[House Report 104-209]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
104th Congress 1st HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Report
Session
104-209
_______________________________________________________________________
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1996
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
together with
DISSENTING AND SEPARATE VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 2127]
July 27, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
104th Congress 1st
Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Report
104-209
_______________________________________________________________________
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1996
----------
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
together with
DISSENTING AND SEPARATE VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 2127]
July 27, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1996
104th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 104-209
_______________________________________________________________________
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1996
_______
July 27, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Porter, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING AND SEPARATE VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 2127]
The Committee on Appropriations submits the following
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making
appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human
Services (except the Food and Drug Administration, Indian
Health Service, and the Office of Consumer Affairs), and
Education (except Indian Education), Armed Forces Retirement
Home, Corporation for National and Community Service,
Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service, Federal Mine Safety and Health Review
Commission, National Commission on Libraries and Information
Science, National Council on Disability, National Labor
Relations Board, National Mediation Board, Occupational Safety
and Health Review Commission, Physician Payment Review
Commission, Prospective Payment Assessment Commission, Railroad
Retirement Board, the Social Security Administration, and the
United States Institute of Peace for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 1996, and for other purposes.
INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT
_______________________________________________________________________
Page number
Bill Report
Title I--Department of Labor:
Employment and Training Administration............. 2
14
Office of the American Workplace...................
23
Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration........ 7
24
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation............... 7
24
Employment Standards Administration................ 8
25
Occupational Safety and Health Administration...... 12
27
Mine Safety and Health Administration.............. 15
28
Bureau of Labor Statistics......................... 16
28
Departmental Management............................ 16
29
Assistant Secretary for Veterans Employment and
Training....................................... 18
30
Office of the Inspector General.................... 18
31
General Provisions................................. 18
Title II--Department of Health and Human Services:
Health Resources and Services Administration....... 22
31
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention......... 25
47
National Institutes of Health...................... 26
56
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration................................. 31
83
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health.......
99
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research......... 32
103
Health Care Financing Administration............... 32
104
Administration for Children and Families........... 34
108
Administration on Aging............................ 38
121
Office of the Secretary............................ 38
124
General Provisions................................. 40
Title III--Department of Education:
Education Reform................................... 42
129
Education for the Disadvantaged.................... 42
130
Impact Aid......................................... 43
134
School Improvement Programs........................ 43
135
Bilingual and Immigrant Education.................. 44
141
Special Education.................................. 44
141
Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research.... 45
145
Special Institutions for Persons with Disabilities. 45
150
Vocational and Adult Education..................... 46
151
Student Financial Assistance....................... 46
156
Federal Family Education Loans..................... 47
159
Higher Education................................... 47
159
Howard University.................................. 48
174
Higher Education Facilities Loans.................. 48
College Housing and Academic Facilities Loans...... 48
175
Historically Black College and University Capital
Financing...................................... 49
175
Education Research, Statistics, and Improvement.... 49
176
Libraries.......................................... 50
180
Departmental Management............................ 50
182
Office for Civil Rights............................ 51
183
Office of the Inspector General.................... 51
183
General Provisions................................. 51
Title IV--Related Agencies:
Armed Forces Retirement Home....................... 55
183
Corporation for National and Community Service..... 56
184
Corporation for Public Broadcasting................ 56
185
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service......... 57
186
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission... 58
186
National Commission on Libraries and Information
Science........................................ 58
187
National Council on Disability..................... 58
187
National Labor Relations Board..................... 58
188
National Mediation Board........................... 61
188
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission... 61
188
Physician Payment Review Commission................ 61
188
Prospective Payment Assessment Commission.......... 61
189
Social Security Administration..................... 62
191
Railroad Retirement Board.......................... 65
189
United States Institute of Peace................... 67
194
Title V--General Provisions................................ 67
Title VI--Political Advocacy...............................
House of Representatives Report Requirements.......
194
Summary of Estimates and Appropriations
The following table compares on a summary basis the
appropriation including trust funds for fiscal year 1995, the
budget estimate for fiscal year 1996, and the Committee
recommendations for fiscal year 1996 in the accompanying bill.
1996 LABOR, HHS, AND EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS BILL
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year-- 1996 Committee
---------------------------------- compared to--
----------------------
1995 1996 1996 1995 1996
comparable Budget Committee comparable Budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of
Labor......... $11,947 $13,261 $10,292 -$1,655 -$2,969
========================================================
Department of
Health and
Human
Services:
Public
Health
Service:
Health
Resour
ces
and
Servic
es
Admini
strati
on.... 3,230 3,301 3,121 -109 -180
Centers
for
Diseas
e
Contro
l..... 2,086 2,223 2,125 +39 -98
Nationa
l
Instit
utes
of
Health 11,297 11,764 11,939 +642 +175
Substan
ce
Abuse
and
Mental
Health
Servic
es
Admini
strati
on.... 2,181 2,247 1,789 -392 -458
Assista
nt
Secret
ary
for
Health 225 233 167 -58 -66
Health
Care
Policy
and
Resear
ch.... 141 148 91 -50 -57
--------------------------------------------------------
Subto
tal,
Publ
ic
Heal
th
Serv
ice. 19,160 19,916 19,232 +72 -684
========================================================
Health Care
Financing
Administra
tion...... 129,429 146,817 146,700 +17,271 -117
Administrat
ion for
Children
and
Families.. 32,072 34,869 31,638 -434 -3,231
Administrat
ion on
Aging..... 876 897 778 -98 -119
Office of
the
Secretary. 228 207 220 -8 +13
Total,
HHS
current
year.... 181,765 202,706 198,568 +16,803 -4,138
Advances. 32,767 32,275 30,995 -1,812 -1,320
========================================================
Department of
Education..... 26,801 28,220 23,063 -3,738 -5,157
Related
Agencies...... 35,752 36,196 35,616 -136 -580
Social
Security
Administra
tion...... 34,583 34,989 34,638 +55 -351
Grand
Total,
current
year.... 256,265 280,383 267,540 +11,274 -12,844
Advances. 40,322 42,001 40,625 +303 -1,376
========================================================
Current year
total using
602(b)
scorekeeping.. 250,411 273,023 261,806 +11,395 -11,217
--------------------------------------------------------
Mandatory.. 183,255 200,943 200,936 +17,681 -7
Discretiona
ry........ 67,156 72,080 60,870 -6,286 -11,210
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCRETIONARY
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year-- 1996 Committee
---------------------------------- compared to--
----------------------
1995 1996 1996 1995 1996
comparable Budget Committee comparable Budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of
Labor......... $9,431 $11,315 $8,355 -$1,076 -$2,960
Department of
Health and
Human Services 29,221 31,042 28,212 -1,009 -2,830
Department of
Education..... 24,415 25,804 20,647 -3,768 -5,157
Related
Agencies...... 4,279 4,275 4,012 -267 -263
Scorekeeping
Adjustments... -190 -356 -356 -166 0
--------------------------------------------------------
Total
discreti
onary... 67,156 72,080 60,870 -6,286 -11,210
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Appropriations for Labor, Health and Human Services and Education
Programs
In addition to the amount included in the bill, very large
sums are automatically appropriated each year for labor, health
and human services, social security and education programs
without consideration by the Congress during the annual
appropriation process. The principal items in this category are
the unemployment compensation, social security, medicare, and
railroad retirement funds, federal payments for interest
subsidy, default and servicing costs for the Federal Family
Assistance Loan program and the full cost of loans made under
the Direct Student Loan Program. The detailed estimates for the
trust fund and permanent appropriations are reflected in the
table appearing at the back of this report, a summary of which
is included in the following table:
TOTAL INCLUDING PERMANENT APPROPRIATIONS AND TRUST FUNDS
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
-----------------------------------------------
1995 1996 Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual appropriation
bill, current year..... $256,265 $267,540 +$11,274
Annual appropriation
bill, advances......... 42,093 42,256 +163
Permanent appropriations 571,743 613,258 +41,515
Deduct interfund
payments............... -44,651 -76,908 -32,257
-----------------------------------------------
Total............. 825,450 846,146 +20,695
------------------------------------------------------------------------
use of federal funds for advocacy
In order to assure that federal funds are not being used,
directly or indirectly, to support the advocacy of public
policy positions by contractors and grantees, the Committee
instructs each of the Departments and independent agencies
funded in this bill to provide the Committee with a list of
grants and contracts that have, as part of their scope of work,
the advocacy of public policy positions and specific statutory
authority for such activities.
The Committee also instructs each Department to include, in
each grant or contract awarded with funds provided in this
bill, a requirement that the recipient report to the awarding
agency any federal funds directly or indirectly expended to
support the advocacy of public policies.
The Committee also instructs the Inspector General for each
Department and independent agency funded in this bill to
develop specific tests to assure that recipients of federal
funds are not using those funds, directly or indirectly, to
support advocacy of public policy activity except those
specifically identified in their scope of work. The Committee
further instructs each Inspector General to employ these tests
as part of any audits it carries out of grantees and as part of
the reviews it carries out of the work of independent audits of
contractors and grantees receiving funds appropriated in this
bill.
Each Inspector General is instructed to provide the
Committee with a report, no later than the date of the
submission of the President's fiscal year 1997 budget,
detailing the tests and assurances which they have developed
and the instructions they have issued as to how and when such
tests and assurances should be applied.
political advocacy
Title VI of the reported bill is a legislative title
dealing with political advocacy by federal grantees.
Highlights of the Bill
In reaching the overall ceiling of $262,729,000,000 in
budget authority and $270,163,000,000 in outlays, and the
discretionary ceiling of $61,191,000,000 in budget authority
and $68,117,000,000 in outlays, the Committee reviewed programs
and made clear priority decisions. These decisions were based
on the following criteria:
We must pay for what we get from government;
All functions of government must contribute to
bringing spending under control;
Programs that work well, advance national interests
or obligations should be funded;
Small, duplicative, administratively costly,
categorical programs serving narrow interests should be
terminated;
Poor performing programs should be terminated and
those without evaluations should be frozen or reduced.
Substantial increases in funding have been provided for the
National Institutes of Health to allow it to continue levels of
biomedical research that will revolutionize the understanding
and treatment of disease, assist in the reduction in the growth
of medical costs and continue to stimulate the growth of the
biotech and other industries. Preventive health services in the
Centers for Disease Control have also been increased as a
proven investment in disease prevention. The Social Security
Administration budget has been increased to assure the
completion of its performance-based management reforms. Job
Corps funding has been increased to allow for the opening of
new centers. The Committee also invested in student aid by
increasing the maximum Pell grant award by $100. This increase
will fund the maximum grant at the highest level in history and
equals the largest increase ever. In addition, the Committee
preserved current year funding levels for federal supplemental
educational opportunity grants and for federal work-study. Many
other programs such as the maternal and child health block
grant, the preventive health block grant, the mental health and
substance abuse block grants, state grants for special
education, and the child care and development block grant have
been funded at or above their FY '95 levels, indicating a high
priority for these broad-based programs.
Smaller programs which focus on a narrow constituency,
which are expensive to administer or which fund duplicative
programs have not been funded in the bill. The bill provides no
funding for 170 programs by eliminating those that have shown
no positive results, are duplicative, or fund planning and
other bureaucratic activity which are best supported and
operated at the state or local level.
The report instructs the Departments and agencies funded in
the bill to identify grants and contracts in which the advocacy
of public policy is an authorized activity, to require
recipients to report any expenditures for public policy
advocacy and to develop audit and other procedures to assure
that federal funds are not being used, directly or indirectly,
to support the advocacy of public policy.
Bill Total.--As part of the overall effort of Congress to
reduce the size and intrusiveness of government and to reach a
balanced budget as outlined in H. Con. Res. 67, the Committee
undertook a massive review of programs under its jurisdiction.
This process began with the Emergency Supplemental
Appropriation (H.R. 1158) and continued in the preparation of
this bill. The result of this review is a bill that
appropriates $261,806 million for the Departments of Labor,
Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies for
fiscal year 1996, and is within its 602(b) ceilings for both
budget authority and outlays.
Program Terminations.--In achieving the reduction needed to
meet our ceiling levels under the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act, and as a result of the Committee's
review of programs under its jurisdiction, it is recommending
no funding for the following programs:
Program Terminations
department of labor
Summer Youth Employment
Youth Fair Chance
Rural Concentrated Employment
JTPA Capacity Building
National Commission for Employment Policy
American Samoans
Microenterprise Grants
National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee
Veterans' Homeless Programs
National Center for the Workplace
Office of the American Workplace
department of health and human services
State Offices of Rural Health
Trauma Care
Black Lung Clinics
Payments to Hawaii-Hansen's Disease
Pacific Basin Initiative
Native Hawaiian Health Care
AIDS Education and Training
Family Planning
Rural Health Research
Health Care Facilities
Nat. Inst. Occupational Safety & Health-Training
Mental Health Clinical Training/AIDS Training
Community Support Demonstrations
Grants to States for Homeless (PATH)
Homeless Service Demonstrations
Treatment Grants to Crisis Areas
Pregnant/Post-Partum Women & Children
Criminal Justice Programs
Designated Populations
Comprehensive Comm. Treatment Prog.
Substance Abuse Training
Substance Abuse Training (AIDS)
Substance Abuse Linkage (AIDS)
Substance Abuse Outreach (AIDS)
Treatment Capacity Expansion Program
Substance Abuse Prevention Demos-High Risk Youth
Substance Abuse Prevention Demos-Pregnant Women & Infants
Substance Abuse Prevention Demos-Other Programs
Community Partnerships
Prevention Education/Dissemination
Substance Abuse Prevention Training
Office of Disease Prevention & Health Promotion
National Vaccine Program
Emergency Preparedness
Health Care Reform Data Analysis
HHS Streamlining Costs
Health Service Management
National AIDS Program Office
Insurance Counseling Program (HCFA)
Essential Access Community Hospitals
New Rural Health Grants
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program
SLIAG Civics & English Education Grants
Child Development Associate Scholarships
Runaway Youth Activities--Drugs
Youth Gang Substance Abuse
Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect
Dependent Care Planning & Development
Child Welfare Research
Social Services Research
Family Support Centers
Community Based Resource Centers
Developmental Disabilities Special Projects
Homeless Service Grants
Rural Housing
Farmworker Assistance
Demonstration Partnerships
Community Food & Nutrition
Community Schools
Ombudsman Services
Prevention of Elder Abuse
Pension Counseling
Preventive Health
Aging Research & Special Projects
Federal Council on Aging
White House Conference on Aging
department of education
Goals 2000 State and Local Grants
Goals 2000 National Programs
Goals 2000 Parental Assistance
School-to-Work National Programs
State School Improvement
Evaluation
Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property
Safe & Drug Free Schools--National Programs
Education Infrastructure
Law Related Education
Christa McAuliffe Scholarships
Women's Educational Equity
Training and Advisory Services
Dropout Prevention Demonstrations
Ellender Fellowships (Close-up)
Education for Native Hawaiians
Foreign Language Assistance
Train. in Early Childhood Ed. & Viol. Counseling
Comp. Regional Assistance Centers
Family and Community Endeavor Schools
Bilingual Ed. Support Services
Bilingual Ed. Professional Development
Early Childhood Education
Innovation and Development
Technology Applications
Special Studies
Personnel Development
Clearinghouses
Regional Resource Centers
Community Based Organizations
Consumer and Homemaker Education
Vocational Education--State Councils
Vocational Ed--Demonstrations
Adult Education--Evaluation & Technical Assistance
National Institute for Literacy
State Literacy Resource Centers
Workplace Literacy Partnerships
Literacy Training for Homeless Adults
Federal Perkins Loans-Capital Contributions
State Student Incentive Grants
State Post-Secondary Review Program
Aid for Institutional Development Endowment Grants
Historically Black Colleges & Universities Endowment Set-aside
Strengthening Institutions--Evaluation
Native Hawaiian & Alaska Native Cultural Arts
Eisenhower Leadership Program
Innovative Projects in Community Service
Institute for International Public Policy
Cooperative Education
Law School Clinical Experience
Urban Community Service
Student Financial Aid Database
Mary McLeod Bethune Mem. Fine Arts Center
Nat. Early Intervention Scholarships & Partnerships
Byrd Scholarships
National Science Scholarships
National Academy of Science, Space & Technol.
Douglas Teacher Scholarships
Olympic Scholarships
Teacher Corps
Harris Fellowships
Javits Fellowships
Faculty Development Fellowships
School, College and University Partnerships
Legal Training for the Disadvantaged
Howard University Endowment--Regular Program
Howard University Endowment--Clinical Law Center
Howard University Research
Howard University Construction
College Housing and Academic Facilities Loans--New Loan
Authority
International Education Exchange
21st Century Learning
Eisenhower Prof. Development-Nat. Programs
Eisenhower Math/Science Education Consortia
National Writing Project
National Diffusion Network
Star Schools
Ready to Learn TV
Telecommunications Demo for Math
Library Construction
Library Literacy Programs
Library Education and Training
Library Research and Demonstrations
Historically Black Coll. & Univ. Capital Fin. Advisory Board
Nat. Bd. of the Fund for the Improv. of Post Secondary Ed.
Jacob K. Javits Fellows Prog. Fellowship Board
Nat. Acad. of Science, Space & Technology Board
President's Ad. Comm. on Ed. Excellence For Hispanic Am.
President's Bd. of Advisors on Hist. Black Colleges & Univ.
National Educational Goals Panel
National Ed. Standards and Improvement Council
Vista Literacy Corps
Senior Demonstration Program
The Committee is aware that the President has proposed
significant consolidations of programs in his FY '96 budget
request. The Committee on Economic and Educational
Opportunities is considering several bills consolidating the
many duplicative programs funded by this appropriations bill as
are other committees in the House of Representatives and the
Senate. Since the reform efforts in the Congress involve
numerous provisions and the final outcome of these efforts
remains unresolved at the time of mark-up, the Committee has
displayed its funding decisions on the basis of current law.
The Committee has attempted to provide funding for programs in
such a way as to expedite the conversion to a new statutory
regimen.
There are also many programs within the jurisdiction of the
Subcommittee on the Departments of Labor, Health and Human
Services, Education and Related Agencies that are currently
unauthorized. Given the large number of such programs in this
Subcommittee's jurisdiction and the complexity of the
reauthorization process, the Committee has chosen not to reject
funding for programs solely due to their not being authorized.
Overall, 77 programs within the Subcommittee's jurisdiction
with a fiscal year 1995 funding level of $6.7 billion are
unauthorized. A table listing the unauthorized programs is
included in the back of this report.
Mandatory programs.--The bill provides $200,936 million for
entitlement programs in fiscal year 1996. 77% of the funding in
the bill is for these mandatory costs. Funding requirements for
these activities are determined by the basic authorizing laws.
Mandatory programs include general fund support for the
Medicare and Medicaid programs, Aid to Families with Dependent
Children, Supplemental Security Income, Black Lung payments,
and the Social Services Block Grant. The following chart
indicates the funding levels for the major mandatory programs
in fiscal years 1995 and 1996 and the growth in these programs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
Program ------------------------------------------------- Percent
1995 1996 +/-1995
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Labor:
Black Lung Disability Trust Fund................. $974,805 $995,447 $20,642 2
Department of Health and Human Services
Health Care Financing Administration:
Medicaid current law benefits................ 84,835,700 92,235,200 7,399,500 9
Medicare Payments to Health Care Trust Funds. 37,546,758 63,313,000 25,766,242 69
Administration for Children and Families:
Aid to Families with Dependent Children...... 12,424,136 12,999,000 574,864 5
Child Support Enforcement.................... 1,155,000 1,068,000 (87,000) -8
Social Service Block Grant................... 2,800,000 2,800,000 -- 0
Department of Education
Federal Family Education Loan Program............ 3,773,733 2,390,198 (1,383,535) -37
Federal Direct Student Loan Program.............. 1,138,219 1,629,043 490,824 43
Federal Family Education Loan Liquidating Account 1,344,545 595,248 (749,297) -56
Related Agencies
Social Security Administration:
Special Benefits for Disabled Coal Miners.... 717,874 665,396 (52,478) -7
Supplemental Security Income................. 27,996,620 25,813,834 (2,182,786) -8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduction below 1995 funding.--Discretionary program
funding of $60,870 million represents a level $6,286 million
below the fiscal year 1995 level and $11,210 million below the
amounts requested by the President in his February request.
Department of Labor.--The bill appropriates $10,292 million
for the Labor Department, a decrease of $1,655 million below
fiscal year 1995 and $2,969 million below the amount requested
by the President in the February request. This funding level
includes $3,081 million in federal funds to carry out the
provisions of the Job Training Partnership Act. The Committee
recommends an increase in funding for the Job Corps of $32
million to allow for the opening of four new centers. The bill
includes no funding for summer youth employment and a reduction
of $378.5 million to a level of $850 million for dislocated
worker assistance. Funding of $290 million is provided for
school-to-work activities funded in the Departments of Labor
and Education and tech-prep in anticipation of a broader
consolidation included in H.R. 1617, the Consolidated and
Reformed Education, Employment and Rehabilitation Systems Act
(CAREERS Act) reported by the Committee on Economic and
Educational Opportunities.
State Unemployment Insurance Administration.--The bill
provides $2,309 million for State administrative costs, $5
million below last year and $161.1 million below the
President's request and provides $100 million for one-stop
career centers. The Committee strongly supports this initiative
and expects that additional support for it will come from the
programs which are participating in the establishment of these
centers.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration.--The
Committee recommends funding for OSHA at $264 million, $83
million below the request and $49 million below last year's
level. Within OSHA, funding for Federal enforcement is reduced
by 33% while compliance assistance is increased by 19%.
The bill includes language preventing the implementation of
the President's executive order preventing federal contractors
from employing striker replacements along with language to
assure that pension funds have freedom to invest in the best
interest of their participants, and to block the OSHA
ergonomics standard.
Program terminations.--The bill provides no funding for 11
Labor Department programs that were funded in fiscal year 1995.
Department of Health and Human Services.--The bill
appropriates $198,192 million which is $2,835 million below the
President's request and $17,203 million above the fiscal year
1995 level. Funding for discretionary programs of $28,212
million is $2,830 million below the President's request and
$1,009 below last year's level.
Health Resources and Services Administration.--Funding for
HRSA programs is $2,927 million, $102 million below last year
and $175 million below the President's request. Within HRSA,
the maternal and child health block grant is funded at $800
million, $121 million above the President's request. Community
and migrant health centers are increased, as part of a
consolidated appropriation, by $77 million. Health professions
training programs are level funded. Ryan White AIDS Care Act
programs are funded at $656 million, $23 million above last
year and $68 million below the President's request.
National Institutes of Health.--The Committee proposes
$11,939 million for biomedical research activities at the
National Institutes of Health. This funding level represents an
increase of $175 million over the President's request and $642
million over last year. This funding level indicates the very
high priority that the Committee places on the activities of
NIH and its expectation that, at this level, increased research
activity can occur. The Committee has also removed the AIDS
earmark in the bill from past years, believing that decisions
as to appropriate levels of funding and appropriate avenues of
research are best left to the scientists.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.--Overall
funding for CDC is $2,125 million, $39 million above last year
and $98 million below the President's request. Disease
prevention activities under CDC are increased including
childhood immunizations, sexually transmitted diseases, chronic
and environmental disease prevention and breast and cervical
cancer screening. Infectious disease programs receive a 23.7%
increase. Level funding is provided for the preventive health
services block grant. Crime bill activities are funded at the
President's request of $39 million.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration.--The bill provides current year funding for the
mental health and substance abuse block grants and children's
mental health services. Many other smaller, duplicative
programs are consolidated or terminated. The Committee
recommends $142 million under general authorities of the Public
Health Service Act to allow the transition of these programs to
other federal sources or to private funding.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health.--The bill
terminates the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health,
transfers the Assistant Secretary and several of the small
programs within the office to the Office of the Secretary and
terminates funding for the Surgeon General.
Medicare and Medicaid.--The bill provides $82,142 million
for Medicaid and $63,313 million in federal funds for the
Government's share of payments to Medicare. Funding of $1,607
million is provided for Medicare contractor payments, $3
million below last year and $24 million below the President's
request.
Social Security Administration.--The bill reflects the
establishment of the Social Security Administration as a
separate agency as required by P.L. 103-296.
Low Income Home Energy Assistance.--The Committee
recommends no funding for LIHEAP.
Child Care and Development Block Grant.--The bill provides
$935 million for the Child Care and Development Block Grant,
the same as last year's level and $114 million below the
President's request.
Funding of abortions.--The bill maintains current law
permitting the funding of abortion only in the cases of rape,
incest, or endangerment of the life of the mother, but includes
new language to give States the option not to pay for abortions
resulting from rape or incest.
Program terminations.--This bill terminates funding for 66
programs within the Department of Health and Human Services
originally funded in fiscal year 1995.
Department of Education.--The bill funds programmatic and
support activities in the Department of Education at $23,063
million, $5,157 million below the President's request and
$3,738 million below last year's level.
Education Reform.--The bill terminates funding for Goals
2000.
Education for the Disadvantaged.--Funding is severely
restricted for activities under this account. Funding of $5,555
million is provided for education for the disadvantaged local
grants, a reduction of $1,143 million from last year and $1,445
million from the President's request. The Committee remains
concerned that evaluations of this program have shown it to be
marginally effective and it has had seemingly little impact on
the overall decline of the quality of education in school
districts with large disadvantaged populations. The Committee
is also concerned that under current formulas, funding for
disadvantaged education goes to some of the richest districts
in America, thus dissipating its impact.
School Improvement Programs.--The bill funds title VI
(Chapter 2), innovative education program strategies state
grants, a program which like Goals 2000 provides assistance to
states and localities in meeting national educational goals,
and Eisenhower Professional Development State Grants at $500
million. This level is $99 million below last year's level and
$235 million below the President's request. This funding level
is provided in anticipation of the consolidation of these
programs into a larger block grant. Safe-and-drug free schools
is funded at $200 million, $266 million below last year and
$300 million below the President's request.
Special Education.--The Committee recommends overall
funding for special education programs of $3,092 million, $160
million below last year's level and $249 million below the
President's request. This funding level includes level funding
for state grants and for direct support and demonstration
services to disabled individuals. Other planning, research and
dissemination programs are not funded.
Student Financial Assistance.--The Committee places a high
priority on direct assistance to students. The bill includes
funding to allow the maximum Pell grant to rise to $2,440, an
increase of $100, or 4.3%. In addition, federal supplemental
educational opportunity grants and federal work-study grants
are funded at last year's level.
Program terminations.--Overall, 93 education programs
originally funded in fiscal year 1995 are terminated in the
bill.
Related Agencies.--Funding for the related agencies title
of the bill is $21,202 million. This level is $2,466 million
below last year's funding level and $263 million below the
President's request.
Social Security Administrative Costs.--The bill includes
funding for the Social Security Administration in the Related
Agencies title of the bill. Funding for the cost of
administering the social security programs is $5,910 million,
$357 million over last year and $299 million below the
President's request. This level of increase is provided to
assure that SSA continues its progress toward service
improvement, administrative efficiency and improved financial
management.
National Labor Relations Board.--Funding for the National
Labor Relations Board is $123 million, $53 million below last
year's level and $58 million below the President's request.
This level of funding assumes the enactment of language
included in the bill to limit the practice of issuing 10(j)
injunctions at the board's own initiative which circumvents
many of the procedures of the board. The bill would also
prohibit the investigation of unfair labor practice cases
involving ``salting'' until the Supreme Court resolves the
issue of whether certain employees are protected under the
National Labor Relations Act.
Corporation for Public Broadcasting.--CPB is an advance
funded account with funds already appropriated through FY '97.
As a continuation of the Committee's policy of gradually
withdrawing federal funds for CPB, the bill funds CPB at $240
million in FY '98, $20 million below the FY '97 level of $260
million and $56 million below the President's request. FY '96
funding for CPB is $275 million. In addition, the bill requires
the Treasury to disburse funds to the Corporation on an ``as
needed'' basis, consistent with the cash management policies
that apply to virtually all other recipients of federal
funding.
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Job Training Block Grants
The Committee is very much aware that the Committee on
Economic and Educational Opportunities has reported out a bill
(H.R. 1617) that would consolidate a large number of job
training programs that are currently authorized by the Job
Training Partnership Act, the School-to-Work Opportunities Act
and other Acts into a Youth/Education block grant and an Adult
Training block grant. Current funding levels would be reduced
by 20%. This would take effect in fiscal year 1997. The
Appropriations Committee therefore views fiscal year 1996 as a
transition year for current programs. This appropriations bill
has been drafted with a view that we are moving towards large
block grants in these areas and away from categorical programs.
A number of smaller programs have been eliminated in this bill,
while the larger programs have been substantially scaled back.
There is widespread agreement that the current number of 163
Federal job training programs (as reported by the General
Accounting Office) must be substantially reduced. This
Committee intends to do its part in that, in conjunction with
the efforts of the Economic and Educational Opportunities
Committee.
Employment and Training Administration
training and employment services
The Committee recommends $3,180,441,000 for this account
which provides funding authorized primarily by the Job Training
Partnership Act. This is a reduction of $776,329,000 below the
1995 level as revised by the recently-enacted Rescissions Act
for 1995, and a reduction of $2,284,043,000 from the budget
request.
Training and Employment Services is comprised of programs
that are supposed to enhance the employment and earnings of
economically disadvantaged and dislocated workers, operated
through a decentralized system of skill training and related
services. As required by the Job Training Partnership Act, this
appropriation is forward-funded on a July to June cycle. Funds
provided for fiscal year 1996 will support the program from
July 1, 1996 through June 30, 1997.
The account is comprised of two activities--Grants to
States and Federally-administered programs. Grants to States
give Governors the primary responsibility for the operation of
training programs in their States. In partnership with the
private sector and all levels of government, training programs
are supposed to emphasize increasing participant skills and
private sector placement.
Separate programs designed to meet the training and
employment needs of specific population segments experiencing
unique problems account for the bulk of funds provided for
Federally-administered programs. These include such programs as
Indians and Native Americans, migrant and seasonal farmworkers,
veterans in need of training and employment assistance, the Job
Corps, and a program to provide improved school-to-work
transition for youth.
Adult training--Title II-A
For adult training programs under title II-A of the Act,
the bill provides $830,000,000. This is a reduction of
$166,813,000 below the 1995 comparable level and a reduction of
$224,813,000 from the budget request. This will provide a
program level of about 374,000 adult participants. This program
is designed to prepare adults for participation in the labor
force by increasing their occupational and educational skills,
resulting in improved long-term employability, increased
employment and earnings, and reduced welfare dependency. It is
operated at the local level through service delivery areas
designated by the Governors. Each area has a private industry
council to provide guidance and oversight with respect to
activities under that area's job training plan, in partnership
with the unit or units of general local government in the
areas. The private industry council includes representatives of
the private sector, educational agencies, organized labor, and
other groups in the area. All funds are allocated to the States
by statutory formula.
The Department's own reviews indicate that short-term job
training is not very effective; that welfare receipt does not
decline after people finish the program; and that most earnings
gains result from increased hours of work and not from
increases in wage gains.
The most recent comprehensive Inspector General's audit
report on the program indicated that only 53 percent of
participants obtained jobs; furthermore, of the ones who got
jobs, half said that they found them without JTPA assistance.
Youth training--Title II-C
For youth training programs under title II-C of the Act,
the bill provides $126,672,000. This is the same as the 1995
comparable level and a reduction of $162,307,000 below the
budget request. This will provide a program level of about
87,000 youth participants. This program is supposed to improve
the long-term employability of youth, enhance their
educational, occupational, and citizenship skills, and
encourage their school completion. Like adult training, the
program is administered by local service delivery areas, as
directed by private industry councils. Funds are allocated to
the States by statutory formula.
The Department's own evaluations show that this program has
``been found to be unsuccessful in raising youth employment or
earnings'' and that ``it does not appear that JTPA youth
training has significant positive impacts.'' Furthermore, the
Department indicates that ``the impacts of relatively short-
term classroom training have in most cases not been
particularly positive, especially for youth.''
Summer youth employment--Title II-B
The bill includes no funding for the summer youth
employment and training program for the summer of 1997. The
President had requested $958,540,000. All funding for the
summer of 1996 was rescinded in the recently-enacted
Rescissions Act for 1995. Thus, the summer of 1995 would be the
last year of operation for this program.
This program has not provided permanent skills training or
education. It is basically an income supplement. The
Department's own reviews indicate that ``subsidized employment
programs alone have not been successful in producing lasting
gains in employment or earnings for youth participants once the
program was over'' and that ``temporary employment programs
without additional services bring little or no post-program
benefits to disadvantaged youth.'' The Department's reviews
also indicate that subsidized work experience ``. . . has
generally not had long-term positive effects on employment and
earnings.'' This program should be picked up by States and
localities if the need is great in their geographic area and by
the private sector. There is no compelling reason for the
Federal government to keep funding it.
Dislocated workers--Title III
The bill provides $850,000,000 for dislocated worker
programs. This is a reduction of $378,550,000 below the 1995
level and a reduction of $546,000,000 from the budget request.
An estimated 585,000 participants are expected to be served by
this appropriation.
The title III system provides for early identification of
dislocated workers, the rapid provision of services to such
workers, and job training. Among the program's components are
universal rapid response capabilities, early intervention
activities, the availability of needs-related payments to
assist workers in training, and substate delivery systems.
Funds are allocated to the States by statutory formula; 20
percent is retained by the Secretary for discretionary
purposes.
The effectiveness of short-term training has been
questioned by Department evaluations. According to the
Department ``. . . short-term skills training has not been
successful in producing earning gains for dislocated workers.''
Further, ``only a minority of displaced workers are likely to
enter long-term training if the option is offered to them.''
According to the Department, ``in the case of workers displaced
from high-tenure jobs, on average even a year or two of
successful training often does not create income gains large
enough to restore earnings to their pre-displacement level.''
In a recent audit report by the Inspector General of the
Department, the point was made that many participants were
unable to obtain jobs related to retraining and that less than
half were working in jobs related to their training;
furthermore, participants believed that they could have
obtained 60% of the jobs without the benefit of retraining.
This program has grown rapidly since FY 1993; the
percentage increase from 1993 to the President's request for
1996 would be 146%. It would be an increase of $830 million in
three year's time.
The Committee is aware of a Department of Labor grant made
earlier this year which brought together representatives from
State and Federal government, business, labor and the
outplacement industry, to participate in workshops across the
country. The workshops identified the benefits of creating
partnerships between the private and public sectors to provide
cost-effective reemployment services. The Committee urges the
Department to further facilitate such collaborative efforts and
to demonstrate this partnership concept across the country.
Job Corps--Title IV-B
For the Job Corps, the bill provides $1,121,010,000 for
program year 1996. This is an increase of $31,550,000 over the
1995 level and a reduction of $106,704,000 from the budget
request. The amount in the bill includes $972,475,000, an
increase of $15,044,000 over 1995, for center operations at 115
centers. The Committee tightened up the President's request by
taking the following actions: eliminating the increase
requested for inflation (-$28,845,000); reducing funds for
center management and administrative costs by 7.5%
(-$13,812,000), the same as the percentage reduction made in
the bill for Federal administrative costs; and eliminating 622
slots associated with two centers, one of which recently closed
and the other of which is closing in the near future
(-$14,500,000). The bill also includes $148,535,000 for
facility construction, rehabilitation, and acquisition, an
increase of $16,506,000. The latter includes $99,311,000 for
repairs and rehabilitation at existing centers and $49,224,000
to continue progress on the 8 centers begun in prior years.
Four of these are scheduled to open in 1996. The bill does not
include funds for any additional new centers beyond the 8 that
were previously approved and awarded. It costs about $16
million to build one new center and about $10 million per year
to operate each one. This kind of funding is not feasible in
the current fiscal climate.
The Committee urges the Department to continue to crack
down on poor-performing Job Corps centers. A significant number
of centers appears to be at the bottom of the performance
rankings year after year. While recognizing that the Department
has taken some steps to begin to address this situation, the
Committee believes that more needs to be done. If changing the
center operator and other management actions do not solve the
problems, then the Department needs to think about closing some
of the chronic poor-performers. The Committee notes that the
bill repeals section 427(c) of the Job Training Partnership
Act, as requested by the Administration. This will permit the
Department to contract out those civilian conservation centers
that are currently operated by the Federal government itself.
If some of these centers continue to perform poorly, the
Department should utilize this authority.
The Committee notes particularly the concerns expressed by
the General Accounting Office in its June 1995 report on the
program. GAO is concerned about a number of issues, among them
the fact that only a little more than a third of students
complete their vocational training courses, the validity of job
placement data is questionable, students are not remaining long
in their initial jobs after completion, and the effectiveness
of national vocational training contractors. The Committee will
follow these concerns closely in the coming year and wants the
Department to take whatever steps are necessary to improve the
program.
School-to-Work
The bill includes $95,000,000 for the school-to-work
opportunities initiative under the School-to-Work Opportunities
Act. This is a reduction of $27,500,000 below the 1995
appropriation and a reduction of $105,000,000 from the budget
request. This program is supposed to provide a national
framework within which all States can create statewide systems
to help youth acquire the knowledge, skills, abilities, and
labor market information they need to make an effective
transition from school to work, or to further education or
training. It is jointly administered by the Departments of
Labor and Education. A like amount is included for the program
in the Department of Education. Funds support development
grants to States to plan school-to-work systems to ease the
transition from school to work and implementation grants
provided competitively to States and local consortia to begin
building such systems. Activities could include recruiting
employers, obtaining in-depth information on local labor
markets, designing school-based and work-based curricula, and
training school-based and work-based staff.
At the Committee mark, this program would still receive
nearly twice what it received in FY 1994. It remains to be seen
whether schools can develop effective partnerships with local
industry, labor and other institutions to assure that education
and training dovetail with the needs of these institutions.
More planning and ``seed money'' may not help solve this
endemic problem. It creates an expectation and demand for
services that the states and localities must then fund, often
cutting other local priorities, when the federal funding is
terminated. Congress will be under pressure to turn this
program into a permanent subsidy rather than a demonstration.
Native Americans
For Native American programs, the bill provides
$50,000,000. This is a reduction of $11,871,000 below the
budget request and a reduction of $9,787,000 below the 1995
level. These programs are designed to improve the economic
well-being of disadvantaged Native Americans through vocational
training, work experience, and other services aimed at getting
participants into permanent unsubsidized jobs.
In a recent program year, only 50% of those who completed
the program were placed into jobs. A lack of private sector
jobs on reservations is a major problem for reservation
training programs. There appears to be a high degree of overlap
and fragmentation among programs in various Federal agencies
which serve the Indian population.
Migrant and seasonal farmworkers
For Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker programs, the bill
provides $65,000,000. This is a reduction of $13,303,000 below
the budget request and a reduction of $14,967,000 below the
1995 level. This program is aimed at alleviating chronic
unemployment and underemployment being experienced by
farmworker families. Training and employability development
services are supposed to prepare farmworkers for stable, year-
round employment, both in and outside the agricultural
industry. Supportive services such as health care, day care and
housing are also provided. Over the 9-year period ending on
June 30, 1992, of the 440,000 participants in the program, only
27% had been placed into permanent unsubsidized employment.
The Department is encouraged to continue the farmworker
housing program at a level proportionate to the current year.
Veterans' employment
For veterans' employment, the bill provides $7,300,000.
This is a reduction of $1,580,000 below the budget request and
the 1995 level. These funds provide special employment and
training programs designed to meet the unique needs of
disabled, Vietnam-era, and recently separated veterans.
Other Federally-administered programs
For other Federally-administered programs, $35,459,000 is
provided. This is $153,925,000 under the budget request and
$23,894,000 under the 1995 level. The Committee allowance
includes funding for research and evaluation ($6,196,000),
labor market information ($5,489,000), the Glass Ceiling
Commission for phaseout costs ($142,000), pilots and
demonstrations ($19,022,000) Women in Apprenticeship
($610,000), and the National Skills Standards Advisory Board
($4,000,000).
The Committee has provided full funding for the ongoing
multiyear evaluation of the Job Corps program. This evaluation
will proceed as planned and on schedule. A number of serious
questions have been raised about Job Corps in the recent past,
and we need to have answers for them.
The Committee has placed the pilots and demonstrations
activity on a phaseout path. The Department is expected to
phase down funding of current principal grantees and not to cut
them off in midstream. They need to have a period of time to
make the transition to other sources of funding.
No funds are provided for the National Occupational
Information Coordinating Committee, $5,500,000 below the 1995
amount and $5,000,000 below the Administration request. The
NOICC has been funded jointly with the Department of Education
since fiscal year 1978. NOICC funds are used for State
Occupational Information Coordinating Committees (SOICCS) and
for the development and delivery of information systems that
assess current and future labor market conditions to
communicate and coordinate activities, and provide
administration to assist students, educators, and vocational
education program planners. This funding decision is consistent
with the Committee's decision to eliminate funding for
duplicative, expensive and unnecessary advisory committees. If
the States feel that this is a critical activity, they can fund
it from other sources. No funds are provided in the Department
of Education either.
The Committee is concerned by the extent of unemployment
among people with disabilities and urges the Department to
provide support for employment and training assistance at the
1996 Paralympic Games for people with disabilities. Job
training could be made available to unemployed workers with
disabilities in conjunction with the planning and program
management for this event.
community service employment for older americans
The bill includes $350,000,000 for community service
employment for older Americans. This is a reduction of
$46,060,000 below the 1995 level and a reduction of $60,500,000
below the budget request. The program, authorized by title V of
the Older Americans Act, provides part-time employment in
community service activities for unemployed, low-income persons
aged 55 and over. It is forward-funded from July 1, 1996
through June 30, 1997. The Committee believes that this program
must take its proportionate share of the overall discretionary
spending reduction in the bill. The Committee has funded the
program under the basic law rather than continuing the past
practice of earmarking 78% of the funds for national
contractors and 22% for the States.
federal unemployment benefits and allowances
The bill includes $346,100,000, the same as the budget
request and an increase of $4,600,000 above the 1995 comparable
level. The FY 1996 allowance provides funding for four
activities, all entitlements.
The first activity, Trade Adjustment Assistance benefits,
provides for special unemployment benefit payments to workers
as authorized by the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. For this
activity the bill includes $183,000,000. This is the same as
the budget request and an increase of $4,000,000 above the 1995
comparable level. These funds will permit payment of benefits,
averaging $198 per week, to 34,000 workers for 1996. Of these
workers, 19,300 will participate in training programs,
receiving benefits for an average of 32 weeks. The remaining
14,700 workers receiving benefits will receive training waivers
and collect benefits for an average of 21 weeks.
The second activity, Trade Adjustment Assistance training,
provides training, job search and job relocation allowances to
workers adversely affected by imports. The funding for this
activity is also authorized under the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended. The bill includes $96,600,000 for this activity. This
is the same as the budget request and a decrease of $1,200,000
below the 1995 comparable level. These funds will provide
services for an estimated 24,200 workers of whom 23,600 will be
enrolled in classroom training and 600 will receive on-the-job
training. In addition a total of 2,400 will receive job search
and job relocation allowances.
The third activity, NAFTA Transitional Adjustment
Assistance benefits, provides for weekly benefit payments to
workers affected by imports from Mexico and Canada. These
payments are also authorized by the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended as a result of the signing of the North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The bill includes $34,000,000 for this
activity. This is the same as the budget request and an
increase of $1,000,000 above the 1995 comparable level. These
funds will provide 5,400 eligible workers an average of 32
weeks of benefits each, at an average weekly amount of $198.
The fourth activity, NAFTA Transitional Adjustment
Assistance training, provides funds for training, job search
and job relocation to workers affected by imports from Mexico
and Canada. The funding for this activity is also authorized by
the amendment to the Trade Act of 1974 resulting from the
signing of the NAFTA. The bill includes $32,500,000 for this
activity. This is the same as the budget request and an
increase of $800,000 above the 1995 comparable level. These
funds will provide training for an estimated 7,650 workers,
7,450 in classroom training and 200 in on the job training. In
addition these funds will provide for job search and relocation
allowances for 900 workers.
state unemployment insurance and employment service operations
The bill includes $3,240,236,000 for this account, a
reduction of $89,126,000 below the FY 1995 comparable level and
$301,747,000 below the budget request. Included in the total
availability is $3,114,908,000 authorized to be drawn from the
Employment Security Administration Account of the Unemployment
Trust Fund. This is $200,964,000 below the budget request and
$87,266,000 below the 1995 comparable level. Also included is
$125,328,000 to be provided from the general fund of the
Treasury, a reduction of $1,860,000 below the FY 1995 amount
and a reduction of $100,783,000 from the budget request.
The funds in this account are used to provide
administrative grants and assistance to State agencies which
administer Federal and State unemployment compensation laws and
operate the public employment service. In addition, funds are
provided for the one-stop career center program.
For Unemployment Insurance Services, the bill provides
$2,314,357,000. This total includes a regular contingency
amount of $223,837,000, which may be drawn from the Employment
Security Administration Account of the Unemployment Trust Fund.
In addition, the bill further provides for a second contingency
amount should the unemployment workload exceed an average
weekly insured claims volume of 2,785,000. This second
contingency amount would fund the administrative costs of
unemployment insurance workload over the level of 2,785,000
insured unemployed per week at a rate of $28,600,000 per
100,000 insured unemployed, with a pro-rata amount granted for
amounts of less than 100,000 insured unemployed. The Committee
wishes to be promptly notified whenever this latter contingency
mechanism is utilized.
The Unemployment Insurance Service recommendation is
$155,586,000 below the budget request and an increase of
$285,000 over the 1995 comparable level. The Committee
recommendation for FY 1996 will support an estimated 44,600
State staff years. The Committee recommendation provides a
small increase of $7,613,000 over the 1995 level for funds
allocated to States. For national activities, the bill includes
$10,000,000; this is a reduction of $7,328,000 below the 1995
level.
For the Employment Service, the bill provides $825,879,000
which includes $25,328,000 in general funds together with an
authorization to spend $800,551,000 from the Employment
Security Administration Account of the Unemployment Trust Fund.
These amounts are $89,411,000 below the 1995 comparable level
and $46,161,000 below the budget request. Included in the bill
for the Employment Service is $761,735,000 for State grants,
available for the program year of July 1, 1996 through June 30,
1997. This is $44,177,000 below the budget request and
$77,177,000 below the 1995 comparable level. This is a
reduction of 9%; the President has proposed a reduction of 5%.
The effectiveness of the Employment Service has been in
question for some time. Only 16% of ES applicants were placed
in jobs in a recent year, only 3% received counseling and only
2% were referred to training.
The Committee has provided $100,000,000 for States to
establish one-stop career centers to integrate the provision of
labor market and training services to unemployed workers and to
employers through collaboration of local service providers.
This is a reduction of $100,000,000 below the budget request,
but it is the same as the 1995 appropriation. Funds provided
under the one-stop initiative must supplement, not supplant,
other Federal, State or local funds committed to such centers.
One-stop centers should provide access to the broadest range of
workforce development and social support services needed to
meet client needs, including, at a minimum, the unemployment
and employment service programs, disclocated workers and other
JTPA programs and the local Job Opportunities and Basic Skills
(JOBS) program.
This program was increased by $50,000,000 in 1995, an
increase of 100% over 1994. Congress will be under intense
pressure to turn this program into a permanent subsidy rather
than a temporary system reform effort. It remains to be seen
whether this program will succeed in simplifying and
streamlining the Nation's myriad of 163 job training programs;
Congress needs to consolidate these programs through
legislation. It is doubtful that a new Federal grant program
can do this job.
advances to the unemployment trust fund and other funds
The bill includes $369,000,000, the same as the budget
request and a reduction of $635,485,000 below the 1995
comparable level. The appropriation is available to provide
advances to several accounts for purposes authorized under
various Federal and State unemployment compensation laws and
the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund, whenever balances in such
accounts prove insufficient. The bill anticipates that FY 1996
advances will be made to the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund.
The separate appropriations provided by the Committee for
all other accounts eligible to borrow from this account in FY
1996 are expected to be sufficient. Should the need arise, due
to unanticipated changes in the economic situation, laws, or
for other legitimate reasons, advances will be made to the
needy accounts to the extent funds are available. Funds
advanced to the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund are now
repayable with interest to the general fund of the Treasury.
PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
The bill includes total funding for this account of
$124,479,000; this is a reduction of 7.5 percent below the 1995
level. This is $22,936,000 below the request and $10,093,000
below the 1995 comparable level. This includes $83,505,000 in
general funds, a reduction of $12,008,000 from the budget
request and a reduction of $6,771,000 below the 1995 comparable
level. In addition, the bill includes authority to expend
$40,974,000 from the Employment Security Administration Account
of the Unemployment Trust Fund. This is a reduction of
$10,928,000 from the budget request and a reduction of
$3,322,000 from the 1995 comparable level.
General funds in this account provide the Federal staff to
administer employment and training programs under the Job
Training Partnership Act, the Older Americans Act, the Trade
Act of 1974, and the National Apprenticeship Act. Trust funds
provide for the Federal administration of employment security
functions under Title III of the Social Security Act and the
Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended.
Office of the American Workplace
salaries and expenses
The Committee has provided no funding for this agency for
1996. The 1995 appropriation was $31,194,000, and the 1996
request was $41,845,000. The Committee has funded the Office of
Labor-Management Standards, including the necessary
administrative and financial management staff, that was
formerly funded in this Office, in the Employment Standards
Administration. The Office of Labor-Management Standards has
the statutory responsibility to enforce the Labor-Management
Reporting and Disclosure Act.
The Office of the American Workplace was established in
1993 to provide a national focal point for encouraging the
creation of high performance workplace practices and policies
and to encourage the development of work organizations and
promote innovation in the workplace.
The Committee proposes to eliminate this Office because it
is not a necessary Federal function; some would argue that it
is not even an appropriate Federal function.
According to the Department of Labor, the mission of this
Office is ``to encourage business competitiveness and the
skills, involvement, and commitment of front-line workers,
while promoting more effective worker-management relations''
and ``to increase the number of workplaces that engage in
organizational change efforts through increased worker
training, worker involvement, and worker-management
partnerships.''
It appears to the Committee that these things should be and
are being done in the private sector. It should not be
necessary to spend scarce Federal funds for these purposes.
Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration
salaries and expenses
The bill provides $64,113,000 for this account, a reduction
of $17,069,000 from the budget request and a reduction of
$5,198,000 below the 1995 comparable level. This is a reduction
of 7.5% below the 1995 amount.
The Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration (PWBA) is
responsible for the enforcement of Title I of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) in both civil
and criminal areas. This involves ERISA fiduciary and
reporting/disclosure requirements. PWBA is also responsible for
enforcement of sections 8477 and 8478 of the Federal Employees'
Retirement Security Act of 1986 (FERSA). PWBA provides funding
for the Enforcement and Compliance; Policy, Regulation, and
Public Services; and Program Oversight activities.
The bill includes language that prohibits the Department of
Labor from taking any steps to promote so-called ``economically
targeted investments (ETI's)'' by private pension funds covered
by ERISA. These include such things as investing in low-cost
housing, infrastructure improvement, and small business
development. ERISA requires pension plans to invest their funds
with prudence and loyalty to plan participants. Investing in
ETI's could jeopardize pension funds. This bill language will
block the Department from engaging in these activities,
including the funding of a clearinghouse on this subject. The
authorizing committee is working on legislation to deal with
this; this rider is necessary in the meantime to remedy the
situation.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation is a wholly-owned
government corporation established by the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974. The law places it within the
Department of Labor and makes the Secretary of Labor the
chairman of its board of directors. The Corporation receives
its income from insurance premiums collected from covered
pension plans, collections of employer liabilities imposed by
the Act, and investment earnings. It is also authorized to
borrow up to $100 million from the Treasury. The primary
purpose of the Corporation is to guarantee the payment of
pension plan benefits to participants if covered plans fail or
go out of existence.
The Corporation's estimate for FY 1996 includes benefit
payments of $1,060,970,000, multi-employer financial assistance
of $4,570,000, an administrative expenses limitation of
$12,043,000, and services related to terminations expenses of
$128,496,000. Only the administrative expenses limitation is
subject to the appropriations process. In the administrative
expenses activity, the Committee recommends $10,603,000, a
reduction of $860,000 below the 1995 comparable level; this is
a reduction of 7.5% below 1995. It is a reduction of $1,440,000
below the budget request.
Employment Standards Administration
salaries and expenses
The total combined general and trust fund amount for this
agency is $273,990,000. This is a reduction of $62,810,000
below the budget request and a reduction of $27,156,000 below
the 1995 comparable level. The bill includes $246,967,000 in
general funds for this account. This is a reduction of
$59,509,000 from the budget request and a reduction of
$24,965,000 below the 1995 comparable level. The bill also
contains authority to expend $978,000 from the Special Fund
established by the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation
Act. This is $691,000 below the budget request and $79,000
below the 1995 comparable. In addition, an amount of
$26,045,000 is available by transfer from the Black Lung
Disability Trust Fund. This is a reduction of $2,610,000 from
the request and $2,112,000 below the 1995 comparable level.
The Committee has funded in this account the Office of
Labor-Management Standards, including the necessary
administrative and financial management staff, that was
formerly funded in the Office of the American Workplace; the
Office of the American Workplace has been eliminated. The
Office of Labor-Management Standards has the statutory
responsibility to enforce the Labor-Management Reporting and
Disclosure Act. This Act requires, among other things, proper
handling and safeguarding of union funds and assets and
reporting and disclosure of financial transactions and
administrative practices of unions and prevents abuse in the
administration of union trusteeships.
The Committee has reduced this account overall by 7.5% from
the 1995 comparable level. In addition, a reduction of 25% has
been made for enforcement activities under the Davis-Bacon Act
and the Service Contract Act. This begins a phaseout of
enforcement staff in anticipation of these Acts being repealed.
The Employment Standards Administration is involved in the
administration of numerous laws, including the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Migrant
and Seasonal Agricultural Workers' Protection Act, the Davis-
Bacon Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Federal
Employees' Compensation Act (FECA), the Longshore and Harbor
Workers' Compensation Act, and the Federal Mine Safety and
Health Act (black lung). The agency also administers Executive
Order 11246 related to affirmative action by Federal
contractors.
The Committee has been advised and is concerned that the
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is not being enforced fairly
and uniformly as to cable television installation companies in
the New York/New Jersey area. The Secretary is instructed to
allocate sufficient resources to ensure fair and uniform
enforcement of the FLSA with respect to the cable television
installation industry in that region.
special benefits
The bill includes $218,000,000, the same as the budget
request and a decrease of $40,000,000 below the 1995 comparable
level. This appropriation primarily provides benefits under the
Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA). The payments are
required by law.
The total amount to be available in FY 1996, including
anticipated reimbursements from Federal agencies of
$1,895,000,000, is $2,113,000,000, an increase of $39,000,000
above the 1995 comparable level.
