[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 150 (Monday, September 18, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5802-S5804]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. McCONNELL:
S. 1824. A bill to reform the Appalachian Regional Commission, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr President, for decades, I have supported the
Appalachian Regional Commission, or ARC, and its mission to invest in
communities to strengthen economic growth throughout the Appalachian
region.
As I have expressed before, however, I have grown frustrated by ARC's
shortcomings. Last year, the Senate considered an amendment to abolish
ARC entirely. I voted against that proposal because I believe that the
Commission still serves an important purpose, but since that time I've
been calling on ARC to clarify its clouded focus.
For instance, because of ARC's own rules, the most distressed
counties in the region can only receive up to 30% of its area
development funds. In other words, a substantial portion of the
agency's resources--which should be focused on alleviating poverty--are
intentionally directed away from the counties most in need of help.
This has been a criticism leveled against ARC for years. I believe
that, if ARC serves a valid purpose today, then it is to assist the
most impoverished counties in the region.
Moreover, while the other regional commissions are headquartered in
the areas for which they're designed to serve, ARC maintains its
primary office right here in Washington, D.C. An expensive office near
Dupont Circle, far
[[Page S5803]]
away from the people and the communities it serves, is not the right
place for ARC.
Today, I will introduce legislation along with my friend and longtime
ARC champion, Congressman Hal Rogers, to make desperately needed
reforms at ARC. Our bill is designed to reform the Commission, to focus
its mission on investing more in the poorest Appalachian communities,
and to direct ARC's leadership to relocate the organization to the
region it serves.
These common-sense reforms will help set ARC on a path toward
fulfilling what should be its central mission--poverty alleviation--and
delivering vital assistance to those who need it the most. I hope that
all of my colleagues will join with me to move this legislation forward
and provide necessary relief to communities in Appalachia.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text
of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1824
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S5803, September 18, 2017, in the first column, the
following appears: AMENDMENT NO. 1824
The online Record has been corrected to read: S.1824
========================= END NOTE =========================
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Appalachian Regional
Commission Reform Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
(a) Headquarters.--Congress finds that--
(1) regional commissions, such as the Delta Regional
Authority, the Denali Commission, and the Northern Border
Regional Commission, are each headquartered in their
respective region;
(2) headquartering regional commissions within the region
affected is a sensible approach to ensure that the
commissions are housed in more affordable locations than the
District of Columbia, thereby reducing administrative
overhead and making the commissions closer and more
accountable to the people the commissions were designed to
serve;
(3) the Appalachian Regional Commission (referred to in
this Act as the ``Commission'') is not headquartered in
Appalachia but in Washington, D.C.; and
(4) the headquarters of the Commission should be relocated
from the District of Columbia to a more affordable location
in the Appalachian region so that it is closer and more
accountable to the people the Commission was designed to
serve.
(b) Performance.--Congress finds that--
(1) the Commission was created to help foster economic
opportunity and close health and educational disparities in a
geographic region of the United States beleaguered by
persistent poverty and high unemployment;
(2) the Commission remains the sole Federal agency focused
singularly on economic revitalization in the Appalachian
region;
(3) in 1998, Congress charged the Commission with
``address[ing] the needs of severely and persistently
distressed areas of the Appalachian region and focus[ing]
special attention on the areas of greatest need'';
(4) the Commission has long been criticized for its
shortcomings in fulfilling this mission, including in--
(A) a 1999 study titled ``Mountain Money: Federal Tax
Dollars Miss the Mark in Core Appalachia'' by Mark Ferenchik
and Jill Ripenhoff for the Columbus Dispatch; and
(B) a 2008 book titled ``Uneven Ground: Appalachia Since
1945'' by Ronald D. Eller;
(5) in 2004, the Office of Management and Budget noted the
importance of the Commission ``[f]ocusing efforts
on...targeting assistance to areas of distress'';
(6) in 2017, Citizens Against Government Waste
characterized the programming of the Commission as
duplicative and called for drastic reductions in the budget
of the Commission;
(7) in 2017, the Office of Management and Budget, citing a
Government Accountability Office study, concluded that the
Commission should be abolished, and that conclusion was
reflected in the fiscal year 2018 budget request submitted by
the President;
(8) these recent actions reflect a growing chorus that the
Commission should be reformed; and
(9) therefore, given the long-recognized shortcomings of
the Commission, the long-standing criticism of the
Commission, and the need to ensure its optimal performance,
the time has arrived for the Commission to be reformed.
(c) Persistent Poverty.--Congress finds that--
(1) using 1960 data, the Commission (which was created in
1965) concluded that there were 214 distressed counties in
the Appalachian region;
(2) in 2017, according to the Commission, there are 84
distressed counties in the Appalachian region, reflecting the
areas of most persistent poverty in the region; and
(3) therefore, the Commission should be reformed to focus
its attention on the areas of most persistent poverty in the
region.
