[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16101-16103]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. GRAHAM of Florida:
  S. 2685. A bill to amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security 
Act to provide States with the option to cover certain legal immigrants 
under the Medicaid and State children's health insurance programs; to 
the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. GRAHAM of Florida. Mr. President, I am introducing the Immigrant 
Children's Health Improvement Act today.
  This legislation would allow States the option to once again provide 
Medicaid and State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) coverage 
to legal immigrant children and pregnant women.
  Traditionally, Medicaid and SCHIP have served as vital components of 
our nation's health care safety net. These programs have provided 
coverage to over 50 million non-elderly, low-income Americans, most of 
them children, and have helped to dramatically reduce infant mortality 
and provide health care for millions of poor children whose families 
cannot afford the high cost of private health insurance.
  However, for many low-income families that are income eligible for 
Medicaid and SCHIP, these safety programs are today little more than a 
mirage--an illusion to those who need them most. The 1996 welfare 
reform law arbitrarily barred states from using Federal funds to 
provide health coverage to low-income legal immigrants during their 
first 5 years in the United States.
  While the goal of welfare reform was to encourage self-sufficiency in 
adults, the legislation unfortunately has punished children. Today, 
half of all legal immigrant children from families making less than 200 
percent of the Federal Poverty Level are uninsured. That's over two and 
a half times the uninsured rate for children who are United States 
citizens.
  In the long term, ignoring the health care needs of legal immigrant 
children and pregnant women will prove more costly than providing care 
today. Children and pregnant women who do not have access to preventive 
care often use the emergency room as a first resort--an expensive 
treatment for conditions that could have been treated at a fraction of 
the cost or possibly even prevented.
  The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology in 2000 estimated 
that $1 spent on prenatal care for immigrant women saved $3 in short-
term postnatal costs and $5 in longer-term costs. By spending on 
prevention today, we can reduce health care costs in the future.
  Another result of the 1996 legislation was to push the costs of care 
to the States. The 20 states with the highest number of legal 
immigrants all used to have state-financed health care programs for 
legal immigrant children or pregnant women. States put these programs 
in place because they recognized the enormous toll the 1996 rules have 
taken on state budgets, when states have to provide preventable 
emergency-room care to thousands of uninsured legal immigrants.
  But due to the recent State budget crisis, some of these states 
cannot now afford programs that are exclusively state-financed. In my 
home state of Florida, for example, new enrollment in the program has 
been frozen.
  This amendment allows states the option to use Medicaid and SCHIP 
funding to cover legal immigrant children and pregnant women. Over the 
last 6 years, Senator Chafee and I, along with our colleagues in the 
House and Senate, have worked to restore this option and we've come 
very close to achieving our goal.
  Last year, a 3-year restoration provision was included in the Senate-
passed Medicare prescription drug bill, with 65 Members supporting it. 
Over 400 national, state, and local organizations have supported this 
legislation, including the National Governors Association, the National 
Conference of State Legislatures, the American Academy of Pediatrics, 
and numerous immigrant, ethnic, labor, health and faith-based 
organizations.
  Despite this support, Congress has yet to enact legislation that 
restores health benefits to legal immigrant families.
  Why?
  Some Members argued it didn't belong on a Medicare bill but instead 
on a welfare reauthorization bill. That was one of the reasons it was 
dropped from the Medicare bill. But the same argument has been made 
when it was discussed in the context of welfare--that it is not a 
welfare issue, it's a health care issue.
  Well, while this volleyball match continues, legal immigrant families 
in this country continue to work hard and pay taxes, while being denied 
the benefits of the system they are paying into. Meanwhile, States 
continue to provide as much care as they can from strapped state 
budgets. We need to send a clear message about our concern for 
uninsured children and we need to stop pretending that our federal 
penny-pinching is cost free to the states or to taxpayers.
  Mr. President, legal immigrants pay taxes, serve in the military, and 
have the same social obligations as United States citizens. Legal 
immigrant children are, as much as citizen children, the next 
generation of Americans. It is important that all children start off on 
the right foot towards good health. This provision can help them do 
just that.
  This legislation is offset by a custom user fee extension included in 
the President's budget.
  I hope that we will begin consideration of this important measure 
before the August recess. The health and lives of many children is at 
stake, and there is simply no reason to delay any further.

