[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 17753-17757]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Smith, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. 
        Lautenberg, and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 1394. A bill to establish a demonstration project under the 
medicaid program to encourage the provision of community-based services 
to individuals with disabilities; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today, Senator Smith and I and others 
introduce the Money Follows the Person Act of 2003. This legislation is 
needed to truly bring people with disabilities and older Americans into 
the mainstream of society and provide equal opportunity for employment 
and community activities.
  In order to work or live in their own homes, Americans with 
Disabilities and older Americans need access to community-based 
services and supports. Unfortunately, under current Federal Medicaid 
policy, the deck is stacked in favor of living in an institution. The 
purpose of our bill is to level the playing field and give eligible 
individuals equal access to community-based services and supports.
  Under our legislation, the Medicaid money paid by States and the 
Federal Government would follow the person with a disability from an 
institution into the community. This legislation provides 100 percent 
Federal reimbursement for the community services that an individual 
needs during the first year that they move out of an institution or 
nursing home. By fully reimbursing the States, it gives them some 
additional resources to allow people with disabilities and older 
Americans to choose to live in the community.
  President Bush first proposed the Money Follows the Person 
Rebalancing Initiative in his FY '04 budget and indicated that the 
demonstration project would provide full Federal reimbursement for 
community services for the first year that an individual moves out of 
an institution or nursing home. As of this date, the administration has 
not suggested legislative language to Congress or provided specific 
details regarding the implementation of the proposal. Working with the 
disability community, we have drafted this legislation and look forward 
to working with the administration and our colleagues to enact the 
Money Follows the Person concept into law.
  We have a Medicaid system in this country that is spending 70 percent 
of its dollars on institutional care and only 30 percent on community 
services. This bill is an important step toward switching those numbers 
around.
  It is shameful that our Federal dollars are being spent to segregate 
people, not integrate them. It has been 13 years since we passed the 
Americans with Disabilities Act, which said no to segregation. But our 
Medicaid program says yes and we need to change it. This is the next 
civil rights battle. If we really meant what we said in the ADA in 
1990, we should enact this legislation.
  The civil right of a person with a disability to be integrated into 
his or her community should not depend on his or her address. In 
Olmstead v. LC, the Supreme Court recognized that needless 
institutionalization is a form of discrimination under the Americans 
with Disabilities Act. We in Congress have a responsibility to help 
States meet their obligations under Olmstead. An individual should not 
be asked to move to another state in order to avoid needless segration. 
They also should not be moved away from family and friends because 
their only choice is an institution.
  For example, I know a young man in Iowa, Ken Kendall, who is 
currently living in a nursing home because he cannot access home and 
community based care. Ken was injured in a serious accident at the age 
of 17 and sustained a spinal chord injury. With the help of community 
based services covered by his insurance company, Ken could live in his 
home in Iowa City. Remaining independent made a tremendous difference 
in his life.
  However, several years ago, Ken lost his health insurance and after a 
time, he went onto Medicaid. As a Medicaid recipient, Ken was only 
given the option to live in a nursing home in Waterloo almost 2 hours 
from his friends and family in Iowa City. In the nursing home, Ken has 
become isolated. He is very far from his family and friends and does 
not have access to transportation. He had not been to a restaurant or a 
movie since he moved to the nursing home over 2 years ago. His life has 
dramatically changed from when he lived in his own apartment and hired 
his own attendants to care for him.
  Recently Ken wrote to me that he finally went to dinner and a movie 
for his 30th birthday. He said ``I was almost in tears. I felt like I 
had a real life again.''
  This bill would give people like Ken a real life and not just on 
their birthdays. People like Ken should not have to continue waiting to 
be able to live in the community and enjoy the opportunities that other 
Americans take for granted.
  Federal Medicaid policy should reflect the consensus reached in the 
ADA that Americans with Disabilities should have equal opportunity to 
contribute to our communities and participate in our society as full 
citizens. That means no one has to sacrifice their full participation 
in society because they need help getting out of the house in the 
morning or assistance with personal care or some other basic service.
  This bill will open the door to full participation by people with 
disabilities and older Americans in our neighborhoods, our communities, 
our workplaces, and our American Dream, and I urge all my colleagues to 
support us on this issue. I want to thank Senator Smith for his 
commitment to improving access to home and community based services for 
people with disabilities. I would also like to thank Senators Kennedy, 
Lautenberg and

