[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Pages 23248-23251]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



  DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND 
           RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2000--Resumed

  Pending:

       Reid amendment No. 1807, to require the Secretary of Labor 
     to issue regulations to eliminate or minimize the significant 
     risk of needlestick injury to health care workers.
       Boxer amendment No. 1809, to increase funds for the 21st 
     century community learning centers program.
       Gregg amendment No. 1810 (to amendment No. 1809), to 
     require that certain appropriated funds be used to carry out 
     Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, when we concluded yesterday afternoon, 
the ranking member and I talked about a unanimous-consent agreement for 
all amendments to be filed. We had talked about 12 noon today, and 
there was concern that since the announcement was made late in the day, 
Senators would not have an opportunity to understand that since many 
had gone home. But it is my expectation that when Senator Harkin 
arrives, we will confer and try to pick a time when we will ask 
unanimous consent that all amendments be filed.


                     Amendment No. 1810, Withdrawn

  On behalf of Senator Gregg, I withdraw the Gregg amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 1809

  Mr. SPECTER. The essential point on the amendment of the Senator from 
California is to add $200 million to afterschool programs. I believe 
afterschool programs are very valuable, and I have supported 
afterschool programs in the past. In fact, in collaboration with 
Senator Harkin, we included $200 million in addition to the $200 
million now allocated for afterschool programs. This is an enormous 
increase on a program that just 3 years ago was at $1 million, then 
increased to $40 million, then to $200 million, and we have doubled it 
this year to $400 million. It is an integral part of the school 
violence prevention initiative.
  In crafting this bill, which comes in at $91.7 billion, Senator 
Harkin and I have made an assessment of priorities among some 300 
programs. And while we would like to have more money for afterschool 
programs--we would like to have more money for many programs--it simply 
is not possible to do it.
  In crafting this bill, which will be passed by the Senate, to get at 
least 51 votes, there is very considerable concern on my side of the 
aisle about a bill with $91.7 billion. Then we have to go to 
conference. Then we have to find a bill which the President will sign. 
The metaphor is, it is like running between the raindrops in a 
hurricane. So it is with reluctance I must oppose the Boxer amendment; 
it is not realistic to do it.
  Some have argued that the $200 million advocated yesterday by Senator 
Murray, which was defeated, or the $200 million sought to be added by 
Senator Boxer would dip into Social Security. I am not going to make 
that argument because no one really knows that. We are determined to 
craft a total appropriations package which is within the caps. In order 
to accomplish that, there has to be advance funding. Of course, the 
Boxer amendment provides for advance funding as well. But at some 
point, if there is sufficient advance funding going into the projected 
$38 billion in surplus for fiscal year 2000, even on the advance 
funding line, Social Security will not be intact, and I think there is 
agreement that we have to protect Social Security and Medicare, that 
our expenditures even on an advance line cannot go beyond.
  I note my distinguished colleague from California is ready to present 
her case, so I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.
  Mrs. BOXER. I thank the Chair.
  The amendment I have at the desk is No. 1809? I just want to make 
sure that is what the clerk has.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mrs. BOXER. I thank the Chair.
  I am going to make some very brief remarks and then yield 7 minutes 
to the Senator from Massachusetts, who is such a leader on education. I 
will begin just by setting the stage for his remarks.
  The amendment we have at the desk--and it is cosponsored by many on 
my side of the aisle--would allow 370,000 children the opportunity to 
get into afterschool programs. This is a program that works. I 
understand both sides agree that it works. The difference is that we on 
this side want to be a little more bold. We want to really say that if 
education is a priority, and

[[Page 23249]]

if our children are a priority, we ought to go up to the President's 
requested level of $600 million for this program.
  The bill goes up to $400 million. That leaves out 370,000 children.
  Think of the impact for those children. It doesn't only impact them 
where they are safe after school. It impacts their parents, their 
grandparents, their communities, and their neighborhoods.
  It is a very simple amendment. We use a technique used all through 
the bill, which is forward funding. We don't touch Social Security or 
anything else. We simply forward fund it because the school year starts 
later, and that kind of funding would work.
  I want to share with my colleagues before you hear from Senator 
Kennedy that last night the National Association of Police Athletic 
Leagues was so delighted to hear we had this amendment pending that 
they got on the phone and called everyone they could in the Senate. I 
am going to read a little bit from their letter:

       Dear Senator: The National Association of Police Athletic 
     Leagues is endorsing and supporting Senator Boxer's 
     afterschool legislation, and anticrime amendment to the 
     Labor-HHS appropriations bill. It would add $200 million to 
     the 21st century learning center funding. This would total 
     $600 million.