The Committee recommends continuation of appropriation
language that provides authority to use the FECA fund to
reimburse a new employer for a portion of the salary of a newly
reemployed injured Federal worker. The FECA funds will be used
to reimburse new employers during the first three years of
employment not to exceed 75% of salary in the workers' first
year, 50% in the second year, and 25% in the third year. Costs
will be charged to the FECA fund.
The Committee recommends continuation of appropriation
language to provide authority to deposit into the Special
Benefits account those funds that the Postal Service, the
Tennessee Valley Authority, and other entities are required to
pay to cover their ``fair share'' of the costs of administering
the claims filed by their employees under FECA. The Committee
also recommends approval of appropriation language to provide
that $11,383,000 of the funds transferred from the ``fair
share'' agencies to pay the costs of administration will be
available to the Secretary of Labor to finance capital
improvements relating to upgrading and enhancing the Federal
Employees' Compensation computer system's hardware and
software. The remaining balance of the administrative costs
paid by the ``fair share'' agencies will revert to Treasury as
miscellaneous receipts.
black lung disability trust fund
The bill includes authority to obligate $996,203,000 from
the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund in FY 1996. This is an
increase of $20,642,000 above the 1995 comparable level; it is
$2,633,000 below the budget request.
The total amount available for FY 1996, including
$17,164,000 from the prior year, will provide $501,494,000 for
benefit payments, and $45,953,000 and $756,000 for
administrative expenses for the Departments of Labor and
Treasury, respectively. Also included is $448,000,000 for
interest payments on advances from the general fund of the
Treasury. In FY 1995, comparable obligations for benefit
payments are estimated to be $516,005,000, while administrative
expenses for the Departments of Labor and Treasury respectively
are $51,800,000 and $756,000.
The Trust Fund pays all black lung compensation/medical and
survivor benefit expenses when no responsible mine operation
can be assigned liability for such benefits, or when coal mine
employment ceased prior to 1970, as well as all administrative
costs which are incurred in administering the benefits program
and operating the Trust Fund.
It is estimated that 81,500 people will be receiving black
lung benefits financed from the Trust Fund by the end of FY
1996. This compares with an estimated 86,500 receiving benefits
in FY 1995.
The basic financing for the Trust Fund comes from a coal
excise tax for underground and surface-mined coal. Additional
funds come from reimbursement payments from mine operators for
benefit payments made by the Trust Fund before the mine
operator is found liable, and advances from the general fund,
estimated at $369,000,000 in FY 1996. The advances to the Fund
assure availability of necessary funds when liabilities may
exceed other income. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1987 continues the current tax structure until 2014.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
salaries and expenses
The bill includes $263,985,000 for this agency. This is a
reduction of $48,515,000 below the 1995 comparable level and a
reduction of $82,518,000 from the budget request. This agency
is responsible for enforcing the Occupational Safety and Health
Act of 1970 in the Nation's workplaces. The Committee has
reduced the Federal enforcement activity by $47,834,000 below
the 1995 level; this is a reduction of 33%. The Committee has
reduced other activities in this agency, except for compliance
assistance, by 7.5% below the 1995 level; executive direction
activities were reduced by 10%. With respect to compliance
assistance, the Committee has provided $53,601,000, an increase
of nearly 20% over 1995. Compliance assistance activities
include on-site consultation programs by designated State
agencies for which the bill includes $40,000,000, an increase
of $8,436,000; training and education grants; fostering and
promoting voluntary protection programs that give recognition
and assistance to employers who establish exemplary
occupational safety and health programs; and the OSHA training
institute.
The Committee does not intend to abolish this agency. It
serves a useful public purpose. However, the overemphasis on
enforcement at the expense of compliance assistance needs to be
changed. The authorizing committee is already moving in this
direction with new legislation. The Committee has attempted to
move that process along with its funding recommendations in
this bill.
The bill includes language prohibiting OSHA from developing
or issuing any standard on the subject of ergonomic protection
for workers during fiscal 1996. It would also prohibit
recordkeeping and reporting requirements directly related to
ergonomic-related injuries or illnesses.
The Committee has included language carried in the bill
since 1976 in one instance and 1979 in the other that restricts
the use of funds for other purposes. First, the bill includes
language that effectively exempts farms employing 10 or fewer
people from the provisions of the Act except those farms having
a temporary labor camp. Second, the bill includes language
exempting firms employing 10 or fewer in industry
classifications having a lost workday injury rate less than the
national average from general schedule safety inspections.
The bill would temporarily halt the implementation of the
fall protection standard as promulgated by the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration and return the standard back
to its original level of 16 feet. In February 1995, OSHA
revised the fall protection standard to lower the height
requirements from 16 feet to 6 feet. This regulation has had a
significant negative impact on various construction businesses,
particularly single family home builders. As opposed to
eliminating this OSHA requirement, this language instead would
compel OSHA to more suitably revise the fall protection rule--
in consultation with those affected. The return of the standard
to 16 feet would only be for the interim period while OSHA
develops these new standards.
The Committee believes that OSHA should review its Roof
Harness Rule to determine its appropriateness and effectiveness
in ensuring worker safety. The Committee expects OSHA to report
back to the Committee the results of this review not later than
January 1, 1996.
Mine Safety and Health Administration
salaries and expenses
The bill includes $185,154,000 for this agency. This is
$26,952,000 below the budget request and $15,492,000 below the
1995 comparable level. It is a 7.5% reduction below the 1995
level. This agency enforces the Federal Mine Safety and Health
Act in underground and surface mines.
The Committee is aware of recent proposals concerning the
merger of this agency with the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration. If such a merger is to be accomplished, it
needs to be done by the authorizing committees of jurisdiction
by amending the basic laws.
The Committee has continued language carried in the bill
since 1979 prohibiting the use of funds to carry out the
training provisions of the Act with respect to shell dredging
or with respect to any sand, gravel, surface stone, surface
clay, colloidal phosphate or surface limestone mine.
Bureau of Labor Statistics
salaries and expenses
The total funding recommended by the Committee for the
Bureau of Labor Statistics is $347,213,000. This is a reduction
of $29,468,000 below the budget request and a reduction of
$4,461,000 below the 1995 comparable level. The bill includes
$296,993,000 in general funds for this account, a reduction of
$23,338,000 from the budget request and a reduction of $579,000
from the 1995 comparable level. In addition, the bill includes
$50,220,000 from the Employment Security Administration Account
of the Unemployment Trust Fund. This is a reduction of
$6,130,000 from the budget request and a reduction of
$3,882,000 below the 1995 level. The Bureau of Labor Statistics
is the principal fact-finding agency in the Federal Government
in the broad field of labor economics. Its principal surveys
include the Consumer Price Index and the monthly unemployment
series.
The Committee has approved $11,549,000, the full amount
requested by the Administration, for the Consumer Price Index
revision. This revision is critical to the Nation's economy and
to the Federal budget. The Committee directs the Bureau to give
this matter the very highest priority.
The Committee has reduced the base funding for the Bureau
by 3% in total below the 1995 level.
Departmental Management
salaries and expenses
The bill includes a combined general and trust fund amount
for Departmental Management activities of $150,144,000. This is
$42,566,000 below the budget request and a reduction of
$28,217,000 below the 1995 comparable level. The bill includes
$130,220,000 in general funds for this account. This is
$42,527,000 below the budget request and $24,480,000 below the
1995 comparable level. The bill also includes authority to
transfer $303,000 from the Employment Security Administration
account of the Unemployment Trust Fund. This is $39,000 below
the budget request and $25,000 below the 1995 comparable level.
In addition, an amount of $19,621,000 is available by transfer
from the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. This is the same as
the budget request and a reduction of $3,712,000 below the 1995
comparable level.
The Departmental Management appropriation finances staff
responsible for formulating and overseeing the implementation
of Departmental policy and management activities. In addition,
this appropriation includes a variety of operating programs and
activities that are not involved in Departmental Management
functions, but for which other salaries and expenses
appropriations are not suitable.
The Committee has reduced the base funding for this account
by 7.5% below the 1995 level. In addition, executive direction
activities have been reduced by a further 7.5% for a total
reduction of 15%. This includes the Offices of the Secretary
and Deputy Secretary and such other offices as the Assistant
Secretary for Policy, Congressional and Intergovernmental
Affairs, and Public Affairs. In addition, the Committee has
substantially downsized the Bureau of International Labor
Affairs from $12,272,000 in 1995 to $1,850,000 in 1996. This
action taken by the Committee will allow the Bureau to carry
out its statutory responsibilities under NAFTA, but will
eliminate all other activities currently conducted. The other
activities carried out by the Bureau are primarily
discretionary in nature and seem to be less than critical in
times of severe fiscal constraints. These include:
participating in the U.S. labor attache program in embassies
abroad, overseas technical assistance projects, monitoring
internationally-recognized worker rights, participating in
multilateral and bilateral trade negotiations and on
international bodies such as the ILO and the OECD and other
U.N. organizations. It would appear that the State Department
and the Office of the Trade Representative could handle most of
these activities.
The Committee notes that the Office of the Solicitor
currently has 14 FTE's devoted to work under the Longshore and
Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. This seems to be an excessive
number in light of the Committee's understanding of recent
court decisions which should require less work in this area.
The Solicitor should also reexamine the role of departmental
attorneys in the black lung program. Efforts should be
refocused on the defense of claims chargeable to the Black Lung
Disability Trust Fund.
The bill includes language that would nullify Executive
Order 12954, issued by the President on March 8, 1995, that
would prohibit Federal contracts with companies that hire
permanent replacement workers for striking employees. The
Committee believes that Congress should legislate labor-
management relationships through amendments to the National
Labor Relations Act. This should not be done through executive
order by the President acting unilaterally. The authorizing
committee has reported a bill on this subject. Until that can
be enacted, this appropriations rider is necessary to block
this executive order.
Teamsters election.--The Committee supports the ongoing
efforts of the Department of Justice to rid the International
Brotherhood of Teamsters of organized crime influence. While
the Committee agrees that it is in the best interest of the
nation to have a union free of these influences, it is most
beneficial to the union itself. The Committee also agrees that
the Federal government should not bear the full cost of the
supervision of the upcoming elections which the Committee
understands will amount to approximately $21,000,000. The cost
for the supervision of this election should be shared by the
Justice Department, the Department of Labor and the
International Brotherhood of Teamsters. As such, the Committee
provides that up to $5,600,000 of the amounts available to the
Department of Labor for fiscal year 1996 may be allocated for
this purpose, subject to the normal reprogramming requirements
of the Committee.
assistant Secretary for veterans employment and training
The bill includes $175,883,000 to be expended from the
Employment Security Administration Account of the Unemployment
Trust Fund. This is $11,231,000 below the budget request and
$9,323,000 below the 1995 comparable level.
For State grants, the bill provides $79,682,000 for the
Disabled Veterans Outreach program. This amount is sufficient
to finance 1,576 State staff. The bill also provides
$73,854,000 for the Local Veterans Employment Representative
program. This amount is sufficient to finance 1,348 State
staff.
For Federal administration, the bill provides $19,525,000,
a reduction of $1,583,000 from the 1995 level. This is a
reduction of 7.5% from the 1995 base level. Included here is
$2,000,000 for the Transition Assistance Program, which, it is
estimated, will provide reemployment assistance to
approximately 164,000 people separating from the military.
The bill provides $2,822,000 for the National Veterans
Training Institute (NVTI). Since its beginning in 1986, this
training institute has trained some 8,100 people in veterans
employment issues. These are primarily State employees who
provide employment services to veterans.
working capital fund
The bill includes appropriations language expanding the
Working Capital Fund authorizing language to establish an
Investment in Reinvention Fund in the Working Capital Fund, and
to allow the Department to utilize up to $3,900,000 in
unobligated balances in Departmental salaries and expenses
accounts to capitalize this fund. The Committee has taken this
action in lieu of appropriating additional funds. This fund
will become self-sustaining through the repayment of initial
investments from savings generated through improvements and
efficiencies.
office of the inspector general
The bill includes a combined general and trust fund amount
of $48,328,000. This is $5,119,000 below the budget request and
$3,918,000 below the 1995 comparable level. This includes
$44,426,000 in general funds for this account. This is
$4,826,000 below the budget request and $3,602,000 below the
1995 comparable level. The bill also includes authority to
transfer $3,615,000 from the Employment Security Administration
account of the Unemployment Trust Fund. This is $293,000 below
the budget request and $293,000 below the 1995 comparable
level. In addition, an amount of $287,000 is available by
transfer from the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. This is
$23,000 below the budget request and $23,000 below the 1995
comparable level. The Committee has reduced this Office by 7.5%
below the 1995 level.
The Office of the Inspector General was created by law to
protect the integrity of Departmental programs as well as the
welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs. Through a
comprehensive program of audits, investigations, inspections,
and program evaluations, the OIG attempts to reduce the
incidence of fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, and to
promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness throughout the
Department.
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Health Resources and Services Administration
Health Resources and Services
The bill includes $2,927,122,000 for health resources and
services programs. This is $101,837,000 below the comparable
amount available for these activities in fiscal year 1995 and
$175,273,000 below the amount requested in the President's
budget.
The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
supports programs which provide health services to
disadvantaged, medically underserved and special populations;
which improve infant mortality rates; which direct the
education, supply and distribution of a wide range of health
professionals; and which provide technical assistance regarding
the utilization of health resources and facilities.
Consolidated health centers
The Committee has provided funds for community health
centers, migrant health centers, health care for the homeless,
and public housing health service grants in a consolidated line
rather than through separate activities. Each of these programs
is being considered for reauthorization and their structure may
well change. Community health centers are often the grantees
for the other programs as well, and the Administration has
already made some efforts to consolidate grant applications and
reduce duplication. The Committee encourages the agency to take
whatever additional administrative steps it can to build on
these consolidation efforts.
The Committee provides $833,518,000 for this consolidated
health centers line, which is $77,000,000 above the 1995 level
and $77,119,000 above the Administration request for this
grouping of programs. The Committee urges HRSA to give priority
to maintenance of existing services when setting its fiscal
year 1996 funding plans for the community and migrant health
centers program.
Community health centers
The community health centers program helps support systems
that provide access to comprehensive, case-managed primary
health care services for populations at risk of numerous and
complex medical problems who live in rural and urban medically
underserved areas.
Migrant health centers
The program helps provide culturally sensitive
comprehensive primary health care services to migrant and
seasonal farmworkers and their families. Over 80 percent of the
centers also receive funds from the community health centers
program.
Health care for the homeless
The program provides project grants for the delivery of
primary health care services, substance abuse services, and
mental health services to homeless adults and children. About
half of the projects are administered by community health
centers. The other half are administered by non-profit
coalitions, inner city hospitals, and local public health
departments.
Public housing health service grants
The program awards grants to community-based organizations
to provide case-managed ambulatory primary health and social
services in clinics at or in close proximity to public housing.
More than 60 percent of the programs are operated by community
health centers.
The Committee is pleased that the program has fostered
partnerships with local housing authorities and tenant
management corporations resulting in a number of innovative
approaches for the delivery of health care. Notable among these
approaches is the training of public housing residents to
participate in the delivery of health education, counseling,
and outreach services to fellow residents.
National Health Service Corps: Field placements
The Committee provides $41,979,000 for field placement
activities, which is the same as the 1995 level. The
Administration requested funding in a consolidated workforce
development cluster. These funds are used to support the
activities of National Health Service Corps obligors and
volunteers in the field, including travel and transportation
costs of assignees, training and education, recruitment of
volunteers, and retention activities. Salary costs of most new
assignees are paid by the employing entity.
National Health Service Corps: Recruitment
The Committee provides $78,206,000 for recruitment
activities, which is the same as the 1995 level. The
Administration requested funding in a consolidated workforce
development cluster. The program awards scholarships to health
professions students and assists graduates in repaying their
student loans. In return for every year of support, these
students are obligated to provide a year of service in health
professional shortage areas usually located in inner cities or
rural areas, with a two-year minimum obligation. The Committee
reiterates its intent that funds provided be used to support
multi-year, rather than single-year, commitments.
Health professions
The Committee provides $278,977,000 for all health
professions training programs in a consolidated line item,
which is the same as the 1995 level. The President requested
funding in five clusters of programs, which would require the
enactment of authorizing law. All of these programs are being
reauthorized for 1996 and it is likely that their structure
will change significantly, with consolidations of previously
separate categorical programs and reduced authorization levels.
The Committee has provided funding in a consolidated pool
because of these uncertainties and directs the Department to
provide an operating plan prior to conference on the 1996
appropriations bill indicating the way in which the funding
provided by the House would be spread, taking into account the
progress of the reauthorizing legislation at that point.
To the extent permitted under the authorizing statutes
currently under consideration, the Committee encourages HRSA to
include the discipline of social work in its training efforts,
particularly in interdisciplinary health and mental health care
settings in underserved communities.
Grants to communities for scholarships
The program provides grants to States to provide financing
for community organizations located in health professions
shortage areas to make scholarship awards to health professions
students in exchange for a service obligation in the community.
Sixty percent of the costs of scholarships are paid by the
State and sponsoring community organization.
Health professions data system
This program supports the collection and analysis of data
on the labor supply in various health professions and on future
workforce configurations.
Nurse loan repayment for shortage area service
This program offers student loan repayment to nurses in
exchange for an agreement to serve not less than two years in
an Indian Health Service health center, Native Hawaiian health
center, public hospital, community or migrant health center, or
rural health clinic.
Research on certain health professions issues
This program supports research on issues such as the extent
to which debt has a detrimental effect on students entering
primary care and the effects that Federally-funded educational
programs for minorities have on the number of such individuals
attending health professions schools.
Centers of excellence
The program is designed to strengthen the national capacity
to educate minority students in the health professions by
offering special support to those institutions which train a
significant number of minority health professionals, including
Hispanics and Native Americans. Funds are used for the
recruitment and retention of students and faculty, information
resources and curricula, faculty and student research, and the
development of plans to achieve institutional improvements.
Health careers opportunity program
This program provides funds to medical and other health
professions schools for recruitment of disadvantaged students
and pre-professional school preparation.
Exceptional financial need scholarships
This program provides scholarship aid to exceptionally
needy students enrolled in medicine, osteopathic medicine, or
dentistry who agree to practice primary care for five years
after completing training.
Faculty loan repayment
The loan repayment for faculty services program provides
for the repayment of educational loans for individuals from
disadvantaged backgrounds who are health professions students
or graduates, and who have agreed to serve for at least two
years as a faculty member of a health professions school. The
school matches the Federal contribution toward loan repayment.
The program also supports fellowships for minority faculty
members.
Financial assistance for disadvantaged health professions students
This program provides financial assistance to disadvantaged
students at medical, osteopathic or dental schools who agree to
practice primary health care for five years after completing
training.
Health Professions Student Loan recapitalization
This program permits additional capital contributions to be
made to school loan funds for loans to financially needy
students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Scholarships for disadvantaged students
The scholarship program provides grants to selected health
professions schools to provide scholarships to individuals from
disadvantaged backgrounds. By statute, 30 percent of the funds
must go to schools of nursing. Up to 25 percent of a school's
grant may be used to provide financial assistance to
undergraduates. The Committee continues to intend that all
health professions disciplines made eligible by statute once it
is reauthorized be able to participate in the scholarships
program.
Family medicine training and departments
This program has four components: (1) grants to medical
schools to promote the predoctoral training of medical
students; (2) grants to support family medicine residency
programs and their trainees; (3) grants to programs that train
physicians who plan to teach in family medicine programs; and
(4) grants to assist medical schools in establishing or
improving family medicine academic administrative units.
General internal medicine and pediatrics
The program is comprised of three different activities: (1)
grants to medical schools and hospitals to plan and operate
residency programs and to provide financial assistance for
residents; (2) grants to institutions to meet the costs of
training programs for physicians who plan to teach in general
internal medicine and pediatrics, as well as to support the
faculty trainees; and (3) grants to develop programs to support
predoctoral activities, including ambulatory care experiences,
curriculum development and student assistantships.
Physician assistants
The program provides grants for the training of physician
assistants and for the training of faculty who will teach in
physician assistants programs. By law, no more than 10 percent
of the funding may be used for faculty development.
Public health and preventive medicine
The program is comprised of three elements: public health
special projects, public health traineeships and preventive
medicine residencies. Public health special projects provide
grants to schools of public health for developing projects in
the areas of preventive medicine, health promotion and disease
prevention, improving access to and the quality of health
services in medically underserved communities, and reducing the
incidence of domestic violence. Public health traineeship
grants provide graduate training to individuals in the fields
of epidemiology, environmental health, biostatistics,
toxicology, and public health nutrition. Preventive medicine
residency grants assist schools in developing new residency
training programs or improving existing programs and in
providing financial assistance to residency trainees.
Health administration traineeships and special projects
This program provides grants to graduate degree programs in
health administration, hospital administration and health
policy analysis for traineeships for students and for special
projects to prepare students for employment with public or
nonprofit private agencies.
Area health education centers
The AHEC program links university health science centers
with community health service delivery systems to provide
training sites for students, faculty and practitioners. The
program supports three types of projects: core grants to plan
and implement programs; special initiative funding for schools
that have previously received AHEC grants; and model programs
to extend AHEC grants with 50 percent Federal funding.
Border health education centers
The program funds schools of medicine and osteopathy to
support health education and training centers to improve the
supply, distribution and quality of health personnel along the
border between the United States and Mexico and in other urban
and rural areas with populations with serious unmet health care
needs.
General dentistry residencies
The program provides grants to dental schools to support
residency programs and provide financial assistance to their
students. In this primary care residency program, dentists
learn to provide a broad range of services for patients
requiring complex care, such as persons with disabilities, high
risk medical patients and those with infectious diseases. All
grantees include community-based rotations, where residents
provide oral health care to underserved populations and
communities.
Allied health special projects
The program provides funding for allied health professions
schools for establishing community-based programs, expanding
enrollment, developing curricula in areas such as geriatrics,
and establishing interdisciplinary training.
Geriatric education centers and training
The program supports grants to health professions schools
to establish geriatric education centers to provide training
for faculty who teach geriatrics and health care professionals
who provide treatment. It also provides grants to medical
schools and hospitals for geriatric training fellowships for
physicians and dentists who plan to teach geriatrics.
Interdisciplinary traineeships
The program provides grants to health departments, academic
institutions, and health professions schools to train
practitioners to provide services in rural areas, to
demonstrate models to improve access to health care, to deliver
health care services to rural residents, and to increase the
recruitment and retention of health professionals in rural
areas.
Podiatric medicine
The program supports grants to hospitals and schools of
podiatric medicine for primary care residency programs that
provide traineeships to residents.
Chiropractic demonstration grants
The program provides grants to colleges and universities of
chiropractic to carry out demonstration projects in which
chiropractors and physicians collaborate to identify and
provide effective treatment of spinal and lower back
conditions.
Advanced nurse education
The program provides institutional support to nursing
schools to plan and operate or significantly expand masters or
doctoral level programs for nurse educators, public health
nurses, or other clinical nurse specialties.
Nurse practitioners/nurse midwives
The program provides grants to public or nonprofit
hospitals and schools of nursing, public health, and medicine
to develop or significantly expand programs to train nurse
practitioners and nurse midwives to provide primary health
care.
Special projects
This program provides grants to nursing schools and public
and nonprofit private entities to expand enrollment in nursing
programs; to provide nursing practice arrangements in non-
institutional settings; to support continuing education for
nurses in medically underserved communities to provide
fellowships to individuals who are employed in long-term care
as paraprofessionals; and to demonstrate innovative nursing
practices.
Nurse disadvantaged assistance
The program provides grants to nursing schools and other
entities to recruit individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds,
to provide counseling and preliminary education for them, to
support stipends and to train school faculty.
Professional nurse traineeships
The nurse traineeships program provides individual support
to nurses receiving masters and doctoral degrees as nurse
practitioners, midwives, educators, public health nurses, and
other clinical nursing specialties.
Nurse anesthetists
This program funds grants to public or private nonprofit
institutions to support the costs of traineeships for licensed
registered nurses to become nurse anesthetists. The program
also funds grants to institutions to develop or expand programs
to train nurse anesthetists. In addition, the program supports
faculty fellowships to permit instructors to obtain relevant
advanced education.
Hansen's Disease services
The bill includes $17,500,000 to support the operation of
the Gillis W. Long Hansen's Disease Center in Carville,
Louisiana, research in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and the Regional
Ambulatory Care program for Hansen's Disease patients. This is
$3,326,000 below both the amount requested in the budget and
the amount provided in fiscal year 1995. The Gillis W. Long
Center operates as a research and treatment center for persons
with Hansen's Disease (leprosy). The Federal government is
required to provide care for anyone presenting themselves at
the facility for care of Hansen's disease. In 1995, the
facility is expected to have an average inpatient census of 125
patients. The Regional Ambulatory Care program provides
secondary and tertiary care in support of direct care at the
Center and regionalized care of patients on an outpatient
basis. It is expected to serve 4,100 patients in 10 locations.
The Committee has been concerned for some time about the
expense and inefficiency of operating the center at Carville.
Accordingly, it is the intent of the Committee that a portion
of these funds be used for the offer of assisted living
allowances to those of the long-term care residents at the
Carville facility as of July 1995 who are able and willing to
live independently. The Committee would hope that this transfer
could be accomplished as soon as is practicable, but without
causing unmanageable disruption. The Committee has been
informed that such payments will help achieve an orderly
transition from direct provision of long-term residential care
at the historic site of the original leprosarium at Carville to
more suitable facilities. Without these actions, the cost of
operating the current 330 acre, 100 building complex will
continue to increase, and could potentially compromise the
quality of care.
Maternal and child health block grant
The bill includes $800,299,000 for the Maternal and Child
Health (MCH) Block Grant. This is $116,349,000 above the amount
appropriated in fiscal year 1995 and $121,433,000 above the
amount requested by the Administration. The block grant
provides funds to States to meet a broad range of enhanced and
wraparound health services, including personal health services;
general, population-wide health services, such as screening;
family support services; and integrated systems of care. About
13 million women, infants, children, adolescents and children
with special health care needs will be served in 1995. The
authorizing statute provides that, up to a funding level of
$600,000,000, 85 percent of the funds are distributed to the
States, with 15 percent of the funds set aside by the Secretary
for special projects of regional and national significance
(SPRANS). When the appropriation exceeds $600,000,000, 12.75
percent of the amount over $600,000,000 is directed to the
Community Integrated Service Systems set-aside program. The
remaining 87.25 percent is distributed by the same 85/15
percent allocation as in the basic block grant formula.
The Committee continues to support the demonstration
projects for disabled children such as the CHOICES program
funded through SPRANS set-aside funding.
Healthy Start
The bill includes $50,000,000 for the Healthy Start infant
mortality initiative, which is $55,000,000 below the 1995 level
and $50,000,000 below the Administration request. Healthy Start
is a five-year demonstration program to reduce infant mortality
which currently provides assistance to 22 urban and rural
communities. Grants support the development of local
coalitions, outreach, public information, case management, and
the coordination of services. The last year of funding is 1996.
If localities wish to continue the program, they will need to
provide 100 percent of the financing in 1997. This funding
level provides a more gradual glidepath to financial
independence than an abrupt shutdown in 1997. States can choose
to support the demonstrations with funding from the $684
million maternal and child health block grant. The
demonstration has received $368 million since 1991. It was
intended to test new ideas that could then be disseminated to
other parts of the country; it was not intended to support on-
going services on a permanent basis.
Organ transplantation
The Committee includes $2,400,000 for organ transplantation
activities in 1996, which is $229,000 below both the 1995
appropriation and the Administration request. The program
supports a scientific registry of organ transplant recipients;
the National Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network,
which matches organ donors with potential recipients; and
grants and contracts with public and private non-profit
organizations to promote and improve organ donations. The
Committee notes that the contractor for the network and the
registry receives over $9 million in patient registration fees
that are financed by Medicare and third party payers. The
Committee urges the contractor to plan over time to decrease
its dependence on Federal funds, which constitute only a small
share of its total budget.
Health teaching facilities interest subsidies
The Committee provides $411,000 for facilities interest
subsidies, which is the same as both the Administration request
and the 1995 appropriation. This program continues support of
interest subsidies and loan guarantees for three loans for
construction of health professions teaching facilities under a
now discontinued Public Health Service Act authority. The
remaining Federal commitment on these loans will expire in the
year 2004.
Bone marrow program
The Committee provides $15,360,000 for the bone marrow
program, which is the same as both the Administration request
and the 1995 appropriation. The National Bone Marrow Registry
has been operational for several years under authorities
previously delegated to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood
Institute of the National Institutes of Health. Beginning in
fiscal year 1995, the authority for this program has been
redelegated to HRSA. In addition to funding from HRSA, in 1996,
the National Marrow Donor Program is expected to receive more
than $23 million from the U.S. Navy and almost $36 million from
other sources. Funds are used for donor medical costs, donor
centers, tissue typing, research, minority recruitment, and
program administration. The registry is run by contract.
Rural outreach grants
The bill includes $26,091,000 for rural outreach grants.
This is the same as the 1995 appropriation. The Administration
requested this funding in a consolidated cluster. The program
supports projects that provide health services to rural
populations not currently receiving them and that enhance
access to existing services. The program requires the formation
of consortia of three or more existing providers to carry out
the demonstrations. Funding in 1996 will complete the third and
final year of the current round of grants. The Committee would
not anticipate funding the program beyond 1996. It has been
funded as a demonstration since 1991 with total funding of $118
million over that time.
State offices of rural health
The bill does not include funding for State offices of
rural health, which is the same as the 1995 appropriation. The
Administration requested this funding in a consolidated
cluster. The program was terminated in the rescission bill
agreed to by the House and Senate; there is no reason to
restore it in 1996. The grants are used to establish offices of
rural health. Most of the funding is used for staff and
associated costs; no funding goes for the direct provision of
care to patients. The average State grant is only $55,000. By
law, by the third year of the grant, States are required to
provide 75 percent of the cost of the office.
Trauma care
The bill does not provide funding for the trauma care
program, which is $293,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The
Administration requested this funding in a consolidated
cluster. Most of the funding supports grants to States to
improve trauma care elements of their State health plan. Both
the House and Senate agreed to terminate this program in the
rescission bill; there is no reason to restore funding in 1996.
None of the funding goes to the direct care of patients.
Preventive health services block grant funds from the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention can be used for this purpose
if States believe the activities are a high priority.
Emergency medical services for children
The Committee has provided $10,000,000 for emergency
medical services for children, which is the same as the 1995
level. The Administration proposed consolidating this activity
into an emergency medical services cluster. The program
supports demonstration grants for the delivery of emergency
medical services to acutely ill and seriously injured children.
Black lung clinics
The bill does not include funding for black lung clinics.
This is $4,142,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The
Administration requested this funding in a consolidated
cluster. This program supports 14 clinics which treat a
declining population of coal miners with respiratory and
pulmonary impairments. The clinics presently receive more than
one-third of their funding from other sources, such as Medicaid
and Medicare. Of the 14 clinics, seven actually receive
community health center funding as well as black lung grants.
Alzheimer's demonstration grants
The Committee provides $4,000,000 for Alzheimer's
demonstration grants, which is $959,000 below the 1995
appropriation. The Administration requested this funding in a
consolidated cluster. The program provides grants to 15 State
governments to help them plan and establish programs to provide
health care services to individuals with Alzheimer's disease.
Funds are used for respite care and supportive services,
clearinghouses, training, and administrative costs for State
offices. By law, States are required to match the Federal
funding--40 percent by the third year of the grant.
Payment to Hawaii, treatment of Hansen's Disease
The bill does not include funding for the treatment of
persons with Hansen's Disease in the State of Hawaii. This is
$2,976,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The Administration
requested this funding in a consolidated cluster. There is no
longer a compelling need for a special program. Most patients
are now treated in the same way as patients on the mainland;
their care can be supported through insurance or Medicaid if
they are income-eligible. In addition, one of the Hansen's
disease regional care centers supported by the Carville
appropriation is located in Hawaii, making specialty care
available to these patients without the need to travel long
distances.
Pacific Basin initiative
The Committee does not provide funding for the Pacific
Basin initiative in 1995, which is $1,500,000 below the 1995
level. The Administration requested this funding in a
consolidated cluster. This activity supports two programs:
health professions training and preventive services capacity
building grants. The House and Senate agreed in the rescission
bill to terminate the capacity building program and to phase
out the training activities. The 1996 bill would complete this
phaseout. $15 million has been provided for these programs
since 1989. The territories receive funding under the
preventive health services block grant that can be used for
this purpose; in addition, Pacific Basin residents can
participate in the regular health professions training programs
funded by HRSA.
Native Hawaiian health care
The bill does not include funding for Native Hawaiian
health care, which is $4,336,000 below the 1995 appropriation.
The Administration requested this funding in a consolidated
cluster. This program funds Native Hawaiian health care
organizations to provide health promotion and disease
prevention activities for that population. The authorizing law
also earmarks an administrative grant for a single
organization, the Pap Ola Lokahi, as well as a health
professions training program specifically for Native Hawaiians,
to be administered by the Kamehameha/Bishops Estate
organization. This program has been funded since 1990 with a
total of $20.6 million. More general health services and health
professions training programs are available to this population.
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
The bill includes $662,902,000 for HRSA programs related to
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). This is $83,787,000
below the amount requested in the President's budget and
$6,713,000 above the 1995 appropriation.
Education and training centers
The bill does not provide funding for AIDS education and
training centers, which is $16,287,000 below both the 1995
appropriation and the Administration request. The centers train
health care personnel who care for AIDS patients and develop
model education programs. This program was first funded in 1987
at the early stages of the AIDS epidemic, when providers were
not very familiar with the progression of the disease and the
recommended treatments. Eight years and $125 million later,
several hundred thousand providers have been trained. There has
been adequate time for educators to incorporate AIDS
information into the curricula at medical schools and in other
health professions training; networks have been established to
translate recent research findings to a broader audience of
practitioners.
AIDS dental services
The bill includes $6,937,000 for AIDS dental services,
which is the same as both the President's request and the 1995
level. The program provides grants to dental schools and
postdoctoral dental education programs to assist with the cost
of providing unreimbursed oral health care to patients with
human immunodeficiency virus disease. 120 schools are expected
to receive awards in 1995.
Ryan White AIDS programs: Emergency assistance
The bill includes $379,500,000 for the Title I emergency
assistance program, which is $27,500,000 below the
Administration request and $23,000,000 above the 1995
appropriation. These funds provide grants to metropolitan areas
with very high numbers and/or per capita rates of AIDS cases
for outpatient and ambulatory health and social support
services. Half of the amount appropriated is allocated by
formula and half is allocated to eligible areas demonstrating
additional need through a competitive grant process. In 1995,
42 metropolitan areas are eligible to receive formula grants.
In 1996, up to 10 new areas are expected to be eligible for
funding under Title I. Funds provided above the 1995 level are
intended to address the funding pressures resulting from
additional cities joining the program in 1996. The Committee
realizes that changes to funding formulas and the authorization
structure may be enacted as part of the reauthorization process
for the Ryan White CARE Act. The Committee has appropriated on
the basis of current law at this time, but expects to conform
its appropriation to changes in the authorizing law which are
enacted by the time of conference.
The Committee recognizes the additional service delivery
challenges faced by service providers in areas with co-
morbidity factors including tuberculosis, substance abuse,
severe mental illness, sexually transmitted diseases, and
homelessness. The Committee expects that HRSA will prioritize
consideration of these co-morbidity factors in awarding Title I
supplemental grants, to the degree that is compatible with
eventual reauthorizing language. Linking supplemental grants to
data driven indices of severe health needs among people with
AIDS in Title I cities will serve to more effectively target
Ryan White funds.
Ryan White AIDS programs: Comprehensive care programs
The Committee provides $198,147,000 for Title II,
comprehensive care programs, which is $23,750,000 below the
Administration request and the same as the 1995 appropriation.
The funds provided support formula grants to States for the
operation of HIV service delivery consortia in the localities
most heavily affected, for the provision of home and community-
based care, for continuation of health insurance coverage for
infected persons, and for purchase of therapeutic drugs. Up to
10 percent of the total may be retained by the Secretary for
special projects of national significance.
Ryan White AIDS programs: Early intervention program
The Committee provides $52,318,000 for Title III-B, the
early intervention program, which is the same as the 1995
appropriation and $10,250,000 below the Administration request.
Funds are used for discretionary grants to migrant and
community health centers, health care for the homeless
grantees, family planning grantees, hemophilia centers and
other private non-profit entities that provide comprehensive
primary care services to populations with or at risk for HIV
disease. The grantees provide testing, risk reduction
counseling, transmission prevention, and clinical care; case
management, outreach, and eligibility assistance are optional
services. Approximately 125,000 HIV positive persons or persons
at high risk for HIV infection are expected to be served in
1995 at 140 sites.
Ryan White AIDS programs: Pediatric demonstrations
The bill includes $26,000,000 for the pediatric AIDS
demonstrations authorized under Title IV of the Ryan White
C.A.R.E. Act. This is $6,000,000 below the Administration
request and the same as the 1995 level. The program supports
demonstration grants to foster collaboration between clinical
research institutions and primary community-based medical and
social service providers for the target population of HIV-
infected children, pregnant women and their families. The
projects are intended to increase access to comprehensive care,
as well as to voluntary participation in NIH and other clinical
trials. 56 projects are expected to be funded in 1995.
The Committee expects all programs funded under the Ryan
White program to increase coordination with CDC outreach
programs to prevent perinatal HIV transmission. Ryan White
programs and other HRSA programs should take the lead in
providing quality care to HIV-infected pregnant women to reduce
the potential for infection of newborns. The Committee expects
that HRSA program guidance to grantees will reflect the need to
plan for and deliver services to pregnant women as part of
priority setting.
Family planning
The bill does not include funding for the family planning
program, which is $193,349,000 below the 1995 appropriation and
$198,982,000 below the Administration request. The Committee
terminates the funding for the Title X categorical program and,
instead, transfers $193,349,000 (the same level allocated for
Title X in fiscal year 1995) to the Maternal and Child Health
block grant and Community and Migrant Health Centers
(Consolidated Health Centers) programs. Of the $193,349,000
amount, $116,349,000 is transferred to the Maternal and Child
Health block grant program and $77,000,000 is transferred to
the Community and Migrant Health Centers (Consolidated Health
Centers) Program. Block granting and consolidating the Title X
funding into these two programs will reduce duplication and
administrative costs and allow better distribution of important
health care services for women and children. The additional
funds transferred to these two programs are available for the
same beneficiaries currently served under Title X but through
programs that also provide other comprehensive health services
to women and children.
Rural health research
The Committee has not included funding for rural health
research, which is $9,426,000 below both the 1995 appropriation
and the Administration request. The Office supports several
rural health research centers, the activities of the Office's
advisory committee, and a telemedicine grant program. The House
and Senate agreed to rescind $3,750,000 from this program in
the rescissions bill. All of the research centers are up for
recompetition in 1996, and consequently the Committee's action
will not interrupt their grants; they could apply to HCFA or
AHCPR for continued research funding. Rural telemedicine is
also funded at HCFA and the National Library of Medicine. The
Office provides no direct services to patients, and its size
and location at HRSA limit its impact on Federal health
reimbursement policies and other concerns of rural areas.
Health care facilities
The Committee has not included funding for health care
facilities. $10,000,000 was provided for this purpose in 1995,
and $2,000,000 was included in the President's 1996 request.
This expired authority provides funds to public and private
nonprofit entities for construction or modernization of
outpatient medical facilities. This activity has not been
funded by the Committee on a regular annual basis. The
Committee felt that provision of services rather than
construction was a higher priority in the current stringent
fiscal environment.
Buildings and facilities
$933,000 is provided for buildings and facilities for 1996,
which is the same as both the 1995 appropriation and the
Administration request. These funds are used to finance the
repair and upkeep of buildings at the Gillis W. Long Hansen's
Disease Center at Carville, Louisiana.
National practitioner data bank
The Committee does not provide funding for the national
practitioner data bank for fiscal year 1996, which is the same
as both the 1995 action on appropriations and the
Administration request. The Administration request and the
Committee recommendation assume that the data bank will be
self-supporting, with collections of $6,000,000 in user fees.
The national data bank receives, stores and disseminates
information on paid medical malpractice judgments and
settlements, sanctions taken by professional societies, and
certain professional review actions. Insurance companies, State
license boards and professional societies are required to
report information to the data bank within 30 days of each
action. The coverage of the data bank includes dentists and
physicians, and with respect to malpractice settlements, other
categories of licensed health professionals. Hospitals are
required to search the data bank when a health care provider
applies for employment and once every two years thereafter.
State licensing boards and other health care entities also have
access to the data bank. Traditional bill language is included
to ensure that user fees are collected to cover all costs of
processing requests and providing such information to data bank
users.
Program management
The bill includes $120,546,000 for the cost of Federal
staff and related activities to coordinate, direct and manage
the programs of the Health Resources and Services
Administration. This amount is the same as the President's
request and $363,000 below the amount provided for fiscal year
1995. In accordance with the policy applied by the Committee
throughout the bill, an undistributed administrative reduction
of $16,000,000 has been applied to the HRSA account. This
amount represents a 7.5 percent reduction in the 1995 level for
administrative costs, with an additional 2.5 percent reduction
for the congressional and public affairs functions. The agency
is directed to apply this reduction only to the categories of
funding that are included in the display of administrative
costs on page 17 of the HRSA 1996 budget justification.
The Committee is aware of legislation, Public Law 103-400,
which authorizes and encourages the President to conclude an
agreement with Mexico to establish a United States--Mexico
Border Health Commission. The Committee understands that the
legislation envisioned that the Department of Health and Human
Services would assume the funding of the Commission from
existing funds. The Committee re-affirms its support for the
Border Health Commission and encourages the Department of
Health and Human Services to move forward in establishing the
commission within the existing funds of the budget provided for
by this bill, and to report to the Committee on its program.
Medical Facilities Guarantee and Loan Fund
Federal Interest Subsidies for Medical Facilities
The Committee provides $8,000,000 for the Medical
Facilities Guarantee and Loan Fund, which is the same as the
budget request and $1,000,000 less than the amount appropriated
in 1995. Appropriations are used to pay interest subsidies on
loans made or guaranteed prior to fiscal year 1977 for hospital
construction. The bill includes language, as in prior years,
which prohibits commitments for new loans or loan guarantees in
fiscal year 1996.
Health Education Assistance Loans Program
The Health Education Assistance Loans (HEAL) program
insures loans provided by non-Federal lenders to students in
health professions schools. Under the accounting rules
established in the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, one account
is maintained to pay the obligations arising from loans
guaranteed prior to fiscal year 1992. A second account pays
obligations and collects income from premiums on loans
guaranteed in fiscal year 1992 and beyond. Each annual cohort
of loans is independently tracked in this account.
The Committee provides $42,000,000 to liquidate 1996
obligations from loans guaranteed prior to 1992, which is the
same as the Administration request and $24,010,000 above the
1995 appropriation.
The Committee provides $13,500,000 for the payment of
claims arising from the cohort of loans guaranteed in 1996,
which is $4,544,000 below the Administration request and
$8,550,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The funding provided
by the Committee is based on a 1996 loan limitation of
$210,000,000 which is $70,000,000 below the Administration's
proposed level and $165,000,000 below the 1995 level. The
Committee has provided a loan limitation level sufficient to
support only the continuation costs of those students currently
receiving HEAL loans and intends that the program be phased out
as these students complete their studies. As the loan limits on
guaranteed student loans administered by the Department of
Education have been increased, the need for the HEAL program
has declined. In addition, the Secretary of Education has
discretionary authority to further increase annual and
aggregate loan limits for the Federal Family Education Loan
program for specialized training with exceptionally high cost.
The Committee instructs the Secretary of Education to monitor
the situation in the health professions and use this authority
as appropriate. In any event, the financial terms of these
loans are more favorable for students than those available on
HEAL loans. Finally, health professions students in some
disciplines have access to loan funds sponsored by their
professional membership organizations.
The Committee provides $2,703,000 for HEAL program
management, which is $219,000 below both the Administration
request and the 1995 appropriation. The 7.5 percent reduction
of administrative expenses applied throughout the bill is
incorporated into the funding level provided.
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Trust Fund
The Committee makes available the release of $59,721,000
from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund in 1996, which
is the same as the Administration request and $2,245,000 above
the total of trust fund monies made available in 1995.
The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program provides a
system of compensation for individuals with vaccine-associated
injuries or deaths. Funds for claims from vaccines administered
on or after October 1, 1988 are generated by a per-dose excise
tax on the sale of selected prescribed vaccines. Revenues
raised by this tax are maintained in a Vaccine Injury
Compensation Trust Fund.
Trust funds made available in the bill will support the
liability costs of vaccines administered after September 30,
1988. They will also support the $3,000,000 in costs incurred
by the agency in the operation of the program, which is the
same as both the 1995 level and the Administration request.
Vaccine Injury Compensation
The bill provides $110,000,000 in general funds for vaccine
compensation for claims associated with vaccines administered
prior to October 1, 1988. This is the same as both the
Administration request and the 1995 appropriation; it is the
full authorized amount.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Disease Control, Research and Training
The bill includes $2,124,931,000 for the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, which is $39,100,000 above the
1995 level and $97,729,000 below the 1996 Administration
request. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
assists State and local health authorities and other health-
related organizations in controlling the spread of infectious
diseases, reducing chronic diseases, providing protection from
environmental and workplace hazards, and reducing risk factors,
such as smoking and high blood pressure. As described in the
opening sections of the report, the Committee has allocated
funding according to existing law rather than to the structure
proposed in legislation by the Administration. The Committee
does not intend through this action to indicate an
unwillingness to consider the legislative changes being
contemplated by the authorizing committees and hopes that these
structural decisions are made in advance of conference action
on the appropriations bill so that they may be incorporated at
that time. Consistent with the decision to appropriate on the
basis of current law, the $6 million in administrative savings
assumed with enactment of the legislative proposals has not
been included in the Committee's recommended funding levels.
Despite severe fiscal constraints, the Committee made the
difficult choices necessary throughout the bill to provide
increased resources for a number of prevention programs,
believing investment in this area is a high priority. As a
result, increases above the 1995 level are included for
childhood immunization, sexually transmitted diseases, chronic
and environmental disease prevention, breast and cervical
cancer screening, and infectious disease.
Preventive health and health services block grant
The Committee recommends $157,918,000 for the preventive
health and health services block grant, which is $3,580,000
above the amount requested and the same as the 1995 level. This
program, which was created by combining eight categorical grant
programs, provides States with funds for programs addressing
any of the Healthy People 2000 objectives, rodent control,
community and school-based fluoridation programs, emergency
medical services, and prevention of sex offenses. Despite
fiscal constraints, the Committee felt it was important to fund
this core activity at the 1995 level because it is available to
all States and permits them broad flexibility to address those
health needs they believe are most acute in their own
communities.
Prevention centers
The Committee recommends $7,724,000 for prevention centers,
which is the same as both the Administration request and the
1995 appropriation. Grants are made to academic institutions to
operate centers which conduct applied research to promote
health and disease prevention. These centers have been funded
since 1986 with a total of $40.5 million and the Committee
intends to review the need for an on-going Federal commitment
to these activities. The research projects that they support
are eligible for funding from other agencies within the
Department of Health and Human Services.
Data initiative
The Committee has not been able to provide first year
funding for the data initiative requested by the
Administration. In addition to the $6,000,000 requested in the
CDC budget, the initiative would tap the other Public Health
Service agencies for an additional $14,000,000. Since the
Committee has not been able to fund many of these agencies at
the 1995 level, it does not believe it is appropriate to
further strain their resources with this new tap. The Committee
would hope that the Administration, in the context of its
ongoing review of health data collection for the reinventing
government exercise, would assess whether this new effort is
important enough to reallocate existing resources within the
Department.
Childhood immunization
The bill includes $475,497,000 for the childhood
immunization program, which is an increase of $10,000,000 above
the 1995 amount and $27,321,000 below the Administration
request. In addition, the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program
funded by Medicaid is expected to support $374 million in
vaccine purchases in 1996, an increase of $34.9 million over
1995.
Project grants assist State and local agencies in planning,
developing, and conducting childhood immunization programs,
including enhancement of the vaccine delivery infrastructure,
and in delivering vaccines. National activities include
maintenance of a stockpile of vaccines; the consolidated
purchase of vaccines for State and local health agencies;
surveillance and investigations; and research into the safety
and efficacy of new and presently used vaccines.
The Committee recognizes the remarkable success that has
been made toward eradicating polio globally and the potential
for eliminating this disease by the year 2000. The Committee
has provided increased funding in part to increase CDC's
contribution to the worldwide effort to eradicate polio. This
will ultimately result in savings of hundreds of millions of
dollars when children in the U.S. no longer need to be
immunized against polio.
Human Immunodeficiency Virus
The bill includes $589,962,000 for activities related to
the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This amount is the same
as the 1995 level. The Administration proposed to consolidate
these activities into an HIV/STD/TB partnership grant. CDC HIV
programs support research, surveillance, epidemiologic and
laboratory studies, and prevention through information,
education, and risk reduction. Major information, education and
prevention activities include counseling, testing, and partner
notification; HIV prevention among high risk populations,
including intravenous drug users, women and infants, and
hemophiliacs; special minority initiatives; programs for school
and college-aged youth; information campaigns for the general
public; and tuberculosis control efforts. CDC provides funds to
State and local health departments to develop and implement
integrated community prevention plans. The planning process
assesses unmet needs and sets priorities among them,
coordinates services among various types of community
providers, reduces duplication and encourages the conduct of
program evaluations.
The Committee commends CDC for implementing community
planning for HIV prevention programs. In order to improve this
process, CDC is encouraged to (a) work toward developing useful
methods of conducting behavioral monitoring as part of local
planning used to target prevention resources; (b) increase
efforts to coordinate substance abuse treatment and prevention
planning into local HIV prevention plans; and (c) provide
continued funding for technical assistance in support of
community planning and HIV prevention programs. CDC is further
encouraged to continue their efforts to develop data monitoring
systems through cooperative agreements with State and local
health departments that would allow annual reporting on funds
allocated by specific interventions to specific target
populations.
The Committee also commends CDC for leadership in
preventing perinatal HIV transmission by developing the
Guidelines for HIV Counseling and Voluntary Testing for
Pregnant Women. Of the funds provided for HIV prevention, CDC
is urged to conduct and evaluate outreach programs to encourage
at-risk pregnant women to be tested for HIV and to provide
referral for medical treatments which would reduce the
potential for HIV transmission to newborns. CDC is encouraged
to target these funds to the geographic areas with the highest
concentration of HIV infected pregnant women and to plan and
fund these outreach efforts through the existing structure for
State and local community planning. These outreach programs
should be evaluated independently to determine the extent to
which the goals of the guidelines are being accomplished.
To encourage CDC's efforts to coordinate HIV prevention and
health care services with substance abuse treatment services,
the Committee has provided funds to enhance existing HIV
prevention programs to provide services in a substance abuse
treatment setting.
Tuberculosis
The Committee has included $119,582,000 for the
tuberculosis program, the same as the 1995 appropriation. The
Administration proposed to consolidate these activities into an
HIV/STD/TB partnership grant. In addition to funding provided
in this line item, CDC AIDS activities support HIV-related
tuberculosis control efforts. The tuberculosis program supports
grants to States and large cities. Funds are used to hire
outreach workers who provide directly-observed therapy, to
support local surveillance, and to conduct screening of high-
risk populations. In addition, funds support research to
develop new prevention, diagnostic, and treatment technologies;
assistance to upgrade State and local laboratories;
epidemiological investigations; and educational and training
activities.
Sexually transmitted diseases
The Committee recommends $110,242,000 for sexually
transmitted diseases (STDs), an increase of $5,000,000 above
the 1995 amount. The Administration proposed to consolidate
these activities into an HIV/STD/TB partnership grant. The
Committee has provided full funding for the Tuskegee
reimbursement program. Grants are awarded to State and local
health departments and other nonprofit entities to support
primary prevention activities, surveillance systems, screening
programs, partner notification and counseling, outbreak
control, and clinical skills training. Federal activities
include technical assistance, special investigations, and
surveillance and epidemiologic research. The Accelerated
Prevention Campaign encourages innovative, interdisciplinary
collaborative efforts and supports quality and access
improvements. The infertility program conducts chlamydia
testing in family planning and STD clinics in an effort to
prevent STD-related infertility.
Chronic and environmental disease prevention
The bill includes $150,000,000 for chronic and
environmental disease prevention, an increase of $10,246,000
above the 1995 amount. The Administration proposed to
consolidate these activities into a chronic disease partnership
grant. The chronic and environmental disease program supports
surveillance, epidemiology, and laboratory evaluation of
environmental exposures and resulting illnesses, chronic
disease, behavioral risk factors, and injuries. It also
supports applied research to develop control and prevention
programs; provision of epidemiologic, laboratory, and
management consultation and training services to State and
local health professionals; and development of laboratory
techniques to test for the presence of hazardous substances in
human tissues and the effects of exposure to environmental
hazards.
Programs supported within this activity include the
behavioral risk factor surveillance system; cancer registries;
the community health promotion program; smoking cessation;
health education for school and college-age youth; and efforts
against diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular disease, especially
among minorities, birth defects, disabilities, chronic fatigue
syndrome, and fetal alcohol syndrome. The Committee urges CDC
to conduct an evaluation of the program to set priorities among
the many chronic conditions it could choose to address,
determining which areas are most appropriate for Federal
intervention for reasons of incidence, knowledge of successful
interventions, or whatever other criteria CDC and its outside
advisors develop. The Committee would like CDC to develop a
strategic plan for presentation prior to the fiscal year 1997
appropriations hearings that would identify the agency's long
range plans for chronic disease prevention in an environment of
steady or declining resources. The plan should identify those
areas of high priority and their justification and the share of
the financial burden CDC expects to be covered by its State and
local partners. CDC should consult with the Committee on
funding level assumptions to be used in the development of the
plan. The plan should also incorporate any other programs that
are blended into chronic and environmental disease prevention
by authorizing legislation that may be enacted into law.
The Committee has included funds to initiate a birth
defects surveillance system. The funds would be targeted to
regional centers to provide comprehensive surveillance data and
applied epidemiological research to discover the causes of
birth defects. Funds would also be used to enhance Statewide
birth defects surveillance programs.
The Committee encourages CDC to expand its diabetes control
program to broaden the scope of State level activities.
The Committee is pleased that CDC continues to make
progress in establishing a prostate cancer awareness and
outreach program targeted to high risk populations. Both the
incidence of, and death rate from, prostate cancer continue to
rise, with a disproportionate impact on African American men.
Early detection and an understanding of the treatment options
for prostate cancer is important. The Committee encourages CDC
to target its outreach efforts to high risk populations,
working with public and private nonprofit organizations with
experience in cancer outreach and education.