[[Page 17754]]

Kerry for joining me in this important initiative.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1394

       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 ``Money Follows the Person Act 
     of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) In his budget for fiscal year 2004, President George W. 
     Bush proposes a ``Money Follows the Person'' rebalancing 
     initiative under the medicaid program to help States 
     rebalance their long-term services support systems more 
     evenly between institutional and community-based services.
       (2) The President, by proposing this initiative, and 
     Congress, recognize that States have not fully developed the 
     systems needed to create a more equitable balance between 
     institutional and community-based services spending under the 
     medicaid program.
       (3) While a few States have been successful at achieving 
     this balance, nationally, approximately 70 percent of the 
     medicaid funding spent for long-term services is devoted to 
     nursing facilities and intermediate care facilities for the 
     mentally retarded. Only 30 percent of such funding is spent 
     for community-based services.
       (4) As a result, there are often long waiting lists for 
     community-based services and supports.
       (5) In the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 
     Congress found that individuals with disabilities continue to 
     encounter various forms of discrimination, including 
     segregation, and that discrimination persists in such 
     critical areas as institutionalization.
       (6) In 1999, the Supreme Court held in Olmstead v. LC (527 
     U.S. 581 (1999)) that needless institutionalization is 
     discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 
     1990, noting that institutional placement of people who can 
     be served in the community ``perpetuates unwarranted 
     assumptions that persons so isolated are unworthy of 
     participating in community life.'' (Id. at 600). The Court 
     further found that ``confinement in an institution severely 
     diminishes the everyday life activities of individuals, 
     including family relations, social contacts, work options, 
     economic independence, educational advancement, and cultural 
     enrichment.'' (Id. at 601).
       (7) Additional resources would be helpful for assisting 
     States in rebalancing their long-term services support system 
     and complying with the Olmstead decision.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT MEDICAID DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Community-based services and supports.--The term 
     ``community-based services and supports'' means, with respect 
     to a State, any items or services that are an allowable 
     expenditure for medical assistance under the State medicaid 
     program, or under a waiver of such program and that the State 
     determines would allow an individual to live in the 
     community.
       (2) Individual's representative; representative.--The terms 
     ``individual's representative'' and ``representative'' mean a 
     parent, family member, guardian, advocate, or authorized 
     representative of an individual.
       (3) Medicaid long-term care facility.--The term ``medicaid 
     long-term care facility'' means a hospital, nursing facility, 
     or intermediate care facility for the mentally retarded, as 
     such terms are defined for purposes of the medicaid program.
       (4) Medicaid program.--The term ``medicaid program'' means 
     the State medical assistance program established under title 
     XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.).
       (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services.
       (6) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given such 
     term for purposes of the medicaid program.
       (b) State Application.--A State may apply to the Secretary 
     for approval to conduct a demonstration project under which 
     the State shall provide community-based services and supports 
     to individuals--
       (1) who are eligible for medical assistance under the 
     medicaid program;
       (2) who are residing in a medicaid long-term care facility 
     and who have resided in such facility for at least 90 days; 
     and
       (3) with respect to whom there has been a determination 
     that but for the provision of community-based services and 
     supports, the individuals would continue to require the level 
     of care provided in a medicaid long-term care facility.
       (c) Requirements.--A State is not eligible to conduct a 
     demonstration project under this section unless the State 
     certifies the following:
       (1) With respect to any individual provided community-based 
     services and supports under the demonstration project, the 
     State shall continue to provide community-based services and 
     supports to the individual under the medicaid program (and at 
     the State's Federal medical assistance percentage (as defined 
     in section 1905(b) of the Social Security Act) reimbursement 
     rate), for as long as the individual remains eligible for 
     medical assistance under the State medicaid program and 