  This is what the National Association of Police Athletic Leagues 
says.

       Our kids need it. They need to be in safe places during 
     nonschool hours. There is no safer place in any community 
     than the school, especially when law enforcement personnel 
     are involved in their activities. This is where PAL plays a 
     part in the afterschool and anticrime amendment. The 
     amendment directly addresses the issue of the juvenile crime 
     rate during nonschool hours by providing productive 
     activities, and improves the academic and social outcome for 
     students.

  He goes on to explain how the Police Athletic Leagues is involved in 
afterschool programs.
  We are very delighted to be here this morning. We are pleased Senator 
Gregg withdrew his amendment because I think it flattened the issue. We 
are all for IDEA, and that has been taken care of in the bill before 
us. But afterschool has been shorted.
  At this time, I am pleased to yield 7 minutes of time to Senator 
Kennedy, who is our leader in the Senate on education issues.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from California. This 
has been an ongoing and continuous effort on her part, since the 
beginning of this program 3 years ago when it started out as an 
extremely modest program. The reason it has grown to where it currently 
stands at $200 million, is to a great extent, because of Senator Boxer 
bringing to the attention of both the administration and the Congress, 
the impact of this program on children, on families, and also in terms 
of law enforcement.
  I think many of us were heartened earlier this year when the 
President asked for $600 million. But I think most of us thought, given 
the amount of the request for that program, that it far exceeded that 
by two or three times. As with very strong programs, it will get the 
kind of focus, attention and priority it deserves. I want to express 
our appreciation to the Appropriations Committee because they have at 
least added some resources to that.
  But, of course, we face a significant decline in terms of the 
commitment from the House of Representatives. By accepting the Boxer 
amendment, we will strengthen the commitment that our appropriators 
have demonstrated in terms of funding this program.
  As we come into the second day's debate on this appropriations bill, 
we are seeing the targeting of scarce resources that we have at the 
national level in areas of proven achievement and accomplishment.
  Yesterday, under the leadership of Senator Murray in the area of 
smaller class size--and the record is very complete--with smaller class 
size and with better trained teachers, the academic achievement and 
accomplishment for children are enhanced significantly, and the 
benefits of those experiences stay with those children. Of course, if 
they are enhanced later on, they even expand. The afterschool program 
is a similar program.
  If we are able to take both of these programs together--smaller class 
size and afterschool programs--with the kind of improvement of those 
afterschool programs, including tutoring, helping children with their 
homework, and also exposing children in many different instances, as we 
see in Boston, to a wide variety of other subjects--for example, 
photography and graphic arts, areas which have awakened enormous 
interest among children--students may find these are areas where they 
may concentrate either near school or later as the source of 
employment.
  The bottom line is very clear. The results are in. Every dollar we 
invest in afterschool programs means that a child will have an enhanced 
academic achievement and accomplishment, period.
  As this country debates, families say: What can we do about 
education?
  This morning many families, as they saw their children going off to 
school, were saying: I hope my child is going to have a good day in 
school; that they are going to have good teachers; and that they are 
going to continue their learning experience.
  One of the things we know and that has been demonstrated and proven 
is that afterschool programs work. They have a positive academic impact 
in terms of children. This ought to be prioritized. That is what this 
amendment does.
  I welcome the fact that Senator Gregg withdrew his amendment because 
I think it is rather cynical to try to place disabled children against 
afterschool children. Hopefully, we are interested in all children. 
Disabled children go to afterschool programs. Why try to say to people 
in local communities: Look, you have to do this, or do that? We ought 
to do what is necessary in terms of those children who qualify for 
IDEA, and we ought to do something for the afterschool program. Now we 
have the opportunity to do something for the afterschool program.
  I want to state very quickly some of the results of the afterschool 
program to date. One is in the student achievement. The second is in 
decreasing juvenile crime.
  The Senator from California has been able to reflect that in the very 
strong support from law enforcement officials that she mentioned in the 
Record. That has been demonstrated. It was demonstrated in Waco, TX, 
where many of the students participated in what they called the Lighted 
Schools Program for afterschool programs. They saw an important and 
significant reduction in juvenile delinquent behavior over the course 
of the school year. It produces that result, as we saw, as in some of 
the presentations we made yesterday about giving the students a 
youthful, productive, and healthy kind of alternative to using their 
time in a wasteful way after school. It has the result of reducing 
juvenile crime.
  Finally, the parents support it. In Georgia, over 70 percent of 
students, parents, and teachers agree that children are receiving 
helpful tutoring in The Three O'clock Project, a statewide network of 
afterschool programs. The parents are the ones who have been the 
strongest supporters of this program.
  As we have seen in other programs, there is no requirement and no 
mandate on this. If the local school and community want to do it, they 
had better get their applications in because there are going to be 
scarce resources. We are doing it on the basis of a solid record of 
achievement, academic improvement, and reduction in crime. They have 
seen that there have been expanded opportunities for students because 
of additional learning experiences.
  This is a win-win-win. I think the Senate of the United States ought 
to go on record in supporting what the parents want and what has been 
demonstrated to be effective in enhancing academic achievement in 
afterschool programs.
  We are glad for what the appropriators have done. But we are talking 
about a $1.7 trillion budget. We think $200 million more for the 
afterschool program, which will bring it up to the