[[Page 16102]]


                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ENZI (for himself, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Dodd, Mr. 
        Alexander, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. 
        Murray, Mr. Reed, and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 2686. A bill to amend the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical 
Education Act of 1998 to improve the Act; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Carl D. 
Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2004. The 
Perkins Act is a central part of a combination of federal education and 
training programs that provide opportunities for lifelong learning to 
our workforce. The Perkins Act, together with the Workforce Investment 
Act, the Higher Education Act, and other federal education programs, 
provides the resources that are needed to help adequately prepare 
students of all ages for jobs in high-wage and high-skilled 
occupations. In this technology driven, global economy, everyone is a 
student who must adapt to the changing needs of their jobs and the 
workforce by continuing to pursue an education in their chosen field. 
In turn, Congress must ensure that education and training are connected 
to the needs of business, including small businesses, now and into the 
future as well.
  It is my hope that this body will take the necessary action to 
reauthorize the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act. 
The Act is an essential part of a combination of federal education and 
training programs that will strengthen our workforce and enable America 
to compete--and succeed--in the global economy.
  At a hearing held on June 24, 2004, before the Health, Education, 
Labor and Pensions Committee, members heard testimonies from leaders in 
career and technical training emphasizing the importance of constant 
training, retraining and upgrading of the skills today's jobs require. 
Many students leaving high school or college and entering the workforce 
find that they are unprepared for life because they lack the skills 
they need to succeed in the workforce. This country created over 1 
million new jobs since January. That's great news. Unfortunately, the 
complaint heard from employers is that there are too few skilled 
workers to meet their needs. We have a strong interest in making sure 
this is corrected. The Perkins Act, along with the Higher Education and 
Workforce Investment Act would provide both strong academic and 
relevant job skill training to promote and sustain the long-term 
competitiveness of this country.
  A unique aspect of the Perkins program that addresses the needs of 
the changing workforce is that it targets funds to both secondary and 
postsecondary schools. This unique aspect also provides a good platform 
from which we can better coordinate workforce preparation policy and 
training with an emphasis on lifelong learning. It is essential to 
facilitate a sequence of career or technical education courses that a 
student can complete before they even get to college, and that they can 
continue at the postsecondary level, whenever they decide to go on. Dr. 
Michael Rush, the Idaho Division of Professional-Technical Education, 
Boise, ID, Administrator, used the example of student Chelsie Lea 
Marier in his testimony to stress this point. He said Chelsie took 
professional-technical classes in welding, auto technology, mechanics 
and power technology at her home high school, Meridian High. As a high 
school senior, she enrolled in an automotive collision repair program 
at the Dehryl Dennis Technology Center. During this time, Chelsie took 
advanced placement academic classes and was President of her Skills-USA 
chapter. She is now enrolled in the auto body program at the College of 
Southern Idaho, and she intends to continue her education and become an 
auto collision forensics investigator. She is an excellent example of 
how linking academic and technical skills attainment can lead to 
success in the workforce.
  In order to strengthen schools programs at both the secondary and 
postsecondary level that meet local workforce needs, provisions in the 
Perkins Act must include the participation of business, including small 
business. In my home state of Wyoming, a career and technical education 
instructor by the name of Ted Schroeder is doing a lot of what I've 
just described. He has met with the local Chamber of Commerce in Rock 
Springs, WY, to identify workforce needs and matched his programs with 
industry standards to meet those needs. When the local business 
community suggested they needed students with computerized accounting 
skills, he took on the task of designing curriculum to help his 
students acquire the skills the businesses had requested. His efforts 
are a good example of what Perkins funds are intended to accomplish. It 
is my hope that we can increase the successes of the Perkins program, 
just like Ted has done in the community of Rock Springs.
  I'm pleased to have worked with the Members of the Committee and 
stakeholders on a bipartisan bill that will improve the Perkins Act to 
better meet the needs of students, workers, and business. The 
legislation I am introducing today, with my colleagues Senators Gregg, 
Kennedy, Alexander, Dodd, Jeffords, Bingaman, Murray, Sessions, Reed 
and Clinton, will help strengthen the Perkins program by improving 
accountability, involving businesses in career and technical education 
programs, emphasizing challenging academic instruction, and advancing 
the field of career and technical education by linking those programs 
to advances in industry.
  This legislation would also encourage greater collaboration between 
state agencies responsible for education and workforce activities. This 
legislation requires state agencies to work together on identifying the 
needs of the workforce and designing curriculum to match those needs. 
It also emphasizes the needs of nontraditional students and other 
lifelong learners, who are returning to school for the first time, or 
those who are seeking additional skill training.
  This legislation also continues to emphasize the need to introduce 
women and girls to high skill, high wage jobs. It is important that we 
help expand the vision of our students to ensure they consider all the 
options that are available to them, not just the ones that fit general, 
and sometimes erroneous, conceptions.
  I hope our bipartisan efforts will continue to produce results as we 
move the bill through the Senate and into Conference. I do not wish to 
see another piece of bipartisan legislation lost in the legislative 
limbo of election year politics. An important step that the Senate must 
take is to appoint conferees to finish the reauthorization of the 
Workforce Investment Act. That program offers the resources that are 
needed to help adequately prepare more than 900,000 unemployed workers 
find work each year. It passed the Senate unanimously, both in 
Committee and the floor. Conferees must now be appointed before the 
August recess. It we are going to help workers in this country, we must 
send this important legislation to Conference so that it will 
ultimately reach the President and be signed into law.
  I cannot stress enough the importance of federal initiatives like the 
Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act and the 
Workforce Investment Act to keep American workers and businesses 
competitive. The Perkins Act can help close the gap that threatens 
America's long-term competitiveness. It is essential that we take 
advantage of the opportunity we have during this reauthorization 
process to improve the link between education and relevant academic and 
skills preparation. By so doing, we will create a pathway to prosperity 
for American workers and businesses alike, that both will make good use 
of for years to come.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to join my colleagues, 
Senators Gregg, Enzi, Dodd, Jeffords, Bingaman, Murray, Reed and 
Clinton in introducing the bipartisan reauthorization of the Carl 
Perkins Vocational Education Act. We have worked closely with leaders 
of the secondary and post-secondary vocational education community to 
make important improvements in this important program in