The Committee commends CDC's initial efforts to develop
effective strategies to educate Americans about the health
consequences of unprotected sun exposure. The Committee
encourages CDC to make efforts to educate and inform children,
including the children of migrant workers, about sun protection
and to develop guidelines for school-based educational
curricula related to the dangers of sun exposure.
Most States lack resources to implement broad-based and
integrated cardiovascular diseases prevention efforts. The
Committee is pleased that CDC plans to launch a State-based
cardiovascular disease prevention and control program to begin
to address this need. This program will track and monitor the
rate of disease and its risk factors and advance efforts to
implement community-based programs promoting physical activity
and healthy diet.
The Committee is very supportive of the hemophilia
consumer-based patient involvement programs that have been
successful in HIV/AIDS risk reduction and in the prevention of
the complications of hemophilia. The Committee has included
funds to maintain and strengthen hemophilia and other
hematologic program activities focused on preventing and
reducing the crippling and debilitating complications and death
caused by such bleeding disorders.
At least a third of the people infected with hepatitis B
and C have no known risk factors. The Committee encourages CDC
to strengthen epidemiological studies, such as the Sentinel
Counties project, to learn more about how these diseases are
transmitted.
The Committee encourages the completion and expansion of
current chronic fatigue and immune dysfunction syndrome (CFIDS)
surveillance projects at CDC. The Committee suggests that CDC
commence a case-control phase of the community-based
surveillance study recently completed in San Francisco. CDC is
encouraged to conduct appropriate education programs and to
commence studies on possible transmission routes for CFIDS,
especially among health care workers, family members and
maternal transmission to unborn children.
The Committee is aware that the nation's leading science
education centers have established a national health sciences
consortium, and that the consortium has begun planning a
women's health project. The Committee has provided one-time
partial funding, to be competitively awarded, for a women's
health project to create museum exhibitions focusing on the
prevention and treatment of health conditions having a special
impact on women. The Committee expects these funds to be
matched with private funds.
The Committee encourages CDC to maintain its support of the
Hanford thyroid disease study and to accelerate the timeframe
for its completion to the extent that resources permit.
Breast and cervical cancer screening
The Committee has included $125,000,000 for the breast and
cervical cancer screening program, which is $25,000,000 above
the 1995 level. The Administration proposed to consolidate
these activities into a chronic disease partnership grant. The
breast and cervical cancer screening program supports
screening, education, and followup services for low-income
women, training for health care providers, quality assurance
activities, national technical assistance and support, and
surveillance and program evaluation. In 1995, 35 States will
receive resources for comprehensive programs, and 16 States
will receive capacity building grants.
The Committee urges CDC to utilize funding for the breast
and cervical cancer screening program to continue to build
programs nationwide, and to develop programs consistently from
State to State that include minimum standards for participating
States. Continued priority for breast cancer screening should
be given to postmenopausal, low-income, underinsured and
uninsured women, and those women at high risk of breast cancer.
The Committee is pleased that there has been a slight
reduction in deaths from breast cancer. However, breast and
cervical cancer will still kill more than one-half million
women in this decade alone. The Committee continues to be
concerned about the disproportionately high prevalence of
cancer among disadvantaged and minority populations. Despite an
overall drop in breast cancer rates, the rates for minority
groups continue to increase. The Committee encourages CDC to
give priority to these groups in its screening program.
The Committee encourages CDC to support within its
demonstration projects activity one or more demonstrations, to
be competitively awarded, to establish community-based
coalitions for breast and cervical cancer prevention and
control, with the participation of academic health centers,
county and municipal public health departments, and local
community groups. Such demonstrations would initiate and
coordinate education, prevention and screening programs with a
research component to evaluate the success of prevention
interventions.
Infectious diseases
The bill includes $67,276,000 for infectious diseases,
which is $12,874,000 above the 1995 level and $4,085,000 above
the Administration request. The Committee strongly supports
this core function of the agency and is aware of the continuing
threats of new and reemerging infectious diseases. The program
supports national surveillance of infectious diseases, the
development of new or improved prevention and control methods
and techniques, the acceleration of the general application of
accepted prevention technologies, and strengthening of the
capability to respond to outbreaks of new and reemerging
infectious diseases. Some of the disease areas concentrated
upon include Lyme Disease, drug resistant microorganisms,
infectious diseases in child care settings, foodborne diseases,
hospital infections, hantavirus, and pneumococcal disease.
Infectious diseases such as drug-resistant tuberculosis,
Lyme disease, cryptosporidiosis, and hantavirus pulmonary
syndrome pose an increasing risk to the U.S., in human terms
and in economic costs. In response to a report by the Institute
of Medicine which determined that the U.S. public health system
is generally unprepared to address emerging microbial threats,
CDC has developed a comprehensive plan that consists of a four
point strategy including surveillance; applied research;
prevention and control; and infrastructure. The Committee
encourages CDC to expand its surveillance efforts in 1996,
which will improve the detection and response to emerging
pathogens.
The Committee is concerned that excessive use of
antimicrobial drugs is increasing the prevalence of drug-
resistant infections. If this trend continues, the choices of
effective therapy for common infections may become more and
more limited. The Committee urges CDC and NIH to work in
collaboration in this important area of drug resistance.
Lead poisoning prevention
The bill includes an appropriation of $36,409,000 for the
childhood lead poisoning prevention program. This is the same
as the 1995 level and $18,000 above the Administration request.
The program supports grants to States and localities for
screening, followup, and education; laboratory proficiency
activities; the development of better instruments for blood
lead measurement; epidemiologic activities; and surveillance.
The average blood level for persons in the U.S. has dropped
78 percent from 1976 to 1991. The Committee urges CDC to make
further efforts to target the program to those areas with the
greatest level of need. In addition, the Committee notes that
the law permits States to use their preventive health services
block grant funds for lead poisoning control; indeed, the block
grant was created in 1981 as a consolidation of numerous
categorical programs, including lead poisoning. A separate
categorical program was reestablished in 1990.
The Committee encourages CDC to continue to develop more
effective and portable hand screening tools for professionals
to use in the field. Such tools will allow an almost immediate
reading, which makes possible immediate intervention and
treatment.
Injury control
The Committee has included $43,679,000 for the injury
control program, which is the same as the 1995 level and
$982,000 below the Administration request. The injury control
program supports intramural research to identify risk factors
and interventions to prevent morbidity, mortality, and
disability resulting from injury and trauma outside the
workplace; injury control research centers; extramural research
project grants; and technical assistance to State and local
health departments. The program focuses on motor vehicle
crashes, falls, fires and burns, poisoning, drowning, and
violence, including homicide, suicide and domestic violence.
The Committee urges CDC to reexamine its injury control
portfolio to target available funding to activities for which
CDC can develop and implement specific interventions and those
that are not currently being addressed in some fashion by other
Federal agencies, such as the Justice and Transportation
Departments.
Occupational safety and health
The bill includes $99,222,000 for the National Institute
for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), which is
$37,862,000 below the Administration request and $32,898,000
below the 1995 level. NIOSH conducts applied research, develops
criteria for occupational safety and health standards, and
provides technical services to government, labor and industry,
including training for the prevention of work-related diseases
and injuries. Activities supported include surveillance, health
hazard evaluations, intramural and extramural research,
instrument and methods development, dissemination, and training
grants.
The Committee has eliminated funding for training because
of budget constraints, considering it to be a less compelling
Federal role. The majority of training funding is allocated to
graduate student stipends. With the private and public sector
demand for occupational safety and health experts unabated, the
job placement outlook for graduates remains strong and students
have access to general student financial aid. The Federal
government makes available $36 billion each year for student
financial assistance, of which $8.8 billion is allocated to
graduate students. In-service training courses can be financed
by the employers of those trained, since insurance and
regulatory requirements provide strong incentives to have
occupational safety specialists on staff.
Epidemic services
The bill provides $73,325,000 for epidemic services, which
is the same as the 1995 level and $7,000 above the budget
request. The objectives of the program include the prevention
and control of epidemics, the maintenance of surveillance
systems, the training of public health epidemiologists, and the
operation of the quarantine program. The program supports the
Epidemic Intelligence Service program, the publication of the
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, and a variety of infant
and minority health programs.
National Center for Health Statistics
The bill includes $53,575,000 in Federal funds for the
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), which is the same
as the 1995 level and $11,000 above the request. In addition to
the amount appropriated, the bill makes available $27,862,000
from the Public Health Service one percent evaluation set-
aside, which is the same as both the amount requested by the
Administration and the 1995 set-aside amount. Taking into
account funds from all sources, the Committee makes available
$81,437,000 for NCHS. The Center is responsible for collecting,
interpreting, and disseminating data on the health status of
the U.S. population and the use of health services. Among the
surveys supported are the National Vital Statistics System, the
National Health Interview Survey, the National Survey of Family
Growth, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,
and the National Health Care Survey.
Buildings and facilities
The bill includes $4,353,000 for buildings and facilities,
which is $778,000 above both the Administration request and the
1995 appropriation. Funding supports ongoing maintenance
projects, as well as safety repairs and equipment purchases.
The Committee is aware that CDC faces some acute renovation
needs, particularly in its laboratory facilities, and would
entertain reprogramming requests to shift funding from other
administrative activities to enhance this appropriation if CDC
felt the situation warranted it.
Program management
The bill includes $3,067,000 for program management, which
is the same as both the budget request and the amount
appropriated in 1995. This activity supports the overall
planning, direction, and administration of the programs and
activities of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Only a small portion of the total CDC administrative costs are
captured in this line item; according to the budget
justification, agency administrative costs in 1995 totaled
$413.9 million. In accordance with the policy applied by the
Committee throughout the bill, an undistributed administrative
reduction of $31 million has been applied to the CDC account.
This amount represents a 7.5 percent reduction below 1995
levels and an additional 2.5 percent reduction below 1995 for
congressional and public affairs functions. The agency is
directed to apply this reduction only to the categories of
funding that are included in the display of administrative
costs on page 13 of the CDC 1996 budget justification.
The Committee continues to be pleased with CDC's program
activity and commitment to improving the health status of
minority and disadvantaged individuals, and urges continuation
of these efforts.
The Committee is somewhat concerned about recent reports
indicating that CDC may need to institute improvements in its
management practices, for example, in the areas of employee
wage grade classification and its allocation of resources to
administrative versus scientific activities. The Committee
expects that improved performance in these areas will be an
integral objective in agency planning as it copes with
financial and personnel downsizing over the coming years.
In addition, the Committee wishes to express its
disapproval of the apparently exorbitant expense of and the
excessive number of CDC employees who attended a recent
$1,000,000 immunization conference held in Beverly Hills,
California. The Committee expects CDC to maximize the resources
available for actual childhood immunization and to constrain
the resources allocated to support activities such as the
immunization conference. Prior to conference on the 1996
appropriations bill, the Committee expects the agency to
provide information detailing the purpose of the conference,
the number of CDC employees who attended and their role in the
conference which justified their attendance, the components of
the cost of the conference and comparison of those costs to the
conference held the prior year, and the reason the conference
was not held in Atlanta to minimize Federal employee travel
expenses.
Crime bill activities
The bill includes $39,100,000 for crime bill activities,
which is the same as the President's request. These programs
are being funded for the first time in 1996. These activities
will be funded through the Crime Bill trust fund. $35,000,000
is provided for rape prevention and services; $4,000,000 is
provided for community programs to prevent domestic violence;
and $100,000 is provided for a study of the incidence of
domestic violence.
The $35,000,000 for rape prevention and services will be
used by States to support rape crisis hotlines, victim
counseling, professional training of police officers and
investigators, educational programs in colleges and secondary
schools, and offender rehabilitation. The $4,000,000 for
community programs on domestic violence will provide funding
for public and private non-profit organizations to coordinate
intervention and prevention strategies in the area of family
violence and to develop an integrated community plan of action
to prevent family violence. $100,000 will be used by CDC to
conduct a study to obtain a national projection of the
incidence of injuries resulting from domestic violence and the
cost of those injuries to health care facilities. These funds
are intended to be awarded to grantees who have experience and
a proven track record in providing these types of services, and
are not to be used for lobbying, advocacy, or public relations.
National Institutes of Health
The bill includes $11,939,001,000 for the 23 appropriations
which together fund the programs of the National Institutes of
Health (NIH). These include appropriations for the 17 research
Institutes, the National Center for Research Resources, the
National Center for Human Genome Research, the John E. Fogarty
International Center, the National Library of Medicine, the
Office of the Director, and Buildings and Facilities. The total
in the bill is $174,935,000 above the President's budget
request for 1996 and $642,455,000 above the comparable
appropriations for fiscal year 1995.
The Committee views NIH as one of its very highest
priorities and has made difficult resource allocation decisions
throughout the bill to preserve what it believes is the minimum
necessary funding level for NIH. NIH is the world's leading
biomedical research institution; its investments in research
save lives and reduce health care costs while creating jobs and
economic growth in a global economy. In recent years, this
research has produced major advances in the treatment of
cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and mental illness that have
helped save lives and improved quality of life. NIH supports
over 50,000 scientists at 1,700 universities and research
institutes across the U.S. In 1993 alone, NIH contributed
nearly $45 billion to the U.S. economy and over 700,000 jobs.
NIH research has spawned the biotechnology revolution, whose
products are projected to grow into a $50 billion industry by
the turn of the century. The U.S.'s ability to translate
scientific discoveries into new product development has
resulted in its lead over the European Community and Japan in
pharmaceutical and biotechnology patents. While the Committee
is firm in its commitment to deficit reduction, it believes
that funding of biomedical research is an important investment
in the future health and economic well-being of our nation.
Balance in the research portfolio.--The Committee believes
that NIH should allocate the funding provided on the basis of
scientific opportunity. The Committee heard compelling
testimony from the Director of NIH during the appropriations
hearings about the problems inherent in using other decision
rules to allocate funding. While the Committee understands that
other factors are relevant, such as the infectious nature of a
disease, the Committee believes that judgments based on numeric
measures or other factors are fraught with potential bias. The
Committee wants to avoid endorsing any methodology that could
be characterized as focusing on the ``disease of the month.''
The Committee believes that the advances made in research areas
like Parkinsons and Alzheimer's disease are largely due to
NIH's flexibility to fund promising research on the basis of
scientific opportunity.
As a result, the Committee has allocated the funding
provided above the President's request consistent with the
distribution reflected in the request, believing that it
represents NIH's judgment of scientific opportunity. If NIH
believes that adjustments to this allocation are necessary, the
Committee would be pleased to consider them in later action on
the bill. To enhance NIH's flexibility to allocate funding
based on scientific opportunity, the Committee has attempted to
minimize the amount of direction provided in the report
accompanying the bill. For example, there are no directives to
fund particular research mechanisms, such as centers or
requests for applications. The Committee does believe it is
appropriate to highlight disease areas of interest to Members
of Congress, but does not intend for that to impede NIH's
flexibility in decision-making.
AIDS Funding.--Consistent with the philosophy outlined
above, the Committee has not earmarked a specific dollar amount
for AIDS research and has not continued the procedure of
establishing a single appropriation for the Office of AIDS
Research. Especially since the total provided for NIH is
different than the President's request, the Committee believes
the Director of NIH, acting in conjunction with the Director of
the Office of AIDS Research, should decide how much of the
total NIH appropriation should be allocated to AIDS research.
The Committee intends that the funds devoted to AIDS should
continue fully to exploit scientific opportunities and to
fulfill scientific objectives in this critically important
research program. The Committee expects the Director of NIH,
through the Director of the Office of AIDS Research, to
identify the total allocated for AIDS and his intended
distribution by Institute under the House funding level prior
to conference on the 1996 bill. The Committee has provided the
Director transfer authority to reallocate funds among
appropriations accounts, subject to consultation with the House
and Senate Appropriations Committees. The Committee encourages
NIH to use this authority whenever it believes that an
adjustment in the allocation of AIDS funding between Institutes
is appropriate to achieve scientific objectives or to
facilitate promising research efforts.
The Committee wants to make clear that it continues to
support the Office of AIDS Research (OAR), its leadership, and
its coordinated budget planning process and that it expects the
individual institutes, centers and divisions to fully cooperate
with OAR's work. The Committee assumes that the NIH Director's
decisions on allocating AIDS funding will be fully consistent
with the plan developed by the OAR and that he will ensure that
the Institutes allocate their budgets accordingly. The
Committee particularly applauds the formation of the OAR
external review panel which is conducting a broad-based
evaluation of the NIH AIDS research portfolio. The Committee
would expect the recommendations of this panel to guide and
inform the NIH Director's allocation of AIDS funding. Lastly,
the Committee assumes that the OAR will maintain its current
structure and responsibilities, including the allocation of an
emergency discretionary fund.
Management improvements.--Despite the Committee's
wholehearted support of NIH's research efforts, it believes
that improvements can and should be made to the management of
its research enterprise, both in the administrative operations
on the NIH campus and in its funding of extramural grants. The
Committee believes that increased efficiencies are important to
expand the share of funding actually going to research rather
than administration, particularly in an environment of
constrained resources. In later years, as spending caps
government-wide continue to decline, the pressures to maximize
the share of NIH funding going directly to research will be
even greater. To that end, the Committee directs that research
management and support costs at NIH will be reduced 7.5 percent
below 1995 levels, and that costs associated with congressional
and public affairs functions will be reduced a total of 10
percent below 1995 levels. The calculation of research
management and support costs should include those expenses at
the National Library of Medicine, as well as within the Office
of the Director, excluding the Director's discretionary fund
and the Women's and Minority Health Initiatives. This is
consistent with that policy followed throughout the bill by the
Committee, except that in this case, the Committee has not
reduced overall funding, instead preserving it within the NIH
accounts to increase the amount of research supported. Any
funding of research and management support costs in excess of
these levels should be treated by NIH as a reprogramming
subject to the approval of the House and Senate Appropriations
Committees. The Committee does not direct NIH to take
particular approaches in achieving these reductions, but does
encourage NIH to consider two areas: (1) consolidation of
certain functions across Institutes, such as personnel,
legislation, planning and evaluation, and communications; and
(2) dismantling issue- or constituent-specific offices within
the Office of the Director or the individual Institutes which
are not mandated by law.
Indirect costs.--The Committee has expressed its concerns
in the past about the current method for reimbursing the
indirect costs associated with research. It continues to be an
area of great concern. The Committee believes this is a key
area in which savings could be generated, which could then be
plowed back into the direct costs of research. It could also
have the welcome side benefit of reducing administrative
burdens, both for the Department and the institutions receiving
NIH grants. The Committee views the Administration's indirect
cost proposal as a useful start--particularly its proposal to
end reimbursement for tuition payments for university employee
dependents, which the Committee urges the Administration to
finalize--but believes the system needs more fundamental
reform. The Committee is intrigued by the development of the
so-called ``Phoenix Plan'' by a group of university officials,
which explores the potential of moving from a cost-based to a
price-based system of reimbursement, comparable to the reforms
implemented in the Medicare program in the 1980s. The Committee
encourages the creators of the Phoenix Plan to conclude their
study as quickly as they can, and urges NIH and the Office of
Management and Budget to fully cooperate with their efforts.
The Committee also notes that the House Science Committee is
drafting legislation to require the Office of Science
Technology and Policy to complete a study by the end of the
year identifying the best ways to achieve a ten percent
reduction in indirect cost reimbursement government-wide. The
Committee awaits the outcome of that study with interest. In
short, the Committee believes it is important to continue to
scrutinize the current indirect cost system. While it is aware
of the complexity and the controversy of the issue, it does not
believe the status quo is sustainable or defensible in an
environment of steady or declining resources.
Policy planning.--The Committee believes that the concept
of a central planning authority, such as that vested in the
OAR, could have broader applicability to other research areas
in NIH with trans-Institute scope. The Committee would like the
NIH Director's assessment of the utility of establishing a
broader central policy office, perhaps through consolidating
portions of the planning and evaluation functions in the
individual Institutes, that would handle crosscutting issues.
The assessment should address issues such as the potential
cost-savings from consolidation and the appropriateness of more
central policy planning for a range of NIH issues. The
Committee would like to receive this assessment prior to the
1997 appropriations hearings.
Communications.--The Committee continues last year's focus
on NIH's external communications. The Committee believes it is
critical for NIH to use all the media at its command to
publicize the benefits and results of NIH research, in order to
solidify the general public support of biomedical research and
to identify NIH as the funding source for these breakthroughs
in the public's mind. The Committee also urges NIH to take
whatever steps are necessary to ensure that its grantees
acknowledge NIH's funding contribution when they publicize
their research findings. The Committee believes that these
efforts can be supported within the funding levels already
provided.
NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE
The bill includes $2,251,084,000 for the National Cancer
Institute (NCI), an increase of $31,287,000 over the amount
requested and $114,676,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--The NCI conducts and supports basic and applied
cancer research in early detection, diagnosis, prevention,
treatment and rehabilitation. NCI provides training support for
research scientists, clinicians and educators, and maintains a
national network of cancer centers, clinical cooperative
groups, and community clinical oncology programs, along with
cancer prevention and control initiatives and outreach programs
to rapidly translate basic research findings into clinical
practice.
Breast cancer.--The Committee recognizes that breast cancer
research continues to require a significant allocation of NCI
resources in order to decipher the complex mysteries of this
disease. The Committee agrees with NCI which places breast
cancer research as a high priority within the Institute.
Therefore, the Committee directs NCI to continue to strengthen
its commitment to breast cancer research, including the
National Action Plan on Breast Cancer.
Prostate cancer.--The Committee notes that the incidence of
prostate cancer continues to rise, and urges that further
effort be placed on research related to early detection,
diagnosis, and treatment, particularly among minority
Americans.
Minority populations.--The Committee continues to be
concerned about the disproportionately high prevalence of
cancer among disadvantaged and minority populations. Despite an
overall drop in breast cancer rates, breast cancer rates for
African American women continue to increase. Also, African-
American males continue to experience the highest rate of
prostate cancer of any population group in the world. The
Committee encourages continued research emphasis in breast and
prostate cancer and other high priority cancer areas in a
concentrated effort to address the needs of minority
populations.
Leukemia.--The Committee recognizes the importance of
continued research and clinical trials for leukemia. Noting
that changes in health care financing have slowed the
development of more effective treatment for leukemia, the
Committee urges the NCI to support further leukemia-related
translational research for innovative, peer-reviewed clinical
trials.
Neurofibromatosis.--The Committee remains fully committed
to continuation of an aggressive program of research on
neurofibromatosis throughout NIH and urges NIH to ensure that
funding levels reflect that priority. This work has already
produced major breakthroughs, particularly in areas of genetics
and the links between neurofibromatosis, various cancers, and
other devastating diseases. The Committee encourages the
Institutes at NIH with NF projects to work together with the
extramural research community to develop a coordinated plan to
move this research forward. The Committee encourages NIH in
managing this effort to support a variety of collaborative
approaches including the possibility of jointly sponsored
requests for applications and an NIH-wide consensus conference
to bring together experts from throughout the world to make
recommendations on research opportunities and priorities.
Nutrition.--The Committee encourages the National Cancer
Institute to continue its strong work in the nutrition field
and to consider placing a priority within that field on breast
cancer research and other research involved with women's
health. Chemoprevention, an important activity of this
Institute, often relates to substances in the diet. Support of
clinical nutrition research units assures that basic
information on chemoprevention is studied in the clinical
arena.
Translational research.--The Committee notes the importance
of translational research in moving research advances from the
``bench to the bedside.'' The Committee encourages NCI to
address to the extent it can some of the barriers to conducting
translational research that were identified in the National
Cancer Advisory Board's 1994 report.
Cancer coordination.--The 1994 report of the National
Cancer Advisory Board entitled ``Cancer at a Crossroads''
outlined that the national cancer program suffered from an
absence of a national coordination of cancer fighting efforts
in the public, private and voluntary sectors. The Committee
recommends that the NCI take the leadership working in
coordination with the CDC and other Federal agencies to re-
establish coordination of the national cancer program. The
Committee expects that other agencies will work with the NCI to
facilitate this recommendation. Before hearings on the fiscal
year 1997 budget, the Committee would like a brief report
outlining the progress made to accomplish this recommendation.
Study of campaign contributions.--The Committee was
disturbed to learn that NCI has funded a research grant
studying tobacco industry campaign contributions to State
legislators and voting records by those individuals on tobacco
control initiatives. While the Committee is not rendering
judgment on the merits of the grant proposal, it feels strongly
that such research projects do not properly fall within the
boundaries of the NCI portfolio, especially when nearly three-
quarters of approved research projects go unfunded.
Accordingly, the Committee does not provide any further funding
for this research grant within the NCI appropriation.
NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE
The bill includes $1,355,866,000 for the Heart Lung and
Blood Institute (NHLBI), an increase of $18,845,000 over the
amount requested and $58,834,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
provides leadership for a national research program in diseases
of the heart, blood vessels, lungs, and blood, in transfusion
medicine, and in sleep disorders through support of basic,
clinical, and population-based and health education research.
Cardiovascular diseases.--The Committee recognizes the
seriousness of heart attack, stroke and other cardiovascular
diseases and remains concerned that despite progress,
cardiovascular diseases remain Americas No. 1 killer of men and
women since 1919 and a major cause of disability. The Committee
believes that additional cardiovascular research is very
important and intends that the Institute give high priority to
research on cardiovascular diseases.
Heart disease in women.--Heart attack is the single largest
cause of death of American women. Yet, reports indicate that
women often receive less aggressive care than men. This problem
appears to be related to difficulties in diagnosing chest pain
in women. The Committee encourages NHLBI to support research to
develop reliable, safe, efficient and cost-effective diagnostic
approaches for evaluating women with suspected ischemic heart
disease in order to decrease heart disease and death in women.
Heart disease in African Americans.--Although death rates
for heart disease have dropped significantly over the past 20
years, the drop has been much greater for whites than for
African Americans. The Committee urges the Institute to
expedite research to advance understanding of heart disease in
African Americans, using molecular biology, cellular and organ
physiology and clinical medicine.
Molecular genetics of high blood pressure.--High blood
pressure is the most critical stroke risk factor and a leading
cause of heart attack, congestive heart failure and kidney
failure. Molecular and genetic research appear to offer an
opportunity to develop improved treatments for high blood
pressure. The Institute should consider expediting research to
identify and map genes responsible for and to clarify the role
of defective genes in the development and maintenance of high
blood pressure.
Cystic fibrosis.--The Committee notes the tremendous
advances in cystic fibrosis research, which has extended the
life expectancy of cystic fibrosis patients from five years of
age 30 years ago to approximately 30 years of age for children
diagnosed today. Among the most promising research on cystic
fibrosis is that of gene therapy. The Committee encourages
NHLBI to continue its support of this research activity to
advance our understanding of cystic fibrosis, its treatment and
cure.
Asthma.--The Committee commends the Institute on its basic
and applied asthma research programs and for its efforts in
asthma education. Asthma prevalence, mortality, and
hospitalization rates have increased in recent years, and
minority populations are disproportionately affected. It is now
recognized that asthma is a complex, chronic disease, triggered
by a number of factors and requiring multiple medications for
treatment and control. The Committee is particularly concerned
about higher incidence and death rates among children living in
poverty, including the disproportionately high incidence in
African Americans and other minorities. The Committee urges the
Institute to enhance its focus on asthma in at-risk
populations. The Institute should also strengthen its
collaboration in this area with both NICHD and NIAID. In
addition, the Committee encourages NHLBI to consider supporting
the development and evaluation of innovative model school
programs to increase identification and appropriate referral of
children with uncontrolled asthma and reduce exposure to known
allergens and irritants.
Sickle cell disease.--The Committee continues to be
encouraged by research developments in sickle cell disease and
the Institute's continuing emphasis of this area. New and
evolving medical research techniques including those of gene
therapy and biotechnology offer increased opportunities to make
further advances in the study and treatment of sickle cell
disease. Where appropriate, the Committee encourages the
Institute to collaborate with other Institutes, centers, and
divisions of NIH in addressing this disease.
Hemophilia.--The Committee encourages NHLBI to enhance its
promising hemophilia gene therapy program. Further, the
Committee remains deeply concerned about insuring the safety of
the nations blood supply and is concerned over the recent
withdrawal of blood products contaminated with Creutzdfeldt-
Jakob Disease (CJD). Therefore, the Committee requests NHLBI to
work in collaboration with CDC and FDA to investigate the
potential impact of CJD on the safety of the U.S. blood supply
and specifically on people with bleeding disorders and
transfusion recipients.
Transfusion medicine.--By holding consensus conferences on
infectious disease testing for blood transfusion and by
establishing research centers for transfusion medicine and for
hematopoietic stem cells research, the NHLBI has demonstrated
its commitment to assuring a safer blood supply and has
recognized the potential of gene therapy to cure both genetic
and acquired diseases. The Committee encourages NHLBI to
support initiatives relating to viral inactivation of cellular
blood components, improved platelet collection and storage
techniques, and transfusion associated immunomodulation. To
facilitate research initiatives in the stem cell area, the
Committee is pleased to see that the NHLBI plans to coordinate
umbilical cord blood and stem cell collection.
Nutrition.--The Committee urges the NHLBI to continue its
nutrition research initiative. The Committee also encourages
NHLBI to include nutrition research in its critical care
medicine initiative. NHLBI has been supporting productive
research to prevent heart disease involving reduced dietary fat
among children and lowering of triglyceride levels through
diet.
Sleep disorders.--The Committee notes the continued
development of the National Center for Sleep Disorders Research
and the expansion of the Center's research portfolio. The
Committee is concerned, however, that the national sleep
disorders education campaign has not moved forward, despite the
Committee's encouragement. The Committee also recommends
continued development of a plan for scientific collaboration
among the National Center and other NIH institutes.
Sarcoidosis.--Sarcoidosis is an inflammatory disease that
can lead to scarring of the lung. Although the disease has been
recognized for over 100 years, information on its incidence,
prevalence, risk factors, and natural history remains limited.
Geographic and racial variations in the incidence of
sarcoidosis suggest that it may be caused by environmental
factors. The Committee, therefore, encourages the Institute to
explore environmental and genetic causes of sarcoidosis as an
essential step toward identifying risk factors and improving
treatment and prevention of the disease.
national institute of dental research
The bill includes $183,196,000 for the National Institute
of Dental Research (NIDR), an increase of $2,546,000 over the
amount requested and $7,983,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--NIDR conducts and supports research and research
training on the normal development, maintenance, and aging of
the oral and craniofacial tissues and the disorders affecting
these tissues, including the effects of systemic diseases and
disease treatments. Major areas studied include craniofacial
birth defects, periodontal diseases, dental caries, bone and
joint diseases, chronic pain conditions, oral cancers,
autoimmune disorders, infectious diseases, epidemiology, and
biomaterials research.
national institute of diabetes and digestive and kidney diseases
The bill includes $771,252,000 for the National Institute
of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), an
increase of $10,719,000 over the amount requested and
$34,226,000 over the comparable FY 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--The NIDDK supports research in three major
disease categories: diabetes, endocrinology, and metabolic
diseases; digestive diseases and nutrition; and kidney,
urologic, and hematologic diseases. The NIDDK supports a
coordinated program of fundamental and clinical research and
demonstration projects relating to the causes, prevention,
diagnosis, and treatment of diseases within these categories.
The Institute also supports efforts to transfer the knowledge
gained from its research program to health professionals,
patients, and the general public.
Diabetes.--Diabetes is the fifth leading cause of death by
disease in America, taking the lives of more than 160,000
annually. The 14 million Americans with diabetes are at great
risk of developing devastating complications, including
blindness, kidney disease, heart disease, and the need for
amputations. Diabetes disproportionately affects minority
populations, especially African Americans, Hispanics and Native
Americans, who are at greater risk for developing this disease
and its complications.
In light of the enormous financial and personal costs of
diabetes, and given the new and promising gains in diabetes
research, the Committee encourages NIDDK to redouble its
efforts in research programs for diabetes. The Committee urges
NIDDK to continue its current efforts to find the genetic
defects which are likely to be responsible for Type I diabetes
and which may be the basis for vulnerability to diabetes and
its complications in all cases.
Kidney disease.--Kidney diseases have tremendous morbidity,
mortality, and economic costs. Every year 45,000 Americans
develop chronic kidney failure, or end stage renal disease. The
number of ESRD patients doubled between 1984-1991 and is
expected to double again in the next seven years. Nephrology
research such as the identification of genes critical to the
delay of the progression of kidney failure in insulin-dependent
diabetics is yielding promising results. The Committee is
encouraged by these results and urges the Institute to provide
strong support for research that may lead to reductions in the
burden and cost of kidney diseases.
Polycystic kidney disease.--Polycystic kidney disease (PKD)
affects some 600,000 Americans. PKD causes several thousand
deaths per year and annually generates more than 2,000
additional cases of kidney failure. Great progress has recently
been made toward an effective treatment and ultimate cure of
PKD. Investigators working in this area have identified and
cloned the gene responsible for 90% of PKD and this gene has
now been fully sequenced. Researchers have also isolated the
gene related to the regressive form of PKD which affects
primarily children and is generally fatal. The Committee
encourages NIDDK to continue its investment in this area.
Urological diseases.--The Committee is pleased with the
continued growth of research on urological diseases. Diseases
of the prostate are a significant health burden. The Committee
encourages the NIDDK to continue its research in the basic
science of prostate growth. The Committee is also concerned
about the high prevalence of prostate disease in minority
population. In addition, the Committee urges the Institute to
strengthen its research program on womens urological diseases
by placing special emphasis on grants related to interstitial
cystitis, urinary incontinence and urinary tract infections.
Prostatitis.--The Committee has learned of the magnitude of
the problems of prostatitis, which afflicts men in their
twenties and thirties and becomes a lifelong disability. Yet,
the Committee understands that little research is being done on
this disease, and that there has been little progress in
understanding and effectively treating it. The Committee
encourages NIDDK to develop a research program in this area and
to consider what steps are necessary to encourage greater
interest in the disease in both the intramural and extramural
communities. The Committee would like the Director to be
prepared to address these issues in the hearings on the 1997
appropriations.
Liver disease.--The Committee heard testimony on the impact
of hepatitis and other liver and gallbladder diseases, which
affect 25 million Americans. They are the seventh leading
disease related cause of death in the U.S. Over 5 million
people suffer from hepatitis B and C, and many will suffer long
term liver diseases, cirrhosis or liver cancer. The Committee
encourages NIDDK to place an emphasis on liver disease
research, with a particular focus on hepatitis C.
Nutrition.--The Committee urges the NIDDK to continue its
nutrition initiative and particularly its focus on obesity and
on clinical research in nutrition. Obesity research has had
significant impact recently as genes associated with obesity
have been identified and clinical research has established the
relationship between weight gain and loss and metabolic
adjustment. Continued research in obesity should be pursued
since obesity affects one-third of all Americans. Obesity is
associated with cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and
hypertension. The Committee remains supportive of the clinical
nutrition research unit and obesity and nutrition research
centers programs.
Hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS).--This syndrome is caused
by a bacterium that may be present in undercooked meat products
which can result in sudden and severe digestive and kidney
complications. The Committee encourages NIDDK to support
research on HUS in order to develop effective treatments for
the disorder.
national institute of neurological disorders and stroke
The bill includes $681,534,000 for the National Institute
of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), an increase of
$9,472,000 over the amount requested and $29,330,000 over the
comparable 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--NINDS supports and conducts basic and clinical
neurological research and research training to increase
understanding of the brain and improve the prevention and
treatment of neurological and neuromuscular disorders. The
NINDS mission encompasses over 600 disorders, including stroke;
head and spinal cord injury; epilepsy; multiple sclerosis; and
neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinsons disease.
Stroke.--Stroke remains Americas third most common cause of
death, the leading cause of serious disability and a major
contributor to late-life dementia. Stroke will cost the U.S. an
estimated $21 billion in medical expenses and lost
productivity, including more than $3.5 billion in Medicare
payments, in 1995. The Committee believes that stroke research
is important and encourages the NINDS to strengthen its stroke
education program and to continue innovative approaches to the
diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation and prevention of stroke
as identified in the status report of the Decade of the Brain.
Parkinsons disease.--Parkinsonism, a neurological disorder
which afflicts as many as 1.5 million Americans, costs society
upward of $6,000,000,000 annually. Recent scientific
breakthroughs may open new avenues of understanding and
treating Parkinsons and the Committee urges NINDS in the
strongest terms to make Parkinsons a very high research
priority, enhancing and focusing the Institute's approach to
research on the disease and ensuring that funding levels
reflect that priority. The Committee acknowledges the
importance of the 1995 research planning conference on
Parkinsons and encourages NINDS to develop a research plan
based on the conference recommendations and report on that plan
at the Committee's 1997 hearings.
Lou Gehrigs disease.--Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS),
commonly referred to as Lou Gehrigs disease, is a progressive,
fatal neuromuscular disease for which no known cure or
treatment currently exists. The first real finding of a cause
of the disease recently occurred with the identification of a
gene defect linked to some cases of familial ALS. But more work
needs to be done to capitalize on these recent developments in
order to successfully treat and cure this disease. The
Committee encourages NINDS to maintain its commitment to brain
research relevant to ALS.
Neurofibromatosis.--The Committee remains fully committed
to continuation of an aggressive program of research on
neurofibromatosis throughout NIH. This work has already
produced major breakthroughs, particularly in areas of genetics
and the links between neurofibromatosis, various cancers, and
other devastating diseases. The Committee encourages the
Institutes at NIH with NF projects to work together with the
extramural research community to develop a coordinated plan to
move this research forward. The Committee encourages NIH in
managing this effort to support a variety of collaborative
approaches including the possibility of jointly sponsored
requests for applications and an NIH-wide consensus conference
to bring together experts from throughout the world to make
recommendations on research opportunities and priorities.
Gaucher's disease.--The Committee continues to be
interested in research pertaining to Gaucher's disease and
encourages the Institute to continue to place priority on
research in this disease area.
Dystonia.--The Committee has been pleased with NINDS
efforts to encourage extramural research initiatives in
dystonia-specific research, including a recent NINDS sponsored
workshop on dystonia research opportunities. The Committee
encourages NINDS to work closely with other organizations
having an interest in dystonia research to collaborate on joint
research programs encouraging investigators to study dystonia.
Syringomyelia.--Syringomyelia is a complex neurological
disorder that is characterized by cystic cavitation and
degeneration of the spinal cord. Its study may lead to
understanding of other types of spinal cord disorders. The
Committee recognizes the success of the syringomyelia
conference conducted last year, and urges the NIH to pursue the
recommendations made by the experts at that symposium. In
addition, the Committee urges the NIH to work with patient
advocates and with investigators who wish to pursue research in
this area.
Niemann-Pick disease.--Niemann-Pick Type C is a rare
degenerative disorder in which patients are unable to
metabolize cholesterol properly. Cholesterol accumulates within
the cells of the liver, spleen and brain, resulting in
deterioration of the body. About 100 children are afflicted
with Niemann-Pick and approximately 60,000 children in the U.S.
have related pediatric neurodegenerative diseases. Some of the
most promising research lies with genetic therapy and
cholesterol metabolism research. The Committee encourages NINDS
to enhance its research on isolating the gene that causes
Niemann-Pick Type C.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES
The bill includes $1,169,628,000 for the National Institute
of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), an increase of
$16,256,000 over the amount requested and $73,171,000 over the
comparable FY 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--The NIAID supports and conducts basic and
clinical research and research training programs in infectious
diseases, including AIDS, and diseases caused by, or associated
with, disorders of the immune system. The NIAID develops new
and improved vaccines and supporting research on acquired
immunodeficiency syndrome, tuberculosis, sexually transmitted
diseases, and tropical diseases.
Asthma.--The number of asthma cases and the number of
asthma-related deaths has increased dramatically in the past
decade, particularly among minority populations. The Committee
has been very pleased with the continued activities of the
National Cooperative Inner City Asthma Study, a comprehensive
effort in eight cities to design and evaluate intervention
programs to counter risk factors for inner city asthmatic
children. The Committee urges continued attention to pediatric
asthma, especially as it affects minority children.
Hemophilia.--The Committee fully supports NIAID's
continuing commitment to provide access to HIV/AIDS clinical
trials for hemophilia patients, utilizing the existing network
of hemophilia treatment centers, through the ``ACTU without
walls'' clinical trials program.
Microbicides.--The Committee acknowledges the progress that
NIAID has made in funding research on microbicides for STD/HIV
prevention. Of note are the establishment of program projects
for topical microbicide research and clinical studies to
evaluate existing and new products. The Committee believes that
safe, effective topical microbicides are urgently needed to
prevent the spread of STDs and HIV infection for both women and
men. The Committee continues to encourage NIAID to make funding
for the major areas of microbicide research a priority,
including funding for basic research, product development,
clinical evaluation, and behavioral research.
Womens interagency HIV study (WIHS).--The Committee
applauds the speed with which the WIHS has begun to enroll
women and to obtain the needed data. The Committee urges
continued funding for this study so that women can be followed
prospectively to obtain the information critical to treatment
and prevention efforts. The Committee believes that it is
important to achieve geographical representation and to include
an adequate number of women in the study to answer these
important questions.
Chronic fatigue and immune dysfunction syndrome (CFIDS).--
The Committee encourages NIAID to direct resources towards
CFIDS research, particularly to extramural grants focused on
promising areas of biomedical research and to investigations
which seek to identify the etiological agents and markers for
and the pathophysiology of CFIDS. The Committee encourages
NIAID to consider appointing a CFIDS coordinator with
institute-wide authority to provide leadership on CFIDS. The
Committee looks forward to the deliberations of the NIAID
Advisory Council meeting scheduled for the fall of 1995 which
will focus on promising CFIDS research.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES
The bill includes $946,971,000 for the National Institute
of General Medical Science (NIGMS), an increase of $13,162,000
over the amount requested and $42,046,000 over the comparable
1995 appropriation.
Mission.--NIGMS supports research and research training in
the basic biomedical sciences. Institute grantees, working in
such fields as cell biology, biophysics, genetics,
developmental biology, pharmacology, physiology, and biological
chemistry, study normal biological processes to better
understand what goes wrong when disease occurs. In this way,
NIGMS supports the new knowledge, theories, and technologies
that can then be applied to the disease-targeted studies
supported by other NIH components. NIGMS-supported basic
research advances also find applications in the biotechnology
and pharmaceutical industries. The Institute's training
programs help provide the scientists needed by industry and
academia and have a special focus on increasing the number of
minority scientists through programs such as Minority Access to
Research Careers (MARC) and Minority Biomedical Research
Support (MBRS). The Committee expects NIGMS to continue to
support these training programs.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
The bill includes $595,162,000 for the National Institute
of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), an increase of
$8,272,000 over the amount requested and $26,339,000 over the
comparable FY 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--NICHD conducts and supports laboratory and
clinical research on the reproductive, developmental, and
behavioral processes that determine and maintain the health and
well-being of children, adults, families and populations. In
addition, research in medical rehabilitation is supported.
Nutrition.--The Committee is very supportive of the new
nutrition research initiatives at NICHD. Of particular
significance is the research regarding folic acid and vitamin
B-12 use during pregnancy and its reduction in the incidence of
neural tube defects among infants. Further research should be
supported regarding the role of nutrition in the support of
very low birth weight children. The Committee is also
supportive of the trial utilizing calcium to reduce the risk of
preclampsia.
Sudden infant death syndrome.--Sudden infant death
syndrome (SIDS) accounts for approximately 7,000 unexplained
infant deaths per year. The Committee is very pleased that the
NICHD has vigorously pursued answers to SIDS through its 5-year
research plans, and through its successful ``Back to Sleep''
campaign. The Committee has provided funding for continued
activity in this important effort.
Rett syndrome.--The Committee recognizes and applauds the
progress which has been made over the past year in
investigating a biological marker for Rett syndrome. The
Committee hopes that such findings will lead to greater
knowledge of the cause, treatment and cure for this
debilitating disease, and encourages continued focus on this
area of research.
Demographic research.--Recent findings on the social,
economic, health and personal benefits of marriage have
received national attention. Those findings and other important
research are supported by the demographic research program at
NICHD. In addition to studying marriage and family dynamics,
NICHD's population research program supports an array of
population studies among which are fertility, mortality,
population growth forecasts, and child care. The Committee
recognizes the importance of demographic research and urges
NICHD to continue giving its demographic research high
priority.
Autism.--Autism continues to be a prevalent neurological
disorder that affects an estimated 400,000 Americans. The
potential cost to society of an untreated, inappropriately
educated person with autism could be $3-5 million over the
course of his or her lifetime. The Committee commends NICHD for
sponsoring the first ever conference on autism, recognizing the
need for autism research at NIH, with a special emphasis on the
study of the genetics of autism. The Committee encourages
NICHD, in conjunction with NIMH, NINDS, and NIDCD, to pursue
the comprehensive research recommendations resulting from the
conference on autism. Further, the Committee will be interested
in an update on the Institute's work in this area at next
year's budget hearings.
NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE
The bill includes $314,185,000 for the National Eye
Institute (NEI), an increase of $4,367,000 over the amount
requested and $13,595,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--NEI conducts and supports basic and clinical
research, research training, and other programs with respect to
blinding eye diseases, visual disorders, mechanisms of visual
function, preservation of sight, and the special health
problems and needs of individuals who are visually-impaired or
blind. In addition, the NEI is responsible for the
dissemination of information, specifically public and
professional education programs aimed at the prevention of
blindness.
Eye health education.--NEI has developed a comprehensive
eye health education program in diabetic retinopathy and
glaucoma. The Committee is pleased that this program is being
adapted to the specific needs of the Hispanic/Latino community,
where diabetic retinopathy is especially prevalent. The
Committee encourages NEI to evaluate and refine its
communication strategies as new information emerges from
ongoing research.
The Committee also acknowledges the strategy of NEI to
emphasize the investigator-initiated research grant. Turnover
within this research portfolio frees funds for new grants even
in times of restricted budgets. The Institute is encouraged to
maintain this policy to the extent it believes it continues to
be appropriate.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES
The bill includes $288,898,000 for the National Institute
of Environmental Health Science (NIEHS), an increase of
$4,015,000 over the amount requested and $16,165,000 over the
comparable 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--The NIEHS mission is to reduce the burden of
environmentally related illness and dysfunction by
understanding how environmental exposures affect our health,
how individuals differ in their susceptibility to these
effects, and how these susceptibilities change over time. This
mission is achieved through multidisciplinary biomedical
research programs, prevention and intervention efforts, and
communication strategies that encompass training, education,
technology transfer, and community outreach.
Carcinogenicity tests.--The Committee remains concerned
about the number of carcinogenicity tests being initiated under
the National Toxicology program at NIEHS. The Committee
requests a report prior to the fiscal year 1997 hearings on the
number of chemicals tested or in the process of being tested
each year. This should include the number of new chemicals for
which full testing was initiated each year using the standard
two year design model. The Director should be prepared to
discuss this issue when he appears before the Committee next
year.
Parkinson's disease.--The Committee is encouraged that the
Institute has sponsored a 1995 workshop on the link between
toxic exposures and Parkinson's disease and other neurological
disorders and the potential benefits of research in this area.
The Committee encourages NIEHS to conduct further research in
the area of the environment and neurological disorders.
Training.--The Committee remains concerned about serious
shortages of experts in the area of environmental health
research and encourages the Institute to enhance its programs
of training and professional development in these important
disciplines.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING
The bill includes $453,917,000 for the National Institute
on Aging (NIA), an increase of $6,309,000 over the amount
requested and $19,337,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--The NIA conducts biomedical, behavioral, and
social research related to the aging process to prevent disease
and other problems of the aged, and to maintain the health and
independence of older Americans. Alzheimer's disease is a
particular focus of the NIA.
Alzheimer's disease.--The Committee is pleased to learn
that the Institute continues to regard Alzheimer's disease
research as one of its highest priorities. Alzheimer's disease
is the most expensive illness threatening older Americans.
Unless it is brought under control, the number of persons
affected will explode, from 4 million today to over 14 million
by the middle of the 21st century. On the other hand, if
scientists can discover ways to delay onset of the disease by 5
years, half the potential victims can live out their lives
without serious impairment, and the nation will save billions
of dollars a year in the cost of caring for persons with
Alzheimer's disease. While science is drawing closer to
breakthroughs, a strong and sustained commitment to basic
research is necessary if an effective drug treatment is to be
found. The Committee urges NIA to maintain that commitment.
The Committee is aware that a planning process financed
with private foundation support has recently been conducted by
the Institute to identify promising strategies to prevent or
delay the onset of Alzheimer's disease. This process has
identified many promising research opportunities, including
prevention of the formation of amyloid and the role of
apolipoprotein E in causation of Alzheimer's disease. The
Committee encourages the Institute to pursue these research
opportunities and to enhance resources targeted to these areas.
Cardiovascular aging research.--The Committee believes that
research on cardiovascular aging is important and encourages
NIA to maintain its innovative extramural and intramural
cardiovascular research programs.
Nutrition.--Nutrition is a significant factor in the aging
process and in the recovery of hospitalized aged patients. The
Committee continues to stress the importance of nutrition
research at NIA, including continued research on the role of
caloric restriction in reducing the incidence of disease among
the aged and research regarding nutrition, frailty and
sarcopenia. In addition, the Committee encourages NIA to
consider supporting research on nutrition screening and
malnutrition and nutrition-related problems among the elderly.
Demographic research.--Informed policy-making on Federal
entitlement programs which support this country's aging
population is one of the benefits of the research currently
underway at NIA's demographic, behavioral and social research
program. The Committee continues to support such research and
the analysis of its data, with special emphasis on the Health
and Retirement and the AHEAD studies, and similar statistical
surveys and data bases.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES
The bill includes $241,828,000 for the National Institute
of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), an
increase of $3,361,000 over the amount requested and
$10,429,000 over the comparable 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--The NIAMS conducts and supports basic and
clinical research and research training, and the dissemination
of health information on the more than 100 forms of arthritis;
osteoporosis and other bone diseases; muscle biology and muscle
diseases; orthopaedic disorders, such as back pain and sports
injuries; and numerous skin diseases.
Osteoarthritis.--Osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint
disease for which there is no known cure. It continues to be
the most widespread of all the chronically disabling arthritic
diseases. The Committee encourages NIAMS to continue to move
forward with its commitment to osteoarthritis research. The
Committee is aware that in the absence of a cure for
osteoarthritis, total joint replacement has been successful in
relieving pain, enhancing mobility and independent living for
many people who would otherwise be substantially disabled.
However, during its hearings, the Committee learned that wear
related failure of the replacements has become a prevalent
problem. The Committee urges NIAMS to strengthen its
investigations of new materials and the interaction of implant
devices and tissue, and to create a better understanding of
wear processes that can prolong the life of the implant.
Low back pain.--Low back pain continues to be a leading
cause of limitation in adults and has become a major public
health problem. Eighty percent of Americans will experience an
episode of low back pain during their lifetime. The Committee
commends NIAMS on its upcoming workshop on low back pain that
will address future research needs to improve the understanding
of this condition and the care of the patient. After the
workshop, the Committee encourages the Institute to develop and
disseminate its findings to the public and the scientific
community.
Repetitive motion.--The Committee is concerned about the
rapid increase in the number of serious injuries being reported
to the Bureau of Labor Statistics related to repetitive motion
syndrome. In 1992 alone more than 300,000 occupational injuries
were reported which were attributed to this problem. The
Committee is pleased that the Institute sponsored a workshop on
repetitive motion injuries in 1994 and encourages further
research in this area during fiscal year 1996.
Lupus.--The Committee encourages NIAMS to continue to
support research aimed at furthering the understanding of the
gender and ethnic related factors associated with the high
prevalence of lupus in women and minorities.
Fibromyalgia.--Fibromyalgia (FM), a chronic painful
disorder characterized by widespread musculoskeletal pain,
stiffness, chronic fatigue, and disturbed sleep, is reported in
a recent study to affect at least 3.7 million Americans, over
eighty percent of whom are women. Presently, there is no known
cure or effective treatment for FM. The Committee commends
NIAMS for stimulating research on FM by holding a scientific
workshop and subsequently making a number of awards for
research on this disabling disease. The Committee urges NIAMS
to continue supporting research in this area in fiscal year
1996 and collaborating with other Institutes.
Psoriasis.--Psoriasis is a chronic skin disease
characterized by thickened, red areas of skin with silvery
scales. Of the 4 to 5 million Americans who suffer from
psoriasis, about 1 million have the severe form. NIAMS-
supported researchers have demonstrated that the gene for
familial psoriasis is located on chromosome 17 of the human
genome. The Committee encourages NIAMS to continue to support
genetic research to determine which gene is the specific gene
for psoriasis as well as to pursue research on the mechanisms
that lead to the onset of this disease. Through continued
support for this research, new knowledge will be gained to
develop improved therapeutic approaches for the treatment of
this chronic skin disease.
Connective tissue disorders.--The Committee is pleased that
NIAMS has recently conducted a consensus workshop on heritable
disorders of connective tissue and encourages NIAMS to pursue
the workshops recommendations on new research opportunities in
the field.
Alopecia areata.--The Committee is pleased that NIAMS
cosponsored a research workshop on alopecia areata last year
and looks forward to seeing how this workshop builds on the
public/private partnership in basic research in search of a
cure.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DEAFNESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION DISORDERS
The includes $176,502,000 for the National Institute on
Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), an increase
of $2,453,000 over the amount requested and $7,569,000 over the
comparable 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--The NIDCD funds and conducts research in human
communication. Included in its program areas are research and
research training in the normal and disordered mechanisms of
hearing, balance, smell, taste, voice, speech and language. The
Institute addresses special biomedical and behavioral problems
associated with people who have communication impairments or
disorders. In addition, the NIDCD is actively involved in
health promotion and disease prevention, and supports efforts
to create devices that substitute for lost and impaired sensory
and communication functions.
Dysphonia.--Spasmodic dysphonia is a voice disorder that
affects women predominantly, and usually renders a person
difficult to understand because of uncontrolled voice and pitch
breaks. NIDCD intramural scientists pioneered the development
of a new treatment for spasmodic dysphonia using injections
into the laryngeal muscle. The Committee recommends continued
NIDCD intramural and extramural study into spasmodic dysphonia.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH
The bill includes $55,831,000 for the National Institute of
Nursing Research (NINR), an increase of $776,000 over the
amount requested and $3,074,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--NINR supports and conducts scientific research
and research training to reduce the burden of illness and
disability; improve health-related quality of life; and
establish better approaches to promote health and prevent
disease.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON ALCOHOL ABUSE AND ALCOHOLISM
The bill includes $198,607,000 for the National Institute
on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), an increase of
$2,760,000, over the amount requested and $8,540,000 over the
comparable 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--The NIAAA supports research to generate new
knowledge to answer crucial questions about why people drink;
why some individuals are vulnerable to alcohol dependence or
alcohol-related diseases and others are not; the relationship
of genetic and environmental factors involved in alcoholism;
the mechanisms whereby alcohol produces its disabling effects,
including organ damage; how to prevent alcohol misuse and
associated damage and how alcoholism treatment can be improved.