[[Page 23250]]

$600 million the President had requested, makes a good deal of sense. 
Again, it is an issue of priority.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask that the Senator have an additional 
2 minutes. I will ask him to yield for a question.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I think my friend makes a very important 
point about the priorities when he talks about the overall size of this 
budget of the United States of America. Comparing that with the $200 
million we are asking for in this program would add 370,000 children 
who are awaiting in line.
  I ask my friend another question. Our friend from Pennsylvania is not 
supporting our amendment and alludes to the fact that, well, we just 
can't keep spending more. But yet every Republican, as I remember, 
voted for an enormous tax cut of billions and billions of dollars. Now 
that is off the table.
  I say to my friend, it seems ironic there would be complaints about 
spending more on education than the bill already provides, when every 
single one of my Republican friends voted for this huge tax cut to 
benefit the wealthiest. All we want is to take a relatively small 
amount of that and put it into afterschool.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, the Senator is correct. We had a tax cut 
for $792 billion over the period of the next 10 years. As the Senator 
remembers, we had the opportunity to fully fund the IDEA program and 
only reduce the tax cut by one-fifth. That was real money going toward 
education for the disabled. That was rejected on party lines. Those who 
are advocating and supporting the Boxer amendment supported it. It was 
turned down on the other side.
  If we were able to have that amount of money that would be used in 
the tax cut, why not take $200 million of that $792 billion and put it 
in afterschool programs to service 370,000 children? It makes sense to 
me.
  Mrs. BOXER. I want to give my friend some information. I know he 
fought this tax battle and a lot of the numbers have perhaps slipped 
away. The number of dollars that would have been lost in the school 
year 1999-2000 as a result of the Republican tax cut was $5.273 billion 
in the first year, this year that we are talking about.
  They were willing to give to the wealthiest people in this country 
$5.273 billion in the school year 1999-2000. All we are asking is to 
take the latter part of that figure--the $5 billion we are not 
touching--the $273 million.
  When it comes to priorities, I think this vote is very important.
  Mr. KENNEDY. The Senator has brought up an enormously important 
point, one that some Members understand, and hopefully the American 
people understand.
  To move ahead with that tax cut would mean an effective reduction in 
support of programs that reach out and benefit children in the public 
schools. That is part of the money they were going to use to fund that 
tax break, and, of course, the President vetoed it so we are able to at 
least effectively hold those programs at their current level.
  However, the Senator additionally makes the point that we have 
447,000 new children going to school this next year, about 300,000 the 
following year, and 300,000 the next year. Unless we see an important 
increase, we will not be able to serve all the children in need.
  I think the Senator from California's program will move us down that 
road in an important way.
  Mrs. BOXER. I reserve the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, the agreement to vote at 10 o'clock is 
complicated by the withdrawal of the Gregg amendment. For the record, I 
ask unanimous consent the time restraints outlined in the previous 
consent agreement apply to the Boxer amendment, with a vote to occur at 
10 o'clock. That is our plan 6 minutes from now.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SPECTER. By way of brief reply to the arguments made by the 
Senator from California, did I understand the Senator from California 
to say that no Republican voted against the $792 billion proposed tax 
cut?
  Mrs. BOXER. I thought that was correct. How many did vote against it?
  Mr. SPECTER. Quite a few. I wouldn't want to cite an exact number.
  Mrs. BOXER. I don't think it was ``quite a few.'' It might have been 
three.
  I stand corrected.
  Mr. SPECTER. It might have been more than three; it was some.
  Mrs. BOXER. I stand corrected. I apologize. I know my friend did vote 
against it.
  Mr. SPECTER. I can testify to that from direct personal knowledge; I 
voted against it and others did. There were some Republicans against 
the tax cut.
  Mrs. BOXER. I congratulate the Senator for that.
  Mr. SPECTER. We thank the Senator more for the accurate 
identification than the congratulations. My vote against it was based 
upon concern of what the surplus would be.
  I think it ought to be noted the President has come forward with a 
proposal for a tax cut of his own. It is not a tax cut of the magnitude 
passed by the Senate and the House, but he has come forward with a role 
for a tax cut.
  Back to the issue on more money for afterschool programs. I think it 
is very important to consider this issue in the perspective of what has 
happened with this program which was created as recently as 1994. For 
the fiscal year 1995, enacted in 1994, the last year when the Congress 
was controlled by the Democrats, the afterschool program was $750,000. 
The next year it was $750,000. In fiscal year 1997, it went to $1 
million. In 1998, when I chaired the subcommittee and Senator Harkin 
was ranking, we raised it to $40 million. Last year, we raised it to 
$200 million. This year, we are raising it another $200 million. I 
believe there has been a real recognition of the value of the 
afterschool program.
  The Senator from California and I had an extended debate yesterday 
afternoon on the question of whether there would be a request for more 
money. Had we added $400 million, there would still have been many 
applications and many meritorious applications. Among the total 
number--there were some 2,000 applications--only 184 were granted. That 
brings me to the conclusion that regardless of what we craft in a bill 
and how much money we add for afterschool programs there will be an 
effort by someone to up the ante so that no figure is satisfactory.
  Someplace the line has to be drawn. The overall education budget, 
which the subcommittee recommended and the full committee recommended 
and is now before the Senate, increases educational funding over last 
year by $2.3 billion--$2.3 billion. It is more than $500 million more 
than the President's request. When we take education in the aggregate, 
we have done more than President Clinton has asked. When we go down to 
some of the specific items, we have not put quite as much as he wants 
into some programs. He asked for the program on preparing disadvantaged 
secondary high school students for college, GEAR UP; he asked for an 
increase from $120 million to $240 million, doubling it. We increased 
it to $180 million, $60 million over last year's funding level.
  However, the Congress has the principal responsibility in the 
appropriations process under the Constitution. It is true the President 
has to sign the bill, but we are the baseline appropriators. While we 
have disagreed on some of the priorities, I believe that Senator Harkin 
and I have crafted a bill, which the subcommittee accepted and the full 
committee accepted, that is a realistic and appropriate allocation of 
those priorities. It is for that reason, as much as I like afterschool 
programs, there has to be some limit before we go into Social Security, 
some limit considering how much we have added to education.
  Mrs. BOXER. Will my friend yield for a clarification on a 
conversation we had a moment ago?