     continues to require such services and supports, beginning 
     with the month that begins after the 12-month period in which 
     the individual is provided such services and supports under 
     the demonstration project.
       (2) The State shall allow an individual participating in 
     the demonstration project (or, as appropriate, the 
     individual's representative) to choose the setting in which 
     the individual desires to receives the community-based 
     services and supports provided under the project.
       (3) The State shall identify and educate individuals 
     residing in a medicaid long-term care facility who are 
     eligible to participate in the demonstration project (and, as 
     appropriate the individual's representative) about the 
     opportunity for the individual to receive community-based 
     services and supports under the demonstration project.
       (4) The State shall ensure that each individual identified 
     in accordance with paragraph (3) (and, as appropriate, the 
     individual's representative), has the opportunity, 
     information, and tools to make an informed choice regarding 
     whether to transition to the community through participation 
     in the demonstration project or to remain in the medicaid 
     long-term care facility.
       (5) The State shall maintain an adequate quality 
     improvement system so that individuals participating in the 
     demonstration project receive adequate services and supports.
       (6) The State shall conduct a process for public 
     participation in the design and development of the 
     demonstration project and such process shall include the 
     participation of individuals with disabilities, elderly 
     individuals, or individuals with chronic conditions who are 
     part of the target populations to be served by the 
     demonstration project, and the representatives of such 
     individuals.
       (7) The Federal funds paid to a State pursuant to this 
     section shall only supplement, and shall not supplant, the 
     level of State funds expended for providing community-based 
     services and supports for individuals under the State 
     medicaid program as of the date the State application to 
     conduct a demonstration project under this section is 
     approved.
       (d) Approval of Demonstration Projects.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary 
     shall conduct a competitive application process with respect 
     to applications submitted under subsection (b) (taking into 
     consideration the preferences provided under paragraph (2)) 
     that meet the requirements of subsection (c). In determining 
     whether to approve such an application, the Secretary may 
     waive the requirement of--
       (A) section 1902(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1396a(a)(1)) to allow for sub-State demonstrations;
       (B) section 1902(a)(10)(B) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1396a(a)(10)(B)) with respect to comparability; and
       (C) section 1902(a)(10)(C)(i)(III) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1396a(a)(10)(C)(i)(III)) with respect to income and resource 
     limitations.
       (2) Preference for certain applications.--In approving 
     applications to conduct demonstration projects under this 
     section, the Secretary shall give preference to approving 
     applications that indicate that the State shall do the 
     following:
       (A) Design and implement enduring improvements in 
     community-based long-term services support systems within the 
     State to enable individuals with disabilities to live and 
     participate in community life, particularly with respect to 
     those practices that will ensure the successful transition of 
     such individuals from medicaid long-term care facilities into 
     the community.
       (B) Design and implement a long-term services support 
     system in the State that prevents individuals from entering 
     medicaid long-term care facilities in order to gain access to 
     community-based services and supports.
       (C) Engage in systemic reform activities within the State 
     to rebalance expenditures for long-term services under the 
     State medicaid program through administrative actions that 
     reduce reliance on institutional forms of service and build 
     up more community capacity.
       (D) Address the needs of populations that have been 
     underserved with respect to the availability of community 
     services or involve individuals or entities that have not 
     previously participated in the efforts of the State to 
     increase access to community-based services.
       (E) Actively engage in collaboration between public housing 
     agencies, the State medicaid agency, independent living 
     centers, and other agencies and entities in order to 
     coordinate strategies for obtaining community integrated 
     housing and supportive services for an individual who 
     participates in the demonstration project, both with respect 
     to the period during which such individual participates in 
     the project and after the individual's participation in the 
     project concludes,