NIAAA addresses these questions through a program of
biomedical, behavioral, and epidemiologic research on
alcoholism, alcohol abuse, and related problems. This program
includes various areas of special emphasis such as medications
development, fetal alcohol syndrome, genetics, and moderate
drinking.
Genetics.--The Committee recognizes that significant
strides have been made in recent years in research on genetic
bases for a wide range of medical conditions and finds that
such research has great promise in the area of alcohol abuse
and alcoholism. The Committee encourages NIAAA to enhance its
research into genetic bases for alcohol abuse and alcoholism.
Medications development.--The Committee is pleased that
research supported by NIAAA has led to the approval of
naltrexone by FDA for alcoholism treatment. The Committee
encourages NIAAA to support further research to determine the
effects of naltrexones longer-term use, side effects, and how
it reduces alcohol craving.
Moderate drinking.--Excessive alcohol consumption is linked
to higher risk of high blood pressure and hemorrhagic stroke as
well as cirrhosis and early death. However, there is also
evidence from epidemiologic studies suggesting that moderate
wine and alcohol consumption may be positively associated with
cardiovascular health. In addition to ethyl alcohol, wine
contains antioxidants that may offer a protective element
against cardiovascular disease. The Committee notes favorably
that NIAAA has publicized its intention to support research on
the health effects of moderate wine and alcohol consumption at
a significant funding level. The Committee urges NIAAA and
other Institutes to support and assist research efforts in
these areas, especially the impact of alcohol on cardiovascular
health and longevity and on the dietary role of antioxidants
and moderate alcohol consumption.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE
The bill includes $458,441,000 for the National Institute
on Drug Abuse (NIDA), an increase of $6,372,000 over the amount
requested and $20,998,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--NIDA supports much of the world's biomedical
research in the area of drug abuse and addiction. NIDA's basic
research furthers knowledge about the ways in which drugs act
on the brain to produce drug dependence and about how the brain
works. In addition, NIDA research identifies pharmacological
and behavioral drug abuse treatments. NIDA conducts research on
the nature and extent of drug abuse in the U.S. and monitors
drug abuse trends nationwide to provide information for
planning both prevention and treatment services. NIDA's mission
is also to study the outcomes effectiveness, and cost benefits
of drug abuse services delivered in a variety of settings.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH
The bill includes $661,328,000 for the National Institute
of Mental Health (NIMH), an increase of $9,192,000 over the
amount requested and $30,053,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--The NIMH supports research to identify the causes
of and the most effective treatments for mental illnesses. NIMH
research brings a multidisciplinary approach to the human brain
and behavior in health and in illness, integrating findings
from the neurosciences, basic behavioral sciences, clinical
research, epidemiology, prevention research, and mental health
services research. In addition to research on the causes of and
treatments for the most severe mental illnesses, the Institute
supports studies of mood disorders, anxiety disorders, eating
disorders, Alzheimer's disease, and childhood mental illnesses,
as well as studies of the mental health needs of special
populations that include rural communities, racial and ethnic
minority populations, women, and individuals with the risk of
developing AIDS.
Prevention research.--In keeping with the Committee's
interest in NIMH support for prevention research, the Committee
commends NIMH for developing an implementation plan to address
the recommendations of the 1994 Institute of Medicine report
``Reducing Risk of Mental Disorders: Frontiers for Preventive
Intervention Research,'' and urges timely implementation of two
areas of primary importance. First, to meet the need to train
mental disorder prevention researchers, the Committee
encourages NIMH to maintain its support for the B-START
program, both for those at the beginning stages of their career
and for career transitions to behavioral science research.
Second, the Committee urges NIMH to take the lead among Federal
research agencies in coordinating research efforts to prevent
mental disorders.
Behavioral science.--The Committee continues its support of
basic behavioral science research as recommended by the NIMH
Advisory Council. In particular, NIMH is encouraged to consider
the recommendation regarding increased emphasis on individual
investigator grants. The Committee would like a progress report
on implementing the Advisory Council recommendations before the
fiscal year 1997 appropriations hearings.
Autism.--Last year the Committee encouraged NIH to
implement a nationwide epidemiological study to determine the
incidence of autism in the U.S. NIMH is funding the UNOCCAP
Project, a large-scale investigation of the prevalence of
various disease and disorder symptoms in children. The
Committee encourages NIMH to collaborate with NICHD and include
the symptoms of autism in its nationwide screening and follow-
up efforts.
Violence.--NIMH is encouraged to support research
pertaining to behavior modification and attitude change within
the general population and their role in increasing criminality
and violence. This would also include the research questions
involved in psychological profiling of violent, criminal, and
destructive personalities.
NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES
The bill includes $390,339,000 for the National Center for
Research Resources (NCRR), an increase of $14,425,000 over the
amount requested and $40,972,000 over the comparable FY 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--NCRR develops and supports critical research
technologies and shared resources that underpin biomedical
research. The NCRR programs develop a variety of research
resources; provide resources for complex biotechnologies,
clinical research and specialized primate research; develop
research capacity in minority institutions; and enhance the
science education of pre-college students and the general
public.
Extramural facilities.--The Committee has included
$20,000,000 for extramural biomedical facility renovation and
construction, as requested by the Administration. These funds
are to be awarded competitively, consistent with the
requirements of section 481A of the Public Health Service Act
which allocates 25 percent of total funding to institutions of
emerging excellence.
Primate centers.--The Committee confirms its understanding
that primate center grants are competitively awarded. The
Committee urges NCRR to make clear to any institutions not
currently receiving primate center grants that they are
permitted and encouraged to apply for center funding as current
grants expire. The Committee intends that NCRR will announce
the opportunity to apply for primate center funding in the NIH
Guide for Grants and Contracts as the current grants come up
for renewal.
NATIONAL CENTER FOR HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH
The bill includes $170,041,000 for the National Institute
for Human Genome Research (NCHGR), an increase of $2,363,000
over the amount requested and $17,175,000 over the comparable
1995 appropriation.
Mission.--The NCHGR coordinates extramural research and
research training for the NIH component of the Human Genome
Project, an effort to determine the location and sequence of
the estimated 100,000 genes which constitute the human genome.
The Division of Extramural Research supports research in
genetic and physical mapping, DNA sequencing and technology
development, database management and analysis, and studies of
the ethical, legal, and social implications of human genome
research. The Division of Intramural Research focuses on
applying the tools and technologies of the Human Genome Project
to understanding the genetic basis of disease and developing
DNA-based diagnostics and gene therapies.
New strategies.--The Committee encourages NCHGR to take
advantage of newly proposed strategies for sequencing the human
genome that utilize the best available plans and technology and
that may enable the Human Genome Project to complete the
accurate sequencing of the human genome ahead of schedule and
under budget.
JOHN E. FOGARTY INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR ADVANCED STUDY IN THE HEALTH
SCIENCES
The bill includes $25,313,000 for the Fogarty International
Center (FIC), an increase of $352,000 over the amount requested
and $1,538,000 over the comparable 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--FIC attempts to improve the health of the people
of the United States and other nations through international
cooperation in the biomedical sciences. In support of this
mission, the FIC pursues the following four goals: mobilize
international research efforts against global health threats;
advance science through international cooperation; develop
human resources to meet global research challenges; and provide
leadership in international science policy and research
strategies.
Infectious diseases.--The Committee commends FIC for
developing a long-range plan which identifies infectious
diseases of international origin as a major concern and
encourages the Center to continue its efforts in this area. In
addition, the Committee recommends FIC consider other
transnational factors that contribute to the world's burden of
disease, such as biodiversity loss.
NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE
This bill includes $141,439,000 for the National Library of
Medicine (NLM), an increase of $1,966,000 over the amount
requested and $12,745,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--The mission of the National Library of Medicine
is to collect, organize, disseminate, and preserve the worlds
output of biomedical literature in all forms. The resulting
collection can be consulted at the Library's facilities on the
NIH campus, requested by U.S. health professionals through
interlibrary loan, or searched via online databases that the
NLM makes available to health professionals around the world.
NLM has a program of outreach to the health professions. The
Library also has statutory responsibility to conduct research
into biomedical communications and biotechnology; to award
grants in support of health science libraries and the services
they provide; and to create specialized information services in
such areas as health services research, environmental health,
hazardous substances, and toxicology.
Outreach.--The Committee encourages NLM to continue its
special outreach efforts to bring the benefits of its
information systems to all American health professionals.
Providing information access to health professionals in remote
rural and inner city areas is a high priority. The Committee
supports NLM's efforts toward improving health care information
sharing among clinicians, researchers, educators, and other
health professionals through the implementation of the national
information superhighway, and programs such as Internet. In
order to maximize the productivity of these activities, the
Committee urges that they be effectively coordinated through
the use of medical librarians and other health information
specialists.
In the late 1980's the Congress urged NLM to develop an
outreach program to facilitate the transfer of scientific
findings to the Nation's health professionals. The Committee is
pleased that documents publicizing the availability of NLM
products and services are being made available in print as well
as electronically over the Internet.
Telemedicine.--The Committee encourages NLM to continue its
investment in telemedicine test-bed networks to evaluate the
impact of telemedicine on cost, quality, and access to care. In
addition, in a study funded by NLM, HCFA, and the Department of
Veterans Affairs, the Institute of Medicine is currently
identifying key criteria for evaluation of the impact of
operational telemedicine projects. NLM will work with its
existing test-bed sites to apply these criteria to its
telemedicine projects.
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR
The bill includes $261,488,000 for the Office of the
Director (OD), an increase of $3,634,000 over the amount
requested and $21,629,000 over the comparable 1995
appropriation.
Mission.--The Office of the Director (OD) provides
leadership to the NIH research community, and coordinates and
directs initiatives which cross-cut the NIH. The OD is
responsible for the development and management of intramural
and extramural research and research training policy, the
review of program quality and effectiveness, the coordination
of selected NIH-wide program activities, and the administration
of centralized support activities essential to operations of
the NIH.
Minority health initiative.--The Minority Health Initiative
(MHI) is a coordinated set of programs designed to address the
health needs of minorities across the lifespan and to expand
the participation of minorities in all phases of biomedical and
biobehavioral research. The MHI comprises a portfolio of multi-
year research projects as collaborative efforts with NIH
Institutes, centers and divisions (ICDs) as well as new
components developed to confront emerging and unaddressed
health research areas.
Women's health initiative.--This research is a large cross-
Institute initiative to study prevention of conditions unique
to or more common in women--particularly breast cancer, heart
disease, and osteoporosis. There are three components of the
study: a clinical trial; an observational study; and a
community prevention study. In fiscal year 1996, funds will be
used to support continued activities in the coordinating center
and the 40 clinical centers. Funds will also be used to plan
the community prevention component.
Office of Research on Women's Health.--The Office of
Research on Women's Health (ORWH) works in collaboration with
the ICDs of the NIH to promote and foster efforts to address
gaps in knowledge related to women's health through the
enhancement and expansion of funded research and/or the
initiation of new investigative studies. The ORWH is
responsible for ensuring the inclusion of women in clinical
research funded by the ICDs, including the development of a
computerized tracking system and the implementation of new
guidelines on such inclusion. This Office is also involved in
promoting programs to increase the number of women in
biomedical science, and in the development of women's health as
a focus of medical/scientific research.
Cardiovascular disease and diabetes.--The Committee is
pleased with the collaborative efforts already underway between
the Office of Research on Womens Health (ORWH) and NIDDK to co-
fund research focusing on cardiovascular disease in women with
diabetes. Diabetes is one of the leading risk factors for
coronary artery disease among women between the ages of 30 and
55 who have Type I diabetes. The Committee encourages the ORWH
to develop and pursue new projects that could lead to the
prevention and control of diabetes and its potentially
devastating consequences in women.
Lymphangioleiomyomatosis.--Lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM)
is a rare disorder that occurs exclusively in women. It is a
progressive disorder of women of childbearing age, marked by
lesions of smooth muscle and fat cells. Over the course of 8-10
years, the lesions destroy lung functioning and the result is
respiratory failure and death. Unfortunately, the medical
community knows little more about the pathogenesis of LAM now
than was known 50 years ago when the first case was reported.
The Committee believes that an important step in finding a cure
for this disease may be through the establishment of a national
registry for LAM patients which would allow the pooling of
experience from the largest number of individuals possible. The
Committee, therefore, encourages the Office of Research on
Women's Health, in conjunction with NHLBI and the Office of
Rare Disease Research, to fund research in this area, including
a possible national patient registry.
Office of Research on Minority Health.--The Office of
Research on Minority Health (ORMH) serves as the coordinating
office for minority health research and research training
activities at NIH. Through partnerships with the ICDs, and
other federal agencies and outside organizations, the ORMH
strives to improve the health status of all minorities and
increase the numbers of minority scientists. The ORMH provides
supplemental support to ICD projects, develops programs to
increase minority participation in clinical trials, and
initiates and develops programs to increase the competitiveness
of grant applications submitted by minority researchers.
Diabetes.--The Committee is pleased with the collaborative
efforts that the Office of Research on Minority Health (ORMH)
has pursued with NIDDK on research to promote the health of
minorities, particularly on the genetics of diabetes and the
treatment and prevention of the disease in minority
populations. The Committee urges the ORMH to continue its
support of cooperative efforts with NIDDK through the Minority
Health Initiative, and to continue to focus specifically on the
genetics of diabetes and the treatment and prevention of the
disease. The Committee also encourages the ORMH through the
Minority Health Initiative to explore collaborative
opportunities with the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention to support the expansion of the diabetes control
program.
Gastric cancer.--The bacterial infection H. pylori and
gastric cancer are more common in African Americans and
Hispanics than whites in the U.S. The Committee encourages the
Office of Research on Minority Health to collaborate with
NIDDK, NCI, and NIAID in research on H. pylori infection as it
relates to peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancer in minority
populations.
Office of AIDS Research (OAR).--The OAR is responsible for
coordination of the scientific, budgetary, legislative, and
policy elements of the NIH AIDS research program. The OAR
develops a comprehensive plan for NIH AIDS-related research
activities which is updated annually. The plan is the basis for
the President's budget distribution of AIDS-related funds to
the Institutes, centers and divisions within NIH. The Committee
expects the Director of NIH to use this plan and the budget
developed by OAR to guide his decisions on the allocation of
AIDS funding among the Institutes. In addition, the OAR
allocates an emergency AIDS discretionary fund to support
research that was not anticipated when budget allocations were
made. As noted in the introduction of the NIH section of the
report, the Committee continues to strongly support the OAR,
its leadership, and its coordinated budget planning process,
and it applauds the formation of the extramural review panel
which is conducting a broad-based evaluation of the NIH AIDS
research portfolio.
Office of Rare Disease Research.--This office was
established in recognition of the need to provide a focal point
of attention and coordination at NIH for research on rare
diseases. The office works with Federal and non-Federal
national and international organizations concerned with rare
disease research and orphan products development; develops a
centralized database on rare diseases research; and stimulates
rare diseases research by supporting scientific workshops and
symposia to identify research opportunities. The Committee
supports continued activity in this area, recognizing that
research on rare diseases, such as Lesch-Nyhan Syndrome, to
note one example, may well provide valuable scientific
knowledge with applicability to many other, more common
diseases.
Department of the Army AIDS research.--The Appropriations
Committee has transferred responsibility to NIH for primary
support of the extramural AIDS research program presently
funded by the Department of the Army; the Committee intends
that NIH fund the continuation costs of this program. At the
conclusion of the normal grant period, NIH will consider
further funding of this research in the context of its entire
AIDS research portfolio. The Committee expects NIH to support
the Army research without interruption in fiscal year 1996.
However, if NIH has concerns about funding some portion of this
research activity, the Director may submit a reprogramming
request to the Committee. The Committee expects research
cooperation to continue between NIH and the Department of the
Army.
Pediatric research.--The Committee recognizes the
substantial benefits that biomedical research offers to the
health and well being of our nation's children. Savings from
productive innovations in health care, derived from scientific
investigations of the highest quality, can be significant in
terms of dollars and quality of life for children. The
opportunities for advancements in the prevention and treatment
of diseases which affect children or begin in childhood have
never been greater.
The Committee is concerned that inadequate attention and
resources are devoted to pediatric research conducted and
supported by the National Institutes of Health. Most research
on the cause, treatment and cure of diseases which affect
children rely primarily on adults as subjects in clinical
trials. Consequently, treatment options which may be effective
for adults can have an adverse impact on the outcome of
children as well as on their future growth and development. The
Committee strongly encourages the NIH to strengthen its
portfolio of basic, behavioral and clinical research conducted
and supported by all of its relevant Institutes to establish
priorities for pediatric research, and to ensure the adequacy
of translational research from the laboratory to the clinical
setting. The Committee encourages the NIH to establish
guidelines to include children in clinical research trials
conducted and supported by NIH. The Committee expects NIH to
develop performance indicators to measure specific progress on
the above, demonstrated by the development of new programs or
strengthening of existing programs and to report to the
Committee prior to the 1997 appropriations hearings.
Osteoporosis.--The Committee urged in its 1995 report that
NIH continue to increase its support for research on
osteoporosis and related bone disorders and is pleased that
funding for this important problem has grown substantially
since 1991. The Committee believes these diseases should
continue to be a priority and requests the Department to submit
a report not later than January 15, 1996 on the specific steps
which have been taken by NIH in support of research on these
important problems, including a description of its research
priorities for fiscal year 1996.
Nutrition.--The Committee fully supports the new trans-NIH
nutrition initiative to bring the findings of basic science to
applications in human disease, and urges its continuation in
1996. Diet is a major factor associated with cancer, heart
disease, diabetes, hypertension, maternal and infant health,
and the aging process. Through research, understanding of the
impact of nutrition on disease as well as its clinical
application can be enhanced. This will assist in preventing
disease and its complications and provide savings for the
health care system. Nutrition research is particularly
important in the prevention of diseases associated with women's
health, including breast cancer and osteoporosis.
Clinical research.--The Committee is pleased that the NIH
Director has taken the initiative to appoint an advisory
committee on clinical research issues. The Committee agrees
with the concerns expressed in a 1994 Institute of Medicine
(IOM) report regarding the problems of training for and
pursuing careers in clinical research and is anxious to see NIH
implementation of some of the solutions identified in that
report. The Committee requests a report from the NIH Director
by January 1 as to the progress NIH is making toward three
initiatives recommended by the IOM: the expansion of clinical
research training opportunities, the expansion of the General
Clinical Research Centers program, and the development of a
loan forgiveness program for persons who pursue clinical
research careers.
Integrative medical sciences.--The NIH is encouraged to
foster implementation of programs to provide sound peer review
and funding of integrative medical sciences projects conducted
in intact vertebrates including humans. Enhancement is needed
both in the number of investigator-initiated research grants
and in training grants designed to replenish the pool of
scientists with the skills to conduct research at the level of
the intact animal. Restoration of our national capacity to
advance the understanding of human function and disease in the
integrative context is essential to developing suitable
preventions, treatments and diagnostic procedures.
Diagnostic radiology.--With the Committee's support,
research is now underway at the Laboratory for Diagnostic
Radiology Research to more accurately detect early stages of
breast and ovarian cancer, especially among younger women. As a
central focus for radiology research, the intramural laboratory
not only responds to these types of emerging health issues, but
can also enhance, through non-invasive imaging procedures, the
research capabilities of other intramural research teams as
well as assist extramural programs in identifying promising
areas of research. The Committee encourages this type of
activity and urges NIH to continue its support for the
laboratory.
Sleep disorders.--The Committee is concerned that while
NHLBI has proceeded with the establishment of the National
Center on Sleep Disorders Research, no mechanism has been
formally established to encourage grant collaboration between
the National Center and other NIH institutes that have an
interest in and a portfolio of sleep research activity. The
Committee requests that the NIH Director, the NHLBI Director,
the National Center and other Institutes conducting sleep
research prepare a plan for the Committee to review before the
1997 budget hearings that formalizes this mechanism of
scientific and program collaboration.
Transfer authority.--The Committee has included traditional
bill language permitting the Director of NIH to transfer up to
one percent of one NIH appropriation to another. The Committee
emphasizes that such transfers are subject to the normal
reprogramming procedures. The Committee notes that this
transfer authority could be used if the Director believes that
a reallocation among Institutes is necessary for implementation
of the AIDS plan developed by the Office of AIDS Research.
Minority issues.--The Committee notes that NIH has had a
continuing problem with regard to discrimination against
minorities and women, ranging from hiring to participation in
research. The Committee expects the NIH to continue to address
this problem and to provide a progress report at the time of
next year's appropriations hearing.
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
The bill includes $146,151,000 for buildings and
facilities, an increase of $2,031,000 over the amount requested
and $32,031,000 over the comparable 1995 appropriation.
Mission.--The Buildings and Facilities appropriation
provides for the design, construction, improvement, and major
repair of clinical, laboratory, and office buildings and
supporting facilities essential to the mission of the National
Institutes of Health. The funds in this appropriation support
the 77 buildings on the main NIH campus in Bethesda, Maryland;
the Animal Center in Poolesville, Maryland; the National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) facility in
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina; and other smaller
facilities throughout the United States. The NIH is developing
updated campus plans for both the Bethesda campus and the NIH
Animal Center in Poolesville, scheduled for completion in
December 1995.
Construction programs.--This account supports continued
essential safety and health improvements to maintain the
Clinical Center; the continuation of the campus infrastructure
modernization program as well as programs for power plant
safety, asbestos abatement, fire protection and life safety,
the elimination of barriers to persons with disabilities,
safety and reliability upgrades at the Rocky Mountain
Laboratory, and indoor air quality improvement.
Repairs and improvements.--Support is also provided for the
continuing program of repairs and improvements required to
maintain existing buildings and facilities.
Clinical center renewal program.--The Committee is aware
that NIH is considering a number of options to finance and
construct a new clinical center hospital facility. The
Committee expects to be notified of NIH's plans regarding
design and construction, both immediate and long-term, as well
as financing, before any financial or contractual commitments
are made to begin the project.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
The bill provides $1,788,946,000 for substance abuse and
mental health services activities for fiscal year 1996,
$392,384,000 below the 1995 appropriation for these programs
and $458,446,000 below the Administration request. The
Committee generally concurs with the Administration proposals
to consolidate programs and to establish national goals as well
as performance and outcomes measurements for substance abuse
and mental health services. The Committee believes that the
Administration should take the additional step of establishing
national standards and conditioning all funding on grantees'
demonstrated ability to achieve those standards and make
progress toward achieving the goals. The Committee notes that
the responsibility for providing substance abuse and mental
health services rests primarily with state and local
governments, and the private sector. The federal role should be
constrained to 1) fostering the development of goals, standards
and performance measures, 2) limited and shared demonstration
and dissemination, and 3) limited financial assistance to
states and providers.
The Committee is concerned about SAMHSA implementation of
the Government Performance and Responsibility Act (GPRA) and
directs the Administrator to take immediate action to fully
implement the law. The Committee further directs the SAMHSA
Administrator to be prepared to testify during the 1997 budget
hearings on all actions taken to implement GPRA.
While the legal authority for most programs administered by
SAMHSA has expired, the Committee has consolidated 26 programs
into 6, as permitted under previously enacted law and pending
enactment of new mental health and substance abuse legislation.
Specifically, the Committee has established a consolidated
demonstration program under general authority to support mental
health, substance abuse prevention and substance abuse
treatment activities which received separate line-item funding
in 1995 but are not separately funded in the bill. The
Committee has transferred funding from the pregnant women and
infants, pregnant/post-partum women and children, and high risk
youth programs--activities which it considers to be among the
highest previously funded priorities--to fund this new line
item. Activities previously supported under programs which have
been consolidated may be continued under general authority if
deemed by the SAMHSA Administrator to be a sufficiently high
priority; however, consistent with the President's request, the
Committee directs that no new grants be awarded for such
activities in 1996. The Administrator may fund new
demonstration programs as described in the Administration
proposal to reauthorize SAMHSA where such demonstrations are
authorized under previously enacted law.
In general, the Committee is concerned that the
relationship between federal, state, local and private
responsibilities regarding mental health and substance abuse
treatment and prevention has not been adequately delineated.
The federal government currently funds direct treatment and
prevention services as well as research and demonstration
projects to determine which types of treatment and systems of
delivery will work most effectively. The federal government
also provides start up and operating funding to grantees to
adopt successful strategies which have been demonstrated with
federal funding. Clearly, the federal government is neither
substantively competent nor financially able to assume
effective responsibility for all of these roles. The Committee
is especially concerned that the multi-billion dollar federal
investment in demonstration programs, which exceeded half a
billion dollars in 1995 alone, has not sufficiently impacted
the practice of substance abuse treatment and prevention. While
this investment has produced voluminous information on
potential improvements in the practice of treatment and
prevention, little has been disseminated and ultimately
implemented. Rather, demonstration funding has often been
treated as temporary operating capital with successfully
demonstrated activities lapsing as federal grant funding
expires. Therefore, the Committee has provided funding only to
continue high priority demonstrations pending restructuring of
the substance abuse prevention and treatment fields to more
productively integrate demonstrated activities in general
practice.
SAMHSA is responsible for supporting mental health,
alcoholism, and other drug abuse prevention and treatment
services nationwide through categorical grants and block grants
to States. The agency consists of three principal centers: the
Center for Mental Health Services, the Center for Substance
Abuse Treatment, and the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention.
In addition, the Office of the Administrator is responsible for
overall agency management with the exception of the Office of
External Review (OER) which administers grant selection for the
three service agencies.
The Committee is concerned about the administrative
inefficiency inherent in operating three agencies to provide
substance abuse and mental health services. It is particularly
concerned about the maintenance of two agencies to administer
substance abuse prevention and substance abuse treatment
services, particularly since grants review--a principal
function of substance abuse and prevention programs--is
centralized externally to both at the Office of External
Review. By contrast, 48 states operate a single administrative
authority to provide substance abuse prevention and substance
abuse treatment services. The Committee directs the
Administrator to begin consolidating substance abuse treatment
and prevention activities in a single administrative authority
to the extent possible within the constraints of the law and
further directs the Administrator to be prepared to report to
the Committee during the fiscal year 1997 budget hearings on
progress regarding consolidation of all three operating
agencies.
Mental Health and Substance Abuse Demonstrations
The bill includes funding pursuant to general authority
provided in sections 501(d)(2), (4), (5), (8), and 501(m) of
the Public Health Service Act to continue substance abuse and
mental health activities funded in 1995 but not separately
appropriated in the 1996 bill. This appropriation includes
funds transferred from the pregnant and post-partum women and
infants program at CSAT, and the high risk youth and the
pregnant women and infants programs currently administered by
CSAP. The Committee considers these programs to be the highest
priorities among the programs not separately funded in the
bill. However, the Committee wishes to emphasize that any
mental health or substance abuse activity funded in 1995 but
not separately funded in this bill may be continued with
demonstration funding if it represents a sufficiently high
priority in the judgment of the SAMHSA Administrator to merit
additional support. The Committee expects that new
demonstration grants, with the exception of those newly
proposed in the Administration's reauthorization proposal, will
not be initiated during this period of fiscal constraint and
pending reauthorization.
Center for Mental Health Services
Mental Health Block Grant
The bill includes $275,420,000 for this block grant, the
same as the 1995 appropriation. The budget included funding for
this program as part of a larger consolidated block grant
including the PATH grants for the homeless. The bill does not
continue funding for the PATH formula grants to states for
homeless activities which may be performed under authority of
the mental health block grant.
The mental health block grant provides funds to States to
support mental health prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation
services. The funds are allocated among the States according to
a statutory formula. Comprehensive state mental health planning
requirements are an integral part of the block grant program.
State planning councils are designed to create strong networks
of families, providers, and consumers to direct Federal
resources to local needs. State plans must be submitted as part
of the annual block grant application, and approval of the plan
is necessary before a grant may be awarded. Each year, States
also must submit an implementation report of the activities of
the previous year, and the agency must determine whether the
State has adequately implemented its plan for the previous
year. States which fail to implement plans for each fiscal year
are subject to a penalty against the block grant award.
The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for
the clinical and AIDS training programs, community support
demonstrations, homeless services or AIDS demonstrations. The
States are encouraged to evaluate projects previously funded by
these programs and not supported with demonstration funding
provided in the bill to determine whether they constitute
sufficiently high priority to merit continued funding under the
general block grant authority.
Children's mental health
The bill includes $60,000,000 for the fourth year of
funding for the grant program for comprehensive community
mental health services for children with serious emotional
disturbance authorized by part E of Title V of the Public
Health Service Act. This appropriation is the same as the 1995
amount and the Administration request. Despite the great need
to downsize programs under its jurisdiction, the Committee
believes this program serves an important and underserved need
which merits continued funding. The Committee is particularly
pleased with the strong evaluation component required for each
approved grant and looks forward to reviewing the results of
these evaluations. The bill provides full funding to continue
all 22 demonstration projects through 1996.
Grants and technical assistance support community-based
services for children and adolescents up to age 22 with serious
emotional, behavioral, or mental disorders. The program
provides funding to States and local jurisdictions for the
development of integrated systems of community care. Each child
or adolescent served through the program receives an individual
service plan developed with the participation of the family and
the child. Grantees are required to provide increasing levels
of matching funds over the five year grant period. The
Committee believes that the existing 22 grants are sufficient
to demonstrate the potential success of integrated systems of
care for children. Further nationwide adoption of these models
is the responsibility of state, local and private mental health
service providers, and dissemination of these models and their
results should be a primary responsibility of those national
mental health organizations which are concerned about the needs
of children.
Clinical training/AIDS training
The bill does not provide separate funding for the clinical
training and AIDS training programs in 1996 consistent with the
President's proposal to consolidate this program into a larger
demonstration activity. The President's proposal is not
currently authorized by law. The Congress provided $5,394,000
for these activities in 1995. The Committee believes that these
activities are not primarily federal responsibilities and
should not be separately funded during periods of fiscal
constraint. The bill does provide $141,889,000 pursuant to the
general authority accorded SAMHSA under section 501 of the
Public Health Service Act which may be used to continue
clinical and AIDS training if SAMHSA determines these
activities are sufficiently high priorities to merit continued
support with limited resources.
The clinical training program awards grants to public and
private non-profit institutions to train personnel to deliver
services to specifically designated underserved populations and
to train minority students and students preparing to work in
rural areas.
The AIDS training program awards grants and contracts for
the education of mental health care providers to address the
neuropsychiatric and psychosocial aspects of HIV infection.
Trainees may include psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses,
psychiatric social workers, psychologists, marriage and family
counselors, medical students, primary care residents, clergy,
police, and alternative health care site providers.
In general, the Committee believes that providing clinical
training is not a primary federal responsibility. Further,
assistance, when provided, should be more appropriately awarded
to individuals rather than institutions as is the case with the
current clinical training program. Regarding AIDS training, the
Committee believes that the responsibility for educating
providers in the provision of services to people with AIDS
rests with first with the institutions which provide education
in mental health treatment and second with the employers of
social services providers. The Committee has taken similar
action with regard to the HRSA AIDS education and training
program.
Community support demonstrations
The bill does not provide separate funding for the
community support demonstrations consistent with the
President's proposal to consolidate this program into a larger
demonstration activity. Neither the community support
demonstrations nor the President's consolidated demonstration
proposal are currently authorized by law. The Congress provided
$24,184,000 for this program in 1995. The bill does provide
$141,889,000 pursuant to the general authority accorded SAMHSA
under sections 501(d)(2), (4), (5), (8) and section 501(m) of
the Public Health Service Act which may be used to continue
existing community support demonstration projects if SAMHSA
determines these activities are sufficiently high priorities to
merit continued support with limited resources.
The Committee notes that 303 community support
demonstration projects will have been completed by the end of
fiscal year 1995. The effectiveness and value of these types of
demonstrations will have been well demonstrated by that time.
Individual communities are now responsible for familiarizing
themselves with effective federally-supported demonstrations
and adopting successfully mental health strategies according to
their own priorities and as limited public resources permit.
The Committee notes that the child and adolescent service
system program duplicates the purposes of the children's mental
health program which is fully funded in the bill.
Community support demonstration awards fund projects to
increase the effectiveness of community-based mental health
services for adults and statewide service systems. The
Committee notes that CMHS used its 1995 appropriation to
initiate programs to support strategies to empower consumer and
family networks to strengthen their ability to participate in
State and local mental health services planning, national self-
help technical assistance centers to support the development of
consumer roles in service planning and delivery, and outreach
counseling services to the families of displaced coal miners.
Community support demonstrations also support projects designed
to improve systems of service delivery for children and
adolescents with severe emotional disturbance.
Grants to the States for the homeless (PATH)
The bill does not provide separate funding for grants to
the States for the homeless program. All activities currently
funded under the PATH grants may also be funded under the
mental health block grant. The budget request proposes to
consolidate these two formula grants into one grant program.
Congress provided $29,462,000 for this program in 1995. The
Committee notes that neither the mental health block grant nor
the PATH grants are currently authorized in law.
Under both the mental health block grant and the PATH
formula grants, the States have primary responsibility for
identifying priorities and allocating funding among competing
needs as limited resources permit. The Committee believes that
States, by virtue of participation in the PATH grants program,
are well aware of their responsibility to respond to the needs
of the homeless and those at imminent risk of becoming
homeless. The Committee has therefore consolidated these two
grant programs to invest states with the authority to make
priority decisions regarding the allocation of limited mental
health services funding and to achieve federal administrative
efficiency. All services and activities provided with PATH
funding may also be provided under the general authority of the
mental health block grant, and the States and SAMHSA are
encouraged to continue to provide services and support to the
homeless and those at imminent risk of becoming homeless when
such service provision represents sufficiently high priority to
merit continued support with limited resources.
The PATH program provides formula grants to the States to
assist individuals who suffer from severe mental illness alone
or in combination with substance abuse and who are homeless or
at imminent risk of becoming homeless. Grants may be used for
outreach, screening and diagnostic treatment, rehabilitation,
community mental health services, alcohol or drug treatment,
training, case management, supportive and supervisory
assistance in residential settings, and limited housing
assistance.
Homeless service demonstrations
The bill does not provide separate funding for homeless
service demonstrations consistent with the President's proposal
to consolidate this program into a larger demonstration
activity. Neither the homeless service demonstrations nor the
President's proposed demonstration program are currently
authorized by law. The Congress provided $21,227,000 for this
program in 1995. The bill does provide $141,889,000 pursuant to
the general authority accorded SAMHSA under sections 501(d)
(2), (4), (5), (8) and section 501(m) of the Public Health
Service Act which may be used to continue existing homeless
service demonstration projects if SAMHSA determines these
activities are sufficiently high priorities to merit continued
support with limited resources.
The Committee notes that 16 homeless service demonstration
grants in a variety of urban and rural settings will have been
completed by the conclusion of 1995. The effectiveness and
value of these types of demonstrations will have been
adequately demonstrated by that time. Individual states and
communities are now responsible for familiarizing themselves
with effective federally-supported demonstrations and adopting
successfully mental health strategies according to their own
priorities and as limited public resources permit. The
Committee notes that homeless services as demonstrated under
this program may be provided with federal mental health block
grant funding when grantees deem such services sufficiently
high priority to merit the allocation of limited federal
resources.
Protection and advocacy
The bill provides $19,500,000 for the protection and
advocacy program, a reduction of $2,260,000 below the budget
request and $2,457,000 below the 1995 appropriation. This
funding is distributed to States according to a formula based
on population and income. This program assists State-designated
independent advocates who provide legal assistance on behalf of
mentally ill individuals during their residence in inpatient
facilities and for 90 days following their discharge.
The Committee believes that protection and advocacy is a
sufficiently unique, effective and important program to merit
continued funding during this period of fiscal constraint. The
Committee further notes that the President and both
Congressional committees of jurisdiction have indicated their
intention to provide a separate authorization for this activity
in the pending CMHS reauthorization.
AIDS demonstrations
The bill provides $1,487,000 for the AIDS mental health
demonstrations program, the same as the 1995 funding level. The
President proposed to consolidate and then phase out this
program as part of a larger consolidated activity which has not
been previously authorized in law. This program provides 5-year
grants to public and non-profit private organizations to assist
individuals who are experiencing severe psychological distress
as a result of being informed that they are HIV positive. The
recommendation will provide the 3rd year of assistance to 11
grantees to continue these projects.
The Committee commends CMHS for leadership in working
cooperatively with HRSA and NIMH to fund these cooperative
agreements demonstrating delivery of mental health services to
individuals affected by and living with HIV/AIDS and one
coordinating center to independently evaluate the quality and
effectiveness of these services. The Committee encourages the
Secretary to maintain these agencies' support for this program.
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment
Substance abuse block grant
The bill includes $1,234,107,000 for the substance abuse
block grant, the same as the 1995 funding level and $60,000,000
below the President's request. The Committee notes that the
block grant is not currently authorized in law but that the
President and both Congressional committees of jurisdiction
have indicated their intention to provide separate authority
for this grant program in the substance abuse reauthorization.
While the Committee wishes to provide more flexibility to
States, it also believes the Administration must develop
substance abuse prevention and treatment goals, standards and
performance measures and incorporate substance abuse evaluation
into all federal substance abuse programs. The Committee is
aware of a substantial body of anecdotal evidence which
purports to demonstrate the effectiveness and economic
efficiency of substance abuse treatment. However, as the 1996
budget hearings revealed, SAMHSA has developed few if any
comprehensive evaluation tools, and the Committee has little
basis on which to evaluate the effectiveness of the overall
federal investment in substance abuse prevention and treatment.
The Committee commends SAMHSA for its emphasis on developing
goals and standards and requiring outcomes measurement. The
Committee notes that these activities can be fully implemented
without further legislation and directs SAMHSA to submit
reliable and comprehensive information regarding the
effectiveness of federal substance abuse programs in support of
future requests for funding.
The substance abuse block grant provides funds to States to
support alcohol and drug abuse prevention, treatment, and
rehabilitation services. Funds are allocated among the States
according to a statutory formula. State applications, including
comprehensive state plans, must be submitted annually and
approved by SAMHSA prior to release of funds.
Treatment grants to crisis areas
The bill does not provide separate funding for this
program, a decrease of $35,520,000 below the 1995 level,
consistent with the President's proposal to consolidate the
program into a larger demonstration authority. Neither the
treatment grants to crisis areas program nor the President's
proposal are currently authorized by law. The bill does provide
consolidated demonstration funding with which continuing crisis
grants may be supported if deemed a sufficiently high priority
to merit continued support in the judgment of the SAMHSA
Administrator. In addition, States may use substance abuse
block grant funding to support any of the activities previously
supported by this program if they are deemed to be sufficiently
high priorities to merit the allocation of limited resources.
Projects funded by this program focus on the development of
intergovernmental cooperative agreements designed to improve
treatment systems in metropolitan areas and to integrate
substance abuse services with other social services including
health care, education, justice programs and labor services.
Projects focus heavily on centralized intake, assessment, and
referral systems. Little, if any, of the program funding
provides actual substance abuse treatment. The Committee
believes that these systems improvement activities, while
important to improving social service delivery, are not the
primary responsibility of the federal government and do not
merit separate line-item funding during this period of fiscal
constraint. Eight multi-year crisis area grants were funded to
completion in 1994 and eleven others will be fully operational
in 1995. The Committee believes that the value of systems
integration as demonstrated by these 19 projects will have been
well established by the close of fiscal year 1995, and the
responsibility for continuing these systems improvements rests
with the state and local institutions with primary
responsibility for substance abuse and related social services
delivery.
Treatment improvement demonstration grants
Pregnant and post-partum women and children
The bill transfers $54,228,000, an amount equal to the 1995
appropriation for this program and $4,156,000 above the amount
necessary to continue existing grants in 1996, to the new
consolidated mental health and substance abuse demonstration
program. The President's budget requests consolidation of this
program in a larger demonstration program. Neither the
President's proposal nor the pregnant and post-partum women and
children program are currently authorized in law. The funding
provided in the bill may support continuing multi-year grants
for the pregnant and post-partum women and children program.
The Committee considers these grants to be among the highest
priority projects previously funded by SAMHSA. Nevertheless,
the bill vests the Administrator with the final authority to
determine independently which SAMHSA program grants among those
continuing from 1995 are the highest priorities and merit
continued federal support in 1996. Consistent with the
President's SAMHSA reauthorization proposal, the Committee
expects that no new multi-year pregnant and post-partum women
and children grants will be funded under this program in 1996.
Program funds provide grants for comprehensive treatment
services in residential settings which permit infants and
children to live with their mothers. In addition, grants may
support a comprehensive array of health, education and other
social services for mothers and their children. Grantees must
provide between 10% and 25% of program funding during the
three-year federal grant cycle.
While the Committee has provided funding to continue the
pregnant and post-partum women and children program in 1996, it
wishes to indicate that these grants are made on a temporary
basis for the purpose of demonstrating successful residential
treatment options for mothers and children; they are not
ongoing operating subsidies for treatment and other social
services. With 71 projects currently awarded, the Committee
believes that the value of residential treatment for mothers
and children will have been adequately demonstrated by the
close of 1996. States, local governments and private service
organizations must then assume primary responsibility for
learning of and implementing successful demonstrations with
non-federal resources or with resources provided through the
federal block grants.
Criminal justice program
The bill does not provide separate funding for the criminal
justice program, a decrease of $37,502,000 below the 1995
level, consistent with the President's proposal to consolidate
these activities in a larger demonstration authority. Neither
the criminal justice program nor the President's proposal are
currently authorized by law. The bill does provide $141,889,000
in consolidated demonstration funding to continue previously-
funded mental health and substance abuse demonstrations which
the SAMHSA Administrator considers to be the highest priorities
for the agency.
The criminal justice program provides grants to state and
local justice systems to demonstrate the effectiveness of
treatment for incarcerated individuals and parolees. Projects
may support diversion-to-treatment and alternative sentencing
programs, treatment for prisoners, and treatment for high risk
probation/parole clients.
The Committee emphasizes that 91 criminal justice
demonstration projects will have been funded to completion by
the end of fiscal year 1995, and it believes that the relative
value of the various programs of criminal justice treatment and
systems improvement will have been thoroughly demonstrated by
that time. State and local justice systems must now assume the
responsibility for learning of and implementing successful
federally-funded criminal justice strategies. States are
permitted to use federal block grant funds for these purposes
when, in the States' judgment, they represent sufficiently high
priority to merit the allocation of limited substance abuse
treatment resources.
Consistent with the 1995 appropriation and the President's
request, the bill does not provide separate funding for the
National Capital Area Treatment Demonstration program
authorized under section 571 of the Public Health Service Act.
Designated populations
The bill does not provide separate funding for treatment
demonstrations involving designated populations, a decrease of
$23,561,000 below the 1995 appropriation, consistent with the
President's proposal to consolidate funding for these
activities in a larger demonstration authority. Neither the
designated populations program nor the President's proposal are
currently authorized in law. The bill does provide a
consolidated source of funding to continue demonstration
programs funded in 1995 but not separately appropriated in
1996. The SAMHSA Administrator may award funding from this new
appropriation of $141,889,000 to support the highest priority
continuing demonstrations, including those previously funded
under the designated populations program. Consistent with the
President's request, the Committee expects that no new grants
serving designated populations will be awarded in 1996 during
this period of constrained resources.
The designated populations program awards grants to provide
outpatient substance abuse treatment services for specified
populations including individuals in rural areas, adolescents,
racial and ethnic minorities, women and their children, and
families at risk of entering the child welfare system. Projects
are designed to initiate contacts with designated population
groups and to encourage individuals to enter treatment.
The Committee notes that 140 designated population grants
will have been funded to completion by the end of 1995, a
sufficient number to have substantially demonstrated the value
of engaging designated populations in outpatient treatment. The
Committee believes that the States, local governments, national
substance abuse treatment organizations and other treatment
services providers must now assume full responsibility for
learning about, disseminating and implementing successful
designated populations demonstrations as limited treatment
resources permit. States are permitted to designate federal
substance abuse block grant funding for the purposes of this
program when such projects are deemed to be sufficiently high
priority to merit the allocation of limited substance abuse
treatment resources.
Comprehensive community treatment programs
The bill does not provide separate funding for the
comprehensive community treatment programs, a decrease of
$27,277,000 below the 1995 appropriation, consistent with the
President's proposal to consolidate this program into a larger
demonstration authority. Neither the comprehensive community
treatment programs nor the President's proposal are currently
authorized in law. The bill does provide $141,889,000 for a
consolidated demonstration program under general authority from
which the SAMHSA Administrator may fund the highest priority
continuing demonstration projects from 1995, including projects
previously funded under this program. Consistent with the
President's request, the Committee expects that no new
comprehensive community treatment programs will be awarded in
1996.
This program supports grants for a wide variety of planning
and systems improvement as well as collaborative activities
with other federal agencies. The Committee notes that many of
the projects previously funded by this program duplicate the
purposes of other federal programs including some at SAMHSA.
The program has supported projects involving treatment in Job
Corps centers, homeless individuals, individuals receiving SSI
by virtue of a substance abuse-related impairment, strategies
for diversion from incarceration, disaster areas, and projects
in rural and remote areas focusing on Native Americans,
Hawaiian Natives and Native Alaskans.
The Committee believes that this program has supported
projects of value, however limited federal resources should be
focused on direct treatment and prevention rather than on
systems improvement which is an essential responsibility of
substance abuse treatment providers. The Committee notes that
all activities previously conducted under this program may be
continued with federal block grant funding if they are deemed
to be sufficiently high priorities to merit the allocation of
limited resources.
Training
The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for
the substance abuse treatment training program, a decrease of
$5,590,000 below the 1995 appropriation, consistent with the
President's request to consolidate this program into a larger
demonstration authority. Neither the substance abuse treatment
training program nor the President's proposal are currently
authorized in law. The bill does provide $141,889,000 for a
consolidated demonstration program under general authority from
which the SAMHSA Administrator may award funding to the highest
priority projects funded in 1995 but not separately
appropriated in 1996. Consistent with the President's budget
request, the Committee expects that no new addiction training
centers will be awarded in 1996.
The training program supports two primary training
activities. First CSAT has awarded eleven Addiction Training
Centers (ATCs) primarily to universities to establish networks
responsible for training a cadre of health and allied health
practitioners in the addiction treatment and recovery field.
These ATCs were established in 1993 and will be fully
operational in 1995. Second, CSAT operates the Project for
Addiction Counselor Training (PACT) to provide career
development opportunities to assist individuals to obtain
counseling accreditation. The budget request indicates the
project will be phased down in 1995 with no further funding
requested in 1996.
The Committee believes that training of treatment services
providers is an important element of the nationwide drug
control effort but is not a primary federal responsibility and
should not be funded separately during this period of fiscal
constraint. Nevertheless, the States are permitted to use
federal block grant funding for training activities when they
are deemed to be sufficiently high priorities to merit
allocation of limited substance abuse treatment resources.
AIDS demonstration and training
The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for
the AIDS demonstration and training programs, a decrease of
$18,026,000 below the 1995 level. The President proposed to
consolidate these programs into a larger demonstration
authority. Neither the President's proposal nor the AIDS
demonstration and training programs are currently authorized in
law. The bill provides a total of $141,889,000 for a
consolidated demonstration program under general authority from
which the SAMHSA Administrator may fund the highest priority
continuing demonstration projects which were funded
categorically in 1995 but are not separately appropriated in
1996. Consistent with the President's request, the Committee
expects that no new grants will be initiated under this program
in 1996.
The AIDS outreach program awards grants to organizations to
engage particularly difficult to reach populations, including
injecting drug users, their sexual partners and other high risk
substance abusers, in drug treatment and health services. The
Committee is aware that evaluations of previously-funded
programs indicate reductions in high risk abuse behavior as
well as reduced transmission of HIV. The Committee notes that
fourteen projects have already been completed, fourteen more
will have been awarded by the conclusion of 1995, and 20
projects in all will have been completed by the start of fiscal
year 1996. The Committee believes that these 34 demonstrations
will effectively demonstrate the relative value of AIDS
outreach activities. State and local health and substance abuse
officials and national representative organizations must now
assume responsibility for learning of, disseminating and
implementing successful AIDS outreach programs as resources
permit.
The AIDS linkage program is a collaborative effort with the
Health Resources and Services Administration to coordinate a
broad array of substance abuse treatment, health, and other
social services for injecting drug users, their sexual partners
and other high risk individuals. The Committee notes that this
program substantially duplicates the purposes of the outreach
program and does not believe it should be separately funded
during this period of fiscal constraint. However, the
Administrator may continue funding existing projects from the
consolidated demonstration program fund, if, in her judgment,
they represent sufficiently high priority to merit continued
funding with limited federal resources.
The AIDS training program, through a series of courses and
workshops, supports the education of substance abuse treatment
staff in providing HIV-related services. The Committee does not
believe that the training of health care workers is a federal
responsibility, and substance abuse and health care providers--
whether state, local or private--must assume the primary
responsibility for these activities.
While line-item funding has been discontinued for the AIDS
Linkage and AIDS Outreach programs, the Committee believes that
the important function of outreach to substance abusers should
be fully integrated into the community-based HIV prevention
programs at the CDC. Thus, the Committee strongly encourages
CSAT and CDC to work together in assuring that outreach to
substance abusers is given careful consideration in the HIV
community planning process at the CDC.
All of the activities previously funded by the AIDS
demonstration and training programs may be supported with
federal block grant monies if SAMHSA or the States consider
them to be sufficiently high priorities to merit continued
funding with limited resources.
Capacity expansion program
The bill does not provide funding for the capacity
expansion program consistent with the President's request.
Congress provided $6,701,000 for the program in 1995 to finance
the final year of continuing grants.
Center for substance abuse prevention
Prevention demonstrations
The bill provides $141,889,000 for a consolidated mental
health and substance abuse demonstration program which is
generally authorized under section 501 of the Public Health
Service Act. This new program is funded in part through
transfers from the high risk youth program and the pregnant
women and infants programs previously funded through CSAP. This
consolidated program will allow the Administrator to continue
support for the highest priority projects continuing from 1995
but not separately funded in the bill.
The Committee is concerned that CSAP may have adopted an
informal policy of funding only grantees which have not
received funding from sources within the alcohol or tobacco
industries. The Committee believes that grants should be funded
solely on the basis of merit, not on the basis of whether
individual grantees may have received funding from
organizations of which the CSAP leadership does not approve.
Accordingly, the Committee directs SAMHSA to discontinue any
such policy whether formal or informal.
High risk youth
The bill transfers $65,160,000 for the high risk youth
demonstrations program, the same amount appropriated for 1995
and $15,088,000 above the amount necessary to continue ongoing
grants in 1996, to the new consolidated mental health and
substance abuse demonstration grants program. The President
proposed to consolidate this program into a larger
demonstration authority which is not currently authorized by
law. The Committee considers high risk youth grants to be among
the highest priority projects funded in 1995, and has provided
funding to continue all 132 existing grants in 1996. The
Committee encourages SAMHSA to focus resources on the children
of substance abusers--those at highest risk. The Committee
notes that 228 projects will have been completed by the
conclusion of 1995 and when combined with the potential 132
continuing grants in 1996 will have sufficiently demonstrated
the value of focusing resources on high risk youth. State,
local and private substance abuse professionals must then
assume full responsibility for learning of, disseminating and
implementing successful high risk youth substance abuse
prevention strategies.
The high risk youth program supports demonstration and
evaluation of strategies to prevent and reduce the use of
alcohol, tobacco and other drug use among specific populations
of youth at risk for such use. In addition, some projects
demonstrate strategies to prevent substance abuse-related
violence among or affecting youth ages 6-14 and others focus on
the specific needs of adolescent females.
Finally, the Committee notes that high risk youth
prevention activities may be funded with federal block grant
monies and the States are encouraged to do so when these
programs represent a sufficiently high priority to merit the
allocation of limited resources.
Pregnant women and infants
The bill transfers $22,501,000, the same amount
appropriated for this purpose in 1995 and $14,224,000 above the
amount necessary to fully fund the 16 continuing grants in
1996, to the new consolidated mental health and substance abuse
demonstration grants program authorized under general
authority. The President proposed to consolidate this program
into a larger demonstration authority which is not currently
authorized in law. The Committee encourages SAMHSA to focus
resources on the children of substance abusers--those at
highest risk. The Committee notes that 41 projects will have
been completed by the conclusion of 1995 and when combined with
the potential 16 continuing grants will have sufficiently
demonstrated the value of focusing resources on pregnant women
and infants. State, local and private substance abuse
professionals must then assume full responsibility for learning
of, disseminating and implementing successful pregnant women
and infants substance abuse prevention strategies.
The pregnant women and infants program awards grants to
develop models for coordinating substance abuse and health
promotion services to reduce substance abuse among pregnant
women, prevent the birth of drug-addicted babies, and improve
the general health of mothers and their infants. The Committee
is aware of evidence indicating the success of individual
projects in achieving these goals and encourages CSAP to
refocus resources for all grants on measuring outcomes against
control communities and quantifying the economic costs and
benefits of implementing these demonstrations.
The Committee notes that States may use federal block grant
funding to support pregnant women and infants demonstrations
and to generally implement successfully demonstrated strategies
when such activities represent a sufficiently high priority to
merit the allocation of limited resources.
Community partnership grants
The bill does not provide separate funding for the
community partnership grants, a decrease of $114,741,000 below
the 1995 appropriation. The President's request proposes to
consolidate the program into a larger demonstration authority.
Neither the program nor the President's proposal are currently
authorized in law. The bill does provide $141,889,000 for a new
consolidated mental health and substance abuse demonstration
program under general authority provided in section 501 of the
Public Health Service Act. With this funding, the SAMHSA
Administrator is authorized to fund the highest priority
demonstration programs which continue from 1995 but are not
separately funded in the bill for 1996.
The Committee emphasizes that community partnership grants
help to improve coordination of local service delivery and do
not directly fund substance abuse services. Over 200 community
partnerships will have been fully funded through completion by
the conclusion of 1995, not including 100 new projects which
will be awarded during the year. The federal government has
provided these resources to exhaustively demonstrate and
evaluate several hundred separate community-based strategies
for improving substance abuse prevention, and the Committee
believes this substantial investment is more than sufficient to
adequately demonstrate the value of coordinating criminal
justice, substance abuse, education, health and other services
at the community level. Information on all demonstrated
community partnerships will be available nationwide to all
service providers, states and municipal governments interested
in improving substance abuse prevention and other social
services. The Committee expects that having fulfilled the
federal responsibility to fund research to determine which
prevention strategies are most effective, states and
communities will fulfill their responsibility to implement
successful prevention strategies with state and local
resources. Failure of states and communities generally to do so
would render the previous federal investment of several hundred
millions of dollars meaningless.
Public education and dissemination
The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for
the CSAP public education and dissemination activities, a
decrease of $13,465,000 below the 1995 level, consistent with
the President's proposal to consolidate this program into a
larger demonstration authority. The President's proposal is not
currently authorized by law. The bill does provide consolidated
demonstration funding under general authority from which the
SAMHSA Administrator may fund the highest priority continuing
demonstration activities which are not separately funded in
1996.