[[Page 16103]]

current law. Among the key issues we addressed are the more effective 
integration of academic and technical education, the use of funds for 
secondary and post-secondary programs, the Tech Prep Programs that form 
the bridge between the high school and college training programs, and 
the need for students to have access to good information about emerging 
and existing job opportunities in high-wage, high-skill and high-demand 
careers.
  Since passage of the original Smith-Hughes Act in 1917, the Federal 
Government has recognized the importance of good preparation for 
technical occupations. Over the years, we have made a series of 
revisions in the law to reflect the growing importance of combining 
academic learning with technical skill learning in order to meet the 
changing needs of American business and industry.
  This bill is an example of how we can work well together when we 
focus on good policy. I look forward to action on this bill in our 
Labor Committee before the recess, and to its enactment into law this 
year.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN:
  S. 2687. A bill to provide coverage under the Railway Labor Act to 
employees of certain air and surface transportation entities; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill that will 
help ensure that employees of ``express carrier'' delivery companies 
are treated like employees who perform the same duties for other 
delivery, companies when it comes to Federal labor law jurisdiction.
  Over the years, there have been many advances made in the way 
citizens and businesses ship goods from city to city. Numerous air-
carrier and cargo services make the delivery of goods speedy, reliable 
and affordable. Truck, air and rail delivery networks are in place 
across the country. These operations employ large workforces that 
perform various types of work in a range of conditions.
  Some of the leading delivery companies appear to have similar 
organizational structure and clientele. But there is a disparity in the 
terms and conditions of their workers' employment. Some of the 
companies provide full- and part-time workers with good wages and 
benefits, including medical plans, dental coverage and paid vacation 
time. Others take a lower road, in part by using independent 
contractors and anti-union campaigns.
  Unfortunately, Federal law facilitates this difference. It ensures 
that all of the workers at one of the largest companies which delivers 
by air are covered by the Railway Labor Act (RLA), even when those 
workers do the same jobs as employees at other delivery companies who 
are covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). What is the 
difference? Under the NLRA, workers can act locally in seeking to 
organize and bargain collectively. Under the RLA, workers must organize 
nationally, an enormous challenge in today's labor environment.
  Congress created the concept of an ``express carrier'' in 1996, 
putting all the employees of one large company under RLA jurisdiction, 
regardless of individual employees' relation to air transportation. 
That means those workers cannot organize a union chapter locally, 
weakening their opportunity to bargain for better wages, benefits and 
workplace conditions.
  This bill provides that employees of an express carrier will be 
governed under the RLA only if they are licensed airmen, aircraft 
maintenance technicians or aircraft dispatchers. That is consistent 
with the treatment of other delivery companies' workers.
  The bill delivers fairness to responsible employers trying to do the 
right thing for workers while remaining competitive. It seeks to raise 
living standards, not encourage a race to the bottom. Workers can 
decide for themselves whether or not to collectively bargain, but in 
all businesses similarly situated, workers should be regulated the 
same.
  Let's deliver fairness to those who deliver for us.

                          ____________________