[[Page 17755]]

     in order to enable the individual to continue to reside in 
     the community.
       (F) Develop and implement policies and procedures that 
     allow the State medicaid agency to administratively transfer 
     or integrate funds from the State budget accounts that are 
     obligated for expenditures for medicaid long-term care 
     facilities to other accounts for obligation for the provision 
     of community-based services and supports (including accounts 
     related to the provision of such services under a waiver 
     approved under section 1915 of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1396n)) when an individual transitions from residing 
     in such a facility to residing in the community.
       (e) Payments to States.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall pay to each State with 
     a demonstration project approved under this section an amount 
     for each quarter occurring during the period described in 
     paragraph (2) equal to 100 percent of the State's 
     expenditures in the quarter for providing community-based 
     services and supports to individuals participating in the 
     demonstration project.
       (2) Period described.--The period described in this 
     paragraph is the 12-month period that begins on the date on 
     which an individual first receives community-based services 
     and supports under the demonstration project in a setting 
     that is not a medicaid long-term care facility and is 
     selected by the individual.
       (f) Reports.--
       (1) In general.--Each State conducting a demonstration 
     project under this section shall submit a report to the 
     Secretary that, in addition to such other requirements as the 
     Secretary may require, includes information regarding--
       (A) the types of community-based services and supports 
     provided under the demonstration project;
       (B) the number of individuals served under the project;
       (C) the expenditures for, and savings resulting from, 
     conducting the project; and
       (D) to the extent applicable, the changes in State's long-
     term services system developed in accordance with the 
     provisions of subsection (d)(2).
       (2) Uniform data format.--In requiring information under 
     this subsection, the Secretary shall develop a uniform data 
     format to be used by States in the collection and submission 
     of data in the State report required under paragraph (1).
       (g) Evaluations.--The Secretary shall use an amount, not to 
     exceed one-half of 1 percent of the amount appropriated under 
     subsection (h) for each fiscal year, to provide, directly or 
     through contract--
       (1) for the evaluation of the demonstration projects 
     conducted under this section;
       (2) technical assistance to States concerning the 
     development or implementation of such projects; and
       (3) for the collection of the data described in subsection 
     (f)(1).
       (h) Funding.--
       (1) In general.--There is appropriated to carry out this 
     section $350,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 
     2008.
       (2) Availability.--Funds appropriated under paragraph (1) 
     for a fiscal year shall remain available until expended, but 
     not later than September 30, 2008.
  Mr. SMITH. Madam President, my job as a Senator is to help protect 
and defend the freedoms of all Americans. Among the most basic freedoms 
are those we most often overlook: the freedom to choose where we live--
for example, among family and friends and not among strangers--the 
freedom to walk down your neighborhood street, and not in a restricted 
courtyard; and the freedom to be an active member in your community.

  All too often, these basic freedoms are denied to older Americans and 
Americans with disabilities. I have noticed an alarming trend in this 
country: we are unnecessarily isolating people with disabilities from 
their communities, friends, families, and loved ones by placing them in 
institutional care facilities.

  Many of these Americans should not be in a nursing home or other 
institutional setting. Many Americans with disabilities could be better 
served--and better integrated into their communities--by allowing them 
to live in community-based homes.

  However, recent data indicates that 70 percent of Medicaid dollars 
are spent on institutional care and only 30 percent are spent on 
community services for the disabled. Because Medicaid requires that 
States provide nursing home care for Americans with disabilities but 
does not require the same for community-based services, many 
individuals with disabilities and older Americans are forced to live in 
isolated settings.