The Committee believes that this program supports several
important national activities including the collection and
reporting of data on drug use and abuse which would be more
appropriately funded through the 5% federal administrative set-
aside in the substance abuse block grant. These activities are
expressly identified in the block grant authorizing law.
Training
The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for
the CSAP training programs, a decrease of $16,049,000 below the
1995 level, consistent with the President's proposal to
consolidate this program into a larger demonstration authority.
The President's proposal is not currently authorized by law.
The bill does provide consolidated demonstration funding under
general authority from which the SAMHSA Administrator may fund
the highest priority continuing demonstration and training
activities which are not separately funded in 1996.
The Committee believes that training is not a primary
responsibility of the federal government and should more
properly be provided by schools of medicine and health and
substance abuse professionals and their employers. This program
supports three types of training: community prevention, health
systems and professionals, and medical education. The community
prevention program focuses on cultural diversity, violence
prevention and community resource building in providing
training to community residents and professionals. The CSAP
training system has provided courses attended by physicians,
physician assistants, dentists, nurses, social workers, mental
health counselors, and health maintenance organization and
migrant health center personnel. The medical education program
provides 26 grants to schools of medicine, nursing and social
work to incorporate drug prevention training in their regular
curricula.
The Committee notes that States are already permitted to
use federal block grant funding for training programs when, in
their judgment, they represent sufficiently high priorities to
merit the allocation of limited resources.
Program management
The bill provides $56,543,000 for program management,
$4,585,000 below the 1995 appropriation and $1,499,000 below
the Administration request. The President's proposal to reduce
funding for these purposes is based on the consolidation of 26
programs into 7 and the assumption that existing demonstration
programs which consume substantial administrative resources
relative to overall program funding will be phased out.
However, the Administration has declined requests to indicate
the level of out-year savings associated with the consolidation
proposal as existing grants expire and free up administrative
resources for other purposes. Because the President's
consolidated demonstrations are not authorized by law and
because the Committee has not received sufficient information
regarding the out-year impact of the proposal on administrative
costs, the Committee has adopted an alternative consolidated
demonstration program which is permitted under previously-
enacted general authority. Based on information provided by the
agency, the Committee approved the level of funding for program
management necessary to administer the six remaining SAMHSA
programs including the consolidated demonstrations.
In addition to the general concerns cited above regarding
the inherent inefficiency of operating three separate substance
abuse and mental health agencies, the Committee is concerned
about the level of duplication of activities supported with
program management resources. For instance, each of the three
operating agencies as well as the Office of the Administrator
retain budget, public relations and congressional affairs
operations--functions which should more appropriately be
centralized within the Office of the Administrator.
Accordingly, the Committee directs SAMHSA to re-examine its
administrative structure and to streamline management of the
agency to improve efficiency, reduce duplication of effort, and
contain costs.
The program management activity provides funding to
coordinate, direct and manage the agency's programs. Funds are
used for salaries, benefits, space, supplies, equipment, travel
and overhead.
Assistant Secretary for Health
office of the assistant secretary for health
The bill terminates separate funding for the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH) and reassigns priority
activities previously funded in the OASH to the Office of the
Secretary. The Committee has been extremely disappointed with
the lack of progress in downsizing and streamlining middle
management activity within the OASH.
The Committee notes that the Department recently indicated
its intention to consolidate the management functions of the
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health with the Office of
the Secretary. Given the elevation of the Social Security
Administration to independent status, the Committee supports
the consolidation and downsizing of these health policy making
and management functions. The Committee commends the
Administration for the progress it has made in these areas but
believes that far more progress is both possible and desirable
in 1996.
Adolescent family life
The bill transfers $6,698,000 for the adolescent family
life abstinence counseling program, the same as the 1995
appropriation and $554,000 above the President's request to the
Office of the Secretary.
Disease prevention and health promotion
The bill does not provide funding for the disease
prevention and health promotion program, a decrease of
$4,604,000 below the 1995 comparable appropriation and
$4,601,000 below the President's request.
According to the budget request, this program is designed
to provide ``leadership, coordination, and policy development
related to prevention,'' to assist the Assistant Secretary to
``coordinate and work collaboratively with PHS agencies, other
Federal departments, and private voluntary, professional, and
trade associations to implement programs and provide services
that support and monitor targeted improvements in key priority
areas for health promotion and disease prevention,'' and to
provide leadership in carrying out the Secretary's priorities.
The Committee believes these activities should be carried out
within the resources provided for the Office of the Secretary.
Physical fitness and sports
The bill transfers $1,000,000 to the Office of the
Secretary to continue operation of the President's Council on
Physical Fitness & Sports, a decrease of $407,000 from the 1995
comparable appropriation and $406,000 below the Administration
request for 1996.
Minority health
The bill transfers $20,631,000 for the Office of Minority
Health to the Office of the Secretary, the same as the 1995
comparable appropriation and $39,000 above the President's
budget request.
National Vaccine Coordinating Office
The bill does not provide funding for the national vaccine
coordinating office, a decrease of $996,000 from the 1995
comparable appropriation and $995,000 from the President's
original budget request. The Secretary recently notified
Congress of her decision to transfer the remaining 1995 funding
for this office to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention thereby terminating the separate National Vaccine
Coordinating Office. The Committee notes that this office does
not directly provide for the manufacture, purchase,
distribution or delivery of vaccines. Rather, it attempts to
coordinate the activities of various government agencies
involved in these vaccine activities, and its mission is
carried out in conjunction with another coordinating agency as
well as a vaccine advisory committee. The Federal government
spent over $1.4 billion on vaccine programs and activities in
1995. The Committee does not believe that an additional level
of management is necessary to ensure the effective delivery of
vaccines to Americans and concurs with the Secretary's decision
to terminate the vaccine office.
Office of Research Integrity
The bill transfers $3,858,000 for the Office of Research
Integrity (ORI) to the Office of the Secretary. This amount is
the same as the budget request and $5,000 below the 1995
appropriation.
Office on Women's Health
The bill transfers $2,200,000 for the Office on Women's
Health to the Office of the Secretary, a reduction of $362,000
below the 1995 funding level and $352,000 below the
Administration request.
Office of Emergency Preparedness
The bill does not provide separate funding for the Office
of Emergency Preparedness, $2,180,000 less than the 1995
comparable level and $2,374,000 less than the Administration
request. The Committee believes that this program has provided
important coordinating services during recent disasters but has
not been operated in an efficient manner. Therefore, activities
previously supported with this separate appropriation may be
continued within funds appropriated to the Office of the
Secretary when they are deemed to be sufficiently high priority
to merit the allocation of limited federal resources.
The Office of Emergency Preparedness (OEP) coordinates
various health services in response to major disasters. HHS is
the primary agency for health and medical services under the
Federal Response Plan, and responsibility for Departmental
activities was delegated to OEP in 1990.
Health care reform data activities
The bill does not provide funding for the health care
reform data activities program, consistent with the President's
request to transfer this funding to a new data development
program. The Congress provided $2,760,000 for this program in
1995 to directly support development of the President's health
care reform plan. Because that plan is no longer under
congressional consideration, both the House and Senate
recommended terminating unspent funding for this program in
H.R. 1158 and H.R. 1944.
Data Development Program
The bill does not provide funding for a new data
development program for which the Administration requests
$3,854,000 in 1996. The President's proposal includes funding
to be transferred from the health care reform data activities
program as well as from program management. No funding was
provided for this program in 1995.
The President's proposal indicates that this program is
designed ``to support the Assistant Secretary for Health in
providing executive leadership to the Public Health Service
(PHS),'' and staff will ``support the Assistant Secretary for
Health in policy development, the management of multi-agency
research and program initiatives, coordination of legislative
and regulatory processes, direction of the PHS one-percent
evaluation program, and providing general staff support for ASH
interactions with the Congress, outside constituency groups,
other Federal departments and government-wide commissions and
committees.'' The Committee does not believe that limited
federal funds should be expended for such excessive and
unnecessary management activities. Further, the budget proposal
to transfer funding from program management to this account, in
effect masking a $1.3 million increase for Department overhead,
is precisely the type of budgeting gimmick and management
inefficiency that has convinced the Committee that it should
discontinue separate funding for the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Health.
Public Health Service Management
The Committee has transferred $3,000,000 to the Office of
the Secretary for management of the public health service,
$15,432,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The President
requested an increase of $134,000 for program management
activities including $1,262,000 which was proposed under the
new data development program.
National AIDS Program Office
The bill does not provide separate funding for the National
AIDS Program Office, a reduction of $1,742,000 below the 1995
comparable appropriation and $1,739,000 below the President's
request. The Committee notes that the Secretary requested to
reprogram $350,000 from this office in November, 1994.
The National AIDS Program Office (NAPO) serves as the
principal AIDS/HIV staff to the Assistant Secretary for Health.
NAPO does not provide direct services. Rather, it provides
administrative support to the Assistant Secretary and
coordinates activities among various public health service
agencies which do provide direct services. The Committee
believes that limited federal resources ought to be expended
for direct services to individuals impacted by HIV and AIDS,
not for federal overhead. The Public Health Service will spend
$2.6 billion on HIV/AIDS activities in 1995 and is entirely
capable of coordinating its services through sound management
and reasonable interaction with other federal and non-federal
HIV/AIDS service providers within existing resources. The bill
provides over $126,000,000 for the Office of the Secretary
which may be used to support any AIDS management activities
deemed sufficiently high priority to merit the allocation of
limited federal resources. The Committee notes that the federal
government will spend $6.9 billion in 1995 on HIV/AIDS services
including $5.9 billion through the Department of HHS.
retirement pay and medical benefits for commissioned officers
The bill provides an estimated $166,925,000 for retirement
pay and medical benefits, the same as the budget estimate and
an increase of $7,604,000 over the estimated payments for 1995.
This activity provides mandatory payments to Public Health
Service commissioned officers who have retired for age,
disability, or specified period of service. This appropriation
also provides for the cost of medical care in non-Public Health
Service facilities to dependents of the Public Health Service
Commissioned Corps and payments to the Social Security trust
funds for the costs to them of granting credits for military
service.
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research
Health Care Policy and Research
The bill includes $85,423,000 in general funds for the
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR), which is
$49,986,000 below the 1995 level and $57,001,000 below the
President's request. In addition, the bill makes available
$5,796,000 in trust funds, which is the same as the request,
and $34,284,000 in one percent evaluation funding, compared to
the request of $45,284,000, for a total resource level of
$125,503,000. This total resource level is $34,002,000 below
the 1995 level and $68,001,000 below the request.
AHCPR is charged with developing clinically-based, policy-
relevant information for use in improving the health care
system and with supporting health services research.
The bill includes $69,284,000 for health services research,
which is $6,361,000 below the 1995 level and $33,433,000 below
President's request. Areas of research focus include: how
consumers make choices on health insurance; managed care; risk
adjustment systems; health insurance reform; rural hospital
closures and rural emergency medical services; cost
effectiveness of preventing AIDS complications; and improved
electronic medical records systems. Funds are also included for
the third National Medical Expenditure Survey (NMES), which
will be conducted in 1996. NMES is the only Federal survey to
collect and compile data on nationwide health care expenditures
and utilization. AHCPR also supports five rural centers
addressing issues of cost and quality of and access to health
services. In addition, AHCPR supports demonstrations of
Statewide or regional managed care system initiation in rural
areas.
The Committee has consolidated the various line items
within this activity to give AHCPR greater flexibility in
managing the reduced funding levels contained in the bill. The
Committee has increased the amount of funding available through
the one percent evaluation tap in recognition of the increased
costs of NMES in 1996. The Committee encourages the agency to
implement as quickly as possible any cost-savings measures that
result from a study currently underway of alternative ways to
conduct the NMES. The Committee also encourages AHCPR to
distribute necessary reductions among its various research
activities in order to maintain a balanced program of grants
and contracts for research.
The bill includes $55,796,000 for medical treatment
effectiveness, which is $25,640,000 below the 1995 level and
$32,568,000 below the President's request. This program
supports the following activities: effectiveness research,
including Patient Outcomes Research Teams (PORTs) and Research
Centers on Minority Populations; the development of clinical
practice guidelines and their evaluation; the development and
standardization of data bases for research, including the
development of computerized medical records; dissemination of
patient outcomes research and clinical practice guidelines; and
assessment of new technologies under consideration for
reimbursement by Federal agencies.
As it develops strategies to manage the funding reductions
contained in the bill for this activity, the Committee
encourages AHCPR to reevaluate its approach to the development
of clinical guidelines and technology assessments. With the
widespread development of clinical guidelines in the private
sector and by professional societies, the Committee questions
the need for AHCPR to allocate its resources to this activity.
Rather, the agency is urged to consider modifying its role to
one of certifying the impartiality and thoroughness of
guidelines that are developed by others. With regard to
technology assessments, the Committee urges AHCPR to reassess
its role in financing this activity in favor of greater
financial participation by the beneficiaries of the
assessments.
To the extent that resources permit, the Committee
encourages AHCPR to consider developing a children's research
agenda on health care effectiveness, quality and outcomes
measures that establishes research priorities for children on a
three-to-five-year basis in consultation with experts in
children's health care delivery and managed care.
To the extent resources permit, the Committee encourages
AHCPR to consider supporting research on clinical risk
modification techniques in order to enhance patient safety
through appropriate clinical practices throughout the health
care system.
The bill includes $2,423,000 for program support, which is
$1,000 below the 1995 level and the same as the President's
request. This activity supports the overall direction and
management of AHCPR. Consistent with the policy followed
throughout the bill, an undistributed reduction of $2,000,000
is included for total agency administrative costs, to bring
total costs to a level 7.5 percent below 1995. Administrative
costs associated with legislative and public affairs functions
should be reduced 10 percent below 1995 levels. The Committee
intends that these reductions be taken only from the categories
of costs identified on the table on page 11 of the 1996 budget
justification.
Health Care Financing Administration
Grants to States for Medicaid
The bill includes $82,142,072,000 for the Federal share of
current law State Medicaid costs in fiscal year 1996. This
amount includes $27,047,717,000 which was advance funded in the
1995 appropriation. The amount recommended in the bill for
fiscal year 1996 is the same as the amount requested by the
Administration and $7,098,703,000 less than the amount
appropriated for fiscal year 1995. Obligations in the Medicaid
program are expected to decrease only slightly, by $413,649,000
from 1995 to 1996, but the program is projected to have an
unobligated balance of $13.8 billion carry over from 1995,
reducing the new budget authority needs in the account. The
unobligated balance results from the continuing difficulties in
estimating actual State expenditures due to regulatory changes
and demonstration waivers.
Federal Medicaid grants reimburse States for 50 to 83
percent (depending on per capita income) of their expenditures
in providing health care for individuals whose income and
resources fall below specified levels. Subject to certain
minimum requirements, States have broad authority within the
law to set eligibility, coverage and payment levels. It is
estimated that nearly 37.6 million low income individuals will
receive health care services in 1996 under the Medicaid
program. State costs of administering the program are matched
at rates which generally range from 50 to 90 percent, depending
upon the type of cost. Total funding for Medicaid includes $412
million for the entitlement Vaccines for Children program.
These funds, which are transferred to the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention for administration, support the costs of
immunization for children who are on Medicaid, uninsured or
underinsured and receiving immunizations at Federally qualified
health centers or rural health clinics. There is an offsetting
reduction of $200 million for vaccines formerly purchased
through the Medicaid program. Indefinite authority is provided
by statute for the Vaccines for Children program in the event
that the current estimate is inadequate.
The Committee is aware that the authorizing committees are
considering fundamental changes to the Medicaid program,
including conversion to a block grant. The Committee has
appropriated on the basis of existing law, but if such changes
are enacted, will modify the appropriation in conference to
comport to the new statute.
Payments to Health Care Trust Funds
The bill includes $63,313,000,000 for the Payments to the
Health Care Trust Funds account. This is an increase of
$25,766,242,000 over the 1995 level and the same as the
Administration request.
This substantial increase is due to several factors: a
large unanticipated shortfall in the Federal contribution for
Supplementary Medical Insurance; a statutory change in the
computation of the beneficiary contribution to Part B that
takes effect in 1996; and the adjustment made once every five
years to military service credits.
This entitlement account includes the general fund subsidy
to the Medicare Part B trust fund as well as other
reimbursements to the Part A trust fund for benefits and
related administrative costs which have not been financed by
payroll taxes or premium contributions. The amount provided
includes $145 million for program management administrative
expenditures, which is the 1996 estimate of the general fund
share of Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) program
management expenses. This general fund share will be
transferred to the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund to
reimburse for the funds drawn down in 1996 from the trust fund
to finance program management.
Program Management
The bill makes available $2,136,824,000 in trust funds for
Federal administration of the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
This is $42,220,000 less than the amount available for this
purpose for fiscal year 1995 and $116,970,000 less than the
Administration request.
Research, demonstration, and evaluation
The bill includes $40,000,000 for research and
demonstrations. This total is $18,000,000 less than the amount
requested by the Administration and $5,146,000 less than the
amount provided in 1995. These funds support a variety of
studies and demonstrations in such areas as monitoring and
evaluating health system performance; improving health care
financing and delivery mechanisms; modernization of the
Medicare program; the needs of vulnerable populations in the
areas of health care access, delivery systems, and financing;
and information to improve consumer choice and health status.
Funding for this activity was increased dramatically in 1995
beyond historical levels to support particular research
projects. The House and Senate agreed to rescind most of this
increase. The Committee's recommendation returns this account
to more typical funding levels, which will be sufficient to
support the research projects developed by the agency in
accordance with its strategic priorities.
Health care represents one of the largest areas of
expenditure for the Federal government. Most of that money is
spent in hospitals, long-term care facilities, skilled-nursing
facilities and clinics. Because of its interest in containing
health care expenditures, the Committee encourages HCFA to
review the training of administrators of health care facilities
and report to the Committee what, if any, steps should be taken
to improve that training.
The bill does not include funding for health insurance
information, counseling and assistance grants, which is
$4,500,000 less than the President's request and $4,536,000
less than the 1995 level. These grants provide funding to
States to counsel Medicare recipients about insurance benefits
and plans. The House and Senate approved a $5.5 million
rescission of these funds; the phaseout of the program would be
complete in 1996. All States have received grants--a total of
$34 million in the last four years. The average State grant is
now only $91,000. Fifteen States receive funding from other
sources for this program. The counseling is largely done on a
volunteer basis; State monies are used for a coordinator and
some travel.
$10,000,000 is included for the continuation costs of rural
hospital transition grants, which is $7,584,000 less than the
1995 level and $10,000,000 above the Administration request.
These grants provide modest allocations to small rural
nonprofit hospitals to help them adapt to changes in the demand
for different types of services, changes in the populations
served, or changes in the hospitals' ability to provide
staffing. This program has distributed $135 million since its
inception in 1989. The Committee does not intend to fund new
grants in this program in 1996 or later years.
No funding is provided for essential access community
hospital/rural primary care hospital (EACH/RPCH) grants, which
is $2,000,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the same as the
President's request. The EACH/RPCH program provides grants to
States for the establishment of rural health networks and
designation of EACHs and RPCHs, as well as grants to hospitals.
The House and Senate approved a $1.5 million rescission of
these funds; the phaseout of the program would be complete in
1996. Only seven States are currently authorized to participate
in the program--Kansas, North Carolina, South Dakota, West
Virginia, California, Colorado, and New York--and only a few of
their hospitals remain eligible for additional funds. In
previous years, appropriated funds have lapsed because not
enough hospitals in these seven States chose to participate.
No funds are provided for new rural health grants, which is
$2,000,000 less than the Administration request and $37,000
below the 1995 level. The House and Senate agreed to terminate
this program in the rescission bill; there is no reason to
resume funding in 1996. This funding is intended to assist a
limited number of States in developing rural health system
delivery models. These activities can be supported within the
regular research account if the agency considers them to be
high priority.
Medicare contractors
The bill provides $1,607,058,000 to support Medicare claims
processing contracts. This is $24,042,000 below the amount
requested by the Administration and $2,613,000 below the
operating level provided in fiscal year 1995.
Medicare contractors are responsible for paying Medicare
providers promptly and accurately. In addition to processing
claims, contractors also identify and recover Medicare
overpayments, as well as review claims for questionable
utilization patterns and medical necessity. In addition,
contractors provide information and technical support both to
providers and beneficiaries regarding the administration of the
Medicare program. In 1996, contractors are expected to process
822 million claims. Within the resources provided, the
Committee urges HCFA to maintain payment safeguard activities
to the maximum extent possible.
State survey and certification
The bill provides $152,000,000 for State inspection of
facilities serving Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, which
is $6,200,000 above the 1995 level and $10,100,000 below the
Administration request.
Survey and certification activities ensure that
institutions and agencies providing care to Medicare and
Medicaid beneficiaries meet Federal health, safety and program
standards. On-site surveys are conducted by State survey
agencies, with a pool of Federal surveyors performing random
monitoring surveys. Almost 26,000 facilities are expected to be
reviewed in 1996. By law, nursing homes and home health
agencies must be surveyed on an average of once per year. In
1996, it is expected that other facilities will be surveyed on
an average of 20 percent per year.
The Committee directs the Administrator to reexamine the
Survey, Certification and Enforcement of Skilled Nursing
Facilities, published at pages 56116 through 56252 in Volume
59, Number 217 of the Federal Register on November 10, 1994.
The Committee is concerned that the regulations have imposed an
excessively high standard that will cause many acceptably
performing facilities to be out of compliance. The Committee
understands that no monetary penalties will be applied in most
cases for 90 days following the survey and encourages HCFA to
use this time period to assess whether the regulations are
having any unintended impacts. The Committee strongly urges the
Administrator to consider reopening the rule-making process on
this regulation if the findings of the analysis provide
justification and to report to the Committee the results of its
analysis by December 31, 1995.
Federal administration
The bill includes $354,266,000 to support Federal
administrative activities related to the Medicare and Medicaid
programs. This is $41,828,000 below the Administration request
and $4,000 below the amount available in 1995. Consistent with
the policy throughout the bill, the recommendation also
includes $26.5 million in undistributed administrative savings,
which represents a 7.5 percent reduction in salaries and
expenses from 1995 levels and an additional 2.5 percent
reduction in congressional and public affairs functions. This
reduction is to be applied only to the Federal administrative
costs in the Federal administration line item.
The Committee directs that none of these funds may be used
for the implementation of or planning for future implementation
of the Medicare/Medicaid data bank. The Committee believes that
the data bank as enacted should not be implemented. Since the
Committee has not funded the data bank, and does not intend to
fund the data bank in the future, penalties associated with the
data bank's employer reporting requirements should not be
imposed.
Undocumented Aliens Assistance
The Committee has not provided the $150,000,000 requested
by the Administration in fiscal year 1996 for a new State grant
program for the medical costs of undocumented aliens. This
program is not authorized.
Health Maintenance Organization Loan and Loan Guarantee Fund
The bill does not provide funding for the Health
Maintenance Organization Loan and Loan Guarantee Fund, which is
the same as the Administration request. $15,000,000 was
provided for this account in 1995. The Fund was established in
1975 to provide working capital during the initial operating
period of a health maintenance organization (HMO). Direct loans
were made to HMOs from the Fund. These loans were then sold,
with guarantees, to the Federal Financing Bank. The Fund also
guaranteed loans made by private lenders to HMOs. The last loan
commitments were made in 1983. The Administration indicates
that the current fund balance should be adequate to cover
principal payments, interest charges, and prepayment penalties
throughout 1996.
Administration for Children and Families
FAMILY SUPPORT PAYMENTS TO STATES
The bill includes authority to spend $18,014,307,000 during
FY 1996 for Family Support Payments to States. This is
$653,610,000 more than the comparable appropriation for 1995,
and the same as the President's request. The FY 1996 amount
includes $4,400,000,000 in advance funding that was provided in
FY 1995.
This appropriation combines funding for the assistance
payments and child support enforcement programs. The assistance
payments programs are administered by State welfare agencies
under individual plans developed by each State consistent with
Federal requirements. The largest of the programs is AFDC,
which provides basic cash benefits for needy children. The
Federal program, on average, finances 55 percent of the cash
benefits provided to AFDC households. The Child Support
Enforcement program was created to locate absent parents, to
enforce their support obligations, and to establish paternity.
The Federal government provides about 85 percent of the costs
incurred by State and local governments in administering the
program.
The amount provided includes $954,000,000 for the child
care expenses authorized by Title IV-A of the Social Security
Act for participants in the JOBS program and transitional child
care for up to 12 months for former AFDC recipients who have
left the rolls due to increased income from employment. In
addition to this amount, $300,000,000 is included for the At-
Risk Child Care program established in the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990 to serve low-income working families
in need of child care and at risk of becoming eligible for
AFDC.
job opportunities and basic skills (jobs)
The bill provides $1,000,000,000 for the Job Opportunities
and Basic Skills (JOBS) program, which is the same as the
budget request and an increase of $30,000,000 over the
comparable 1995 appropriation. The JOBS program provides
education, training and employment services to AFDC recipients
to help them obtain employment leading to self sufficiency and
to avoid long-term welfare dependency. All 50 states and 76
Native American Tribes and Alaska Native organizations operate
JOBS programs which must include high school or equivalent
education, basic and remedial education, and services for those
with limited English proficiency. JOBS programs must also
provide job skills training, job readiness, job development and
placement services, and at least two of the following programs:
group and individual job search, on-the-job training, work
supplementation, and community work experience. States must
provide matching funds and receive Federal funds up to the
limit of their entitlements as determined by formula.
low income home energy assistance
(rescission)
The bill rescinds the $1,000,000,000 advance 1996
appropriation for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance program
provided in previous legislation. The Committee notes that this
program was initiated to temporarily supplement existing cash
assistance programs to help low income individuals pay for
escalating home fuel costs resulting from the second energy
crisis and was not intended to meet the entire home energy
costs of assisted individuals. Since the program's creation,
real energy prices for all three sources have declined to pre-
1980 levels. The price of electricity, the most costly source
of home energy, has decreased to pre-1974 levels according to
Administration figures. In addition, the Administration
informed the Committee in 1994 that low income families now
spend \1/3\ less of their income on home energy than they did
when the LIHEAP program was initiated. The Committee believes
that the program has evolved from a temporary energy crisis
assistance program into a narrowly focused income supplement
program that does not target households with the greatest
energy needs and fails to encourage reduced dependence on it.
Moreover, the Committee believes the program is poorly
targeted, providing average benefits of only $180 per year to
over 5 million households rather than concentrating assistance
on those with true crises. The Committee anticipates that the
committees of jurisdiction will reexamine the structure and
purpose of this program in the near future.
The bill does not provide advance funding for 1997,
$1,319,204,000 less than requested in the budget.
refugee and entrant assistance
The bill provides $411,781,000 for refugee assistance
programs which is $2,418,000 below the request and $12,009,000
above the 1995 appropriation.
Transitional and Medical Services
The bill provides $278,882,000 for transitional and medical
services, an increase of $20,609,000 above the comparable 1995
amount and $353,000 above the request. The transitional and
medical services activity consolidates funding for the state-
administered cash and medical assistance program which assists
refugees who are not categorically eligible for AFDC or
Medicaid, the unaccompanied minor program which reimburses
States for foster care, and the voluntary agency grant program
in which participating national refugee resettlement agencies
match Federal funds and provide resettlement assistance. The
Committee expects that funding provided in the bill, along with
language added to allow prior year funds to be available for
1995 and 1996 costs, will allow the Administration to continue
the eight month reimbursement policy for cash and medical
assistance.
Social services and preventive health
The bill provides $80,802,000 for social services, the same
as the 1995 appropriation and the budget request. Approximately
85 percent of these funds are distributed by formula and the
remainder supports special discretionary projects. The bill
also provides $2,700,000 for preventive health activities, a
decrease of $2,600,000 below the 1995 level and $2,771,000
below the request. The Committee is concerned that domestic
refugee preventive health funds have been provided to the
Public Health Service mainly for administrative activities,
including activities overseas. The bill eliminates funding for
this activity and expects the PHS to fund this activity within
its 1996 appropriation. The Committee is also concerned that
funding for States and local governments for domestic health
assessment activities has not been administered in the most
cost effective manner and directs that program activities be
administered directly by the Office of Refugee Resettlement.
The Committee notes with interest service providers
offering treatment for persons who have suffered mental and
physical torture by foreign governments. The Committee
recommends that special consideration be given to supporting
such efforts.
Targeted asssistance
The bill includes $49,397,000 for the targeted assistance
programs, the same as the budget request and the 1995
appropriation. This program provides grants to States for
counties which are impacted by high concentrations of refugees
and high dependency rates. The Committee agrees that
$19,000,000 is available for targeted assistance to serve
communities affected by the Cuban and Haitian entrants and
refugees whose arrivals in recent years have increased. The
Committee has set-aside 20 percent of these funds for increased
support to communities with large concentrations of refugees
whose cultural differences make assimilation especially
difficult justifying a more intense and longer duration level
of Federal assistance.
Child Care and Development Block Grant
The bill includes $934,642,000 for the Child Care and
Development Block Grant program, which is the same as the 1995
appropriation and $114,183,000 below the request. The Committee
has proposed no reduction in this program in light of pending
welfare reform and the need for child care that will result
from that effort.
The Child Care and Development Block Grant program was
enacted in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 to
increase the availability, affordability and quality of child
care by providing funds to States, Territories and Indian
Tribes for child care services for low-income families. Under
the authorizing law, 75 percent of the Block Grant funds must
be used for child care services provided to eligible children
on a sliding fee scale basis, as a contracted service or
through a certificate program; and for activities designed to
improve the quality and availability of care. Of these 75
percent funds, grantees must spend at least 90 percent for
services, and no more than 10 percent on administration. Of the
remaining 25 percent Block Grant funds, 75 percent must be used
for early childhood development and before- and after-school
services; 20 percent must be used for improvement in the
quality of child care services; and the remaining 5 percent may
be used for any of the stated purposes.
Social Services Block Grant
The bill includes $2,800,000,000, the same as the budget
request and the full amount authorized for fiscal year 1996.
The 1995 appropriation was the same.
The social services block grant program is designed to
encourage each State, as far as practicable, to furnish a
variety of social services best suited to the needs of
individuals residing within the State. It is intended to:
prevent, reduce or eliminate dependency; achieve or maintain
self-sufficiency; prevent neglect, abuse or exploitation of
children and adults; prevent or reduce inappropriate
institutional care; and secure admission or referral for
institutional care when other forms of care are not
appropriate.
Social services block grant funds are distributed to the
territories in the same ratio such funds were allocated to
territories in 1981. The remainder of the appropriation is
distributed to the States and the District of Columbia
according to relative State population.
children and families services programs
The bill includes $4,543,343,000, a reduction of
$332,367,000 below the 1995 amount and a reduction of
$690,913,000 below the budget request. This account finances a
number of programs aimed at enhancing the well-being of the
Nation's children and families, particularly those who are
disadvantaged or troubled.
Head Start
The bill includes $3,397,429,000 for the Head Start program
for fiscal year 1996, a reduction of $137,000,000 below the
1995 amount and $537,299,000 below the budget request. Because
of overall constraints on discretionary spending in this year's
budget process, the Committee was unable to maintain current
funding levels for Head Start. The reduction below 1995 is
3.9%; this compares to a reduction for discretionary programs
for the bill as a whole of about 13%. The Committee notes that
the program was increased by $2 billion from fiscal year 1990
to fiscal year 1995; this was a 128 percent increase in five
years.
Head Start provides comprehensive development services for
children and their families. Intended for preschoolers from low
income families, the program seeks to foster the development of
children and enable them to deal more effectively with both
their present environment and later responsibilities in school
and community life. Head Start programs emphasize cognitive and
language development, emotional development, physical and
mental health, and parent involvement to enable each child to
develop and function at his or her highest potential. At least
ten percent of enrollment opportunities in each State are made
available to handicapped children.
Grants to carry out Head Start programs are awarded to
public and private non-profit agencies. Grantees must
contribute 20 percent of the total cost of the program. The
Head Start Act does not include a formula for the allotment of
funds to grantees; however, it does require minimum State
allocations. The Act requires 87 percent of Head Start's
appropriation to be distributed among States based on: (1) the
relative number of poor children; and (2) the number of
recipients of Aid to Families with Dependent Children in each
State as compared to all States. In addition, grants,
cooperative agreements and contracts are awarded in the areas
of research, demonstration, technical assistance and evaluation
from the remaining 13 percent.
There has been much concern expressed that the program has
had difficulty in properly managing and programming the huge
increase in funding over the past several years; local grantees
in many cases have been hard pressed to find qualified teachers
and decent facilities to accommodate increased enrollment.
Despite the fact that the program is 30 years old, rigorous
evaluation of it has been minimal. The evaluations that do
exist suggest that whatever academic and other gains that
children make in the program do not last. Further, solid
performance standards have been lacking in Head Start, although
the Department claims to be making some progress. The
Department was unable to tell the Committee during the hearings
how many grantees had been terminated from the program over the
past 30 years for poor performance.
The number of children in the program has increased from
541,000 in 1990 to 752,000 in 1995; the percentage increase
(39%) is much lower, however, than the percentage increase in
the amount appropriated. One principal reason for this is that
an estimated (by HHS) $594 million has been spent since 1990 on
increasing teacher salaries in the program. The average salary
has increased by an estimated 25% since 1990. The authorizing
legislation requires the program to spend 25% of the increase
in the appropriation each year for ``quality improvements'', at
least half of which must be spent on salary increases.
The Committee notes that the ``infants and toddlers''
initiative (0-3 years) would actually increase under the
Committee bill, from $106 million in 1995 to $133 million in
1996. This is because the basic law requires that 4% of the
appropriation be spent on this in 1996 as opposed to 3% in
1995.
The Committee recognizes that homeless families represent
the fastest growing portion of the homeless population. The
Committee also recognizes that most early childhood programs do
not have the specialized training and outreach necessary to
serve homeless preschoolers and their families. The Head Start
program has supported a number of innovative and high-quality
demonstration programs to serve rural and urban homeless
children, at substantial start-up costs. The Committee
recognizes that this demonstration program will expire at the
end of 1995, and believes that allowing these slots to expire
would squander the federal investment made in these programs.
Therefore, the Committee urges that the $3 million currently
used to fund slots for homeless preschoolers through the
demonstration program be converted into permanent Head Start
slots to serve homeless children.
Head Start facilities.--The Committee encourages the
Department to study the feasibility of a Head Start facilities
demonstration program that uses federal funds to leverage
private investment and works with nonprofit community
development finance organizations to manage the process. If the
Department determines that the program is feasible, then it
should initiate the program. The Department should work with
local nonprofit community development finance organizations
with expertise and experience in development and finance of
Head Start and/or other child agencies. The awarding of grants
to local organizations would be done through a competitive
process.
Child development associate scholarships
The bill includes no specific funding for child development
associate scholarships, as the President requested. The budget
request proposes to consolidate this program with the Child
Care and Development Block Grant. The Committee concurs with
this recommendation. The Administration believes, and the
Committee agrees, that the States have authority to provide
these scholarships under the Child Care Block Grant. The States
will provide them if there is a need.
These scholarships are awarded to financially eligible
individuals who are candidates for the Child Development
Associate credential. This is used as a certification
credential for child care workers.
Runaway and homeless youth
The bill includes $54,107,000 for runaway and homeless
youth activities, a reduction of $14,466,000 below the amount
available for 1995 and a reduction of $14,465,000 below the
budget request. The budget request proposed to consolidate
these programs; the Committee has not done this because it is
not authorized by law.
The basic program, for which the bill includes $40,458,000,
the same as the 1995 amount, is intended to help address the
needs of runaway and homeless youth and their families through
support of activities sponsored by State and local governments
and private nonprofit agencies. Grants are used to develop and
strengthen community-based facilities which are outside the law
enforcement structure and the juvenile justice system. The
Runaway and Homeless Youth Act mandates that funds for this
program be allocated to each State on the basis of its youth
population under 18 years of age in proportion to the national
total. Runaway Youth programs have been very successful in
reuniting runaway children with their families and preventing
runaways which, in turn, decreases the number of high school
dropouts, incidents of juvenile drug abuse, crime and
incarceration.
The Committee has provided $13,649,000 for the transitional
living program for homeless youth, the same as the 1995 amount.
The program was created to serve those young people who cannot
return home. Funds are used to provide appropriate shelter and
services for up to 18 months for youths ages 16-20 who have no
safe available living arrangements. Services are designed to
help youth move towards self-sufficient and independent living,
and to prevent long-term dependency on social services. In
addition to shelter, such services may include education,
vocational training, basic life skills, interpersonal skills
building, and mental and physical health care. Grants are
available to public and private programs.
The bill includes no funding for the drug education and
prevention program for runaway and homeless youth. The purpose
of this program is to reduce and prevent the illicit use of
drugs by runaway and homeless youth. This same purpose can be
achieved more efficiently by the States through the Federally-
funded substance abuse block grant which is funded at $1.2
billion for 1996. The elimination of small categorical programs
also saves Federal administrative costs, and it reduces
bureaucratic paperwork and grant forms that must be filled out
by the local providers.
Youth gang substance abuse
The Committee recommends no additional funding of a youth
gang drug education and prevention program. The purpose of this
program is to reduce and prevent the participation of youth
gangs in illicit drug activities. This same purpose can be
achieved more efficiently by the States through the Federally-
funded substance abuse block grant which is funded at $1.2
billion for 1996. Further, this program is a demonstration
program that funds about 15 grantees. It has been operating for
a number of years and should have been able to demonstrate what
works and what doesn't by now. There is no justification for
funding demonstration programs indefinitely, particularly in
times of severe fiscal constraint.
In addition, there are other gang-related programs funded
in the Federal government. This includes two in the Justice
Department and one in the Treasury Department
Child abuse
For child abuse prevention and treatment, the Committee
recommends $38,239,000, a reduction of $288,000 below the 1995
level and the budget request. The total amount recommended
includes $22,854,000 for State grants and $15,385,000 for
discretionary projects; these amounts are the same as the 1995
amounts. The small reduction below 1995 is accounted for by
eliminating funding for the Advisory Board on Child Abuse and
Neglect. The child abuse programs attempt to improve and
increase activities at all levels of government which identify,
prevent, and treat child abuse and neglect through State
grants, technical assistance, research, demonstration, and
service improvement.
The bill continues language carried last year that
prohibits HHS from withholding funds to States under the Child
Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act by reason of a determination
that a State is not in compliance with the religious exemption
regulations. This language would expire upon the
reauthorization of the Act.
Temporary child care/crisis nurseries
The bill includes $9,835,000 for temporary child care for
handicapped children and crisis nurseries. This is $2,000,000
below the 1995 amount and the budget request. These funds
support demonstration grant programs to help private and public
agencies and organizations to provide temporary non-medical
child care for handicapped children and children with chronic
or terminal illnesses; and provide crisis nurseries and
referral to support services for abused or neglected children
or children at risk of abuse and neglect.
Abandoned infants assistance
The Committee recommends $12,406,000 for the Abandoned
Infants Assistance Act, a reduction of $2,000,000 from the 1995
appropriation and from the budget request. The purpose of this
program is to provide financial support to public and non-
profit private entities to develop, implement, and operate
demonstration projects that will prevent the abandonment of
infants and young children; identify and address their needs,
especially those infected with AIDS; assist such children to
reside with their natural families or in foster care, as
appropriate; provide respite care for families and caregivers;
and recruit and train caregivers. Grantees must establish a
care plan and case review system for each child.
Dependent care planning and development
The bill includes no specific funding for this activity, as
the President requested. The budget request proposes to
consolidate this program with the Child Care and Development
Block Grant. The Committee concurs with this recommendation.
The Administration believes, and the Committee agrees, that the
States have authority to provide these activities under the
Child Care Block Grant. The States will provide them if there
is a need.
This program provides 75 percent Federal matching grants
for dependent care services, including before- and after-school
care and local resource and referral systems providing
information on dependent care services.
Child welfare services
The bill includes $291,989,000 for child welfare services,
the same as the 1995 amount and the budget request. This
program provides grants to States to assist public welfare
agencies establish, extend, and strengthen child welfare
services in order to enable children to remain in their homes
under the care of their parents, or, where that is not
possible, to provide alternative permanent homes for them.
Current law requires States to meet certain conditions in order
to receive additional ``incentive'' funds. The Committee feels
that this program should not be reduced at this time. It may
eventually be included in a child protection block grant as
proposed by H.R. 4 as passed earlier this year by the House.
The bill includes $2,000,000 for child welfare training, a
reduction of $2,398,000 below the amount available for 1995 and
the budget request. This program provides teaching and
traineeship grants to schools of social work to train social
workers in the specialty of child welfare.
The bill includes no separate funding for child welfare
research. This program provided grants and contracts for
projects in areas such as child welfare, child care, youth
development, and child and family development. Research and
demonstration activities can be centralized in the Secretary's
office under the Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation. That office already has an extensive research
program; there is no need to replicate research accounts
throughout the Department. By not funding separate research
accounts throughout the Department, Congress can force the
Department to carefully set research priorities and to
coordinate all research activities that are currently scattered
throughout the Department. These include such things as social
services research, child welfare research, aging research,
health services research, rural health research, health
financing research, maternal and child health research and
prevention research.
Adoption opportunities
The Committee recommends $11,000,000 for adoption
opportunities, a reduction of $2,000,000 below the 1995 amount
and the budget request. This activity funds a national adoption
data gathering and analysis system, including a national
information exchange, and implements adoption training and
technical assistance programs.
Family violence
The Committee recommends $32,645,000 for family violence
prevention and services, which is the same as the 1995 level
and the budget request. This program is designed to demonstrate
the effectiveness of assisting States in efforts to prevent
family violence and to provide immediate shelter and related
assistance for victims of family violence and their dependents,
and to provide for technical assistance and training relating
to family violence programs to State and local public agencies
(including law enforcement agencies), nonprofit private
organizations, and persons seeking such assistance.
The bill includes $400,000 to continue funding of a
domestic violence hotline that was funded in 1995, and $400,000
to fund four model projects for youth domestic violence
education. This is pursuant to last year's Crime Bill. These
funds are intended to be awarded to grantees who have
experience and a proven track record in providing these types
of services, and are not to be used for lobbying, advocacy, or
public relations. The President has requested an additional
$104,500,000 to fund other programs under the Crime Bill; the
Committee does not recommend funding for these programs. Most,
if not all, of these additional activities, including community
schools, community economic partnership, runaway youth
programs, and battered women's shelters, can be funded under
other Federal programs. Throughout the bill, the Committee has
endeavored to eliminate small programs that duplicate
authorities in larger state and block grants. In this case, the
Committee has provided current level funding for family
violence programs; HHS block grants dealing with preventive
health, substance abuse, and mental health; and injury control
programs in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In
addition, funds for research and demonstration programs are
available in the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH),
the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research and Special
Programs of National Significance in the Maternal and Child
Health Block Grant (MCH). The Committee has provided increased
funding for NIMH.
Social services research
The bill includes no separate funding for social services
research. These funds have supported research, demonstration,
evaluation and dissemination activities. This includes such
things as welfare reform, youth services and child support
enforcement. Demonstrations related to the AFDC program have
also been carried out.
Research and demonstration activities can be centralized in
the Secretary's office under the Assistant Secretary for
Planning and Evaluation. That office already has an extensive
research program; there is no need to replicate research
accounts throughout the Department. By not funding separate
research accounts throughout the Department, Congress can force
the Department to carefully set research priorities and to
coordinate all research activities that are currently scattered
throughout the Department. These include such things as social
services research, child welfare research, aging research,
health services research, rural health research, health
financing research, maternal and child health research and
prevention research.
Community-based resource centers
The bill includes no funding for this program for 1996. The
1995 amount was $38,734,000. This program as it now exists was
created in FY 1995 through a change in the authorizing
legislation. It combined several programs into one, including
family resource centers, family support centers, child abuse
challenge grants and emergency child abuse activities related
to substance abuse.
According to the Department, the purpose of the program is
``to assist each State in implementing/enhancing a statewide
system of family resource services through innovative funding
mechanisms . . . and to support . . . community-based child
abuse and neglect prevention activities . . .''. It would seem
that the States should be doing these things on their own
without financial assistance from the Federal government. It
would just be sound management on the part of the States to
pull together and coordinate various social service programs
for families. Further, child abuse activities are already
funded under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act
grants to States.
This is another example of a small Federal program that
requires Federal administrative costs and paperwork that should
be accomplished by the States themselves. The House-passed
welfare reform bill (H.R. 4) would roll this program into a
much larger child protection block grant.
Developmental disabilities
For programs authorized by the Developmental Disabilities
Assistance Act, the Committee recommends $77,156,000, a
reduction of $44,694,000 below the amount available for fiscal
year 1995 and below the budget request. The total includes
$40,438,000 for allotments to the States to fund State
Councils. These Councils engage in such activities as planning,
policy analysis, demonstrations, training, outreach,
interagency coordination, and public education. They do not
provide direct services to the developmentally-disabled
population. At a time of severe fiscal constraint, these are
not the highest priority activities for the Federal government
to be funding. The Councils are State agencies staffed with
State employees. It would seem reasonable that the States
should pick up part of the cost of operating them.
In addition, $26,718,000 will be available to the States to
be used for operating an advocacy program to protect the rights
of the developmentally disabled. This is the same as the 1995
level.
The bill includes no funding for special discretionary
projects for training, technical assistance and demonstration.
These activities are clearly not a high priority in times of
severe fiscal constraint, and they do not provide any direct
services to developmentally-disabled people.
The Committee approves a total of $10,000,000 for grants to
university affiliated facilities and satellite centers to
support the cost of administering and operating demonstration
facilities and interdisciplinary training programs. These are
discretionary grants to public and private non-profit agencies
affiliated with a university. These grants provide basic
operational and administrative core support for these agencies.
In addition, these funds support interdisciplinary training,
community services, technical assistance to State agencies and
information dissemination. Funding has been reduced by 47% from
the 1995 level. The States could certainly pick up part of the
funding for this program; there is no reason for the Federal
government to pay the entire cost. Some of these activities can
also be funded in the Vocational Rehabilitation program in the
Department of Education.
Native American programs
The bill includes $35,000,000, a reduction of $3,461,000
below the 1995 level and the amount requested in the budget.
The Administration for Native Americans assists Indian Tribes
and Native American organizations to plan and implement their
own long-term strategies for social and economic development.
In promoting social and economic self-sufficiency, this
organization provides financial assistance through direct
grants for individual projects, training and technical
assistance, and research and demonstration programs.
Community Services Block Grant
The bill includes $428,604,000 for Community Services
activities, which is $29,029,000 below the 1995 level and
$11,352,000 over the budget request.
For the State Block Grant, the bill includes $389,600,000,
which is the same as the 1995 level and $1,900,000 below the
budget request. This program provides grants to States for
services to meet employment, housing, nutrition, energy,
emergency services, and health needs of low-income people. By
law, 90% of these funds are passed directly through to local
community action agencies which have previously received block
grant funds.
The bill includes no specific funding for community
services grants for the homeless. These funds support homeless
individuals to enable them to move out of poverty and meet
their social and maintenance needs. The Committee believes that
exactly the same activities can be, and are being, funded
through the State block grant. The local community action
agencies can certainly provide all necessary services to
homeless people; there is no need for a separate categorical
program with its own grant application, rules and regulations
and Federal staff.
The bill includes $23,733,000 for community economic
development grants, which is the same as the 1995 level. These
activities provide assistance to private, locally-initiated
community development corporations which sponsor enterprises
providing employment, training and business development
opportunities for low-income residents. The bill also includes
$3,271,000 for rural community facilities, the same as the 1995
level. These grants are provided to multi-state, regional,
private nonprofit organizations to provide training and
technical assistance to small, rural communities in meeting
their community facilities needs. The Committee believes that
these two activities would not be done by local community
action agencies.
The bill includes $12,000,000 for the National Youth Sports
Program, which is the same as the 1995 level. These funds are
made available to a private, non-profit organization to provide
recreational activities for low-income youth, primarily in the
summer months. College and university athletic facilities are
employed in the program.
The bill provides no funding for the Community Food and
Nutrition program, which was funded at $8,676,000 in 1995. The
program does not provide any direct feeding services. It
provides grants to public and private agencies to coordinate
existing food assistance programs, to identify sponsors of
child nutrition programs and attempt to initiate new programs
and to do advocacy work at the State and local levels. These
are activities that could just as easily and probably more
appropriately be funded by the States and local governments. It
is important to try to eliminate these kinds of small
categorical Federal funding streams, each with its own set of
rules and regulations, grant applications and Federal staff.
Program direction
The Committee has approved $150,933,000 for program
direction expenses of the Administration for Children and
Families, a reduction of $12,238,000 below the 1995 level and
$23,050,000 below the budget request. This represents a 7.5%
reduction below the 1995 level.
Electronic benefit transfer (EBT) task force
The bill includes the budget request of $2,000,000 for this
new activity. The Administration has proposed a small temporary
interagency team to oversee the implementation of a nationwide
EBT program for Federal cash benefit programs. This is the
result of a National Performance Review recommendation. In FY
1996, the Agriculture, Health and Human Services, and Treasury
Departments, and the Social Security Administration are
scheduled to participate and provide funding.
family preservation and support
The bill includes $225,000,000 for Family Support and
Preservation, an increase of $75,000,000 over the 1995 amount,
and the same as the request. This capped entitlement program
established in 1994 provides grants to States to develop and
expand innovative child welfare services including family
preservation, family reunification, and community-based family
support services for families at-risk or in crisis.
payments to states for foster care and adoption assistance
The bill includes $4,307,842,000 for Payments to States for
Foster Care and Adoption Assistance, an increase of
$710,471,000 over the 1995 and the same as the budget request.
The amount includes $3,749,825,000 for the Foster Care
program, which provides maintenance payments for children who
must live outside their homes. This is an increase of
$621,802,000 above the 1995 appropriation, and the same as the
budget request. The appropriation for Foster Care is sufficient
to fund estimated costs under current law, and is based on an
estimated average of 272,900 children per month, an increase of
16,500 over the 1995 monthly average.
The total also includes $488,017,000 for Adoption
Assistance, which represents an increase of $88,669,000 over
the 1995 appropriation and the same funding level as the
request. This program provides an alternative to long,
inappropriate stays in foster care by helping to develop
permanent placements with families. In 1996, all states and the
District of Columbia are expected to participate in this
program. The 1996 amount reflects increased State expenditures
and continued growth in the number of assisted children to
nearly 118,800 a month, an increase of 16,300 over the 1995
monthly average.
The Committee has included $70,000,000 for the Independent
Living program, the same as the 1995 funding level and the
budget request. This program provides services to foster
children age 16 or older to help assist them make the
transition to independent living by helping them earn a high
school diploma or receive vocational training; receive training
in daily living skills such as budgeting, locating housing,
career planning and job finding; or otherwise make the
transition to independent living. Funds are awarded to States
in the form of grants. Each State is eligible to receive a
proportion of the funds appropriated that is equal to the
State's proportion of the national total of foster care
children receiving maintenance payments under the title IV-E
Foster Care program.
Administration on Aging
aging services programs
For programs administered by the Administration on Aging,
the Committee recommends a total of $778,246,000, which is
$97,849,000 below the 1995 level and $118,902,000 below the
budget request. This account finances all programs under the
Older Americans Act, with the exception of the Community
Services Employment Program under title V, which is
administered by the Department of Labor.
Supportive services and centers
The Committee has included $291,375,000 for support
services and centers. The amount provided is $15,336,000 below
the 1995 level and the budget request. Funds for this program
are awarded to each State with an approved State plan. The
formula under title III of the Older Americans Act mandates
that no State be allotted less than the total amount allotted
to it in fiscal year 1987. The statute also requires that
additional funds be distributed on the basis of each State's
proportionate share of the total age 60 and over population,
with no State receiving less than one-half of one percent of
the funds awarded. The funds contained in the bill will support
coordinated, comprehensive service delivery systems at the
local level.
The program is reduced by 5% below the 1995 level. The bill
as a whole is reduced by about 13% below the 1995 level for
discretionary programs. This program is certainly not taking a
disproportionate reduction as compared to the bill as a whole.
A number of other service programs throughout the bill are
being reduced as well.
The States should pick up more of the costs in this area.
The title XX social services block grant could also be utilized
to fund some of the costs associated with operating senior
centers.
The States have the ability under the basic law to transfer
up to 20% of funds appropriated between the senior centers
program and the nutrition programs; this allows the State to
concentrate its resources in the program it deems most
critical. Many States do transfer funds into this program from
the congregate meals program.
Ombudsman/elder abuse
The bill includes no separate funding for the State long-
term care ombudsman activities. This separate appropriation is
a funding stream to finance the staffing of State Offices of
Ombudsman Services for older people. This funding is a
relatively small portion of total funding for this purpose;
States use funding under title III of the Older Americans Act,
the basic senior centers and nutrition programs, and they also
use some of their own funds. In 1993, over $37 million was
spent for this purpose. It is not necessary to also have this
small separate appropriation for this purpose.
The bill includes no funding for the elder abuse prevention
program authorized by title VII of the Older Americans Act.
This is basically a public relations program to call attention
to the problem of elder abuse. It would not appear to be a
Federal responsibility to pay for this. This is certainly
something that could be financed through the private sector
through the use of public service ads.
The Committee is trying to reduce the number of small
categorical programs, all of which have separate grant
applications, rules and regulations and Federal staff. This is
especially true where there are other funding sources available
to accomplish the same purpose.
Pension counseling
The bill includes no funding for an outreach and counseling
program authorized under section 741 of the Older Americans
Act. This activity should be carried out by the local area
agencies on aging with funds provided under title III of the
Older Americans Act. There is really no justification for a
separate small categorical program to counsel older people
about Medigap policies, long-term care insurance, pensions,
public assistance programs and food stamps. Information on
these activities is available in a number of different places.
Further, this is a State formula grant program that sends small
amounts of money to all 50 States. A number of States receive
as little as $10,000 a year under the formula, hardly enough to
accomplish anything worthwhile.
Preventive health
The bill includes no funding for preventive health services
authorized under part F of title III of the Act. This activity
should be carried out by the local area agencies on aging with
funds provided under title III. There is really no
justification for a separate small categorical program to
provide certain preventive health services. Further, there are
other Federal programs that provide similar kinds of services.
These would include the preventive health services block grant,
the breast cancer screening and control program and the chronic
diseases program in the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. In addition, the private sector does some health
screening activities as well. This would include such groups as
the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society.
Nutrition programs
For congregate nutrition services, the Committee includes
$357,019,000, a reduction of $18,790,000 below the 1995 level
and below the budget request. For home-delivered nutrition
services, the Committee provides $89,362,000, a reduction of
$4,703,000 below the 1995 amount and below the budget request.
