congress--indeed
funds denied the executive branch by Congress--Administration
officials committed a transgression far more basic than a
violation of the Boland Amendment.
The power of the purse, which the Framers vested in
Congress, has long been recognized as ``the most important
simple curb in the Constitution on Presidential Power.'' The
Framers were determined not to combine the power of the purse
and the power of the sword in the same branch of government.
. . .
When members of the executive branch raised money from
third countries and private citizens, took control over that
money through the Enterprise, and used it to support the
Contras' war in Nicaragua, they bypassed this crucial
safeguard in the Constitution. . . .
The appropriations clause was intended to give Congress
exclusive control of funds spent by the Government, and to
give the democratically elected representatives of the people
an absolute check on Executive action requiring the
expenditure of funds. . . .
Congress' exclusive control over the expenditure of funds
cannot legally be evaded through the use of gifts or
donations made to the executive branch. Were it otherwise, a
President whose appropriation requests were rejected by
Congress could raise money from private sources or third
countries for armies, military actions, arms systems, and
even domestic programs. . . .
The Constitutional process that lodges control of
Government expenditures exclusively in Congress is the Anti-
Deficiency Act (31 USC Section 1341) which prohibits an
officer of the United States from authorizing an expenditure
that has not been the subject of a Congressional
appropriation, or that exceeds the amount of any applicable
appropriation. Thus it provides:
``An officer or employee of the United States Government
may not make or authorize an expenditure or obligation
exceeding an amount available in an appropriation or fund for
the expenditure or obligation; or involve [the] government in
a contract or obligation for the payment of money before an
appropriation is made unless authorized by law.''
. . . The Constitutional plan did not prohibit the
President from urging other countries to give money directly
to the Contras. But the Constitution does prohibit receipt
and expenditure of such funds by this Government absent an
appropriation. This prohibition may not lawfully be evaded by
use of a nominally private entity, if the private entity is
in reality an arm of the Government and the Government is
able to direct how the money is spent.
____
Bush Sets Up Foundation To Start Model Schools
(By Karen De Witt, July 9, 1991)
In a move he described as a milestone in the ``educational
revolution'' he outlined in April, President Bush today
announced the establishment of a foundation to foster the
creation of model schools.
In a Rose Garden ceremony, Mr. Bush, who was accompanied by
Education Secretary Lamar Alexander, introduced 18 business,
education and political leaders as members of the board of
the New American Schools Development Corporation, saying they
would help ``set aside stale preconceptions'' about how
schools should work and ``seek nothing less than a new
generation of schools.''
Mr. Bush has said he hopes the private, nonprofit
corporation will persuade businesses to donate as much as
$200 million for the creation of 535 experimental schools
intended to be models of reform for the nation. The schools,
one in each Congressional district and two more for each
state, are part of Mr. Bush's education legislation now being
considered by Congress.
``We want to encourage and experiment,'' Mr. Bush said.
``No one will conduct our educational revolution for us.
We've got to do it ourselves. We've done enough hand-wringing
about the state of our schools and now let's act.''
The Rand Corporation's Institute on Education and Training
will serve as the research arm for the new corporation. An
advisory panel of educators is to assist the corporation.
Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Governor and chairman
of the corporation, said the group had already received $30
million in donations. Walter H. Annenberg, the publisher and
former diplomat, is a member of the board and donated a $10
million ``challenge'' grant to encourage other corporations
to help.
But with a recession, some companies that plan to
contribute to the new program are cutting back on financial
commitments to existing education projects.
The Exxon Corporation, for example, told Theodore R. Sizer,
a professor of education at Brown University, that it would
give him one year's worth of financial aid instead of the
five years he had requested for his Coalition of Essential
Schools, a nationwide group of schools that have been
promoting innovative teaching and learning techniques.
Edward F. Ahnert, executive director of the Exxon Education
Foundation, said, ``We have not made a decision to cut back
our longer-term funding but rather to review our long-term
commitments to his program in the light of the New American
School Program.''
Here is complete list of members of the board of the New
American Schools Development Corporation. Thomas H. Kean,
president of Drew University and former Governor of New
Jersey, chairman. W. Frank Blount, president of the
Communications Products Group of the American Telegraph and
Telephone Company, president. Louis V. Gerstner Jr., chairman
of R. J .R. Nabisco, vice president. James K. Baker, chairman
of Arvin Industries, vice president. Frank Shrontz, chairman
of the Boeing Company, vice president. Walter H. Annenberg,
philanthropist, former diplomat and publisher. Norman R.
Augustine, chief executive of the Martin Marietta
Corporation. Gerald L. Baliles, former Governor of Virginia.
John L. Clendenin, chairman and chief executive of BellSouth.
James R. Jones, chairman and chief executive of the American
Stock Exchange. Lee R. Raymond, president of the Exxon
Corporation. Paul Tagliabue, commissioner of the National
Football League. Earl Graves, publisher of Black Enterprise
magazine. Joan Ganz Cooney, chairman of the executive
committee of Children's Television Workshop. Kay Whitmore,
chairman, chief executive and president of Eastman Kodak.
James J. Renier, chairman and chief executive of Honeywell.
John Ong, chairman of B. F. Goodrich. Stanley A. Weiss, board
chairman of Business Executives for National Security and the
BENS Education Fund.
____
Members of the Iran-Contra Select Committee
senate
Daniel K. Inouye, Chairman (Hawaii); George Mitchell
(Maine); Sam Nunn (Georgia); Paul Sarbanes (Maryland); Howell
Heflin (Alabama); David Boren (Oklahoma).
Warren Rudman, Vice Chairman (New Hampshire); James McClure
(Idaho); Orrin Hatch (Utah); William Cohen (Maine); Paul S.
Trible, Jr. (Virginia).
house
Lee H. Hamilton, Chairman (Indiana); Dante Fascell, Vice
Chairman (Florida); Thomas Foley (Washington); Peter Rodino
(New Jersey); Jack Brooks (Texas); Louis Stokes (Ohio); Les
Aspin (Wisconsin); Edward Boland (Massachusetts); Ed Jenkins
(Georgia).
Dick Cheney, Ranking Republican (Wyoming); Wm. S.
Brookfield (Michigan); Henry Hyde (Illinois); Jim Courter
(New Jersey); Bill McCollum (Florida); Michael DeWine (Ohio).
Mr. ALEXANDER. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Donnelly). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________