  In order to preserve the freedoms of our friends in the disabled 
community and their loved ones, we must do something to reverse this 
trend. I would therefore like to join my distinguished colleague from 
Iowa as a cosponsor of the Money Follows the Person Act of 2003. The 
Senator from Iowa and I first introduced the provisions of this act as 
an amendment to S. 1, the Medicare and Prescription Drug Improvement 
Act of 2003.
  This bill would enact the President's 2004 Money Follows the Person 
Program to give people with disabilities the freedom to choose where 
they want to live. Under this legislation, Oregon's effort to help an 
individual move out of an institutional facility and into a community 
home would be 100 percent federally funded for 1 year. After that first 
year, the Federal Government would pay its usual rate. Under the 
provisions of this bill, States can take advantage of $350 million 
annually for 5 years for a total of $1.75 billion.
  These dollars can help reintegrate countless older Americans and 
Americans with disabilities into a setting where they can be more 
active citizens. For instance, this bill is supported by the Oregon 
Chapter of Paralyzed Veterans because it helps honor and reintegrate 
those veterans whose disabilities resulted from noble and selfless 
service to this Nation.
  Under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Olmstead Supreme 
Court decision, we know that the needless institutionalization of 
Americans with disabilities constitutes discrimination under the 
Americans with Disabilities Act.
  Americans everywhere realize the value of integrating Americans with 
disabilities into our communities. Needlessly isolating productive 
citizens from their communities, whether they are disabled or not, is 
unfair and unjust. It is time we work to reintegrate disabled Americans 
back into our communities.
  I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this 
important bill and to support the freedom of choice for Americans with 
disabilities.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN (for himself and Mr. Brownback):
  S. 1395. A bill to authorize appropriations for the Technology 
Administration of the Department of Commerce for fiscal years 2004 
through 2005; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by Senator 
Brownback in introducing the Technology Administration Authorization 
Act of 2003. This legislation would authorize funding for the 
Department of Commerce's Technology Administration, which includes the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the Office of 
Technology Policy, and the Office of Space Commercialization.
  As we begin the 21st Century, we must recognize that technology is a 
vital key to our world leadership. In addition, technology is the 
engine that drives our economy. According to the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics, there will be 2.5 million new jobs between 2000 and 2010, 
just in the field of information technology alone. According to the 
Department of Commerce, the contribution of the high-tech industry to 
the U.S. economy has doubled over the past 10 years, from 4.2 percent 
to 8.3 percent of the gross domestic product. Information technology 
has contributed more than one-third of the real U.S. economic growth, 
or approximately $170 billion.
  The Technology Administration has broad responsibilities including 
supporting the development of standards for first responders, promotion 
of space commercialization, publication of technical documents, and 
development of policies regarding technology transfer. The quality of 
work conducted at NIST labs in Gaithersburg, MD, and Boulder, CO, is 
evident by the awarding of two Nobel Prizes to NIST researchers, Dr. 
Bill Phillips and Dr. Eric Cornell, within the past seven years.
  NIST plays an important role in developing measurement methods, 
standards, and technologies that improve U.S. competitiveness in fields 
as diverse as chemical engineering, manufacturing, electronics, 
metallurgy, and 


[[Page 17756]]

physics. In addition, NIST is charged with the mission in our 
Constitution of setting, ``the Standard of Weights and Measures'' that 
are the foundation of our economy. NIST also runs the Malcolm Baldrige 
National Quality Award Program that recognizes performance excellence 
and quality. Recently, NIST has been charged with a number of new 
missions, including cyber security research and development, election 
reform, investigating the collapse of the World Trade Center, and 
developing metrology for the promising new field of nanotechnology. 
However, these new initiatives have diverted resources from NIST's 
traditional missions, and forced scientists to be laid off due to 
reduced funding. Given NIST's recognized leadership as a ``world 
class'' science institution, it is important that we ensure that it is 
adequately funded.
  This legislation would authorize the Technology Administration from 
Fiscal Years 2004 through 2008 to ensure a steady funding stream for 
this agency's activities. The bill is based on the President's budget 
request for NIST's laboratory activities, and includes funding 
increases of six percent per year to offset the deteriorating funding 
situation.
  The legislation also would authorize funding for the Manufacturing 
Extension Partnership, (MEP), Program. As Secretary Evans recently 
stated, ``[m]anufacturing is a key pillar of our economy and we are 
committed to enhancing growth opportunities for our American 
manufacturing companies.'' I commend the Secretary for his recognition 
of the need to energize the manufacturing sector to restore robust 
growth to our economy. With this recognition in mind, I urge the 
Administration to be aware of the role that MEP can play in restoring 
the health of this sector. MEP centers aid small and medium-sized 
manufacturers by offering expertise, needs evaluation, training and 
information dissemination to help these companies deal with the 
challenges of globalization and weak economic growth.
  I would urge my colleagues to support this legislation. It is 
important that we reauthorize these programs to ensure that they 
continue to carry out their critical role in our Nation's economy.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1395