These programs are intended to address some of the difficulties
confronting older individuals, namely: nutrition deficiencies
due to inadequate income, lack of adequate facilities to
prepare food, and social isolation. About 228 million meals
will be provided either in congregate sites or through the home
delivery program.
These programs are reduced by 5% below the 1995 level. The
bill as a whole is reduced by about 13% below the 1995 level
for discretionary programs. These programs are certainly not
taking a disproportionate reduction as compared to the bill as
a whole. A number of other service programs throughout the bill
are being reduced as well.
The States should pick up more of the costs in this area.
The title XX social services block grant could also be utilized
to fund some of the costs associated with operating senior
nutrition programs.
The States have the ability under the basic law to transfer
up to 20% of funds appropriated between the senior centers
program and the nutrition programs; this allows the State to
concentrate its resources in the program it deems most
critical.
The nutrition programs also collect substantial sums each
year in voluntary contributions from participants; private
sector funds are also contributed. In 1993, over $98 million
was collected for the congregate nutrition program and over $72
million for the home-delivered program. Volunteers also make a
significant contribution to these programs.
Frail elderly services
For frail elderly in-home services the bill includes
$9,263,000, the same amount as the 1995 appropriation and the
budget request. These funds will be used to assist frail older
persons in maintaining their independence and self-sufficiency.
By supporting the provision of services to frail older people
in their homes, the funds will help the vulnerable elderly
avoid institutionalization and increase their access to needed
assistance.
Grants to Indian tribes
The bill provides $16,057,000 for grants to Indian tribes.
This is $845,000 below the 1995 amount and $2,345,000 below the
budget request. This represents a 5% reduction in the program's
funding level. Funds under this program are awarded to tribal
organizations to be used to promote opportunities for older
Indians, to secure and maintain independence and self-
sufficiency, and to provide transportation, nutrition, health
screening and other services to help meet the needs of this
population.
Research, training and special projects
The bill provides no funding for research, training and
special projects under title IV of the Older Americans Act.
Funds under this program were used to support education and
training activities for personnel working in the field of aging
and to finance research, development, and demonstration
projects. Examples of things funded in the past with this
appropriation include: national resource and policy centers, a
national aging information center, resource centers on native
American elders, Older Americans Month activities, disaster
assistance, dissemination, interagency agreements, workshops
and White House Conference on Aging mini-conferences.
Research and demonstration activities can be centralized in
the Secretary's office under the Assistant Secretary for
Planning and Evaluation. That office already has an extensive
research program; there is no need to replicate research
accounts throughout the Department. By not funding separate
research accounts throughout the Department, Congress can force
the Department to carefully set research priorities and to
coordinate all research activities that are currently scattered
throughout the Department. These include such things as social
services research, child welfare research, aging research,
health services research, rural health research, health
financing research, maternal and child health research and
prevention research.
White House Conference on Aging
The bill includes no further funding for the White House
Conference. The Conference took place in May of 1995. Congress
to date has appropriated a total of $6,000,000 to carry out the
Conference. An additional $500,000 is requested in the
President's 1996 budget for the writing and publishing of the
final report of the Conference. It should not be necessary to
appropriate additional funds for this purpose; the cost should
be absorbed within the $6,000,000 that has already been
appropriated.
Program administration
The bill includes $15,170,000 for program administration
expenses of the Administration on Aging. This is $1,230,000
below the 1995 amount and $2,229,000 below the budget request
This is a 7.5% reduction below the 1995 level. This activity
provides administrative and management support for all Older
Americans Act programs administered by the Department. No
funding is allowed for the Federal Council on Aging.
Office of the Secretary
general departmental management
The bill includes $116,826,000 for general departmental
management, an increase $28,460,000 over the amount for 1995
and an increase of $30,664,000 over the budget request. The
increases are accounted for by the transfer of several budget
activities to this account from the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Health. The Committee has eliminated the
appropriation for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Health. Also included is authority to spend $6,813,000 from the
Medicare trust funds, $12,164,000 below the comparable
authority granted in 1995 and $391,000 below the budget
request. The numbers reflect the budget amendment transmitted
as a result of the Social Security Administration becoming an
independent agency on April 1, 1995. The Committee has reduced
the traditional departmental management functions by 7.5% below
the 1995 level. In addition, executive direction activities
have been reduced by a further 7.5% for a total reduction of
15%. This includes the Offices of the Secretary and Deputy
Secretary and such other offices as the Assistant Secretary for
Legislation, Intergovernmental Affairs, and Public Affairs.
This appropriation supports those activities that are
associated with the Secretary's roles as policy officer and
general manager of the Department. The Office of the Secretary
also implements Administration and Congressional directives,
and provides assistance, direction and coordination to the
headquarters, regions and field organizations of the
Department. For these activities the bill provides $86,252,000.
It also supports several small health activities that were
formerly funded in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Health.
The Committee is concerned that the fragmentation of
research, demonstration and evaluation authorities is a
significant problem for the Department and that there seems to
be little coordination among these different authorities.
The Committee instructs the Department to, within 30 days
of the passage of this bill in the House of Representatives,
provide the Committee with a listing of all research,
demonstration and evaluation authorities and the funding levels
provided for each in fiscal year 1995. Further, it instructs
the Secretary to appoint a senior official of the Department to
coordinate all Departmental research, demonstration and
evaluation activities.
The Committee also instructs the Department to develop and
submit to the Committee, as part of the President's budget
request each year, a comprehensive research, demonstration and
evaluation budget and plan that indicates Departmental
programmatic goals to be achieved through its research,
demonstration and evaluation activities and how each separate
program or activity supports these overall goals.
Adolescent family life
The bill provides $6,698,000 for the adolescent family life
abstinence counseling program, the same as the 1995
appropriation and $554,000 above the President's request.
Physical fitness and sports
The bill transfers $1,000,000 to the Office of the
Secretary to continue operation of the President's Council on
Physical Fitness and Sports, a decrease of $407,000 from the
1995 comparable appropriation and $406,000 below the
Administration request for 1996. While the Committee believes
the Council provides valuable service to the country, some of
its activities are widely duplicated throughout the economy and
can be provided with non-federal support.
The Council seeks to improve the level of physical fitness
nationwide through professional consultation, technical
assistance, public information, program evaluation and program
development which is provided to school systems, government
agencies, employee organizations, private business and
industry, and professional organizations. The Committee notes
that these services are also available to users from sources
other than the President's Council.
Minority health
The bill transfers $20,631,000 for the Office of Minority
Health to the Office of the Secretary, the same as the 1995
comparable appropriation and $39,000 over the President's
budget request.
According to the budget request, the Office of Minority
Health works with PHS agencies and other agencies of the
Department in a catalytic, coordinative, advocacy and policy
development role to establish goals and coordinate other
activities in the Department regarding disease prevention,
health promotion, service delivery and research relating to
disadvantaged and minority individuals; conclude interagency
agreements to stimulate and undertake innovative projects;
support research, demonstration, and evaluation projects,
coordinate efforts to promote minority health programs and
policies in the voluntary and corporate sectors, obtain
bilingual health professionals assistance; operate a national
minority health resource center; and develop health information
and health promotion materials.
The Office of Minority Health and the Office of Research on
Minority Health, NIH are the focal point for the formulation
and development of policy issues affecting minority health. The
Committee commends the Offices and the Secretary for their
leadership and commitment to improving minority health, and
working to ensure that all Americans benefit from advances in
biomedical research, disease prevention, and other health
promotion quality of life initiatives under the auspices of the
Department. The Committee expects this emphasis to continue.
Office of Research Integrity
The bill transfers $3,858,000 for the Office of Research
Integrity (ORI) to the Office of the Secretary. This amount is
the same as the budget request and $5,000 below the 1995
appropriation. The Committee has provided funding at the
requested level to fund the investigation, prosecution and
deterrence of scientific misconduct.
The Nation's $12 billion investment in biomedical research
is among its highest fiscal priorities. The Committee believes
that the Department must have a strong investigative and
deterrent capability in order to ensure the integrity and
effectiveness of that investment as well as the public's
confidence in it. The ORI is responsible for investigating
individual allegations of waste and misconduct as well as
ensuring institutional compliance with federal misconduct
procedures.
Office on Women's Health
The bill transfers $2,200,000 for the Office on Women's
Health to the Office of the Secretary, a reduction of $362,000
below the 1995 funding level and $352,000 below the
Administration request. The Committee notes that each of the
Public Health Service agencies under its jurisdiction supports
an office or program which focuses on women's health. The
Office on Women's Health will be elevated to the Office of the
Secretary to advise the Secretary directly and to provide
Department-wide coordination of programs focusing specifically
on women.
The AIDS epidemic is expanding increasingly and
disproportionately into communities of color, especially in
African American and Hispanic women and their children. The
Committee urges the Secretary to strengthen efforts at CDC,
NIH, HRSA, and other components of the Department to address
this escalating AIDS problem.
Public Health Service Management
The Committee has transferred $3,000,000 to the Office of
the Secretary for management of the public health service,
$15,432,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The President
requested an increase of $134,000 for program management
activities including $1,262,000 which was proposed under the
new data development program. The Committee is concerned that
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health remains, and
is likely to remain under the President's reorganization plan,
a largely unnecessary and excessively inefficient management
and overhead layer. The Office has failed to take serious
action regarding budget and staff streamlining despite repeated
instructions and assistance from previous Congresses to do so.
In fact, the report of the Assistant Secretary regarding the
allocation of $1.5 million in streamlining assistance provided
by Congress last year indicates that over half--$920,000--was
allocated for staff salaries directly contrary to the
instructions of the House-Senate conference committee. The
decision to allocate streamlining funding for staff salaries
was subsequently overturned. The Committee believes that this
significant reduction in health service management funding will
be enough to support necessary health management activities.
The Committee continues to be concerned about the
disproportionately high rate of diabetes in people of color,
especially among African Americans and Hispanics. The Committee
is also concerned about the excessive amputations that both
populations have suffered from the disease. The Committee
expects the Secretary to strengthen diabetes efforts across the
CDC, NIH, AHCPR, and other appropriate components of the
Department. The Secretary should also determine what outreach
and consensus development initiative might be necessary to
address this critical health problem, and provide the Committee
an update at next year's appropriations hearing.
office of the inspector general
The bill includes $73,956,000 for the Office of the
Inspector General, which is a reduction of $15,652,000 below
the 1995 level and $5,981,000 below the budget request. This
includes Federal funds of $56,333,000, together with a trust
fund transfer of $17,623,000. The numbers reflect the budget
amendment transmitted as a result of the Social Security
Administration becoming an independent agency on April 1, 1995.
The original 1996 request for the Inspector General was reduced
by $21,789,000 as a result of SSA independence, or about a 21%
reduction. These funds were moved to the Social Security
Administration, Office of Inspector General.
The Office of the Inspector General was created by law to
protect the integrity of Departmental programs as well as the
health and welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs.
Through a comprehensive program of audits, investigations,
inspections and program evaluations, the OIG attempts to reduce
the incidence of fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement, and to
promote economy, efficiency and effectiveness throughout the
Department.
office for civil rights
The bill includes $10,249,000, a reduction of $7,982,000
below the 1995 level and $7,309,000 below the budget request.
Also included is authority to transfer $3,251,000 from the
Medicare trust funds, a reduction of $351,000 from the budget
request and $529,000 below the 1995 amount. Total resources
available to the Office are $13,500,000, a reduction of
$8,511,000 below 1995. The numbers reflect the budget amendment
transmitted as a result of the Social Security Administration
becoming an independent agency on April 1, 1995.
The Office for Civil Rights is responsible for enforcing
civil rights statutes that prohibit discrimination in health
and human services programs. OCR implements the civil rights
laws through a compliance program designed to generate
voluntary compliance among all HHS recipients.
The Committee has fully funded protection and advocacy
activities for the developmentally-disabled and the mentally
ill elsewhere in the Department. This ensures the protection of
legal rights for these groups.
policy research
The bill includes $9,000,000, a reduction of $417,000 below
the amount available in 1995 and $3,278,000 below the budget
request.
The Policy Research account, authorized by section 1110 of
the Social Security Act, is the Department's principal source
of policy-relevant data and research on the income sources of
low-income populations; the impact, effectiveness, and
distribution of benefits under existing and proposed programs;
and other issues that cut across agency lines. The program is
intended to analyze issues that cannot be carried out by other
departmental research programs or under existing evaluation
activity.
Title III--Department of Education
Education Block Grants
The Committee is very much aware that the Committee on
Economic and Educational Opportunities has reported out a bill
(H.R. 1617) that would consolidate a large number of education
programs. Current funding levels would be reduced
substantially. These reforms would take effect in fiscal year
1997. The Appropriations Committee therefore views fiscal year
1996 as a transition year for current programs. This
appropriations bill has been drafted with a view that we are
moving toward large block grants in these areas and away from
categorical programs. A number of smaller programs have been
eliminated in this bill, however, funding for larger, core
state grant programs has been maintained at as close to current
level funding as possible. There is widespread agreement that
the current number of education programs must be substantially
reduced. This Committee intends to do its part in that, in
conjunction with the efforts of the Economic and Educational
Opportunities Committee.
education reform
The bill includes $95,000,000 for Education Reform
programs. This amount is $855,000,000 less than the
Administration's 1996 budget request and $399,370,000 below the
1995 amount. This appropriation account includes Goals 2000
under the Goals 2000: Educate America Act and School-to-work
opportunities under the School-To-Work Opportunities Act.
The Committee specifically instructs the Department not to
employ any other funds to carry out Goals 2000 activities which
are currently funded or proposed to be funded by the Department
as part of its fiscal year 1996 budget request. If the
Department feels that such programs should be funded, they
should do so only after full consultation with the Committee.
Goals 2000: Educate America Act: State and local education systematic
improvement grants
The bill includes no funding for carrying out the State and
local education systemic reform grant program authorized by
title III of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. This is
$693,500,000 below the budget request and $361,870,000 below
the 1995 appropriation level for this activity. This formula
grant program supports State and local efforts to engage in
systemic education reform. The Committee is concerned that the
rapid escalation in demand for funding for this program, as
evidenced in the President's request, cannot be accommodated in
the tight budgetary environment in which the Committee must
operate. Moreover, these broad planning, policy development and
policy advocacy programs must be of lower priority than those
programs that directly address needs of the students in the
classroom.
Goals 2000: Educate America Act: National programs
The bill includes no funds for national programs,
$46,500,000 below the budget request and the same as the 1995
appropriation level for this activity. The purpose of these
programs is to provide support and guidance to States and local
school districts in their reform efforts. The Committee has
provided no funds for these program-based assessments,
development of standards (including ``opportunity-to-learn''
standards), research, and technical assistance (including
assistance in achieving ``school finance equity''). The
approach taken in funding this account is consistent with the
concerns over the multiplicity of small research, demonstration
and technical assistance activities expressed in the
Committee's report of last year. The Committee believes that
any activities funded under this account which have impact
beyond the implementation of Goals 2000 can be funded by the
Secretary from funds made available in the Office of Education
Research and Improvement.
Goals 2000: Educate America Act: parental assistance
The bill includes no funding for parental assistance under
Goals 2000. This is $10,000,000 below both the budget request
and the 1995 level. This program provides assistance for parent
information and resource centers. With the proposed termination
of the Goals 2000 program, this program is no longer justified.
School-to-work opportunities: State grants and local partnerships
The bill includes $95,000,000 for State grants and local
partnerships under the School-to-Work Opportunities Act. This
is $105,000,000 below the budget request and $27,500,000 below
the 1995 level. Funds support grants to States to plan school-
to-work systems to ease the transition from school to work and
implementation grants provided competitively to States and
local consortia to begin building such systems. Activities
include recruiting employers, obtaining in-depth information on
local labor markets, designing school-based and work-based
curricula, and training school-based and work-based staff.
At the Committee mark, this program would still receive
nearly twice what it received in FY 1994. It remains to be seen
whether schools can develop effective partnerships with local
industry, labor and other institutions to assure that education
and training dovetail with the needs of these institutions.
More planning and seed money may not help solve this endemic
problem. It creates an expectation and demand for services that
the States and localities must then fund, often cutting other
local priorities, when the federal funding is terminated.
Congress will be under pressure to turn this program into a
permanent subsidy rather than a demonstration.
School-to-work opportunities: National programs
The bill includes no funds for national programs,
$15,000,000 below the budget request and $6,875,000 below the
1995 amount. This program allows the Department of Education to
conduct various activities, including collecting and
disseminating information on successful School-to-Work
Opportunities initiatives and methods for recruiting and
building the capacity of employers to provide work-based
learning opportunities, and to support the work being carried
out by States and localities. The approach taken in funding
this account is consistent with the concerns expressed in the
Committee's report of last year indicating ``. . . [M]uch more
can be done to consolidate and focus Departmental research
activities. . . . In fact, the Committee notes that more
research funds remain outside of OERI in the budget request
than within OERI.'' The Committee believes that any activities
funded under this account which have broader impact should be
funded by the Secretary from funds made available in the Office
of Education Research and Improvement.
education for the disadvantaged
The bill includes $6,014,499,000 for education for the
disadvantaged programs. This amount is $1,426,793,000 less than
the Administration's 1996 budget request and $1,213,617,000
less than the 1995 appropriation. This appropriation account
includes compensatory education programs authorized under title
I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA),
and two migrant education programs authorized by the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (HEA).
Grants to local educational agencies
Of the amounts provided for Title I programs,
$4,949,505,000 is available for basic grants to local education
agencies and State administration. This is $317,358,000 below
the request and $1,018,730,000 below the 1995 funding level.
Funding for concentration grants, which targets funds to Local
Education Agencies in Counties with high levels of
disadvantaged children, is funded at $549,945,000, $115,192,000
below last year and $115,192,000 below the request level. The
Committee provided no funding under Targeted Grants which
focuses even more funding on the most disdvantaged LEA's. This
level is $1,000,000,000 below the request level and the same as
last year. The Administration's proposal would have required
changes in the underlying authorizing statute and the Committee
was unable to reach agreement with the authorizing committee on
the propriety of making this change in an appropriations bill.
The Committee urges, that in this time of declining resources,
the Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities review
the allocation formula for this program and concentrate more
funding on the most disadvantaged districts.
Local school districts develop and implement their own
programs to meet the needs of their students. About 14,000
local school districts participate in the program, which served
an estimated 6.2 to 6.5 million pupils in 1995.
Financial assistance flows to school districts by formula,
based primarily on a State's number of school-aged children
from low-income families and its average per pupil expenditure
for public elementary and secondary education. Within
districts, local school officials target funds on school
attendance areas with the greatest number or percentage of
children from poor families.
Funds under this account will also be used to pay the
Federal share of State administrative costs for title I
programs. The maximum State administration grant is equal to 1
percent of title I local educational agency plus State agency
grants to the State, or $400,000, whichever is greater. These
funds are included in the grants to local educational agencies
account, rather than being a separate line item. The Committee
remains concerned that after spending $66.6 billion since 1980,
the Department of Education indicates that a national
assessment of the title I program found that:
Pre- and post-tests administered to the same group of
students (through the Prospectus study) show little progress
among title I students. Comparison of similar cohorts by grade
and poverty show that program participation does not reduce
test score gaps for the disadvantaged students. Indeed, title I
student scores (in all poverty cohorts) declined between the
third and fourth grades.
The Committee is also concerned that in this time of
reduced funding, funds for the program are still poorly
targeted with school districts in some of the wealthiest areas
in America still receiving funding. The Committee
recommendations include language to speed up the distribution
of funding on the basis of Local Education Agency rather than
County poverty data.
The Committee is concerned that in title I, as in education
generally, there is adequate information in student achievement
to allow parents, students, educators and Congress to measure
achievement. The Committee expects that sufficient assessments,
meeting all recognized technical and professional standards,
will be carried out in the new school year and thereafter to
assure full information on student achievement. These
assessments must assure that parents receive individual student
data and that disaggregated data on student performance is
available.
Capital expenses for private school students
Capital expenses grants are authorized to pay some of the
additional costs of providing title I services to children who
attend nonpublic schools. As a result of a decision of the U.S.
Supreme Court in 1985, in the case of Aguilar v. Felton, public
school teachers or other employees can not be sent to sectarian
nonpublic schools for the purpose of providing title I
services. The capital expenses grants are allocated to States
in proportion to the number of nonpublic school pupils they
serve. Purposes for which these funds may be used include
rental of classroom space in neutral sites (i.e., locations
other than private or public schools), rental of mobile vans
used for title I instruction, or transportation of nonpublic
pupils to public schools or neutral sites. The bill includes an
appropriation of $20,000,000 for this purpose, the same as the
budget request and $21,434,000 below the 1995 appropriation.
Even Start
Even Start provides demonstration grants for model programs
of joint education of disadvantaged children, aged 1-7 years,
who live in title I target school attendance areas, plus their
parents who are eligible to be served under the Adult Education
Act. These parents are not in school, are above the State's
compulsory school attendance age limit, and have not earned a
high school diploma (or equivalent). At appropriations levels
above $50,000,000, Even Start funds are allocated to the
States, generally in proportion to title I basic grants. The
bill includes $102,024,000 for this program, $102,024,000 above
the budget request and the same as the 1995 appropriation.
Funding for this program is based on the decision of the
Economic and Educational Opportunities Committee to reject the
President's proposal to consolidate this program into a larger
block grant and retain this program in its separate categorical
status.
State agency programs: migrant
The bill includes $305,475,000 for the migrant education
program, $4,525,000 below the budget request and the same as
the 1995 appropriation. This program supports grants to State
agencies for the support of special educational and related
services to children of migratory agricultural workers and
fishermen. The purpose of this program is to provide
supplementary academic education, remedial or compensatory
instruction, English for limited English proficient students,
testing, plus guidance and counseling.
State agency programs: neglected and delinquent
For the State agency program for neglected and delinquent
children, the bill includes $32,000,000; this is $8,000,000
less than the budget request and $7,311,000 below the 1995
appropriation. This program provides services to participants
in institutions for juvenile delinquents, adult correctional
institutions, or institutions for the neglected.
State program improvement grants
Title I requires State educational agencies to assist local
educational agencies in the development of program improvement
plans. These plans are developed for schools that fail to
produce increases in the aggregate level of achievement among
participating pupils. The bill includes no funding for this
program, $35,146,000 less than the budget request and
$27,560,000 below the 1995 appropriation. There are substantial
administrative set-asides in title I and other State and local
funding sources that can support activities funded under this
authority. In a time of fiscal stringency, the Committee feels
that these multiple administrative funding streams cannot be
sustained.
Demonstrations of Innovative Practices
The Committee bill provides no funding for a program of
title I demonstration grants for innovative practices. This is
$25,146,000 below the budget request and the same as the 1995
appropriation. Under this program, the Secretary of Education
makes discretionary grants to test, demonstrate, develop, and
evaluate innovative techniques for the education of
disadvantaged children. The approach taken in not funding this
account is consistent with the concerns expressed in the
Committee's report of last year indicating ``. . . [M]uch more
can be done to consolidate and focus Departmental research
activities. . . . In fact, the Committee notes that more
research funds remain outside of OERI in the budget request
than within OERI.'' The Committee believes that any activities
funded under this account which have broader impact should be
funded by the Secretary from funds made available in the Office
of Education Research and Improvement.
Evaluation
The Committee provides no funding for evaluation,
$11,000,000 less than the budget request and $3,664,000 less
than the 1995 appropriation. Title I evaluation supports large
scale national evaluations that examine how title I is
contributing to improved student performance at the State,
local education agency, and school levels; short term studies
that document promising models; and other activities to help
States and local education agencies implement requirements in
the title I statute. The Committee decision to provide no
funding for this activity is based on its concern surrounding
having the managers of the programs supervise its evaluation.
The Committee expects the Department to utilize its broader
evaluation authorities to continue the evaluation of the title
I program.
Migrant education: high school equivalency program and college
assistance migrant program
The bill includes no funding for two demonstration migrant
education programs; the migrant high school equivalency program
(HEP) and the college assistance migrant program (CAMP). This
funding level is the same as the request and $10,292,000 below
the FY `95 level. According to the Administration, these two
demonstration programs have long since accomplished their goals
of demonstrating techniques to assist disadvantaged youth in
completing high school equivalency and effectively competing
for placement in and completing college. Several less expensive
programs are available to continue these activities.
impact aid
The bill includes $645,000,000 for Impact Aid programs, an
increase of $26,000,000 over the budget request and $83,000,000
below the 1995 appropriation. This appropriation account
supports grants to school districts affected by federal
activities and is authorized under title VIII of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act. During the current school year,
payments are being made to approximately 2700 school districts
on behalf of approximately 1.8 million eligible children.
Basic support payments
The bill includes $550,000,000 for basic support payments.
This amount is the same as the budget request and $81,707,000
less than the 1995 appropriation. These payments compensate
school districts for lost tax revenue and are made on behalf of
``federally connected'' children, such as children of members
of the uniformed services who live on federal property.
Payments for children with disabilities
The bill provides $40,000,000 in payments for children with
disabilities. This amount is the same as the budget request and
the 1995 appropriation. These payments compensate school
districts for increased costs of servicing ``federally
connected'' children with disabilities.
Payments for heavily impacted districts
The bill includes $50,000,000 for payments for heavily
impacted districts. This amount is $30,000,000 above the budget
request and $10,000,000 above the 1995 appropriation. These
payments help heavily impacted districts to bring their per-
pupil spending to levels comparable to other school districts
in their States.
Facilities maintenance
The bill does not provide funding for facilities
maintenance. These funds are for maintaining certain school
facilities owned by the Department of Education.
Payments for increases in military dependents
The bill does not provide funding for increases in military
dependents. This amount is the same as the budget request and
$2,000,000 than the 1995 appropriation. These funds provide a
one-time payment to school districts experiencing large
increases of ``federally connected'' children as a result of
military realignment and draw-down overseas.
Construction
The bill includes $5,000,000 for construction. This amount
is the same as the budget request and $5,000,000 more than the
1995 appropriation. These funds provide payments to eligible
school districts for building and renovating school facilities.
Payments for Federal property
The bill provides no funds for payments for federal
property. This amount is the same as the budget request and
$16,293,000 less than the 1995 appropriation. These funds
compensate eligible school districts for lost tax revenue as
the result of the federal acquisition of real property since
1938.
school improvement programs
The bill includes $842,000,000 for school improvement
programs. This amount is $712,331,000 below the
Administration's 1996 budget request and $486,037,000 below the
1995 appropriation. This appropriation account includes the
following programs: Eisenhower professional development state
grants (part b, title II of ESEA); innovative education program
strategies state grants (title VI, ESEA); safe and drug-free
schools and communities (title IV of ESEA); education
infrastructure (title XII, ESEA); inexpensive book distribution
(part E, title X, ESEA); arts in education (part D, title X,
ESEA); law-related education (section 10602, ESEA); Christa
McAuliffe fellowships (part C, subpart 2, title V, HEA); magnet
schools assistance (part A, title V of ESEA); education
programs for homeless children and youth under the Stewart B.
McKinney Homeless Assistance Act; women's educational equity
programs (part B, title V of ESEA); training and advisory
services under title IV-A of the Civil Rights Act; dropout
prevention demonstration programs (part C, title V of ESEA);
Ellender fellowships (part G, title X, ESEA); Education for
Native Hawaiians (part B, title IX, ESEA); foreign languages
assistance (part B, title VII of ESEA); training in early
childhood education and violence counseling (part F, title V,
HEA); charter schools (part C, title X, ESEA) and comprehensive
regional assistance centers (part A, title XIII, ESEA).
Consolidated funding for professional development and program
innovation
The Committee recommends a consolidated funding for
professional development and program innovation of
$500,000,000. This level is $98,548,000 below last year's level
and $235,000,000 below the President's request. This
consolidated funding is proposed in anticipation of the passage
of an Education Reform Block Grant, currently under
consideration by the Economic and Educational Opportunities
Committee.
Professional development and program innovation: Eisenhower
professional development State grants
The Committee recommends no funding for State grants under
the Eisenhower professional development State grants,
$735,000,000 below the budget request and $251,298,000 below
the 1995 level. These funds are used to address teacher
training needs in all of the core academic subject areas. This
program provides funds to States by formula for use by State
and local educational agencies, and State higher education
agencies for sustained, intensive professional development
opportunities. Funding for this activity is assumed in the
consolidated funding recommended above.
Professional development and program innovation: innovative education
program strategies State grants
The bill includes no funding for innovate education program
strategies State grants. This is the same as the budget request
and $347,250,000 below the 1995 amount. The program makes
grants to state and local educational agencies for activities
intended to help meet the National Education Goals and assist
in the reform of elementary and secondary education. Local
educational agencies can use program funds for acquiring
educational materials, supporting educational reform projects
and magnet schools, and reducing illiteracy among children and
adults. Funding for this activity is assumed in the
consolidated funding recommended above.
Safe and drug-free schools and communities: State grants
The Committee bill includes $200,000,000 for the State
grants program of the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and
Communities. This is $265,000,000 below the budget request and
$240,981,000 less than the amount provided for 1995. The
program supports comprehensive, integrated approaches to drug
and violence prevention. Local educational agencies must use
their funds to implement a drug and violence prevention program
for students and employees. The Committee believes that State
and local activities should be carried out under other
authorities such as the Substance Abuse Block Grant, the
Preventive Health Block Grant and the Social Services Block
Grant with a total funding recommended by the Committee of $4.2
billion. The Committee is also concerned that the broad,
unfocused distribution of the funds--98% of all districts
receive funds--dissipates the effectiveness of this program.
After spending over $3 billion since 1987, statistics indicate
that the fear of marijuana use is declining among young people
and substance abuse is increasing.
Safe and drug-free schools and communities: national programs
For the national programs under the Safe and Drug-Free
Schools and Communities Act, the bill provides no funding,
which is $35,000,000 below the budget request and $25,000,000
less than the 1995 amount. Under this program, the Secretary of
Education administers a variety of activities to prevent the
illegal use of drugs and violence among, and promote safety and
discipline for, students at all educational levels, preschool
through postsecondary. The Committee remains concerned by the
multiplicity of small, program oriented research, demonstration
and evaluation programs which increase the likelihood for
duplication and self-serving evaluations. The Committee
believes that any activities funded under this account which
have broader impact, or high priority should be funded by the
Secretary from funds made available in the Office of Education
Research.
Education infrastructure
The bill provides for no funding for the education
infrastructure program. This is $35,000,000 below the budget
request and the same as the 1995 amount. The purpose of this
program is to assist local educational agencies to repair,
renovate, or rebuild school facilities. The Administration
indicated in its original submission that expanding the
authority of the College Construction Loan Assurance
Association would ``. . . provide the most cost-effective
construction assistance to the largest number of LEA's.''
Inexpensive book distribution (Reading Is Fundamental)
The bill provides $9,000,000 for the inexpensive book
distribution program. This is $1,300,000 below both the budget
request and the 1995 appropriation. The purpose of this program
is to buy inexpensive books, offer them through local community
programs to children from low-income families, and motivate
children to read. Federal funds provide for up to 75 percent of
the costs of the books. This program annually provides an
estimated 7.6 million books to 2.4 million children nationwide.
Arts in education
The bill provides $9,000,000 for the arts in education
program. This is $1,000,000 less than the budget request and
$1,500,000 less than the 1995 appropriation. The purpose of
this program is to support arts programs in elementary and
secondary education and to conduct demonstration programs for
the involvement of handicapped persons in the arts.
Law-related education
The bill provides no funding for the law-related education
program. This is the same as the budget request and $4,500,000
less than the 1995 amount. The purpose of this program is to
provide students with information and skills concerning the
law, the legal process and system, and the fundamental values
on which these are based. Funds support model classroom
programs and techniques relevant to law-related education.
Competitive grants are awarded to State agencies and local
educational agencies or other public or private agencies,
organizations, or institutions. This program, in existence
since the early 1980's has developed programs, trained teachers
and supported the institutionalized programs. According to the
Administration, these programs should now be able to continue
without further federal assistance.
Christa McAuliffe fellowships
The Committee recommends no funding for the Christa
McAuliffe fellowships. This is the same as the budget request
and $1,946,000 less than the 1995 amount. This program provides
1-year fellowships to experienced, outstanding elementary and
secondary school teachers. The fellowships may be used for
sabbaticals; consultation with other schools and school
systems; and development of innovative programs, partnerships
between schools and businesses, technology programs, and model
staff development programs.
Magnet schools assistance
The bill includes $95,000,000 for the magnet schools
assistance program, $16,519,000 below both the budget request
and the 1995 level. The magnet schools assistance program
awards competitive grants to local educational agencies for use
in establishing or operating magnet schools that are part of a
desegregation plan approved by a court or by the Department of
Education's Office for Civil Rights. A magnet school is defined
by the statute as ``a school or education center that offers a
special curriculum capable of attracting substantial numbers of
students of different racial backgrounds.'' A funding priority
is given to local educational agencies that have not
participated during the most recent funding cycle. For 1995, 55
districts were supported in the first year of a 2-year funding
cycle.
Education for homeless children and youth
For the education of homeless children and youth program,
authorized by section 722 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless
Assistance Act, the Committee recommends $23,000,000. This is
$7,000,000 less than the budget request and $5,811,000 less
than the 1995 appropriation. Grants are allocated to States in
proportion to the total that each State receives under the
title 1 program. For local grants, at least 50 percent must be
used for direct services to homeless children and youth,
including tutoring or remedial or other educational services.
Women's educational equity
The bill contains no funding for the women's educational
equity program, $4,000,000 below the budget request and
$3,967,000 below the 1995 amount. This program promotes
educational equity for women and girls through the support of
national, State, and other projects. Equality is encouraged
through the development and dissemination of model educational
programs and materials, as well as through guidance and
counseling activities, preservice and inservice training for
educators, and courses for underemployed and unemployed women.
This very small program, in existence since 1974, supports only
32 grants at approximately $100,000 per year. This program has
adopted no indicators of success after 20 years of existence
and, given its size, can have little impact.
Training and advisory services
The bill includes no funding for training and advisory
services authorized by title IV-A of the Civil Rights Act. This
is $14,000,000 below the budget request and $21,412,000 below
the 1995 amount. Title IV-A authorizes technical assistance and
training services for local educational agencies to address
problems associated with desegregation on the basis of race,
sex, or national origin. Competitive awards are made to civil
rights units within State educational agencies and to regional
desegregation assistance centers.
Dropout prevention demonstrations
The bill provides no funding for dropout prevention
demonstrations; this is the same as the budget request and
$12,000,000 below the 1995 level. This program provides
discretionary grants to local educational agencies, community-
based organizations, and educational partnerships. These grants
are for projects designed to reduce the number of children who
do not complete their elementary and secondary education. Such
programs may include identification, prevention, outreach, or
reentry projects for dropouts and potential dropouts, as well
as activities to coordinate community resources, evaluate
programs, and conduct related studies. According to the
Administration, these demonstration programs have identified
strategies that can be used to combat the dropout problem.
``Continuation of this program--which under reauthorization,
has evolved into a program of direct, noncompetitive assistance
to incumbent grantees, rather than a demonstration program--is
no longer justified,'' according to the Administration.
Ellender Fellowships/Close Up
The bill includes no funding for the Ellender fellowship
program, the same as the budget proposal and $3,000,000 less
than the 1995 amount. The program supports the Close Up
Foundation of Washington, D.C., to carry out its program to
increase the understanding of the Federal Government by
providing fellowships to disadvantaged secondary school
students, secondary school teachers, economically disadvantaged
older Americans, and recent immigrants. Fellowship recipients
receive practical experience in the activities of the
legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the Federal
Government. Evaluations of the program indicate that there are
several other programs carrying out similar programs without
federal assistance and that the incumbent grantee should be
able to continue activities without continuing federal support.
Education for Native Hawaiians
The bill includes no funding for education for native
Hawaiians, $9,000,000 below the budget request and $9,000,000
less than the 1995 amount. A number of programs limited to
Native Hawaiians are supported with these funds, including a
model curriculum project, family-based education centers,
postsecondary education fellowships, gifted and talented
education projects, and special education projects for disabled
pupils. The Administration, in its original request, indicated
that ``Native Hawaiians, to the extent that they meet
eligibility criteria that are applied to all citizens, are
already eligible for Department of Education funded services. .
. .''
Foreign language assistance
The bill provides no funding for the foreign language
assistance program, $10,912,000 less than both the budget
request and the 1995 amount. This program provides formula
grants to State educational agencies. States use funds to
support model programs in local educational agencies for the
improvement or expansion of foreign language instruction for
students. Programs must be designed at the local level and
represent a variety of alternative and innovative instructional
methods. Foreign languages are limited to those that have been
deemed critical by the Secretary; these currently include
Chinese, Japanese, and Russian.
Training in early childhood education and violence counseling
The bill includes no funding for training in early
childhood education and violence counseling, $9,600,000 below
the budget request. This program was not funded in 1995. This
program, first authorized by the Higher Education Amendments of
1992, supports the training of individuals for careers in early
childhood development and for careers in counseling young
children affected by violence and the adults who work with
them. Funds are awarded to higher education institutions.
Charter schools
The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for support of charter
schools, $14,000,000 below the budget request and the same as
the 1995 amount. Charter schools are developed and administered
by individuals or groups of individuals which may include
teachers, administrators, and parents. These groups enter into
charters for operation of their schools which must be granted
exemptions from State and local rules that limit flexibility in
school operation and management. Under this program, grants are
made to State educational agencies in States that have charter
school laws; the State educational agencies will in turn make
subgrants to authorized public chartering agencies in
partnerships with developers of charter schools. Grants are
limited to 3 years, with no more than 18 months devoted to
local planning.
Technical assistance for improving ESEA programs: comprehensive
regional assistance centers
The Committee recommends no funding for comprehensive
regional assistance centers, $55,000,000 below the budget
request and $29,641,000 below the 1995 amount. The program
supports the consolidation of 7 former technical assistance
programs that funded 48 technical assistance centers into a
program of 15 comprehensive regional technical assistance
centers for improving ESEA programs.
violent crime reduction program
The bill includes no funding for the violent crime
reduction program authorized by section D, title III of the
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 and
funded by the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund. This is
$31,000,000 below the budget request and the same as the 1995
amount. This program supports competitive grants to local
educational agencies and community based organizations to
improve the academic and social development of at-risk students
living in high-poverty and high-crime areas.
BILINGUAL AND IMMIGRANT EDUCATION
The bill includes $103,000,000 for bilingual and immigrant
education programs. This amount is $197,000,000 below the
Administration's 1996 budget request and $103,700,000 less than
the 1995 appropriation. This account supports bilingual
education programs authorized by section A, title VII of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the immigrant
education program authorized by section C, title VII of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
Bilingual education: instructional services
The bill provides $53,000,000 for instructional services,
$102,690,000 below the budget request and $64,190,000 below the
1995 amount. This program provides assistance through
competitive grants to schools districts to help ensure that the
limited English proficient students learn English.
Bilingual education: support services
The bill includes no funding for support services,
$15,330,000 below the budget request and $14,330,000 below the
1995 appropriation. These funds provide discretionary grants to
States to support data collection and reporting on the
population of limited English proficient persons and the
educational services available to them, planning, development,
review and evaluation of bilingual education programs, and
provision of technical assistance and student assessment
activities. These funds also provide for the operation of a
national clearinghouse on bilingual education and studies and
evaluations designed to provide information for policy-makers
and program administrators.
Bilingual education: professional development
The bill includes no funding for the bilingual education
professional development program. This is $28,980,000 below the
budget request and $25,180,000 below the 1995 appropriation.
This program is intended to increase the number of trained
bilingual education teachers and to strengthen the skills of
current teachers providing instruction for limited english
proficient children.
Immigrant education
The bill includes $50,000,000 for immigrant education,
$50,000,000 below the budget request and the same as the 1995
level. The program provides grants to States with school
districts that enroll substantial numbers of immigrant
children. Awards are used to help cover the cost of providing
supplemental educational services to these students.
SPECIAL EDUCATION
The bill includes $3,092,491,000 for programs for children
with disabilities. This funding level is $249,635,000 below the
Administration's 1996 budget request and $160,355,000 below the
1995 appropriation. In Special Education, as in many other
programs, the Committee sought to fund the core activity, in
this case, grants to states, at or above last year's levels.
Smaller, duplicative and expensive categorical programs whose
missions could be accomplished by states, using state and
federal resources, were not funded.
IDEA grants for special education
The bill provides no funding for the proposed State grants
for special education, which is $2,772,460,000 under the budget
request and the same as the 1995 amount. The proposed grants to
States would assist States in educating children with
disabilities and providing early intervention services to
infants and toddlers with disabilities.
IDEA grants to States
The bill provides $2,323,837,000 for grants to States,
which is $2,323,837,000 above the budget request and $922,000
above the 1995 level.
Preschool grants
The bill provides $360,409,000 for preschool grants,
$360,409,000 above the budget request and $144,000 above the
1995 level.
Grants for infants and families
The bill provides $315,754,000 for grants for infants and
families, $315,754,000 above the budget request and $122,000
above the 1995 level.
Program support and improvement
The bill provides no funding for the President's proposed
program support and improvement, $254,034,000 below the budget
request and the same as the 1995 amount. The proposal by the
President includes support for the following activities:
research and demonstrations, technical assistance and systems
change, professional development, parent training, and
technology development and support.
Deaf-blindness
The bill includes $12,832,000 for deaf-blindness programs,
which is $12,832,000 above the budget request and the same as
the 1995 appropriation. Deaf-blind project funds are used to
support regional centers serving deaf-blind infants, toddlers,
children and youth, and for technical assistance grants and
model demonstration projects for the education of deaf-blind
infants, toddlers, children and youth.
Serious emotional disturbance
The bill includes $4,147,000 for projects for children and
youth with serious emotional disturbance, which is $4,147,000
above the budget request and the same as the 1995
appropriation. The program includes research projects and local
school demonstration projects to improve and provide special
education and related services to children and youth with
serious emotional disturbance.
Severe disabilities
The bill provides $10,030,000 for severe disabilities
programs, which is $10,030,000 above the budget request and the
same as the 1995 appropriation. The grants under this program
support research, personnel training, and dissemination
projects to meet the needs of the severely disabled.
Early childhood education
The bill provides no funding for early childhood education
programs, which is the same as the budget request and
$25,167,000 below the 1995 appropriation. Grants support
research, dissemination, demonstration, and other projects to
improve the early education of children with disabilities. The
Committee expects that services to infants and young children
can be supported by the broader special education and
developmental disability authorities funded in the bill and
through the research, demonstration and technical assistance
activities funded by programs administered by the Office of
Education Research and Improvement.
Secondary and transitional services
The bill provides $23,966,000 for secondary and
transitional service projects, which is $23,966,000 above the
budget request and equal to the 1995 appropriation. This
program provides assistance to strengthen and coordinate
services for the transition of youth with disabilities from
secondary school to postsecondary education, employment, and
adult life and services, and to improve secondary special
education.
Postsecondary education
The bill provides $8,839,000 for postsecondary education
programs, which is $8,839,000 above the budget request and the
same as the 1995 appropriation. This program supports four
postsecondary institutions that provide model comprehensive
support services to serve deaf students as well as awards for
demonstration projects in postsecondary education for students
with disabilities other than deafness.
Innovation and development
The bill provides no funding for innovation and development
projects, which is the same as the budget request and
$20,635,000 below the 1995 appropriation. This program funds
research and demonstration projects, student-conducted research
in institutions of higher education, model projects to improve
educational opportunities for children with disabilities,
Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) information centers, and
ombudsman model demonstration projects. There are a broad range
of research funding sources in the Office of Educational
Research and Improvement and, at a more basic level, in the
National Institutes of Health. Other demonstration activities
can be funded under broader authorities in the Department of
Education, in the Developmental Disabilities programs of the
Department of Health and Human Services. Given these other
sources and the funding of State grants at above last year's
level, the Committee cannot justify the continued funding of
this essentially research and demonstration activity.
Media and captioning services
The bill provides $19,142,000 for media and captioning
services, which is $19,142,000 above the budget request and the
same as the 1995 appropriation. This program supports the
captioning of films, videos, and television programs for the
deaf, recordings for the blind, and cultural experiences for
the deaf and hard of hearing. The Committee is concerned that
Recordings for the Blind continue its activities which helps
assure the availability of high quality materials for this
segment of the disabled population. It is of particular concern
that the delay in the most recent funding cycle for Recordings
for the Blind has resulted in a funding gap that undermines its
ability to maintain continuous services. The Committee requests
that the Secretary review the funding for Recordings for the
Blind and determine whether funding can be provided to
reimburse it for activities during the funding hiatus.
Technology applications
The bill includes no funding for technology applications,
which is the same as the budget request and $10,862,000 below
the 1995 appropriation. This program provides assistance to
advance the use of new technology, media, and materials in the
education of students with disabilities and in the provision of
early intervention services. The program also supports projects
that increase access to devices and services providing
technical assistance. The Committee has funded Educational
Technology accounts in the Office of Educational Research and
Improvement at above last years level and expects high priority
activities funded under this account to be funded by this or
other authorities.
Special studies
The bill provides no funding for special studies, which is
the same as the budget request and $4,160,000 below the 1995
appropriation. This program supports data collection,
evaluations, and special studies to assess progress in the
implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act, examines special topics in early intervention and special
education, and provides information on State and local program
management. The approach taken in funding this account is
consistent with the concerns expressed in the Committee's
report of last year indicating ``. . . [M]uch more can be done
to consolidate and focus Departmental research activities . . .
. In fact, the Committee notes that more research funds remain
outside of OERI in the budget request than within OERI.'' The
Committee believes that any high priority activities funded
under this account can be funded by the Secretary from funds
made available in the Office of Education Research and
Improvement.
Personnel development
The bill includes no funding for personnel development,
which is the same as the budget request and $91,339,000 below
the 1995 appropriation. This program provides higher education
grants for training personnel for careers in special education,
related services, and early intervention; special preservice
and inservice training grants for instructing both regular
education and special education personnel; and grants to aid
States in meeting their personnel needs as identified in their
comprehensive plans for personnel development. The program also
supports personnel training grants to Historically Black
Colleges and Universities and other minority colleges and
universities to increase the number of minority special
education personnel. The Committee believes that high priority
programs funded under this program can be supported by broader
authorities including funding for historically black
institutions, funding for specific institutions, or the broader
training and education reform proposals under consideration by
the Economic and Educational Opportunities Committee.
Parent training
This bill provides $13,535,000 for parent training programs
authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act, Part D, Section 631(c) which is the same as the FY 1995
appropriation and $13,535,000 above the request. This program
support parent training and information centers to aid parents
of children with disabilities.
Clearinghouses
The bill includes no funding for clearinghouses, which is
the same as the budget request and $2,162,000 below the 1995
appropriation. This program funds three clearinghouses on:
children with disabilities, postsecondary education for
individuals with disabilities, and careers in special
education. These clearinghouses disseminate information and
provide technical assistance to parents, professionals and
other interested parties; provide information on postsecondary
programs and services for children with disabilities; and
encourage students and professionals to seek and obtain careers
and employment in special education and related fields. The
Committee believes that these dissemination activities can be
carried out by the Office of Education Research and
Improvement.
Regional resource centers
The bill provides no funding for regional resource centers,
which is the same as the budget request and $7,218,000 below
the 1995 appropriation. This program funds six centers that
provide technical assistance to State governments and, through
them, to localities to improve administration of Federal
programs for students with disabilities and disseminate
information on and encourage the replication of exemplary
programs and practices. A national coordinating technical
assistance center is also authorized. The Committee believes
that these technical assistance activities, to the degree there
is continued demand, can be carried out by the Office of
Education Research and Improvement.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH
The bill includes $2,455,760,000 for rehabilitation
services and disability research. This amount is $1,177,000
less than the Administration's 1996 budget request and
$62,408,000 above the 1995 appropriation. The programs in this
account are authorized by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the
Helen Keller National Center Act, and the Technology-Related
Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988.
The Rehabilitation Act and the Helen Keller Center programs
were reauthorized in 1992 (P.L. 102-569). The Technology-
Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act was
authorized in 1994 (P.L. 103-218). The bill includes an
increase in funds over the 1995 level for the title I
vocational rehabilitation (VR) State grant program, for
supported employment State grants, for centers for independent
living, for client assistance State grants, and for the Helen
Keller Center program. The bill also includes funding for
technical assistance activities, which were not funded in 1995.
The bill includes the merging of the special demonstration and
supported employment programs with an overall decrease in funds
from the 1995 level. This includes the same level of funds as
appropriated in 1995 for all other programs. Funding for
Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research are considered
mandatory accounts under the Budget Enforcement Act.
The Committee is concerned by the extent of unemployment
among people with disabilities and urges the Department to
provide support for employment and training assistance at the
1996 Paralympic Games for people with disabilities. Job
training could be made available to unemployed workers with
disabilities in conjunction with the planning and program
management for this event.
The Committee is impressed by the contributions of the
regional head injury centers in improving services for victims
of traumatic brain injury (TBI). The Committee recommends that
the Rehabilitation Services Administration, in conjunction with
other Departments funding research and treatment activities
associated with TBI, investigate ways to disseminate the
experience of these centers through existing dissemination and
technical assistance mechanisms.
Vocational rehabilitation grants to States
For vocational rehabilitation State grants, the bill
includes $2,118,834,000, $64,689,000 above the 1995 amount and
the same as the budget request. This program supports basic
vocational rehabilitation services through assistance to the
States. Grants are made to States through an allocation formula
based on population and per capita income. States in turn
support a wide range of services designed to help persons with
physical and mental disabilities prepare for and engage in
gainful employment to the extent of their capabilities.
Emphasis is placed on providing vocational rehabilitation (VR)
services to persons with the most severe disabilities. In 1995,
an estimated 1.36 million persons will be served, 76 percent of
whom have severe disabilities. Of this number, an estimated
211,000 will be rehabilitated. (Persons are defined to be
rehabilitated if, after receiving VR services, they maintain a
suitable rehabilitation objective, usually employment, for at
least 60 days.)
Technical assistance to States
The bill includes $1,000,000 for technical assistance to
States, the same as the budget request. No funds were provided
in 1995. This program assists State agencies improve operations
of the VR program and the provision of services to persons with
disabilities.
Client assistance
The bill includes $10,119,000 for the client assistance
program, $295,000 above the 1995 amount and the same as the
budget request. A client assistance program is required in each
State as a condition of receipt of a basic State grant. This
program helps persons with disabilities overcome problems with
the service delivery system and improve their understanding of
services available to them under the Rehabilitation Act. Funds
are distributed to States according to population; each State
receives a minimum of $100,000. In 1995, an estimated 52,000
persons will receive information and referral through the
program and 11,000 cases will receive further assistance.
Training
For training personnel to provide rehabilitation services
to persons with disabilities, the bill includes $39,629,000,
the same as both the 1995 level and the budget request. The
program supports long-term and short-term training, in-service
personnel training, and training of interpreters for deaf
persons. Projects in a broad array of disciplines are funded to
ensure that skilled personnel are available to serve the
vocational needs of persons with disabilities. In 1995, the
program supports about 335 grants.
Special demonstration programs
The bill combines the special demonstration program with
the supported employment demonstration program and includes
$23,942,000 for the consolidated program, $6,616,000 below the
1995 level for the two programs, and the same as the budget
request. These programs authorize discretionary awards on a
competitive basis to public and private organizations to
support demonstrations, direct services, and related activities
for persons with severe disabilities. In 1995, these programs
support 113 projects.
Migratory workers
For programs serving migratory workers, the bill provides
$1,421,000, the same as both the 1995 amount and the budget
request. This program makes comprehensive vocational
rehabilitation services available to migrant or seasonal
farmworkers with vocational disabilities. Projects emphasize
outreach activities, specialized bilingual rehabilitation
counseling, and coordination of vocational rehabilitation
services with services from other sources. Funds are awarded
through discretionary grants to State and local vocational
rehabilitation agencies and to nonprofit organizations working
in collaboration with the State vocational rehabilitation
agency. This program supports 10 projects in 1995.
Recreational programs
For recreational programs, the bill provides $2,596,000,
the same as both the 1995 amount and the budget request. This
program provides individuals with recreation and related
activities to aid in their employment, mobility, independence,
socialization, and community integration. Discretionary grants
are made on a competitive basis to States, public agencies, and
nonprofit private organizations, including institutions of
higher education. In 1995 this program supports 38 projects.
Protection and advocacy of individual rights
For protection and advocacy for persons with severe
disabilities, the bill provides $7,456,000, the same as the
1995 amount and the budget request. Grants are awarded to
entities that have the authority to pursue legal,
administrative, and other appropriate remedies needed to
protect and advocate the rights of persons with severe
disabilities. These entities must be independent of State
vocational rehabilitation agencies. In 1995, the program
supports 56 grants.
Projects with industry
For projects with industry, the bill provides $22,071,000,
the same as the 1995 amount and the budget request. This
program is the primary Federal vehicle for promoting greater
participation of business and industry in the rehabilitation
process. The program provides training and experience in
realistic work settings to persons with disabilities to prepare
them for employment in the competitive labor market. Awards are
made to a variety of agencies and organizations, including
business and industrial corporations, rehabilitation
facilities, labor organizations, trade associations, and
foundations. This program supports 122 projects in 1995.
Supported employment State grants
For supported employment State grants, the bill includes
$38,152,000, which is $1,616,000 above the 1995 amount, and the
same as the budget request. These grants assist States in
developing collaborative programs with public agencies and
nonprofit agencies for training and post-employment services
leading to supported employment. In supported employment
programs, persons with severe disabilities are given special
supervision and assistance to enable them to perform a job.
Funds are distributed on the basis of population, except no
State can receive less than $300,000. In 1995, an estimated
34,000 clients will be served and of that number, about 9,500
will be rehabilitated.
Independent living: State grants
For State grants for independent living, the bill includes
$21,859,000, the same as the 1995 amount and the budget
request. This program supports formula grants to the States to
assist in the provision of services designed to meet the
current and future needs of persons whose disabilities are so
severe that they do not presently have the potential for
employment, but who may benefit from services to enable them to
live and function independently. Awards are made to States on
the basis of population. In 1995, the program supports 79
grants to general vocational rehabilitation agencies and
vocational rehabilitation agencies for persons who are blind.
Independent Living: centers
For centers for independent living, the bill provides
$41,749,000, which is $1,216,000 above the 1995 amount, and the
same as the budget request. This program supports a network of
consumer-controlled, nonresidential, community-based private
nonprofit centers that provide a wide range of services to help
persons with severe disabilities live more independently in
family and community settings. Centers provide information and
referral services, independent living skills training, peer
counseling, and individual and systems advocacy. Discretionary
grants are made to State vocational rehabilitation agencies or
other public agencies or private nonprofit organizations. In
1995, the program supports 225 centers.
Independent living: services for older blind persons
For independent living services for older blind
individuals, the bill provides $8,952,000, the same as the 1995
amount and the budget request. This program supports services
for persons 55 years old or over whose severe visual impairment
makes gainful employment extremely difficult to obtain, but for
whom independent living goals are feasible. Discretionary
grants are awarded competitively to designated State agencies.