(d) Area Development Funding for Distressed Counties.--
Congress finds that--
(1) according to the study by the Columbus Dispatch
referred to in subsection (b)(4)(A), of the 22,169 grants
issued by the Commission from fiscal year 1966 through fiscal
year 1998, none of the 5 counties that received the most
Commission funding was considered distressed, and more than
\1/4\ of all Commission spending during that period went to
States with few, if any, distressed counties;
(2) according to author Ronald D. Eller in 2014, ``[the
Commission] policies have concentrated resources in a select
few `growth centers' in the [Appalachian] region, expanding
services to the poor and growing the mountain middle class,
but doing little to alter conditions in the most rural
distressed counties or to address systemic political or
economic inequalities throughout Appalachia'';
(3) until 1995, the Commission allocated up to 20 percent
of its area development grants for use in distressed
counties;
(4) following instructions given to the Commission by the
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of
Representatives in 1995, this allocation was increased by the
Commission to 30 percent;
(5) section 7.5(c) of the Code of the Commission (as in
effect on the date of enactment of this Act) reflects this
1995 policy change and states that the Commission ``will
allocate up to 30 percent of Commission area development
funds for use in distressed counties'', even though,
according to the Commission's public representations,
economic conditions in distressed areas of the Appalachian
region have not greatly improved since the 1960s;
(6) given the persistent levels of poverty in the
distressed counties in the Appalachian region, more area
development funding and emphasis should be devoted to those
counties; and
(7) therefore, the allocation described in paragraph (3)
should be increased to 60 percent.
(e) Grant Expenditures.--Congress finds that--
(1) section 14524(d) of title 40, United States Code,
provides that ``not less than 50 percent of the amount of
grant expenditures the Commission approves shall support
activities or projects that benefit severely and persistently
distressed counties and areas'';
(2) given the persistent levels of poverty in the
distressed counties in the Appalachian region, more grant
expenditures and emphasis should be devoted to those
counties; and
(3) therefore, the 50 percent threshold in section 14524(d)
of title 40, United States Code, should be increased to 60
percent.
SEC. 3. MISSION OF THE APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION.
Section 14301 of title 40, United States Code, is amended
by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
``(a) Establishment and Mission.--
``(1) Establishment.--There is an Appalachian Regional
Commission (referred to in this chapter as the `Commission').
``(2) Mission.--The mission of the Commission shall be to
focus primarily on poverty reduction and economic development
in areas in the Appalachian region with the most persistent
poverty.''.
SEC. 4. HEADQUARTERS OF THE APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION.
(a) In General.--Section 14301 of title 40, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Headquarters.--The headquarters of the Commission
shall be located in the Appalachian region.''.
(b) Implementation.--The Federal Cochairman of the
Commission shall take such actions as may be necessary to
carry out the amendment made by subsection (a).
SEC. 5. GRANT EXPENDITURES.
Section 14524(d) of title 40, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``50 percent'' and inserting ``60
percent''.
SEC. 6. AREA DEVELOPMENT FUNDS FOR DISTRESSED COUNTIES.
Section 14526(b) of title 40, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking ``In program and'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--In program and''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Area development funds.--
``(A) In general.--Of the funds made available for each
fiscal year for the Area Development Program of the
Commission, the Commission shall allocate not less than 60
percent for projects in counties for which a distressed
county designation is in effect under this section.
``(B) Methodology.--The methodology for determining whether
a county is designated as a distressed county under
subsection (a)(1)(A) shall be the methodology in effect on
the day before the date of enactment of the Appalachian
Regional Commission Reform Act.
``(3) Report.--The Commission shall submit an annual report
that describes the allocation of funds, in dollar amounts and
percentage of total appropriations, for the Area Development
Program to counties described in paragraph (2) to--
``(A) the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
``(B) the minority leader of the House of Representatives;
``(C) the majority leader of the Senate;
``(D) the minority leader of the Senate;
``(E) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives;
``(F) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
``(G) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of
the House of Representatives; and
[[Page S5804]]
``(H) the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the
Senate.''.
______
By Mr. REED (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Brown, Mr. King, Mr.
Franken, and Mr. Whitehouse):
S. 1828. A bill to change the date for regularly scheduled general
elections for Federal office to the first Saturday and Sunday after the
first Friday in November in every even-numbered year; to the Committee
on Rules and Administration.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by Senators
Klobuchar, Brown, King, Franken, and Whitehouse in introducing the
Weekend Voting Act. This bill makes voting in Federal elections easier
and more accessible through one simple change: moving Election Day from
Tuesday to the following Saturday and Sunday in November of an election
year.
We know from surveys and common sense that Tuesday voting stands in
the way of greater voter participation. In 1845, Congress set Tuesday
as Election Day because it was the easiest day for farmers--then
travelling by horse and buggy--to make it to the polls in the course of
their regular Tuesday trips to bring goods to market. Tuesday voting
has no such benefit for farmers, or anyone else, in the 21st Century.
It does, however, force many Americans to choose between their workday
and family responsibilities, and participation in our democratic
process.
According to the Pew Research Center, voter turnout in the United
States regularly lags behind other developed countries, many of which
hold elections on one or more days during the weekend. According to
U.S. Census data, the most consistent reason Americans give for not
voting is that they are too busy to get away from their daily lives to
make it to the polls.
The Weekend Voting Act would give Americans the ability to vote
during times that make better sense for them. Rather than on a Tuesday,
polls would stay open during the first Saturday and Sunday after the
first Friday in November of an election year. States would retain full
autonomy to continue to offer alternatives to Election Day voting, such
as early voting or voting by mail, and States are encouraged to give
special consideration to accommodate weekend religious practices.
Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support the Weekend Voting Act
so that more Americans can take part in our democratic process by
voting at times that work for them.
____________________