       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 ``Technology Administration 
     Authorization Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
     the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Commerce.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR SCIENTIFIC AND 
                   TECHNICAL RESEARCH AND SERVICES.

       (a) Laboratory Activities.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Commerce for use by the 
     Secretary of Commerce for the Scientific and Technical 
     Research and Services laboratory activities of the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology--
       (1) $387,621,000 for fiscal year 2004 of which $5,795,000 
     shall be for the National Quality Program;
       (2) $410,878,000 for fiscal year 2005 of which $5,969,000 
     shall be for the National Quality Program;
       (3) $435,530,000 for fiscal year 2006 of which $6,148,000 
     shall be for the National Quality Program;
       (4) $461,662,000 for fiscal year 2007 of which $6,332,000 
     shall be for the National Quality Program; and
       (5) $489,362,000 for fiscal year 2008 of which $6,522,000 
     shall be for the National Quality Program.
       (b) Construction and Maintenance.--There are authorized to 
     be appropriated to the Department of Commerce for use by the 
     Secretary of Commerce for construction and maintenance of 
     facilities of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology--
       (1) $69,590,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (2) $71,678,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (3) $73,828,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       (4) $76,043,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
       (5) $78,324,000 for fiscal year 2008.
       (c) Teacher Science and Technology Enhancement Institute 
     Program.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Department of Commerce for use by the Secretary of Commerce 
     for the Teacher Science and Technology Enhancement Institute 
     program of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology--
       (1) $750,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (2) $773,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (3) $796,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       (4) $820,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
       (5) $844,000 for fiscal year 2008.
       (d) Industrial Technology Services.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Department of Commerce for use by 
     the Secretary of Commerce for the Manufacturing Extension 
     Partnership Program of the National Institute of Standards 
     and Technology--
       (1) $107,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (2) $110,210,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (3) $113,516,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       (4) $116,921,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
       (5) $120,429,000 for fiscal year 2008.

     SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF THE 
                   UNDER SECRETARY FOR TECHNOLOGY.

       (a) Office of the Under Secretary for Technology.--There 
     are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of 
     Commerce for use by the Secretary of Commerce for the 
     activities of the Under Secretary for Technology and the 
     Office of Technology Policy--
       (1) $8,015,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (2) $8,255,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (3) $8,503,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       (4) $8,758,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
       (5) $9,021,000 for fiscal year 2008.
       (b) Office of Space Commercialization.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Commerce 
     for use by the Secretary of Commerce for the activities of 
     the Office of Space Commercialization--
       (1) $500,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (2) $515,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (3) $530,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       (4) $546,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
       (5) $563,000 for fiscal year 2008.

     SEC. 5. AMENDMENT OF STEVENSON-WYDLER ACT.

       Section 17(c) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation 
     Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3711a(c)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and nonprofit organizations'' after 
     ``Companies'' in paragraph (1)(C); and
       (2) by striking paragraph (3) of subsection (c).

     SEC. 6. FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL 
                   INFORMATION SERVICE.

       Within 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary of Commerce shall report to the Senate Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Science regarding the financial 
     status of the National Technical Information Service.