In 1995, the program supports 45 grantees.
Evaluation
The bill includes $1,587,000 for program evaluation, the
same as the 1995 amount and the budget request. These funds are
used to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of individual
programs authorized under the Rehabilitation Act. Contracts are
awarded on an annual basis for studies to be conducted by
persons not immediately involved in the administration of the
programs authorized by the Act. In 1995, two evaluation studies
are funded.
Helen Keller National Center
For the Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youth
and Adults, the bill includes $7,144,000, which is $208,000
above the 1995 amount and the same as the budget request. These
funds are used for the operation of the national center for
intensive services for deaf-blind individuals and their
families at Sands Point, New York and a network of 10 regional
offices for referral and counseling. In addition to support for
the national and regional staff, the Helen Keller Center
provides seed money to State and private nonprofit affiliate
agencies to assist them initiate programs for deaf-blind
persons. In 1995, the program expects to serve 70 persons at
the New York center, 2,000 persons through its regional
representatives, and 3,400 persons through the affiliate
agencies. The average cost of providing services at the New
York Center in 1993 was approximately $72,200 per person.
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
The bill includes $70,000,000 for the National Institute on
Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), the same as the
1995 amount and the budget request. NIDRR supports research,
demonstration and training activities that are designed to
maximize the employment and integration into society of
individuals with disabilities of all ages.
Assistive technology
For assistive technology activities, the bill provides
$39,249,000, the same as the 1995 amount, and $1,177,000 below
the budget request. Technology assistance activities are
authorized under the Technology-Related Assistance for
Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988, which was
reauthorized in 1994. This program provides discretionary
grants to the States to assist them in developing statewide
programs to facilitate the provision of devices for, and
services to, persons with disabilities. In 1995, this program
supports 57 State grants.
Special Institutions for the Disabled
AMERICAN PRINTING HOUSE FOR THE BLIND
The bill provides $4,000,000 for the American Printing
House for the Blind, which is $2,680,000 below both the budget
request and the 1995 level. The purpose of this appropriation
is to subsidize the production of educational materials for
legally blind persons enrolled in programs below the college
level. The Printing House manufactures and maintains an
extensive inventory of special materials that are distributed
free of charge to schools and States based on the number of
blind students in each State. The Printing House also conducts
research and field activities to inform educators about the
availability of materials and how to use them.
The Committee believes that the Printing House provides a
valuable service to local educational agencies which are
required by federal law to provide free and appropriate
education to all students with disabilities including those
with sight impairment. However, the bill provides over $2.3
billion for flexible grants to states for the education of
individuals with disabilities. This formula grant funding may
be used to purchase appropriate materials for educating
visually impaired individuals including materials produced by
the Printing House. The Committee believes that the flexible
state grants are a more appropriate method of assisting states
to meet the needs of all students with disabilities. Through
the existing system of Printing House credits to states made
available by this appropriation, all states are familiar with
and regularly use Printing House products and services. To the
extent that states believe Printing House materials and
services represent the best option available to them in the
market place and are a sufficiently high priority to merit the
allocation of limited public resources, states will continue to
purchase them.
NATIONAL TECHNICAL INSTITUTE FOR THE DEAF
The bill provides $39,737,000 for the National Technical
Institute for the Deaf (NTID), a reduction of $3,454,000 below
the 1995 appropriation and $3,304,000 below the request. The
recommendation adopts the President's proposal to provide a
consolidated appropriation for NTID but does not adopt the
request to earmark funding for the endowment. The Committee
believes this recommendation will provide NTID needed
flexibility in allocating limited funding among various
activities including operations, construction and endowment.
The Committee notes that this recommendation was one of the
most difficult decisions it faced and wishes to commend NTID
for the many actions it has already taken to downsize its
workforce, control costs, increase efficiency, and develop non-
Federal sources of support.
GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY
The bill includes $72,028,000 for Gallaudet University, a
decrease of $8,002,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the
budget request. The recommendation adopts the President's
proposal to provide a consolidated appropriation for the
University rather than maintaining separate line items for
university, pre-college, endowment and construction programs.
The recommendation does not adopt the request to earmark
funding for the endowment program. The Committee believes this
consolidated funding will provide the University needed
flexibility in allocating limited federal funding among various
activities including university-level programs, elementary and
secondary programs, endowment and construction.
Gallaudet is a private, non-profit educational institution
federally-chartered in 1864 providing elementary, secondary,
college preparatory, undergraduate, and continuing education
for deaf persons. In addition, the school offers graduate
programs in fields related to deafness for deaf and hearing
students, conducts various deafness research, and provides
public service programs for deaf persons.
VOCATIONAL AND ADULT EDUCATION
The bill includes $1,057,919,000 for vocational and adult
education programs. This amount is $324,649,000 below the 1995
appropriation and $610,656,000 below the 1996 budget request.
This appropriation account includes vocational education
programs authorized by the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and
Applied Technology Education Act and adult education programs
authorized by the Adult Education Act, the Stewart B. McKinney
Homeless Assistance Act, and title VI of the National Literacy
Act of 1991.
Vocational education state grants
This bill includes no funds for State grants consolidation
as proposed by the President, $1,141,088,000 below the budget
request. No funds were provided in 1995. State grants would
support the School-To-Work Opportunities Act and the Department
of Labor's youth program development of developing
infrastructure for statewide school-to-work transition systems
for in-school and out-of-school youth. The funding formula is
based on two age cohorts (15-19 and 20-24). While the Committee
provides no funding for this particular consolidation approach,
it supports the overall consolidation of these multiple,
duplicative programs.
Vocational education basic grants
This bill includes $700,000,000 for basic grants to States
under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology
Education Act, which is $272,750,000 below the 1995 amount. The
Administration requested no funds for this program. Basic
grants support programs that are of sufficient size, scope, and
quality to be effective; that integrate academic and vocational
education; and that provide equitable participation in these
programs for special populations such as the disadvantaged and
the disabled. Basic grants are allotted to States according to
a formula based on State population with an adjustment based on
State per capita income.
Community-based organizations
For community-based organizations the bill includes no
funds. This is the same as both the budget request and the
amount provided in 1995. Grants are allocated to the States
under the same formula used for basic grants. Grants fund
collaboration among community-based organizations, public
agencies, and businesses to provide vocational education
services to disadvantaged youth. These services may include
outreach programs, transitional services, prevocational
preparation, career intern programs, special programs for the
disadvantaged, model programs for school dropouts, and guidance
and counseling. The President requested a rescission of all
fiscal year 1995 funds for this program and P.L. 104-00
rescinded $9,479,000.
Consumer and homemaking education
For consumer and homemaking education the bill includes no
funds, which is the same as the budget request. No funds were
provided in 1995. This program provides formula grants to the
States for instruction in the areas of food and nutrition,
consumer education, family living and parenthood education,
child development and guidance, housing, home management, and
clothing and textiles. The President requested a rescission of
all funds in this program for fiscal year 1995 and P.L. 104-00
rescinded $34,409,000.
Tech-prep education
For tech-prep education, $100,000,000 is provided,
$8,000,000 below the 1995 amount. The Administration requested
no funds for this program. At this level of funding, grants are
allocated to the States under the same formula used for basic
grants. In turn, States make grants to consortia of secondary
and postsecondary institutions to link the last 2 years of high
school vocational education with 2 years of additional
vocational education after high school. Funds are used to
develop tech-prep programs, acquire equipment for such
programs, and obtain technical assistance from other successful
tech-prep programs. Funding of $290,000,000 has been provided
in this and the School-to-Work accounts in anticipation of the
consolidation of these and other youth and adult training
programs as reported by the Economic and Educational
Opportunities Committee in HR 1617.
Tribally controlled postsecondary vocational institutions
The bill includes $2,919,000 for grants for tribally
controlled postsecondary vocational institutions, the same as
the 1995 amount. The Administration requested no funds for this
program. This program provides grants for the operation and
improvement of training programs to ensure continuation and
expansion of vocational training opportunities for Indian
youth.
State councils on vocational education
For State councils on vocational education no funds are
provided, which is $8,848,000 below the 1995 amount. The
Administration requested no funds for this program. Grants are
allocated to the States under a modification of the formula
used for basic grants. States must establish and maintain these
councils in order to receive any Federal funds for vocational
education. The councils assist in the development and
evaluation of State vocational education plans, policies, and
programs. States can assign the duties of the vocational
education council to the voluntary State human resources
investment council (HRIC) established under title VII of the
Job Training Partnership Act and allocate State council funds
to the HRIC. The decision not to fund this program is
consistent with the Committee's overall policy of not funding
bureaucratic planning and advocacy activities within state and
local governments. The States may use their basic State grants
to fund these councils.
National programs, research
For national research programs, the Committee recommends
$1,000,000, which is $5,851,000 below the 1995 amount. The
Administration requested no funds for this program. This
authority supports the conduct and dissemination of research in
vocational education, and includes support for the National
Center for Research in Vocational Education, six regional
curriculum coordination centers, and other discretionary
research. The Committee recognizes the value of the broad
dissemination of quality curriculum and instructional materials
at the state and local levels and encourages the Department to
continue the functions of the National Network for Curriculum
Coordination with the funds provided. The Committee intends to
work with the Department to see that this service is
maintained.
National programs, demonstration
For national demonstration programs, no funds are provided,
the same as the 1995 amount and the budget request. The
Secretary makes competitive grants under this program, with
priority given to the development of instructional
telecommunications materials and demonstration centers for
dislocated workers. Other types of projects include cooperative
demonstration projects for corrections education and school-to-
work transition programs, and projects to establish specific
occupational competencies in industries and trades. The
Committee believes that high priority programs funded under
this authority can be funded under authorities administered by
the Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee
For National Occupational Information Coordinating
Committee, no funds are provided, $4,250,000 below the same
1995 amount. The Administration requested no funds for this
program. The National Occupational Information Coordinating
Committee (NOICC) is authorized by the Carl D. Perkins
Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act, Title IV, Part
C, Section 422. The NOICC has been funded jointly with the
Department of Labor since fiscal year 1978. NOICC funds are
used for State Occupational Information Coordinating Committees
(SOICCS) and for the development and delivery of information
systems that assess current and future labor market conditions
to communicate and coordinate activities, and provide
administration to assist students, educators, and vocational
education program planners. This funding decision is consistent
with the Committee's decision to eliminate funding for
duplicative, expensive and unnecessary advisory committees.
State activities for adult education
For State activities authorized by the Adult Education Act,
the Committee recommends $250,000,000, which is $2,345,000
below the 1995 amount, and $229,487,000 below the budget
request. These funds are used by States for programs to enable
all adults to acquire basic literacy skills, to enable those
who so desire to complete a secondary education, and to make
available to adults the means to become more employable,
productive, and responsible citizens. Grants are allotted to
the States according to a formula whereby each receives
$250,000 with remaining funds distributed in proportion to the
number of persons age 16 years and older who have not completed
a high school education. States are specifically required to
give preference to funding programs and projects that recruit
and serve educationally disadvantaged adults (persons
demonstrating basic skills at or below those of students at the
fifth grade level).
National Institute for Literacy
For the National Institute for Literacy, the bill provides
no funds, which is $4,869,000 below the 1995 amount. The
Administration requested no funds for this program. The
Institute supports research and development projects, tracks
progress made toward national literacy goals, supports research
fellowships, disseminates information through a national
clearinghouse, and coordinates literacy information data from
national and State sources. The Committee believes that high
priority activities funded under this authority can be funded
under broader authorities administered by the Office of
Educational Research and Improvement.
National programs for adult education
For national programs authorized by the Adult Education
Act, no funds are provided, $11,000,000 less than the budget
request and $8,769,000 less than the 1995 amount. These
programs include evaluation, technical assistance, analyses,
and studies of Federal and State adult education programs, as
well as the development of new technologies in adult education
and literacy instructional programs. These activities should
generate new information on the nature and extent of illiteracy
and the most effective techniques for reaching the population
of illiterate adults. The Committee believes that high priority
activities funded under this authority can be funded under
broader authorities administered by the Office of Educational
Research and Improvement.
State literacy resource centers
For State literacy resource centers, the bill provides no
funds, the same as the budget request and the 1995 amount.
Authorized under the Adult Education Act, this program
allocates funds to States or groups of States in proportion to
their awards under the adult education State grant program.
Funds are used to establish and maintain a network of State or
regional centers to stimulate the coordination of services and
enhance the capacity of State and local organizations to
provide literacy services. P.L. 104-00 rescinded $7,787,000
eliminating all funding for the program in fiscal 1995.
Workplace literacy partnerships
For workplace literacy partnerships, no funds are provided,
the same as the budget request, and $12,736,000 below the 1995
amount. The workplace program provides discretionary
demonstration grants for workplace-related training, including
adult secondary education; literacy training for adults with
limited English proficiency; updating basic skills to meet
changing needs in the workplace; improving the competency of
adult workers' literacy skills; and educational counseling,
transportation, and child care. The authority to fund training
and support activities such as those funded under workplace
literacy partnerships also exists, and similar services are
provided, under joint training programs authorized by the Job
Training Partnership Act. These activities, to the degree that
they are public responsibilities, can be funded under the state
grant program.
The Committee believes that there are several worthwhile
workplace literacy programs, such as those identified in last
year's Congressional reports on the FY 95 appropriations bills
and encourages the Department of Education to give careful
consideration to the directives outlined in those reports.
The Committee also believes that the upgrading of employee
workplace skills is more properly a function of their
employers.
Literacy training for homeless adults
For literacy training for homeless adults, authorized under
section 702 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act,
the bill provides no funds, the same as the budget request and
the 1995 amount. Under this program, the Secretary makes
discretionary grants to the States for programs of literacy
training and basic skills remediation for homeless persons.
Programs must develop cooperative arrangements with other
service agencies to provide an integrated package of services
to support the most urgent needs of homeless adults. The
Committee believes that high priority activities funded under
this authority can be funded by states under their broader
state grant programs.
Literacy programs for prisoners
For literacy programs for prisoners, authorized under title
VI of the National Literacy Act, the bill provides $4,000,000,
$1,100,000 below the 1995 amount. The Administration requested
no funds for this program. The purpose of this program is to
assist persons incarcerated in prison, jail, or detention
centers with functional literacy and life skills training
programs. Discretionary grants are authorized to be awarded to
eligible State and local correctional agencies and correctional
education agencies, with priority given to programs with the
potential for innovation, effectiveness, and replication. This
program supports 19 awards annually.
student financial assistance
The bill provides $6,916,915,000 for student financial
assistance programs. In combination with $805,000,000 in Pell
Grants carry-over funding which was provided in previous
appropriations, the bill makes available $7,721,915,000 for
student financial assistance, an increase of $103,945,000 over
the resources available in the 1995 appropriation. The budget
requests $7,651,415,000 for 1996.
The Committee considers student financial assistance to be
among the highest priorities within its jurisdiction and has
provided substantial resources to support these programs.
Despite a reduction in funding of 13% bill-wide below the
amount provided in the regular 1995 appropriations bill, the
recommendation includes a $100 increase in the maximum Pell
Grant and level funding for Supplemental Education Opportunity
Grants and the Work Study program.
Pell Grants
The bill provides $5,697,000,000 for the Pell Grant
program, an amount sufficient, when coupled with carry-over
funding and additional program changes in the bill, to raise
the maximum Pell Grant to $2,440, the highest level in the
program's history and an increase of $100 over the maximum
grant for 1995. The budget request included $6,217,125,000 for
Pell Grants based on earlier estimates which indicated a lower
carry-over amount than is currently estimated to be available.
While funding has been reduced by 13% bill-wide from the
amounts provided in the regular 1995 appropriations bill in
order to comply with the budget law, the Committee considers
this means-tested voucher program to be among the highest
priorities under its jurisdiction and has made difficult
reductions elsewhere in the bill in order to raise the maximum
grant. The President proposed to divide the Pell Grant program
between degree- and non-degree-seeking students, with non-
degree students receiving ``Skills Grants'' from the Department
of Labor.
The bill adopts a legislative change to the Pell Grant law
in order to better target limited resources to those students
with the greatest needs and to increase the maximum grant to a
level that will provide low-income students with real and more
meaningful choices among institutions of higher education. The
bill eliminates the transition ``bump'' under which students
who qualified for Pell Grants in the range of $200 to $400
prior to 1992 now receive the new minimum Pell award of $400.
In addition, the bill eliminates assistance to those students
who currently qualify for grants of less than $600. The
Committee believes that funding for these small grants which
support individuals with relatively less need should be better
targeted to those students with relatively greater financial
need. These changes in the basic law permit the increase in the
maximum grant to $2,440, thereby providing increased assistance
to the estimated 3,550,000 Pell Grant recipients with greatest
financial need. The Congress has provided adequate loan capital
and guarantees to ensure that the estimated 250,000 students
adversely impacted by these legislative changes will have ready
access to additional loans of $400-$600 necessary to supplement
their education expenses.
Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOGs)
The bill provides $583,407,000 for supplemental educational
opportunity grants, the same as the budget request and the 1995
appropriation. The Committee considers these grants to be among
the highest priorities under its jurisdiction. The SEOG program
provides grants through postsecondary institutions to assist
qualified students who demonstrate exceptional financial need
to meet the cost of education. Institutions have broad
flexibility within the eligibility criteria for awarding these
grants with the exception that priority be given to Pell Grant
recipients.
Work-study
The bill provides $616,508,000 for the federal work-study
program, the same as the 1995 appropriation and the
Administration request. The Committee considers this program to
be among the highest priorities under its jurisdiction. This
program supports part-time employment for students to help meet
the cost of education. Institutions receive funding according
to a statutory formula and may allocate it for job location and
job development centers. The bill includes $1,500,000 to carry
out the provisions of section 448(f) of the Higher Education
act which includes a separate authorization of appropriations
for ``work colleges.''
Perkins loans capital contributions
The bill does not provide funding for the Perkins loans
capital contributions, consistent with the Administrations 1995
budget request which stated Federal Family Education Loans and
Federal Direct Student Loans, together with new Perkins Loans
funded from $6 billion in existing institutional revolving
funds, will provide adequate sources of capital for new student
borrowing. The Committee is not aware of any changes in student
loan policy or in the financial marketplace which would alter
that view or the resulting policy and therefore does not
approve the 1996 request for $158,000,000 for the Perkins loans
capital contributions, the same amount appropriated in 1995.
The Perkins loan program provides low-interest loans to
students through individual institutional revolving funds at
2,700 participating schools. Institutions are required to match
one-third of the federal capital contribution. The program
duplicates both the Federal Family Education Loan Program
(FFEL) and the Federal Direct Student Loan Program (FDSL). The
Committee does not believe the federal government should
continue to administer three duplicative loan programs.
The Committee wishes to emphasize that termination of the
capital contributions will not result in termination of the
program. Participating institutions will continue to receive
federal payments for loan cancellations and may continue to
initiate new grants with the $6 billion in existing
institutional revolving funds.
Perkins loans cancellations
The bill provides $20,000,000 for federal Perkins loans
cancellations, an increase of $2,000,000 over the 1995
appropriation and the same as the budget request. Perkins loans
may be canceled when the borrower pursues a career in one of 12
statutory designated professions including corrections
officers, medical technicians, and Peace Corps and VISTA
volunteers.
State student incentive grants
The bill does not provide funding for the State Student
Incentive Grants program, consistent with the 1995 budget
proposal to terminate this program based on the recommendations
of the National Performance Review which indicated that the
program had accomplished its purpose. The 1996 budget proposes
to phase out SSIGs over two years. The recommended funding
level is $63,375,000 below the 1995 appropriated level and
$31,375,000 below the 1996 request.
The SSIG program was established in 1972 to encourage and
expand State scholarship assistance to postsecondary students
with substantial financial need. At that time, only 26 states
provided such need-based grants. Today, all 50 States and the
District of Columbia provide such assistance. In addition, 46
states over-match the SSIG requirement, 42 states award need-
based aid in addition to SSIG, 33 states award non-need-based
aid, 23 states support part-time students, and 21 states assist
graduate as well as undergraduate students. SSIG now accounts
for only 2.5% of grants awarded by states.
The Committee concurs with the findings of the National
Performance Review which indicated that 24 years of federal
support has been more than sufficient to encourage states to
develop their own student financial assistance programs. State
grant programs have been aware for some time of Congressional
and Administration proposals to phase out or terminate funding.
Each of these programs should be well prepared for the
reduction in funding which represents only 2.5% of all grant
funding awarded by states. The Committee believes that at a
time when federal programs under its jurisdiction are being
reduced by 14% on average as compared to the regular 1995 bill
to comply with the budget law, it is reasonable to require
State grant assistance programs to contribute a percentage
reduction of one-sixth that magnitude to the overall downsizing
effort.
State Postsecondary Review Entities (SPRE)
The bill does not provide funding for the State
Postsecondary Review Entities (SPREs) consistent with H.R. 1944
which rescinds all 1995 funding for the program. The budget
includes $25,000,000 for the program in 1996, a $5,000,000
increase over the original 1995 appropriation. This program
reimburses States for activities that supplement existing
institutional licensing and review functions conducted by
States as part of the process of establishing the eligibility
of postsecondary institutions to participate in federal student
aid programs. The Committee believes that the program is not
well focused on the institutional sectors most in need of
oversight. Termination of this program does not affect
Departmental review and certification activities or independent
accreditation requirements.
federal family education loan program
The bill includes $30,066,000 for the Department of
Education's administration of the Federal Family Education
Loans, the same as the budget request and $32,125,000 below the
1995 level. This discretionary administrative funding is
provided in the Federal Family Education Loans appropriation
account rather than under the Department's Salaries and
Expenses account pursuant to a requirement of the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990. These funds support Federal
administrative activities, including processing payments and
claims, reducing loan default costs, and program monitoring.
Federal Family Education Loans are financed with private
capital and reinsured by the Federal Government against
borrower default, death, disability and bankruptcy. Federal
costs include payments for such insurance claims as well as
support for borrower interest benefits. Federal Family
Education Loan programs have supported over $150 billion in
loans to student and parent borrowers since their inception. In
1993, $16.5 billion in Federal Family Education loans were
disbursed to 5.3 million borrowers.
This account includes discretionary Federal administrative
costs only. Additional amounts for new Federal Family Education
loan subsidies and mandatory administrative expenses for 1996
are provided under permanent authority as authorized by the
1992 Amendments to the Higher Education Act.
The loan subsidy and administrative costs for the new
Federal Direct Student Loan program, authorized by the Omnibus
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, are also provided under
permanent authority and do not require appropriation action.
The bill includes provisions limiting funding available for
administrative expenses of the Federal Direct Student Loan
program under section 458 of the Higher Education Act of
$320,000,000 in 1996, of which $160,000,000 is provided for the
payment of administrative cost allowances to guaranty agencies.
The bill also requires the Department of submit a plan for the
payment of such costs within 30 days of enactment of the bill.
The Secretary is prohibited from borrowing against future
appropriations for the Direct Loan program and may not use
available funds to for marketing, advertising or promoting the
Direct Loan program or for the payment of administrative fees
to institutions of higher education. Finally, the bill
prohibits the use of funding, except by the Advisory Committee
on Student Financial Assistance, to evaluate the Direct Loan
program and prohibits increases in on-board staffing at the
Department.
higher education
The bill provides $757,700,000 for higher education
programs, a decrease of $161,670,000 from the comparable 1995
appropriation and $63,072,000 below the request. This
appropriations account supports a variety of postsecondary
programs, other than student financial assistance. The
Committee generally concurs with the Department's decision to
focus limited federal resources on providing access to
postsecondary education for those who could otherwise not
afford it. The Committee has therefore adopted many of the
Administration recommendations to terminate small, non-need-
based categorical programs within the higher education account
in order to continue to provide funding for the major student
financial assistance programs necessary to preserve access to
education for those who cannot independently afford it.
Strengthening institutions
The bill provides $32,590,000 for the regular strengthening
institutions program, a reduction of $47,410,000 below the 1995
comparable appropriation and $7,410,000 below the
Administration request. This amount fully funds continuing
multi-year awards for non-public institutions of higher
education. No new 5-year grants will be awarded.
This program provides general operating subsidies for
institutions with low average educational and general
expenditures per student and significant percentages of low-
income students. The Committee generally concurs with the
Administration proposal to phase out the program over two years
on the basis that limited federal funding will more effectively
support the general improvement of institutions by increasing
the investment in federal student aid. These revenues are
unrestricted and may be used for the same general purposes as
the strengthening institutions program. In addition, three-
fourths of all funding under this program is awarded to public
institutions for whose program development and management the
sponsoring state or local governments are primarily
responsible. The Committee agrees that federal funds should not
be appropriated to supplant state and local funds for
educational operating expenditures. Therefore, the bill
provides funding to continue the highest priority existing
multi-year grants through 1996 with the intention that the
program be terminated in 1997 in accord with the President's
request. In addition, the bill overrides a provision of law
which authorizes funding for Hispanic serving institutions only
in years in which the appropriations for the strengthening
institutions program is at least $80 million.
Hispanic serving institutions
The bill provides $10,800,000 for the Hispanic serving
institutions program, a decrease of $1,200,000 below the 1995
appropriation and the request. The Committee believes that
Hispanic serving institutions (HSIs) represent a high priority
within the strengthening institutions program and has therefore
continued funding for this program at the 1995 level despite a
substantial reduction in the regular strengthening institutions
program. Nevertheless, the Committee intends to terminate this
program in 1997 consistent with the President's budget request
and for the same reasons indicated above.
The HSI program provides operating subsidies to schools
which serve at least 25% Hispanic students of whom at least
half are low-income, first-generation students and at least a
quarter of whom are either low-income or first-generation
students.
Strengthening historically black colleges and universities
The bill provides $108,990,000 for strengthening the
historically black colleges and universities program, the same
as the 1995 appropriation and the budget request. The Committee
believes that HBCUs represent a high priority within the
strengthening institutions program and has therefore continued
funding for this program at the 1995 level despite a
substantial reduction in the regular strengthening institutions
program.
The strengthening HBCU program provides operating subsidies
to accredited, legally authorized HBCUs established prior to
1964 whose principal mission is the education of black
Americans. Funds may be used to support both programs and
management and are distributed through a formula grant based on
the enrollment of Pell Grant recipients, number of graduates,
and the number of graduates entering graduate or professional
schools in which blacks are underrepresented. The minimum grant
is $500,000.
Strengthening historically black graduate institutions
The bill provides $19,606,000 for the strengthening
historically black graduate institutions program, the same as
the 1995 appropriation and the budget request. The Committee
believes that historically black graduate institutions
represent a high priority within the strengthening institutions
program and has therefore continued funding for this program at
the 1995 appropriation level despite a substantial reduction in
the regular strengthening institutions program.
This program provides 5-year grants to the following 16
postgraduate institutions which are specified in section
326(e)(1) of the Higher Education Act: Morehouse School of
Medicine, Meharry Medical School, Charles R. Drew Postgraduate
Medical School, Clark-Atlanta University, Tuskegee University
School of Veterinary Medicine, Xavier University School of
Pharmacy, Southern University School of Law, Texas Southern
University School of Law and School of Pharmacy, Florida A&M
University School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, North Carolina
Central University School of Law, Morgan State University
qualified graduate program, Hampton University qualified
graduate program, Alabama A&M qualified graduate program, North
Carolina A&T State University qualified graduate program,
University of Maryland Eastern Shore qualified graduate
program, and Jackson State qualified graduate program. No
grants may be made to the last 11 institutions until the first
5 institutions have received at least $12 million. Grants are
limited to $500,000 unless the institution agrees to match the
entire grant with the exception of a minimum $3 million set-
aside for the Morehouse School of Medicine. Awards may be used
for building endowments as well as the same purposes for which
the strengthening HBCU grants may be used.
Endowment challenge grants
The bill does not provide funding for the endowment
challenge grants program, a decrease of $8,060,000 below the
1995 appropriation. The Administration proposes to terminate
the regular endowment challenge grant program and to change the
underlying law to permit funding the HBCU set-aside at the 1995
level without funding the underlying program.
Endowment challenge grants are awarded to institutions
eligible for other strengthening institutions programs on a
matching basis of one institutional dollar for every two
federal dollars. Grants may not exceed $500,000 until total
appropriations for endowment grants exceed $15,000,000. The
Committee believes that these grants are too small to generate
any substantial impact on the endowments of participating
schools or to meaningfully support the goal of self-sufficiency
and concurs with the Administration request to terminate the
regular program subject to the Reinventing Government
recommendations. For the same reasons, the bill does not
provide funding for the HBCU endowment set-aside. Rather, the
bill provides for the HBCU strengthening institutions programs.
The Committee notes that such program funding may supplant
other institutional resources which may be dedicated to
endowment building when such activities represent a
sufficiently high priority to merit the allocation of limited
resources.
Evaluation
Consistent with the request, the bill does not provide
funding to continue the evaluation of the strengthening
institutions programs. The recommendation represents a decrease
of $1,000,000 below the 1995 appropriation.
While the Committee generally believes that all federal
programs must be evaluated for effectiveness, it does not
support the allocation of resources to evaluate programs which
it has recommended be phased out or terminated.
Fund for the improvement of postsecondary education
The bill provides $15,000,000 for the fund for the
improvement of postsecondary education (FIPSE), a decrease of
$2,543,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the budget request.
The Committee believes that projects funded through FIPSE can
contribute substantially to the restructuring of the
postsecondary education industry with particular emphasis on
cost-containment. The Committee notes that the growth in the
cost of attending colleges and universities has dramatically
exceeded general inflation and believes educational
institutions must actively and aggressively restructure their
operations to better meet the needs of their consumers which
include, to a significant degree, the federal government.
FIPSE awards grants and contracts to a variety of
postsecondary institutions and other organizations to improve
the quality and delivery of postsecondary education.
Native Hawaiian and Alaska Native culture and arts development
The bill does not provide funding for the Native Hawaiian
and Alaska Native culture and arts study and instruction
development program. The budget request recommends terminating
this new program in 1996. H.R. 1944 reduces 1995 funding for
the program from $1,000,000 to $500,000 and terminates all
activities in 1996.
The program provides for the study and instruction in
Native Hawaiian or Alaska Native art and culture, functions
which the Committee believes are the responsibilities of the
respective States and which should not be extended to the
federal government during times of fiscal constraint. In
addition, organizations may already receive funds for the
purposes of this program under the National Endowment for the
Arts or the National Endowment for Humanities.
Eisenhower leadership program
The bill does not provide funding for the Eisenhower
leadership program consistent with the budget which requested
termination of the program in 1995, a decrease of $4,000,000
from the 1995 appropriated level and $1,080,000 below the
amount provided in H.R. 1944. The National Performance Review
indicated that this program is poorly focused, does not perform
a federal responsibility, and duplicates activities already
included in many postsecondary curricula. The program provides
funding to schools to stimulate development of leadership
skills among college students and to recruit and educate
students for leadership roles in a variety of fields. The
Committee concurs in the findings of the National Performance
Review and does not believe that limited federal resources
ought to be expended during periods of fiscal constraint for
non-federal responsibilities. In addition, the Committee
generally concurs with the Administration recommendation to
target limited federal resources to students who could
otherwise not afford access to postsecondary education.
Minority teacher recruitment
The bill provides $2,212,000 for the minority teacher
recruitment program, a decrease of $246,000 below the 1995
appropriation and $788,000 below the budget request. The
Committee notes that this recommendation represents a reduction
of 10% below the 1995 appropriation in contrast to the 14%
reduction bill-wide as compared to the regular 1995 bill
necessary to comply with the budget law.
The Committee has continued funding for this program
because it believes the recruitment of minority teachers to
support a racially balanced teaching population is a high
priority for the country. However, the Committee has several
concerns about the impact, effectiveness and targeting of the
program that must be addressed in the near future if funding is
to be continued for the program beyond 1996. First, the program
supports only 13 small awards in 1995, far less than the
Committee believes necessary to meaningfully impact the
nationwide availability of minority teachers in the work force.
The Assistant Secretary is requested to be prepared to testify
regarding the effectiveness of such a small program in meeting
this national need. The Committee is also concerned that the
program does not maintain performance data to determine whether
teacher placement grantees have successfully placed minority
graduates in teaching positions or whether partnership grantees
have successfully recruited, trained and placed minority
students who would otherwise not have entered the teaching
profession. Finally, the committee is concerned that awards to
individuals may be a more effective recruitment tool than
awards to institutions which are already engaged in recruiting
and training minority students for the teaching profession.
The minority teacher recruitment program awards two types
of grants. Partnership grants support institutions of higher
education in developing partnerships which local educational
agencies and community based organizations to recruit and train
minorities for teaching careers. Teacher placement grants
support departments of education in developing and implementing
programs to prepare students to become elementary and secondary
school teachers and to place them in jobs with schools that
have substantial minority populations.
Minority science improvement
The bill provides $5,255,000 for the minority science
improvement program, a decrease of $584,000 below the 1995
appropriation and the budget request. The budget also requests
bill language to override two provisions in the underlying law
to eliminate the set-asides for grants to non-predominately
minority institutions of higher education and for grants to
organizations ``for a broad range of activities designed to
eliminate or reduce specific barriers to the entry of
minorities into science and technology.'' The Committee concurs
with the request to focus program funds on institutions which
serve primarily minority students, and the bill contains the
necessary changes in the law.
The Committee considers the recruitment and training of
minorities in the fields of science, engineering and
mathematics to be high priorities for the country. However, the
Committee has several concerns about the effectiveness and
targeting of the program that must be addressed in the near
future if funding is to be continued for the program beyond
1996. The Committee is specifically concerned about the
inability of the Department to assess the effectiveness of the
program. In addition, the program appears to generally
duplicate the purposes of the graduate assistance in areas of
national need (GAANN) program, and the Committee directs the
Assistant Secretary to be prepared to testify during the 1997
budget hearings regarding any duplication of activities or
services between the two programs. Finally, the Committee is
concerned that awards to individuals may be a more effective
mechanism for increasing minority representation in the fields
of math, science and engineering than awards to institutions
which are already engaged in recruiting and training minority
students in these fields.
The minority science improvement program awards grants to
improve mathematics, science, and engineering programs at
institutions serving primarily minority students and to
increase the number of minority students who pursue advanced
degrees and careers in those fields.
Community service projects
Consistent with the budget request, the bill does not
provide funding for the community service projects program. The
Congress provided $1,423,000 for the program in 1995.
This program provides grants and contracts to institutions
of higher education, public agencies and non-profit
organizations to encourage students to participate in community
services projects, to conduct research on the effect of
community service organizations, to assist student
organizations to collaborate with community service
organizations and to strengthen linkages between youth corps
and institutions of higher education.
The Committee concurs with the request to terminate this
program on the basis that program does not represent a federal
education responsibility, it is far too small to provide
meaningful impact on any national problem let alone the myriad
problems addressed by these projects, most universities already
encourage or require students to engage in community service,
and program activities duplicate the purposes of many other
federal programs including VISTA, Americorps, bilingual
education programs, several federal literacy programs, and many
federal programs which assist the homeless, among many others.
While many community service projects provide important and
valuable services on a very limited basis, they should more
appropriately be coordinated and administered in conjunction
with the federal programs that have primary responsibility for
these activities.
International education and foreign languages studies
Domestic Programs
The bill provides $52,283,000 for the domestic activities
of the international education and foreign languages studies
programs, the same as the 1995 appropriation and the budget
request. Consistent with the budget request and previous
appropriations Acts, no funds are provided for the intensive
summer language institutes or the foreign periodicals program.
The program assists graduate and undergraduate foreign
language and area studies programs and students at institutions
of postsecondary education, research in foreign language and
international education, language resource centers, and
business and international education programs. In general, the
Secretary has discretion to allocate funding among the these
various activities.
The Committee has provided funding for this program because
it believes that foreign language and international education
are high priorities for the country. Nevertheless, it has
serious concerns about the program which must be addressed
prior to consideration of the 1997 appropriation. First, the
Committee notes that foreign language and international studies
were designated by the Secretary as areas of national need
under the GAANN program in 1991, 1992, and 1994, but were
dropped from the list of designated priorities in 1995. In
addition, five of the seven funded programs provide less than
$10,000,000 in grants to a limited number of grantees, and the
Committee is concerned that these small categorical programs
may be unable to substantially impact the supply of students
educated in these areas. Finally, the Committee believes that
awards to individuals rather than institutions may be a more
effective means of improving the supply of students competent
in foreign languages and international subject matter.
Overseas programs
The bill provides $4,000,000 for the overseas programs in
international education and foreign language studies, a
reduction of $1,790,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the
budget request.
The Committee has continued funding for the overseas
programs because it considers international education and
foreign language studies to be a high priority for the country.
Nevertheless, the Committee has several concerns about the
overseas programs which should be addressed by the Department
prior to consideration of the 1997 appropriation. First, the
Secretary has not identified foreign language studies and
international education as areas of national need under the
GAANN program. Nor has the Department indicated that group
projects, faculty research or doctoral dissertation research
are national priorities and federal responsibilities which
merit the allocation of limited federal funds. Finally, the
Committee requests that the Assistant Secretary be prepared to
testify as to the impact of these relatively small categorical
programs on national needs.
Institute for International Public Policy
The bill does not provide funding for the Institute for
International Public Policy, a decrease of $1,000,000 below the
1995 appropriation and the budget request. This program
provides a grant to the United Negro College Fund to operate
the Institute.
While the Committee supports the goal of increasing the
representation of minorities in the Foreign Service, it does
not believe that funding should be diverted from other
important education programs to providing funding for an
Institute which does not directly support the national
education goals. The bill provides $140,596,000 in unrestricted
operating subsidies to HBCUs and HSIs under the strengthening
institutions programs which may be used for the purposes of
supporting the Institute for International Public Policy if the
recipient institutions deem it to be a sufficiently high
priority to merit the allocation of limited federal resources.
Cooperative education
Consistent with the budget request, the bill does not
provide funding for the cooperative education program. Congress
provided $6,927,000 for phase out costs for the program in
1995.
The cooperative education program provides grants to
institutions of higher education to initiate and operate campus
programs to provide students with work experience related to
their academic course work. Student earnings help meet the cost
of education.
The Committee concurs with the budget request to terminate
the program for several reasons. As indicated by the National
Performance Review, the program has achieved its purpose as
over 900 schools now operate cooperative education programs.
Nor does this program fulfill a federal responsibility. Because
many institutions offer cooperative education programs which
attract students both for the work experience and earnings
which help defray educational expenses, all institutions have a
self-interest in providing such programs in order to compete
for students during a period of declining enrollments. In
addition, cooperative education programs help defray operating
expenses for sponsoring institutions because student earnings
increase net revenues available to those institutions from
external sources.
Law school clinical experience
The bill includes no funding for the law school clinical
experience program which is the same as the budget request and
$14,920,000 below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds
$1,698,000 from the program to permit continuation of existing
multi-year grants but to prohibit the award of new grants in
1995. The President's budget also proposed a rescission of all
1995 appropriated funds for the program.
In 1995, the program will provide grants to 130 of the 176
accredited law schools nationwide to maintain programs which
provide students with actual or simulated clinical experience.
The Committee concurs with the administration proposal and
the recommendations of the National Performance Review which
concluded that the program does not perform a federal
responsibility and, regardless, has already achieved its
purpose. Law schools have strong self-interest in maintaining
such programs. The American Bar Association, which is the
national accrediting agency for law schools, recommends that
all schools provide students clinical experience in order to
obtain accreditation. In addition, because clinical experience
is generally considered a critical component of legal education
and because virtually all schools operate clinical experience
programs, schools have an economic incentive to provide such
opportunities in order to attract students. For these reasons,
the Committee believes that this program clearly is not
performing a federal responsibility and should not be funded
during this period of fiscal constraint.
Urban community service
The bill provides no funding for the urban community
service program, the same as the budget request and $13,000,000
below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds $3,000,000
from this program.
The Department makes five-year urban community service
grants to universities for projects which address urban
problems and needs such as job training, poverty, health care,
substandard schools, problems of the elderly, problems of
families and children, environmental concerns, economic
development, crime prevention, and urban infrastructure.
The Committee concurs with the Reinventing Government
proposal which concluded that urban community services are not
an appropriate responsibility of the Department of Education.
Clearly, projects funded under the urban community service
program either do not serve federal responsibilities or
duplicate the purposes of other federal programs including many
administered by agencies funded in this bill. Finally, the
program lacks both focus and the comprehensive approach
necessary to effectively impact national problems on a broad
scale.
Student financial aid database and information line
The bill includes no funding for the student financial aid
database and information line, the same as the budget request
and $496,000 less than was appropriated in 1995. H.R. 1944
contains a rescission of the entire 1995 appropriation.
This program authorizes a contract to maintain a
computerized database of all public and private financial
assistance programs to be accessible to schools and libraries
through either modems or toll-free telephone lines.
The Committee notes that private sector publishers provide
a great deal of information on colleges and financial
assistance. In addition, most high school counseling offices
already make available to students comprehensive information
regarding student financial assistance. The Committee believes
that this program does not represent a federal responsibility
and is a low priority during this period of fiscal constraint.
Interest subsidy grants
The bill provides $16,712,000 for interest subsidy grants
authorized under section 702 of the Higher Education Act, the
same amount requested in the budget and $800,000 below the 1995
appropriation.
This program provides loan subsidies to higher education
organizations for facilities acquisition, construction and
renovation loans taken prior to 1974. All loans will terminate
by the year 2013. The authority to initiate new loan subsidy
commitments was repealed in the 1992 amendments to the Higher
Education Act. Interest subsidies provide institutions the
difference between the interest they pay on commercially-
obtained loans and 3% of the loan balance. The program is
currently making interest subsidy payments on 355 loans
including 103 loans to state-run colleges and universities.
The bill provides funding sufficient to meet the federal
government's commitments on the 351 loans expected to be in
repayment status in 1996. However, the Committee is concerned
about the continuing use of substantial federal resources to
finance the prior acquisition and construction of higher
education facilities--activities which the Committee considers
to be the responsibilities of the respective institutions, not
the federal government. The Committee intends to consider
phasing out or terminating interest subsidy grants beginning in
the 1997 appropriations cycle.
TRIO
The bill provides $463,000,000 for the six TRIO programs,
the same as the 1995 appropriation and the budget request.
The Committee recommends this substantial investment in
TRIO because it believes that the recruitment and retention of
an economically and racially balanced postsecondary student
population is a high priority for the country. The Committee
notes that funding for TRIO increased by 91% in the five years
1990-1995.
The TRIO programs provide a variety of outreach and support
services to encourage low-income, potential first-generation
college students to enter and complete college. The Committee
notes that a 1981 study commissioned by the Department of
Education indicated that students who received the full range
of Student Support Services were more than twice as likely to
complete the first year of college as eligible students who did
not receive such services. A similar study indicated that
Upward Bound participants were four times as likely to have
earned a college degree within four years of high school
graduation as eligible students who did not participate in the
program.
The Committee wishes to emphasize however, that as with all
programs under its jurisdiction, future funding for TRIO will
be conditioned on the results of current outcomes evaluations.
Accordingly, the bill provides $1,500,000 to fully fund the
ongoing evaluation of the TRIO programs.
Early intervention scholarships and partnerships
The bill includes no funding for the early intervention
scholarships and partnerships program, the same as the budget
request and $3,108,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The budget
request also recommends terminating all 1995 funding. This new
program supports grants to 8 states to provide support services
to students at risk of dropping out of school. States must also
guarantee some level of tuition assistance for participating
students who meet State-specified academic goals.
The Committee concurs with the budget request which states
``in view of the significant level of resources available to
postsecondary students, the Administration does not recommend
funding for small, categorical programs such as [this]
program.'' The early intervention scholarships and partnerships
duplicate the purposes of state student financial assistance
programs, the TRIO program, and federal student financial
assistance programs. The Committee notes that the federal
government will provide over $30 billion in student financial
assistance to students pursuing postsecondary education. Much
of this assistance is guaranteed to students in the form of
loan program entitlements.
Bethune-Cookman College fine arts center
The bill does not provide funding for the Bethune-Cookman
College memorial fine arts center, the same as the budget
request and $4,000,000 less than the 1995 appropriation.
This program provides earmarked funding to Bethune-Cookman
College to complete phase II of an extensive campus
construction project. Phase I of the project--construction of a
three-story building including classrooms, library, multi-media
center and exhibit hall--was completed with $6,200,000 in
federal funding. Congress has already provided $4,000,000 for
phase II of the project which includes construction of a
performing arts center and a hospitality management training
facility.
In general, the Committee does not believe that federal
funding ought to be designated for specific institutions non-
competitively. In addition, capital projects are the
responsibility of individual educational institutions, not the
federal government.
The Committee notes that the bill does provide
administrative funding of $166,000 for the HBCU capital
financing program to operate an otherwise self-financing
initiative to make available $357,000,000 in bond financing to
HBCUs, including Bethune-Cookman, for capital projects.
Byrd honors scholarships
The bill includes no funding for the Byrd honors
scholarships program, $38,117,000 less than the budget request
and $29,117,000 less than the 1995 appropriation. The Committee
concurs with the general philosophy reflected in the budget
request of focusing limited federal higher education resources
on providing access to education for those who would not
otherwise be able to afford it. While the Committee generally
supports efforts to reward academic merit, federal funding
should more appropriately be targeted on providing access
rather than providing scholarships to meritorious students who
already have the economic means to obtain postsecondary
education. The Committee concurs with the budget request to
terminate other merit-based programs including the Douglas
teacher scholarships, national science scholars, Javits
fellowships and the National Academy of Science/Space/
Technology on the basis that they duplicate other student
financial assistance programs. The Committee finds the budget
request to increase funding for the Byrd scholarships
inconsistent with the recommendations regarding other merit-
based programs.
The Byrd scholarship program provides formula grants to
states to award four-year $1,500 scholarships to students who
demonstrate academic excellence in high school. The program was
initiated as a one-year scholarship program and was later
expanded to a four-year program. Funding for the program
tripled in size during the two previous years and the budget
request represents a further 31% increase in 1996. This
proposed growth is clearly inconsistent with the 15% downsizing
in the bill in 1996 necessary to comply with the budget law and
contribute to achieving a balanced federal budget by 2002. The
federal government will make available over $30 billion in
student financial assistance through other programs in 1996.
National science scholars
The bill includes no funding for the national science
scholars program, the same as the budget request and $4,424,000
below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 includes a rescission
of $1,121,000 in 1995 funding in order to permit existing
scholarships to be funded to completion and to prohibit the
award of new scholarships.
The program awards four year scholarships of up to $5,000
per year to high school students who demonstrate excellence in
mathematics, engineering, or the physical, life or computer
sciences. The Committee concurs with the budget request which
indicates that the program is costly to administer and
duplicates other federal mathematics, science, and student
financial assistance programs. The Reinventing Government
report recommended termination of the program which is not
currently authorized in law. The federal government will
provide over $30 billion in student financial assistance which
is available to students pursuing postsecondary education in
engineering, mathematics, and the sciences.
National Academy of Science, Space and Technology
The bill includes no funding for the National Academy of
Science, Space and Technology, the same as the budget request
and $2,000,000 less than the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944
rescinds all 1995 funding for the program consistent with the
budget request. The authorization for the program was repealed
by the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994.
The program creates an advisory board to select or develop
a single test to be used as the sole criteria for determining
program eligibility. The top scoring high school student from
each congressional district will receive a scholarship of up to
$5,000 and 4 years to pursue studies in science, mathematics or
engineering. Students receiving scholarships must complete 4
years of employment with the federal government or a U.S.
corporation engaged in a scientific or engineering research
endeavor. Scholars who do not complete the service requirement
must repay the total amount of awards received with interest.
The Committee concurs with the National Performance Review
which indicated this small categorical program is difficult and
costly to administer and duplicates other federal science,
mathematics, and student financial assistance programs. The
service requirement is especially difficult to monitor and
enforce. The federal government will provide over $30 billion
in student financial assistance in 1996 which is available to
students pursuing educations in science, mathematics or
engineering.
Douglas teacher scholarships
The bill includes no funding for the Douglas teacher
scholarships program, the same as the budget request and
$14,599,000 below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds
$14,300,000 of the 1995 appropriation in order to terminate the
program.
The program provides formula grants to states to provide
scholarships of up to $5,000 and four years to students who
intend to pursue teaching careers and have demonstrated
academic excellence. In selecting scholars, states must give
priority to individuals who intend to teach students with
disabilities, limited English proficient students, or preschool
children, or who intend to teach in inner city, rural or
geographically isolated schools or in areas with teacher
shortages. States must also attempt to attract women or
minorities who are interested in teaching mathematics or
science. Recipients must agree to teach 2 years for each year
of assistance received. Those who fail to meet the service
requirement must repay the amount of assistance received
according to the percentage of the requirement not fulfilled.
The Committee concurs with the Reinventing Government
recommendations which indicated the program duplicates the
Eisenhower Professional Development program and federal student
financial assistance programs. In addition, the program is
costly and difficult to administer, and the service requirement
is difficult to monitor and enforce. The federal government
will provide over $30 billion in student financial assistance
in 1996 which is available to students pursuing education
leading to careers in teaching.
Olympic scholarships
The bill includes no funding for the Olympic scholarships
program, the same as the budget request and $1,000,000 less
than the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds all 1995
funding for the program consistent with the budget request.
The program provides grants to the United States Olympic
Education Center and the United States Olympic Training Center
to enable them to provide grants to athletes in training under
the same conditions as other federal grant programs.
The Committee concurs with the recommendations of the
Reinventing Government initiative which indicate that this
program clearly duplicates other federal student assistance
programs. The Committee notes that student athletes at the
Olympic Training and Education Centers are eligible for the
more than $30 billion in federal student financial assistance
which is provided by the government in 1996.
Teacher corps
The bill includes no funding for the teacher corps program,
the same as the budget request and $1,875,000 below the 1995
appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds all 1995 funding for the
program consistent with the President's request.
The program provides discretionary grants to states to
establish teacher corps scholarships. States must identify the
10% of their schools with the highest poverty and lowest
student achievement for designation as teacher corps schools.
States may then award scholarships of up to $5,000 for three
years to graduating high school students pursuing teacher
education who agree to serve at least three years in teacher
corps schools upon college graduation. Students who fail to
fulfill the service requirement must repay the amount of
assistance. The program will make grants to 5 states in 1995.
The Committee concurs with the budget request which
indicates the teacher corps program is overly complex and
difficult to administer. The application process is burdensome
to the States, and the repayment provisions require constant
monitoring that consumes inordinate administrative resources.
In addition, the program duplicates the Eisenhower professional
development state grants and federal student financial
assistance programs.
Harris graduate fellowships
The bill includes no funding for the Harris graduate
fellowships program, the same as the budget request and
$20,244,000 below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds
$10,100,000 of the 1995 funding to effectively terminate the
program.
The program provides grants to institutions of higher
education to fund fellowships for minorities and women who are
underrepresented in masters, professional, and doctoral
education programs in areas of study designated by the
Secretary as national priorities. By law, half of program
funding must support masters level and professional study, and
the remaining half must be designated for doctoral study.
The Committee concurs with the findings of the Reinventing
Government initiative and the budget request which indicate
that the Harris graduate fellowships duplicates the graduate
assistance in areas of national need (GAANN) program and
federal student financial assistance programs.
Javits fellowships
The bill includes no funding for the Javits fellowships
program, the same as the budget request and $7,787,000 below
the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds $942,000 to continue
existing fellowships but prohibit the award of new fellowships
in 1995.
The Javits fellowships program provides fellowships of up
to $14,400 to students of superior ability pursuing doctoral
study in the arts, humanities, and social sciences. The
decision to terminate this program was one of the most
difficult faced by the Committee. Unlike most higher education
programs, Javits fellowships are awarded directly to students
rather than to institutions. The Committee strongly supports
the goals of the program in awarding fellowships to superior
students in the designated fields. Nevertheless, the fellowship
recipients are not selected on the basis of need, funding is
not targeted to underrepresented populations, and fellowships
do not support study in designated areas of national need.
Therefore, the Committee has taken the difficult decision to
terminate this program with the understanding that the
authorizing committees of jurisdiction intend to consider
legislation which would address these concerns in restructuring
the delivery of federal higher education assistance.
Graduate assistance in areas of national need
The bill provides $27,252,000 for the graduate assistance
in areas of national need (GAANN) program, the same as the
budget request and the 1995 appropriation. The program awards
grants to institutions of higher education to provide
fellowships of up to five years and $14,400 to economically
disadvantaged students, with emphasis on those from
traditionally underrepresented backgrounds, who have
demonstrated academic excellence, and who are pursuing graduate
education in designated areas of national need. In 1995, the
Secretary designated chemistry, engineering, mathematics,
physics, biology and computer and information sciences as the
areas of national need.
The Committee believes that this program represents a high
priority for the country by virtue of its emphasis on student
financial need, underrepresented groups, academic excellence,
and study in areas of national need. Nevertheless, the
Committee believes that funding should more appropriately be
awarded directly to students rather than institutions of higher
education.
Faculty development fellowships
The bill includes no funding for the faculty development
fellowships program, $3,732,000 less than the 1995
appropriation and the budget request. H.R. 1944 rescinds
$3,520,000 of the 1995 appropriation to terminate the program.
The faculty development fellowships program provides
approximately 450 fellowships to minority undergraduate
students seeking faculty positions and minority faculty seeking
doctorates. The Committee notes that the program duplicates
federal student financial assistance programs which will
provide over $30 billion in assistance in 1996 and which are
available to individuals previously supported through the
faculty development fellowships program.
School, college, and university partnerships
The bill includes no funding for the school, college, and
university partnerships program, a decrease of $3,893,000 below
the 1995 appropriation and the budget request. The program
provides funds to institutions of higher education which have
entered agreements with secondary schools, businesses, labor
organization or other public or private agencies to improve the
academic skills of students and enhance their employment
prospects following graduation. The program awards grants up to
$1,000,000 and five years.
The Committee notes that this program duplicates the
purposes of the Tech-Prep, School-to-Work and other federal
education and job training programs. In addition, the program
awards funds to consortia to perform local and private
responsibilities. In support of continued funding, the budget
request states, ``institutions of higher education and American
businesses have a vested interest in ensuring that American
secondary schools produce students who are well prepared to
enter higher education or the workplace.'' For this very
reason, the Committee believes the program does not serve a
federal responsibility and should not be funded with limited
federal resources. Driven by this very self interest and
responsibility, many schools and businesses are already working
together to better perform their responsibility of providing
students with the basic skills necessary to function in the
work place. In addition, only 11 school, college and university
partnerships were awarded in 1995, far to few to generate
significant or coordinated nationwide progress toward program
goals.