[[Page 23251]]


  Mr. SPECTER. On the four Republicans who voted against the tax bill?
  Mrs. BOXER. No, it is only two, that is what we were told.
  Mr. SPECTER. Senators Voinovich, Collins, Snowe, and I all voted 
against the tax bill; it was a 50-49 vote. One Republican was absent, 
four Republicans voted against it. Forty-five Democrats voted against 
it, plus four Republicans: Voinovich, Collins, Snowe, and Specter.
  Mrs. BOXER. We have the vote. It shows two voted against.
  Mr. SPECTER. You have the first tax bill, the bill out of the Senate, 
where Voinovich and Arlen Specter voted against it. The conference 
report, which is the tax bill, had four Republicans voting in 
opposition.
  Mrs. BOXER. I was speaking about the vote in the Senate, when the 
Senate bill came before us. There were two and you were one of the two. 
I want to make sure the Record shows that.
  Mr. SPECTER. It is a vote in the Senate on the conference report.
  Mrs. BOXER. Fine. Then we could say two voted against it the first 
time in the Senate and when it came back from the conference, four.
  The point I made is very obvious.
  Mr. SPECTER. Will the Senator from California agree that some 
Republicans voted against it?
  Mrs. BOXER. I agree that two Republicans out of 55 voted against it 
in the Senate. I don't know what the point is. I am glad you did, 
Senator.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Bunning). All time has expired.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I take that as a concession that some 
Republicans voted against it.
  Mrs. BOXER. Well, don't. I don't mean it as a concession.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  Mr. SPECTER. I move to table. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and 
nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to 
table amendment No. 1809.
  The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative assistant called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) is 
necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 54, nays 45, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 299 Leg.]

                                YEAS--54

     Abraham
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--45

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Byrd
     Cleland
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feinstein
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Torricelli
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     McCain
       
  The motion was agreed to.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

                          ____________________