      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. Reid, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Leahy, Mr. 
        Lautenberg, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Smith, Mr. Corzine, 
        Mr. Biden, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Warner, Mr. Inouye, 
        Mrs. Lincoln, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Chafee, Ms. 
        Collins, and Mrs. Boxer):
  S. 1396. A bill to require equitable coverage of prescription 
contraceptive drugs and devices, and contraceptive services under 
health plans; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am pleased today to join Senator Snowe in 
introducing legislation that will promote equity and fairness for 
women.
  The Equity in Prescription and Contraception Coverage Act of 2003, 
EPICC, requires insurance plans that provide coverage for prescription 
drugs to provide the same coverage for prescription contraceptives.
  Senator Snowe and I first introduced EPICC about 6 years ago. We have 
been working across party lines and across the ideological spectrum to 
gain support from our colleagues in the Senate, and I am proud to 
report that EPICC had 44 cosponsors from both parties in the 107th 
Congress.
  It is time for us to come together and enact this legislation. It 
will prevent unintended pregnancies, reduce the number of abortions 
performed in this country, and address unmet health needs of American 
women.
  We can find not only common ground but also a common sense solution 
in the legislation I am introducing with Senator Snowe.
  By making sure women can afford their prescription contraceptives, 
our bill will help to reduce the staggering rates of unintended 
pregnancy in the United States, and reduce the number of abortions 
performed.
  It is a national tragedy that half of all pregnancies nationwide are 
unintended, and that half of those will end

[[Page 17757]]

in abortions. It is a tragedy, but it doesn't have to be. If we work 
together, we can prevent these unintended pregnancies, and abortions.
  One of the most important steps we can take to prevent unintended 
pregnancies, and to reduce abortions, is to make sure American women 
have access to affordable, effective contraception.
  There are a number of safe and effective contraceptives available by 
prescription. Used properly, they greatly reduce the rate of unintended 
pregnancies.
  However, many women simply can't afford these prescriptions, and 
their insurance doesn't pay for them, even though it covers other 
prescriptions.
  That is not fair. We know women on average earn less than men, yet 
they must pay far more than men for health-related expenses.
  According to the Women's Research and Education Institute, women of 
reproductive age pay 68 percent more in out-of-pocket medical expenses 
than men, largely due to their reproductive health-care needs.
  Because many women can't afford the prescription contraceptives they 
would like to use, many do without them--and the result, all too often, 
is unintended pregnancy and abortion.
  This isn't an isolated problem. The fact is, a majority of women in 
this country are covered by health insurance plans that do not provide 
coverage for prescription contraceptives.
  This is unfair to women . . . and it's bad policy that causes 
additional unintended pregnancies, and adversely affects women's 
health.
  Senator Snowe and I first introduced our legislation in 1997. Since 
then, the Viagra pill went on the market, and one month later it was 
covered by most insurance policies.
  Birth control pills have been on the market since 1960, and today, 43 
years later, they are covered by only one-third of health insurance 
policies.
  So, most insurance policies pay for Viagra. But most of them don't 
pay for prescription contraceptives that prevent unintentional 
pregnancies and abortions.
  This isn't fair, and it isn't even cost-effective, because most 
insurance policies do cover sterilization and abortion procedures. In 
other words, they won't pay for the pills that could prevent an 
abortion . . . but they will pay for the procedure itself, which is 
much more costly.
  The Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, which has provided 
contraceptive coverage for several years, shows that adding such 
coverage does not make the plan more expensive.
  In December 2000, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 
EEOC, ruled that an employer's failure to include insurance coverage 
for prescription contraceptives, when other prescription drugs and 
devices are covered, constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under 
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  On June 12, 2001, a Federal district court in Seattle made the same 
finding in the case of Erickson vs. Bartell Drug Company.
  These decisions confirm that we have know all along; contraceptive 
coverage is a matter of equity and fairness for women.
  We are not asking for special treatment of contraceptives--only 
equitable treatment within the context of an existing prescription drug 
benefit.
  This legislation is right because it's fair to women.
  It's right because it will prevent unintended pregnancies, a goal we 
all share.
  And it's right because it is more cost-effective than other 
services--including abortions, sterilizations and tubal ligations--that 
most insurance companies routinely cover.
  This is common sense, cost-effective legislation . . . and it is long 
overdue.

                          ____________________