Legal training for the disadvantaged (CLEO)
The bill includes no funding for the legal training for the
disadvantaged program, the same as the budget request and the
Reinventing Government recommendations and $2,964,000 below the
1995 appropriation. This program makes biennial non-competitive
(earmarked) grants to the Council on Legal Education
Opportunity (CLEO) to prepare economically-disadvantaged
students or those with insufficient academic credentials for
admission to law school.
The Committee concurs with the budget request on the basis
that this program does not perform a federal responsibility and
should more appropriately be funded with private resources
which already represent 40% of the CLEO budget.
HOWARD UNIVERSITY
The bill includes $170,366,000 for Howard University,
$34,297,000 below the 1995 funding level and $25,597,000 below
the 1996 request. Howard University is located in the District
of Columbia and has 17 schools and colleges. Direct
appropriations for Howard University are authorized by 20
U.S.C. 123, originally passed in 1867.
Academic program
The bill includes $140,877,000 for the academic program at
Howard University, $15,653,000 below the 1995 appropriation and
$17,453,000 below the 1996 budget request. Howard University
provides undergraduate liberal arts, graduate and professional
instruction. Masters degrees are offered in over 85 fields and
Doctor of Philosophy degrees in 24 fields. Howard currently
enrolls 12,000 students including 8,700 undergraduates and
3,300 graduate students.
Endowment grant
The bill does not include funding for the endowment
matching grant program at Howard University, which is
$9,030,000 below the 1995 appropriation and $3,530,000 below
the request.
Research
The bill does not include funding for research at Howard
University, a reduction of $4,614,000 below both the 1995
amount and the budget request.
Howard University Hospital
The bill includes $29,489,000 for the Howard University
Hospital, the same level as both the 1995 amount and the budget
request. The hospital serves as a major acute and ambulatory
care center for the inner city of the District of Columbia. It
provides both inpatient and outpatient services and serves as a
facility for training physicians, nurses, and other
professional and technical health care personnel. The direct
Federal appropriation partly finances these activities.
Construction
The bill does not include funding for construction, which
is $5,000,000 below the 1995 level. No funds were requested in
the budget for this purpose.
COLLEGE HOUSING AND ACADEMIC FACILITIES LOANS PROGRAM
Federal administration
The bill includes $700,000 for the Federal administration
of the college housing and academic facilities loan program,
$58,000 below the 1995 appropriation and $327,000 below the
budget request. Under the terms of the Federal Credit Reform
Act of 1990, these funds reimburse the Department for salaries
and expenses that are directly related to the administration of
the loan program. These costs are incurred for the continuation
of the existing loan program, whether or not new borrowing
authority is provided during the current fiscal year.
The bill does not include authority for the Department to
make new loans during 1996.
HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY CAPITAL AND FINANCING PROGRAM
Federal administration
The bill includes $166,000 for the administration of the
historically black college and university capital financing
program authorized under part B of title VII of the Higher
Education Act. This amount is $181,000 below the 1995
appropriation and the same as the budget request. This program
is intended to make capital available for repair and renovation
of facilities at historically black colleges and universities.
In exceptional circumstances, capital provided under the
program can be used for construction or acquisition of
facilities.
Bond subsidies
Under this program, a private, for-profit ``designated
bonding authority'' issues construction bonds to raise capital
for loans to historically black colleges and universities for
construction projects. The Department of Education provides
insurance for these bonds, guaranteeing full payment of
principal and interest to bond holders. Federally insured bonds
and unpaid interest are limited by statute to $357 million. The
letter of credit limitation establishes the total amount of
bonds which can be issued by the designated bonding authority.
The credit limitation must be explicitly stated in an
appropriation act, according to the authorizing legislation.
EDUCATION RESEARCH, STATISTICS, AND IMPROVEMENT
The bill includes $255,107,000 for education research,
statistics, and improvement programs. This amount is
$177,957,000 less than the 1996 budget request, and $68,860,000
below the 1995 level. This account supports education research
authorized under the Educational Research, Development,
Dissemination, and Improvement Act of 1994, title IX of P.L.
103-227; the National Center for Education Statistics and the
National Assessment of Educational Progress authorized by the
National Education Statistics Act of 1994, title VI of P.L.
103-382; and a variety of other discretionary programs for
educational improvement. Throughout the bill, the Committee has
provided no funding for a broad array of research,
demonstration and technical assistance activities supported by
individual line item appropriations. In doing so, the Committee
has also indicated that funding for high priority activities
could be funded by the Office of Educational Research and
Improvement. Funding for the core research activity is provided
with a substantial increase. The Committee expects OERI to
review, and reduce or eliminate funding of low priority or
ineffective activities, and to fund higher priority research,
demonstration, dissemination and technical assistance
activities currently funded elsewhere in the bill.
In last year's report, the Committee indicated that:
. . . [M]uch more can be done to consolidate and
focus Departmental research activities. . . . In fact,
the Committee notes that more research funds remain
outside of OERI in the budget request than within OERI.
The Committee remains concerned that the fragmentation of
research, demonstration and evaluation authorities continues to
plague the Department and that there seems little coordination
among these different authorities.
The Committee instructs the Department to, within 30 days
of the passage of this bill in the House of Representatives, to
provide the Committee with a listing of all research,
demonstration, dissemination and evaluation authorities and the
funding levels for each authority. The Committee further
instructs the Secretary to designate a senior official of the
Department to coordinate all Departmental research,
demonstration, dissemination and evaluation activities.
The Committee also instructs the Department to develop and
submit a comprehensive research, demonstration, dissemination
and evaluation plan that indicates Departmental programmatic
goals to be achieved through these activities and how each
separate program or activity supports these overall goals.
The Committee is pleased that Office of Education Research
and Improvement is considering supporting outcomes-based
research to quantify the degree to which involvement in one-to-
one mentoring programs contributes to the academic performance
of children placed at-risk. The Committee encourages OERI to
place a high priority on this research and demonstration
initiative within the funds provided.
The Committee encourages the Office of Education Research
and Improvement to expand the existing programs through which
local community-based cultural organizations collaborate
formally with local schools to provide music education and to
infuse music into science and math curricula.
Research
The Committee recommends $106,447,000 for educational
research, an increase of $20,247,000 over the 1995 amount, and
$8,847,000 above the budget request. The Office of Educational
Research and Improvement conducts research and development
activities, which are newly authorized and restructured under
the Educational Research, Development, Dissemination, and
Improvement Act of 1994, title IX of P.L. 103-227. The 1994 Act
establishes a National Educational Research Policy and
Priorities Board within the Office of Educational Research and
Improvement, and authorizes five new national research
institutes for the following subject areas: (1) student
achievement, curriculum, and assessment; (2) education of at-
risk students; (3) educational governance, finance, policy-
making, and management; (4) early childhood development and
education; and (5) postsecondary education, libraries, and
lifelong learning. The Assistant Secretary is authorized to
support activities to increase the participation of minority
researchers and institutions as well as research and
development centers, in order to support the objectives of the
national research institutes. A new national education
dissemination system is established to coordinate various
dissemination activities, including an electronic network
linking various offices and activities at the Department of
Education; maintain the 16 Educational Resources Information
Center Clearinghouses (ERIC); identify successful educational
programs and disseminate information about them; provide
contracts for the operation of regional educational
laboratories to conduct research and development, provide
technical assistance, promote education reform, and assist
rural education; including learning grant institutions and
district education agents; support a teacher research
dissemination demonstration program; and operate the National
Library of Education. The bill includes funding for the
regional educational laboratories program including rural
activities. These labs, whose work is defined for them by their
governing boards, determine the educational needs of their
respective regions and help meet those needs through applied
research and technical assistance. The bill specifically
prohibits the use of federal funds to support the Goals 2000
Community Partnership Program, consistent with the Committee's
intent to end this program.
The Committee applauds the important work to improve
education being conducted by the National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards, and urges the Department of
Education to continue this work out of the funds provided to
OERI.
Statistics
The Committee recommends $48,153,000 for the activities of
the National Center for Education Statistics, exclusive of the
National Assessment of Educational Progress. This amount is the
same as the 1995 amount, and $8,847,000 below the budget
request. Statistics activities are authorized under the
National Education Statistics Act of 1994, title VI of P.L.
103-382. The Center collects, analyzes, and reports statistics
on all levels of education in the United States. Activities are
carried out directly and through grants and contracts. Major
publications include ``The Condition of Education'' and
``Digest of Education Statistics.'' Other products include
projections of enrollments, teacher supply and demand, and
educational expenditures. Technical assistance to State and
local education agencies and postsecondary institutions is
provided.
Assessment
The Committee recommends $32,757,000 for the National
Assessment of Educational Progress, the same as the 1995
amount, and $5,243,000 below the budget request. The Assessment
is authorized under section 411 of the National Education
Statistics Act of 1994, and is the only nationally
representative survey of educational ability and achievement of
American students. The primary goal of the Assessment is to
determine and report the status and trends of the knowledge and
skills of students, subject by subject. Subject areas assessed
in the past have included reading, writing, mathematics,
science, and social studies, as well as citizenship,
literature, art, and music. The Assessment is operated by
contractors through competitive awards made by the National
Center for Education Statistics; a National Assessment
Governing Board formulates the policy guidelines for the
program. Of the funds provided, $3,000,000 is available for the
Governing Board.
The Committee provided the maximum funding level possible
for the National Assessment of Educational Progress given its
constrained funding ceiling. Under this program, states are
able to obtain international benchmarks in math and science.
The Committee urges the Department to utilize additional funds
that may be available to assure that all states have access to
these benchmarks.
Fund for improvement of education
The Committee recommends $36,750,000 for the fund for
improvement of education, the same as the budget request and
the 1995 level. The fund has a broad focus on activities
related to the national education goals and systemic education
reform, as well as activities that identify and disseminate
innovative educational approaches.
Civics education
The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for civics education,
$1,463,000 below the budget request and $1,463,000 below the
1995 level. Under civics education, a sole source award is made
to the Center for Civic Education for its ``We the People''
program.
Eisenhower professional development national activities
The bill includes no funds for Eisenhower professional
development national activities, $35,000,000 below the budget
request and $21,356,000 below the 1995 level. The purpose of
this program is to support activities of a national
significance related to professional development in core
subject areas. The Committee believes that high priority
activities funded under this authority can be funded under
broader authorities within OERI.
Javits gifted and talented students education
The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the Jacob K. Javits
Gifted and Talented Students Education Act, $6,521,000 below
the budget request and $1,921,000 below the 1995 amount. This
program provides assistance to State and local education
agencies, higher education institutions, and other agencies for
research, demonstration, training, and other activities to
identify and meet the educational needs of gifted and talented
students. The Committee believes that high priority activities
funded under this authority can be funded under broader
authorities within OERI.
National writing project
For the national writing project, authorized under title II
of the Education Council Act of 1991, the bill includes no
funds, the same as the budget request and $3,212,000 below the
1995 amount. A single grant is awarded directly to the National
Writing Project, a nonprofit educational organization
affiliated with the University of California at Berkeley.
Activities include training programs and classroom research
related to effective writing programs. This demonstration
project has been funded since 1976 and, according to the
Administration, ``. . . [H]as . . . amply demonstrated . . . a
strategy for improving the teaching of writing. It should now
be supported at the initiative of State and local educational
agencies. . . .''
National Diffusion Network
The Committee recommends no funds for the National
Diffusion Network, $14,480,000 below the budget request and
$11,470,000 below the 1995 amount. The National Diffusion
Network validates effective and promising programs and
practices for distribution to schools. Funds are distributed to
state facilitators for state programs and national programs.
The Committee believes that high priority activities funded
under this authority can be funded under broader authorities
within OERI.
Technology for education
The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for Education
Technology: technology for education, $58,000,000 below the
budget request and $2,500,000 above the 1995 amount. The
purpose of this program is to support technology applications
in elementary and secondary schools, professional development
in educational technology, and technology-related services in
nationally significant activities.
The Committee believes that assessments of projects shall
include comparisons with students from other countries and
participation from businesses, corporations, related agencies,
and universities and colleges.
Star schools
The bill includes no funds for the star schools program,
$30,000,000 below the budget request, and $25,000,000 below the
1995 amount. This program supports the development of statewide
or multi-State telecommunications partnerships. Among their
activities, these partnerships have sought to increase the
availability of courses in mathematics, science, and foreign
languages; serve educationally disadvantaged students; and
train teachers in the use of telecommunications equipment. The
budget request indicates that this program is to demonstrate
the potential of technology to create learning opportunities.
The Committee, consistent with its policy throughout the bill,
feels that these activities should be funded through broader
demonstration authorities.
Ready to learn television
The Committee recommends no funds for ready to learn
television, $7,000,000 below the budget request, and $7,000,000
below the 1995 level. Program objectives are to develop and
distribute educational and instructional video programming for
preschool and elementary school children and their parents. The
Committee, consistent with its policy throughout the bill,
feels that these activities should be funded through broader
demonstration authorities.
Telecommunications Demonstration Project for Mathematics
The Committee recommends no funds for Telecommunications
Demonstration Project for Mathematics, $2,250,000 below the
budget request, and $1,125,000 below the 1995 level. Program
objectives are to support a national demonstration project
based on telecommunication and secondary level with regard to
new State Standards in mathematics. The Committee believes that
high priority activities funded under this authority can be
funded under broader authorities of the Office of Educational
Research and Improvement.
LIBRARIES
The bill includes $101,227,000 for programs of assistance
to libraries. This amount is $42,934,000 below the 1995
appropriation and $5,700,000 below the Administration's 1996
budget request. The programs in this account are authorized by
the Library Services and Construction Act and title II of the
Higher Education Act.
Public library services
The Committee provides $83,227,000 for public library
services, $5,908,000 below the budget request and the same as
the 1995 level. These activities are authorized under title I
of the Library Services and Construction Act. Formula grants
are made to the States based on population, after each State
receives an initial grant of $200,000, with a reservation of
1.5 percent of the funds reserved for services to Indians, and
0.5 percent for native Hawaiians. States spend their grants to
extend and improve public library services in areas that are
without services or in which services are inadequate, and to
make library services more accessible to previously underserved
population groups, such as the elderly or those living in
institutions. Title I grants may also be used to enhance
library technology, or to provide innovative services--
including library services to child care facilities,
intergenerational library programs in which older adults assist
school-age children, local library literacy centers, and drug
abuse prevention programs. These are matching grants, with the
State share varying in relation to personal income per capita.
Specified portions of appropriations above $60,000,000 will be
devoted to major urban resource libraries.
Public library construction
The bill provides no funds for public library construction,
$17,792,000 below the 1995 amount and the Administration
request. These activities assist public library construction
programs, especially those that increase access to the
disabled, increase energy efficiency, or accommodate new forms
of library technology.
Interlibrary cooperation
The Committee provides $18,000,000 for interlibrary
cooperation, $5,700,000 below the 1995 amount and the
Administration requested no funds for this program. These
activities support cooperative projects among all types of
libraries to pool their resources efficiently, including
computerized bibliographic data bases, centralized technical
services, and application of new technologies to library
services.
Library literacy programs
The bill includes no funds for library literacy programs,
$8,026,000 below the 1995 level; the Administration requested
no funds for this program. These activities have the purpose of
promoting literacy training in the Nation's public libraries to
combat illiteracy among adults, and complement the adult basic
education services supported under the Adult Education Act.
Activities funded under this narrow authority are also
supportable under the broader adult basic education authorities
of the Adult Education Act and should be funded there.
Library education and training
The Committee provides no funds for library education and
training, $4,916,000 below the 1995 amount; the Administration
requested no funds for this program. Discretionary grants are
provided to institutions of higher education and library
professional organizations for training or retraining of
librarians. The Committee believes that high priority
activities funded under this authority can be funded under
broader authorities of the Office of Educational Research and
Improvement.
Research and demonstrations
The bill provides no funds for library research and
demonstrations, $6,500,000 below the 1995 amount; the
Administration requested no funds for this program. This
program provides discretionary grants and contracts to support
projects to improve libraries and information technologies, and
to disseminate the results of these projects. The Committee
believes that high priority activities funded under this
authority can be funded under broader authorities of the Office
of Educational Research and Improvement.
DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT
The bill includes $409,424,000 for departmental management
(salaries and expenses) at the Department of Education. This
amount is the $35,359,000 below the 1995 appropriation and
$78,270,000 less than the Administration's 1996 budget request.
These activities are authorized by the Department of Education
Organization Act, P.L. 96-88, and include costs associated with
the management and operations of the Department as well as
separate costs associated with the Office for Civil Rights and
the Office of the Inspector General.
The Committee is concerned that the Departments of Labor,
Health and Human Services, Education and other agencies, such
as the Social Security Administration, have no
institutionalized forum for ongoing interdepartmental
collaboration. the absence leads to fragmentation and
duplication of efforts. The Committee is pleased to note that
the Working Group on Comprehensive Early Childhood Family
Centers has begun its work and looks forward to receiving its
report no later than October 6th. The Committee urges the
Departments to institutionalize interdisciplinary collaboration
at all levels and to coordinate future initiatives and
community based planning procedures, regulations and to act to
remove the barriers they present to coordinated services at the
local level.
Program administration
The bill includes $327,319,000 for program administration,
an amount $28,702,000 below the 1995 appropriation and a
decrease of $43,525,000 from the 1996 budget request. These
funds support the staff and other costs of administering
programs and activities at the Department. Items include
personnel compensation and health, retirement and other
benefits as well as travel, rent, telephones, utilities,
postage fees, data processing, printing, equipment, supplies,
technology training, consultants and other contractual
services. The Committee has reduced the base funding for this
account by 7.5% below the 1995 level. In addition, executive
direction activities have been reduced by a further 7.5% for a
total reduction of 15%. This includes the Offices of the
Secretary and Deputy Secretary and such other offices as
Planning and Evaluation, Legislation and Congressional Affairs,
Public Affairs, and Intergovernmental and Interagency Affairs.
It is the intent of the Committee that no funds provided in
this or any other appropriation may be used to fund the
following committees or councils:
Historically Black Colleges/Universities Capital
Financing Board
National Board of the Fund for the Improvement of
Postsecondary Education
Javits Fellows Program Fellowship Board
National Academy of Science, Space, and Technology
Board
President's Advisory Commission on Education
Excellence for Hispanic Americans
President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black
Colleges and Universities.
Headquarters renovation
The bill provides no funding for Headquarters Renovation.
The Administration requested $20,000,000 for this program; no
funds were provided in 1995.
Office for Civil Rights
The bill includes $53,951,000 for the salaries and expenses
of the Office for Civil Rights, an amount $4,374,000 below the
1995 appropriation and $8,833,000 below the budget request.
This Office is responsible for enforcing laws that prohibit
discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin,
sex, handicap, and age in all programs and institutions that
receive funds from the Department. These laws extend to 50
State educational agencies, 16,000 local educational agencies,
3,500 institutions of higher education, as well as to
proprietary schools, State rehabilitation agencies, libraries,
and other institutions receiving Federal funds. These
institutions and agencies generated over 5,000 discrimination
complaints in 1993, according to the Office for Civil Rights.
In addressing these complaints, the Office's duties include
monitoring and performing compliance reviews, investigating
allegations, offering advice on corrective and remedial
actions, and providing technical assistance to help recipients
achieve voluntary compliance.
Office of the Inspector General
The bill includes $28,154,000 for the Office of the
Inspector General, an amount $2,283,000 below the 1995
appropriation and $5,912,000 less than the 1996 budget request.
This Office has authority to inquire into all program and
administrative activities of the Department, as well as into
related activities of grant and contract recipients. It
conducts audits and investigations to determine compliance with
applicable laws and regulations, to check alleged fraud and
abuse, efficiency of operations, and effectiveness of results.
TITLE IV--RELATED AGENCIES
Armed Forces Retirement Home
The bill includes authority to expend $58,186,000 from the
Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund for operations and
construction activities at the United States Soldiers' and
Airmen's Home and the United States Naval Home, which is
$1,131,000 below the 1995 level and $934,000 below the
President's request.
The Committee commends the Armed Forces Retirement Home
Board for undertaking a strategic study/economic analysis which
will provide data on which to base long term strategic
planning. The study will provide estimates of optimal size of
each operating location of the Armed Forces Retirement Home;
identify the most cost effective location (or combination) for
economic performance; and identify the most cost effective use
of AFRH facilities including renovation, new construction, and
partial or complete closure.
The Committee intends to make future appropriations
consistent with the recommendations of the study and, as such,
directs the Armed Forces Retirement Home to develop its FY 1997
budget request in accordance with the outcomes of the strategic
study/economic analysis.
Operation and maintenance
The bill provides $45,090,000 for the operations and
maintenance of the Soldiers' and Airmen's Home, which is a
decrease of $276,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the same
level as the President's request. The bill also provides
$11,045,000 for the operations and maintenance of the United
States Naval Home, which is the same level as the 1995
appropriation and $934,000 below the President's request.
Capital outlay
The bill provides $1,483,000 for capital projects at the
Soldiers' and Airmen's Home, which is $1,017,000 below the 1995
level and the same as the President's request. The bill also
provides $568,000 for capital projects at the United States
Naval Home, which is $162,000 above the 1995 amount and the
same level as the President's request.
Corporation for National and Community Service
domestic volunteer service programs
The bill provides $168,974,000 for the Domestic Volunteer
Service Programs which are part of the Corporation for National
and Community Service. The recommended amount is a decrease of
$45,650,000 below the comparable 1995 level and $93,926,000
below the request. Funding for the Americorps program, which is
also administered by the Corporation for National and Community
Service, is provided in the VA/HUD and Independent Agencies
appropriations bill.
VISTA
The bill provides $25,603,000 for the Volunteers in Service
to America (VISTA) program, a decrease of $17,073,000 below the
comparable 1995 level and $28,197,000 below the request. The
VISTA program supports participants who recruit volunteers and
organize community volunteer activities but who do not provide
direct volunteer services.
The bill does not include separate funding for the VISTA
Literacy Corps, a decrease of $5,024,000 below the 1995 funding
level and $6,200,000 below the request. The Committee notes
that this program duplicates the purposes of several other
literacy programs funded elsewhere in this bill. Activities
previously performed under this program may be conducted under
the regular VISTA program if deemed sufficiently high priority
to merit the allocation of limited federal resources.
National Senior Volunteer Corps
The bill provides a total of $114,548,000 for the National
Senior Volunteer Corps, which is $21,216,000 below the 1995
level and $53,852,000 below the request.
The bill provides $57,640,000 for the Foster Grandparents
Program, which is $10,172,000 below the 1995 appropriation and
$21,170,000 below the request. This program provides volunteer
service opportunities for low-income people aged 60 and over.
The bill includes $26,557,000 for the Senior Companion
Program, a decrease of $4,687,000 below the 1995 appropriation
and $16,533,000 below the request. The program provides project
grants to private, non-profit organizations and State and local
public agencies to offer volunteer service opportunities to
low-income individuals aged 60 and over. These volunteers
assist older adults with physical, mental or emotional
impairments which put them at risk for institutionalization.
The bill provides $30,351,000 for the Retired Senior
Volunteer Program, a decrease of $5,357,000 below the 1995
level and $14,149,000 below the request. This program provides
part-time volunteer service opportunities for low-income
individuals aged 60 and over to recruit volunteers and organize
volunteer activities relating to a variety of social needs.
The bill does not provide separate funding for senior
demonstration programs, a decrease of $1,000,000 below the 1995
level and $2,000,000 below the request. The Committee does not
believe that these demonstrations represent a sufficiently high
priority to merit the allocation of limited federal funding
during this period of fiscal constraint.
Program administration
The bill provides $28,823,000 for program administration, a
7.5% reduction consistent with the bill wide policy regarding
administrative functions. This recommendation represents a
decrease of $2,337,000 below the 1995 level and $5,677,000
below the request.
Corporation for Public Broadcasting
The bill provides $240,000,000 for the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting (CPB) for fiscal year 1998, a decrease of
$20,000,000 below the comparable 1997 funding level and
$56,400,000 below the President's request. This level of
funding will continue the process of graduating the CPB from
annual federal appropriations with the goal of achieving
independence from the federal government. The Committee will
continue to work with other congressional committees of
jurisdiction to facilitate this transition in a manner which
preserves a vital public broadcasting industry.
The bill includes a provision requiring that payments to
CPB from the Treasury be made on an ``as needed'' basis rather
than the current practice of providing the entire appropriation
directly to CPB at the beginning of the fiscal year. The bill
includes a further provision overriding the requirement in the
law to fund an independent production organization.
The Committee urges the CPB in allocating reduced funding
to consider the impact of that reduced allocation on rural
radio and TV stations, particularly those which are sole
service providers, have minimal donor bases, and serve areas
with limited cable alternatives.
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
The bill includes $31,896,000 for the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service, $552,000 above the 1995 appropriation and
$1,394,000 below the budget request.
The Service attempts to prevent and minimize labor-
management disputes having a significant impact on interstate
commerce or national defense, except in the railroad and
airline industries. The agency conducts dispute mediation,
preventive mediation, and arbitration, and convenes boards of
inquiry appointed by the President in emergency disputes. In
addition, the Service offers alternative dispute resolution
services and training to other Federal agencies to reduce
litigation costs and speed federal administrative proceedings.
The 1996 appropriation includes $632,000 to begin
implementation of the Service's Strategic Information Plan.
According to the Plan, investments in improved information
management will result in large savings in resources (staffing
and funding) in the future. During the hearing on the 1996
budget request, it was estimated that personnel savings of
$2,400,000 per year will occur. The Committee directs the
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to prepare a report
prior to November 17, 1995 which outlines anticipated savings
in personnel and funding, including when such savings are
expected to occur.
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
The bill includes $6,467,000 for the Commission, which is
$267,000 above the 1995 appropriation and the same level as the
budget request.
The Commission is responsible for reviewing the enforcement
activities of the Secretary of Labor under the Federal Mine
Safety and Health Act and for protecting miners against
unlawful discrimination. The Commission's administrative law
judges hear and decide cases initiated by the Secretary of
Labor, mine operators, or miners. The five-member Commission
hears appeals from administrative law judge decisions, rules on
petitions for discretionary review, and may direct, of its own
initiative, review of cases that may present unusual questions
of law.
Consistent with the request made during the hearing on the
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission's budget, the
Commission is directed to report to the Committee prior to the
1997 budget hearing on its plans to increase productivity in
case disposition and appellate review and reduce personnel.
This report, which the Committee recommends should take the
form of a strategic plan, should include specific objectives
and time frames for accomplishing them.
National Commission on Libraries and Information Science
The bill includes $450,000 for the Commission, which is
$451,000 below the 1995 appropriation and $512,000 below the
budget request.
The Commission is charged with advising the President and
Congress on national policy in the library and information
field, developing overall plans for meeting national library
and information needs, and coordinating activities at the
Federal, State and local levels.
Beginning with the 1996 appropriation, the Committee
intends a two-year phase-out of Federal support for the
Commission. In times of fiscal constraint, the Committee feels
that activities of the Commission, which focus on developing
policies, not providing services, are not a sufficiently high
priority to merit the allocation of severely constrained
resources. The Committee notes that in 1995 the Commission
received $475,000 from the Departments of Education and State,
which was a 50 percent increase over appropriated funding. The
Committee encourages the Commission to continue to engage in
such activities to supplement, and eventually replace, the
Federal appropriation.
National Council on Disability
The bill includes $1,397,000 for the Council, which is
$396,000 below the 1995 level and $433,000 below the budget
request.
The Council is charged with making recommendations to the
President, the Congress, the Rehabilitation Services
Administration, and the National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research on public policy issues of concern to
individuals with disabilities. The Council focuses on
eliminating barriers that prevent persons with disabilities
from actively participating in community and family life. The
Council also monitors implementation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Due to the fiscal constraints that will continue to shape
the budgetary environment, the Committee encourages the Council
to negotiate memoranda of understanding with various agencies
to supplement the declining Federal appropriation.
National Education Goals Panel
The bill does not provide new account-level funding for the
National Education Goals Panel, a decrease of $2,785,000 below
the request. The Committee believes that during periods of
fiscal constraint, limited federal funds should be allocated
for direct services.
National Education Standards and Improvement Council
The bill does not provide new account-level funding for the
National Education Standards and Improvement Council, a
decrease of $3,000,000 below the request. The Committee
believes that during periods of fiscal constraint, limited
federal funds should be allocated for direct services.
National Labor Relations Board
The bill provides $123,233,000 for the National Labor
Relations Board, a decrease of $52,814,000 below the 1995
funding level and $57,901,000 below the request.
The agency receives, investigates, and prosecutes unfair
labor practice charges filed by businesses, labor unions, and
individuals. It also schedules and conducts representation
elections. The five-member Board considers cases in which
administrative law judge decisions are appealed.
The bill includes a legislative provision to limit the
discretion of the Board to investigate and prosecute charges
under Section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act based on
employer actions with regard to employees or agents of labor
organizations, pending a decision on this matter by the Supreme
Court. The bill also includes provisions limiting the
circumstances in which the Board may pursue injunctive relief
pursuant to section 10(j) of the Act including requirement of a
four-fifths vote of the Board and requirement to provide named
parties to an injunction the opportunity to review and respond
to the General Counsel's memorandum of recommendations and to
present oral evidence.
National Mediation Board
The bill provides $8,000,000 for the National Mediation
Board, a reduction of $519,000 below the 1995 amount and
$993,000 below the request. The National Mediation Board
mediates disputes over wages, hours, and working conditions
that arise between employees and those railroad and airline
carriers subject to the Railway Labor Act. The Board also
resolves representation disputes involving labor organizations
that wish to represent railroad or airline employees.
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
The bill provides $8,200,000 for the Occupational Safety
and Health Review Commission, an increase of $605,000 over the
1995 appropriation and $73,000 over the request. The Commission
adjudicates contested citations issued by the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) against employers for
violations of safety and health standards. The Commission's
administrative law judges settle and decide cases at the
initial level of review. The agency's three appointed
Commissioners also review cases, issue rulings on complicated
issues, and may direct review of any decision by an
administrative law judge.
The Committee commends the Commission for development of
its strategic plan and implementation of cost cutting
initiatives. The recommended funding is sufficient to fully
automate the Commission in 1996 to continue productivity
improvements so that increasing work loads may be handled by
fewer employees.
Physician Payment Review Commission
The bill includes authority to transfer $2,923,000 from the
Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund to support
the activities of the Physician Payment Review Commission,
which is $1,253,000 below the amount available in 1995, and
$1,177,000 below the budget request.
The Commission serves as an independent agency to advise
Congress and the Secretary of Health and Human Services on
matters relating to Medicare physician reimbursement and health
system reform. The Commission is required by law to report to
Congress each year on adjusting Medicare physician payment
rates, setting standards for expenditure growth, and monitoring
access under Medicare. In addition, the Commission considers
policies related to improving access under the Medicaid program
and for underserved populations, controlling costs of
employment-based health plans, physician training and
licensure, medical malpractice reform, and ensuring quality
care.
The Committee has decreased funding for the Physician
Payment Review Commission in anticipation of the merger of this
Commission with the Prospective Payment Assessment Commission.
Once merged, the Commissions will have an aggregate funding
level of $6,190,000, a decrease of approximately 30 percent
below the aggregate 1995 funding level. The Committee believes
that this amount is sufficient to fund the essential activities
of both Commissions subsequent to their merger.
Prospective Payment Assessment Commission
The bill includes authority to transfer $3,267,000 from the
Medicare trust funds to support the activities of the
Prospective Payment Assessment Commission. The amount
recommended by the Committee is $1,400,000 below the 1995 level
and $1,389,000 below the budget request.
The Prospective Payment Assessment Commission advises the
Congress and the Secretary of Health and Human Services on
maintaining and updating Medicare payment policies for
hospitals and other facility services. The Commission is also
responsible for analysis of Medicaid hospital payments and
issues related to health care reform. The Commission issues
several reports required by Congress, including recommendations
on the annual update of Medicare hospital payments and a
general report on the impact of the Medicare program on the
American health care system.
The Committee has decreased funding for the Prospective
Payment Assessment Commission in anticipation of the merger of
this Commission with the Physician Payment Review Commission.
The aggregate appropriations for both Commissions is
$6,190,000, a decrease of approximately 30 percent below the
aggregate 1995 funding level. The Committee believes that this
amount is sufficient to fund the essential activities of both
Commissions subsequent to their merger.
Railroad Retirement Board
dual benefits account
The bill provides $239,000,000 for dual benefits, which is
$15,000,000 less than the comparable 1995 amount and the same
as the budget request. These funds are used to pay dual
benefits to those retirees receiving both railroad retirement
and social security benefits. The Committee has included bill
language to permit a portion of these funds to be derived from
income tax receipts on dual benefits, as authorized by law. It
is estimated that approximately $17,000,000 may be derived in
this manner, which is $2,000,000 less than the 1995 amount.
federal payment to the railroad retirement account
The bill includes $300,000 for interest earned on
unnegotiated checks, the same as the 1995 amount and the budget
request.
limitation on administration
The bill includes $90,912,000 for administrative expenses
of the Board which is the same as the 1995 amount and
$1,788,000 below the request.
The Board administers comprehensive retirement-survivor and
unemployment-sickness insurance benefit programs for the
nation's railroad workers and their families. This account
limits the amount of funds in the railroad retirement and
railroad unemployment insurance trust funds which may be used
by the Board for administrative expenses.
The Committee notes that Board workloads are declining as
fewer applications are received for retirement, spousal,
disability and unemployment and sickness benefit applications.
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Board to aggressively
re-examine and consolidate its regional office structure to
most efficiently process these declining workloads.
The bill provides for a consolidated limitation on
administration in contrast to previous appropriations bill
which provided separate appropriations from the trust funds and
from general revenues.
special management improvement fund
The bill provides $659,000 for the special management
improvement fund, the same as the request and $981,000 less
than the 1995 appropriation. This account provides additional
trust funds to augment the normal administrative expenses to
improve various activities such as claims processing, debt
collection, fraud control, tax accounting, trust fund
integrity, and information systems. The 1996 appropriation will
provide the fifth and last year of funding for this initiative.
The Committee commends the Board for meeting, and in some cases
exceeding, the fourth year performance criteria established to
measure the success of this initiative.
limitation on the office of inspector general
The bill includes $5,100,000 for the Inspector General, a
decrease of $1,582,000 below the 1995 appropriation and
$1,600,000 below the request. This account provides funding for
the Inspector General to conduct and supervise audits and
investigations of programs and operations of the Board. The
funds are derived from the railroad retirement and railroad
unemployment insurance trust funds.
The Committee is concerned that the IG indicated during the
hearing process that its highest priority is the investigation
and prosecution of Medicare fraud. The Committee believes that
the IG's principal concern ought to be safeguarding the
railroad trust funds rather than the Medicare trust funds.
Accordingly, the Committee reiterates its directive that the IG
focus greater resources on management improvements at the Board
as well as ensuring the integrity of the railroad unemployment
and retirement trust funds.
Social Security Administration
payments to social security trust funds
The bill provides $22,641,000 for mandatory payments
necessary to compensate the Social Security system for cash
benefits paid out but for which no payroll tax is received.
This is the same amount requested in the budget and a decrease
of $2,453,000 from the amount provided in 1995. These funds
reimburse the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and
Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Funds for special payments to
certain uninsured persons, costs incurred administering pension
reform activities and interest lost on the value of benefit
checks issued but not negotiated. This appropriation restores
the trust funds to the position they would have been had they
not borne these costs properly charged to the general funds.
The amount provided includes $4,541,000 for the cost of
special payments to a declining population of uninsured persons
who were at least 72 years old in 1968 and attained retirement
age before they could accumulate sufficient wage credits to
qualify for benefits under the normal retirement formulas. This
account also includes $1,100,000 for reimbursements to the
trust funds for administrative costs incurred in providing
private pension plan information to individuals and $17,000,000
to reimburse the trust funds for the value of the interest for
benefit checks issued but not negotiated.
additional administrative expenses
The bill provides $10,000,000 for a new mandatory account
for additional administrative expenses, the same as the budget
request. Section 19141 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992
established the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit program
which Social Security must administer. The law combined two
existing United Mine Workers of America pension plans into a
single fund and required that certain coal mine operators pay
health benefit premiums for the new combined plan. Social
Security assigned retired coal miners covered by the combined
plan to coal operators and must now provide requested earnings
records to mine operators and process appeals of assignments.
The funding is available until expended.
special benefits for disabled coal miners
The bill provides $485,396,000 for special benefits for
disabled coal miners in 1996, the same as the budget request
and $42,478,000 less than in 1995. This amount does not include
$180,000,000 in advance funding for the first quarter of 1996
provided in the 1995 bill or $170,000,000 provided in this bill
for the first quarter of 1997.
This appropriation provides cash benefits to miners who are
disabled because of black lung disease, and to widows and
children of miners. The Social Security Administration was
responsible for taking, processing, and paying claims for
miners benefits filed from December 30, 1969 through June 30,
1973. Since that time it has continued to take claims, but
forwards most to the Department of Labor for adjudication and
payment. The Social Security Administration will continue to
pay benefits and maintain the beneficiary roll for the lifetime
of all persons who filed during its jurisdiction. During 1996,
the SSA expects to provide benefits to 138,000 miners, widows,
and dependents who will receive average monthly benefits of
$427.40.
supplemental security income program
The bill provides $18,753,834,000 for the Supplemental
Security Income program, not including $7,060,000,000 in
advance funding provided in the 1995 bill. The recommendation
is a decrease of $2,472,786,000 below the comparable
appropriation for 1995 and $50,159,000 below the request.
These funds are used to pay Federal cash benefits to
approximately 6,457,000 aged, blind, and disabled persons with
little or no income. The maximum monthly Federal benefit
payable in 1996 is expected to be $472 for an individual and
$709 for an eligible couple. In addition to federal benefits,
the Social Security Administration administers a program of
supplementary State benefits for those States which choose to
participate. The funds are also used to reimburse the trust
funds for the administrative costs of the program.
The SSI appropriation includes $176,400,000 for beneficiary
services, an increase of $33,000,000 over the 1995 level and
the same as the request. This amount includes $142,000,000, an
increase of $33,000,000 over the 1995 level and the same as the
request, to support the referral and monitoring of certain
disabled SSI recipients who are drug addicts or alcoholics and
$34,000,000 to reimburse State vocational rehabilitation
services agencies for successful rehabilitation of SSI
recipients. Legislation enacted in August of 1994 and effective
in February 1995 places a 36 month limit on SSI benefit
payments to disabled individuals for whom drug addition or
alcoholism is a contributing factor to the determination of
disability. This new law requires suspension of benefits for
non-compliance with treatment. Currently, 49 states and the
District of Columbia monitor SSI beneficiary treatment
compliance. The large increase in funding for drug addict and
alcoholic monitoring will permit SSA to ensure that all such
SSI recipients are undergoing necessary treatment or are
terminated from the benefit program.
The bill also contains $6,700,000 for research and
demonstration activities conducted under section 1110 of the
Social Security Act, a decrease of $21,000,000 below the 1995
level and the same as the budget request.
The Committee is concerned by the extent of unemployment
among people with disabilities and believes that a
demonstration quantifying the relationship between
participation in disability sport and economic independence is
an appropriate use of funds.
The bill includes the traditional indefinite appropriation
requested by the Administration to finance unanticipated
shortfalls in the program during the last three months of the
fiscal year, as well as the $9,260,000,000 advance
appropriation requested for the first quarter of 1997.
limitation on administrative expenses
The bill provides a total limitation on administrative
expenses of the Social Security Administration of
$5,910,268,000 to be funded from the Social Security trust
funds, an increase of $356,931,000 over the comparable amount
for 1995 and $299,134,000 below the request.
The recommended amount is sufficient to enable the Agency
to fully meet defined performance targets for the improvement
of service in 14 specific areas as submitted to the Committee
during the budget hearings. This large increase in funding will
support continuing initiatives to streamline the disability
determination process and fully automate agency administrative
functions. These activities should directly contribute to a
reduction of 1,058 FTEs, a 9% reduction in the ratio of
supervisory staff to field staff, and a two-thirds reduction in
overtime workyears.
Disability initiative
The bill provides $407,000,000 for the disability
initiative to streamline the disability processes and improve
service for disabled individuals applying for and receiving
disability payments under SSI and OASDI. This amount is an
increase of $87,000,000 over the comparable 1995 amount and
$127,000,000 less than the request. The recommended funding
level will fully enable the agency to meet its performance
goals relating to reducing pending claims and hearings,
expediting claim and hearing processing, increasing the number
of claims and hearings processed, improving fraud and abuse
activities, improving administrative efficiency and reducing
agency employment. The Committee wishes to emphasize that
future funding for the disability initiative is contingent on
satisfactory attainment of the performance goals submitted
during the budget hearing process.
Automation initiative
The bill provides $228,000,000 for the third year of the 5-
year automation initiative, an increase of $139,717,000 over
the comparable 1995 amount and $129,000,000 below the request.
The Committee has provided this large increase in funding in
response to specific performance goals submitted to it by SSA
during the budget hearings. The recommended amount will fully
enable the agency to meet its first year goals relating to
administrative information processing, level of office
automation, percentage of supervisory staff, agency employment
levels and workload processing. The Committee wishes to
emphasize that future funding for the automation initiative is
contingent on satisfactory attainment of the performance goals
submitted during the budget hearings.
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
The Committee directs the Social Security Administration to
provide a summary of its current Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS)
surveillance projects to the Chronic Fatigue Interagency
Coordinating Committee within 90 days of enactment of this
bill. The Committee is concerned that the SSA has not
established a CFS Advisory Committee to review current medical
standards and investigate the training and information resource
needs of regional SSA office as recommended in the report
accompanying the 1995 bill. The Committee strongly recommends
that the agency establish such a committee in 1996. The SSA is
further encouraged to include medically accurate, up-to-date
information on CFS in the Listing of Impairments and POMS
manuals.
Office of Inspector General
The bill includes $4,816,000 for the new Office of the
Inspector General, the same as the comparable amount allocated
for these activities in 1995 and $2,148,000 below the budget
request. The bill also provides a limitation on trust fund
transfers for the IG of $21,076,000, an increase of $5,000,000
over the comparable amount allocated for these activities in
1995 and $823,000 above the request. This new Office of
Inspector General was created pursuant to P.L. 103-296.
United States Institute of Peace
The bill provides $6,500,000 for the United States
Institute of Peace, a decrease of $5,000,000 below the 1995
appropriation and the request. The Institute was created in
1984 to provide education and training, basic and applied
research, and information services to promote conflict
resolution. This recommendation represents one of the most
difficult decisions taken by the Committee in this bill, and
the Institute is encouraged to target limited funding to those
activities having the greatest impact on the practice of
diplomacy and conflict resolution.
General Provision
Section 509.--The Committee has added a provision that
clarifies that each State is and remains free not to fund
abortions to the extent that the State in its sole discretion
deems appropriate, except where the life of the mother would be
endangered if the fetus were carried to term. This additional
provision is not intended to effectuate any change in Federal
law or policy from that enacted in the Committee's fiscal year
1994 and 1995 appropriations Acts, but is designed instead to
correct erroneous administrative and judicial understandings of
those prior Acts and to provide clarification for fiscal year
1996 and thereafter.
House of Representatives Report Requirements
The following items are included in accordance with various
requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives:
inflationary impact statement
Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4), rule XI of the House of
Representatives, the Committee estimates that enactment of this
bill would have no overall inflationary impact on prices and
costs in the operation of the national economy.
comparison with budget resolution
Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
amended, requires that the report accompanying a bill providing
new budget authority contain a statement detailing how the
authority compares with the report submitted under section 602
of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent
resolution on the budget for the fiscal year. This information
follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
602(b) allocation This bill
---------------------------------------------------
Budget Budget
authority Outlays authority Outlays
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary:
General Purposes 61.150 68,080 60,830 68,080
Violent Crime
Trust Fund..... 41 37 40 24
Mandatory........... 201,538 202,046 210,002 210,211
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bill provides no new spending authority as described in
section 401(c)(2) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as amended.
In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
amended, the following information was provided to the
Committee by the Congressional Budget Office:
five-year projections
In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
amended, the following table contains five-year projections
associated with the budget authority provided in the
accompanying bill:
(In millions of dollars)
Budget authority in the bill............................ 224,469
Outlays:
1996................................................ 177,494
1997................................................ 39,253
1998................................................ 6,618
1999................................................ 1,037
2000................................................ 67
Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments
In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(D) of Public Law 93-
344, the Congressional Budget Office has provided the following
estimates of new budget authority and outlays provided by the
accompanying bill for financial assistance to state and local
governments:
(In millions of dollars)
Budget authority........................................ 104,260
Fiscal year 1996 outlays................................ 82,993
transfer of funds
Pursuant to clause 1(b), rule X of the House of
Representatives, the following table is submitted describing
the transfers of funds provided in the accompanying bill.
The table shows, by Department and agency, the
appropriations affected by such transfers.
APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Account to which Account from which
transfer is to be made Amount transfer is to be made Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Labor:
Employment Standards
Administration
U.S. Postal
Service:
Special (\1\) Postal Service........ (\1\)
Benefits.
Salaries and 26,045,000 Black lung disability 26,045,000
expenses. trust fund.
Departmental
management:
Salaries and 19,621,000 Black lung disability 19,621,000
expenses. trust fund.
Office of 287,000 Black lung disability 287,000
Inspector General. trust fund.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Indefinite.
rescissions
Pursuant to clause 1(b), rule X of the House of
Representatives, the following table is submitted describing
the rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill.
Rescissions Recommended in the bill
Department and Activity:
Department of Health and Human Services: Low-income
home energy assistance............................ $1,000,000,000
Compliance With Rule XIII, Cl. 3 (Ramseyer Rule)
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 444 OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROVISIONS ACT
protection of the rights and privacy of parents and students
Sec. 444. (a) * * *
(b)(1) No funds shall be made available under any
applicable program to any educational agency or institution
which has a policy or practice of permitting the release of
education records (or personally identifiable information
contained therein other than directory information, as defined
in paragraph (5) of subsection (a)) of students without the
written consent of their parents to any individual, agency, or
organization, other than to the following--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(E) State and local officials or authorities to whom
such information is specifically allowed to be reported
or disclosed pursuant to State statute adopted--
[(i) before November 19, 1974, if the allowed
reporting or disclosure concerns the juvenile
justice system and such system's ability to
effectively serve the student whose records are
released, or
[(ii) after November 19, 1974, if--
[(I) the allowed reporting or
disclosure concerns the juvenile
justice system and such system's
ability to effectively serve, prior to
adjudication, the student whose records
are released; and
[(II) the officials and authorities
to whom such information is disclosed
certify in writing to the educational
agency or institution that the
information will not be disclosed to
any other party except as provided
under State law without the prior
written consent of the parent of the
student.]
(E) State and local officials or authorities to whom
such information is specifically--
(i) required to be reported or disclosed
pursuant to State statute adopted before
November 19, 1974;
(ii) allowed to be reported or disclosed
pursuant to State statue adopted before
November 19, 1974, if the allowed reporting or
disclosure concerns the juvenile justice system
and such system's ability to effectively serve
the student whose records are released; or
(iii) allowed to be reported or disclosed
pursuant to State statute adopted after
November 19, 1974, if--
(I) the allowed reporting or
disclosure concerns the juvenile
justice system and such system's
ability to effectively serve, prior to
adjudication, the student whose records
are released; and
(II) the officials and authorities to
whom such information is disclosed
certify in writing to the educational
agency or institution that the
information will not be disclosed to
any other party except as provided
under State law without the prior
written consent of the parent of the
student;
* * * * * * *
Section 427 of the Job Training Partnership Act
job corps centers
Sec. 427. * * *
[(c) No funds appropriated to the Department of Labor for
any fiscal year may be used to carry out any contract with a
nongovernmental entity to administer or manage a Civilian
Conservation Center of the Job Corps.]
Public Law 85-67
working capital fund
There is established a working capital fund, to be
available without fiscal year limitation, for expenses
necessary for the maintenance and operation of (1) a central
reproduction service; (2) a central visual exhibit service; (3)
a central supply service for supplies and equipment for which
adequate stocks may be maintained to meet in whole or in part
the requirements of the Department; (4) a central tabulating
service; (5) telephone, mail and messenger services; (6) a
central accounting and payroll service; and (7) a central
laborers' service: Provided, That any stocks of supplies and
equipment on hand or on order shall be used to capitalize such
fund: Provided further, That such fund shall be reimbursed in
advance from funds available to bureaus, offices, and agencies
for which such centralized services are performed at rates
which will return in full all expenses of operation, including
reserves for accrued annual leave and depreciation of
equipment.
The Working Capital Fund of the Department of Labor shall
be available on and after March 5, 1970, for expenses necessary
for personnel functions in regional administrative offices.
For expenses necessary during the fiscal year ending
September 30 1994, and each fiscal year thereafter, for the
maintenance and operation of a comprehensive program of
centralized services which the Secretary of Labor may prescribe
and deem appropriate and advantageous to provide on a
reimbursable basis under the provisions of the Economy Act
(subject to prior notice to OMB) in the national office and
field: Provided, That such fund shall be reimbursed in advance
from funds available to agencies, bureaus, and offices for
which such centralized services are performed at rates which
will return in full cost of operations including services
obtained through cooperative administrative services units
under the Economy Act, including reserves for accrued annual
leave, worker's compensation, depreciation of capitalized
equipment, and amortization of ADP software and systems (either
acquired or donated): Provided further, That funds received for
services rendered to any entity or person for use of
Departmental facilities, including associated utilities and
security services, shall be credited to and merged with this
fund. Provided further, That within the Working Capital Fund,
there is established an Investment in Reinvention Fund (IRF),
which shall be available to invest in projects of the
Department designed to produce measurable improvements in
agency efficiency and significant taxpayer savings.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of
Labor may retain up to $3,900,000 of the unobligated balances
in the Department's annual Salaries and Expenses accounts as of
September 30, 1995, and transfer those amounts to the IRF to
provide the initial capital for the IRF to remain available
until expended, to make loans to agencies of the Department for
projects designed to enhance productivity and generate cost
savings. Such loans shall be repaid to the IRF no later than
September 30 of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in
which the project is completed. Such repayments shall be
deposited in the IRF, to be available without further
appropriation action.
Changes in Application of Existing Law
Pursuant to clause 3, rule XXI of the House of
Representatives, the following statements are submitted
describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill
which may directly or indirectly change the application of
existing law.
In some instances the bill includes appropriations for
certain ongoing programs which are not yet authorized for 1996.
The bill provides that appropriations shall remain
available for more than one year for some programs for which
the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize
such extended availability.
In various places in the bill, the Committee has earmarked
funds within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific
sections of a law. Whether these actions constitute a change in
the application of existing law is subject to individual
interpretation, but the Committee felt that this fact should be
mentioned.
On page 5 of the bill is language allowing the Labor
Department to withhold from State allotments funds available
for penalty mail under the Wagner-Peyser Act.
On page 6 is language providing that funds in this Act for
one-stop career centers may be used for contracts, grants or
agreements with non-State entities.
On page 6 is language providing that funds in this Act may
be used by the States for integrated Employment Service and
Unemployment Insurance automation efforts.
On page 9 is language authorizing the Secretary of Labor to
accept and spend all sums of money ordered to be paid to the
Secretary, in accordance with the terms of a Consent Judgement
in U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands.
On page 9 is language authorizing the Secretary of Labor to
collect user fees for processing certain applications and
issuing certain certificates and registrations under the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural
Worker Protection Act.
On page 10 of the bill is language providing funds may be
used under the Federal Employees' Compensation Act in which the
Secretary of Labor may reimburse an employer, who is not the
employer at the time of injury, for portions of the salary of a
reemployed, disabled beneficiary.
On page 10 is language allowing the Secretary of Labor to
transfer certain administrative funds from the Postal Service
fund and certain other government corporations and agencies
related to the administration of the Federal Employees'
Compensation Act.
On page 11 of the bill is language allowing the Secretary
of Labor to require any person filing a claim for benefits
under the Federal Employees' Compensation Act or the Longshore
and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act to provide such
identifying information as the Secretary may require, including
a Social Security number.
On page 12 is language establishing a maximum amount
available for grants to States under the Occupational Safety
and Health Act, which grants shall be no less than 50 percent
of the costs of State programs required to be incurred under
plans approved by the Secretary under section 18(b) of the Act.
On page 13 is language authorizing the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration to retain and spend up to $500,000 of
training institute course tuition fees for training and
education grants.
On page 15 is language allowing the Mine Safety and Health
Administration to purchase and bestow certificates and trophies
in connection with mine rescue and first-aid work; to accept
lands, buildings, equipment, and other contributions from
public and private sources; to prosecute projects in
cooperation with other agencies, Federal, State, or private;
and to promote health and safety education and training in the
mining community through cooperative programs with States,
industry, and safety associations.
On page 15 of the bill is language allowing the Secretary
of Labor to use any funds available to the Department to
provide for the costs of mine rescue and survival operations in
the event of major disasters.
On page 17 is language amending P.L. 85-67 with respect to
the Department of Labor Working Capital Fund; the language
establishes a new Reinvention Investment Fund and allows the
Department to use up to $3,900,000 in unobligated balances to
capitalize the fund.
On page 19 is language repealing section 427(c) of the Job
Training Partnership Act.
On page 23 is language providing that the Division of
Federal Occupational Health may utilize personal services
contracting in certain instances.
On page 23 is language providing that in addition to fees
authorized by section 427(b) of the Health Care Quality
Improvement Act of 1986, fees shall be collected for the full
disclosure of information under the Act sufficient to recover
the full costs of operating the National Practitioner Data
Bank, and shall remain available until expended to carry out
that Act.
On page 25 is language permitting the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention to insure official motor vehicles in
foreign countries.
On page 25 is language providing that collections from user
fees may be credited to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention appropriation.
On page 25 is language making amounts under section 241 of
the Public Health Service Act available to carry out the
National Center for Health Statistics surveys.
On page 30 is language providing that the National Library
of Medicine may enter into certain personal services contracts.
On page 32 of the bill, language is included to permit the
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research to retain and expend
amounts received from Freedom of Information Act fees,
reimbursable and interagency agreements and the sale of data
tapes.
On page 33 of the bill is a provision that in the
administration of title XIX of the Social Security Act,
payments to a State for any quarter may be made with respect to
a State plan or plan amendment in effect during any such
quarter, if submitted in, or prior to, such quarter and
approved in that or any such subsequent quarter.
On page 34 is language allowing fees charged in accordance
with 31 U.S.C. 9701 to be credited to the Health Care Financing
Administration administrative account.
On page 36 is language providing that funds appropriated
pursuant to section 414(a) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act for fiscal year 1994 shall be available for the costs of
assistance provided and other activities conducted in such year
and in fiscal years 1995 and 1996.
On page 42 is language providing that funds may be used by
the Department of Education to obtain certain data from the
Census Bureau; and that no funds shall be reserved under
section 1003(a) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
On page 43 is language providing that funds for Impact Aid
shall be allocated in a certain manner.
On page 44 is language providing that immigrant education
funds may be allocated by States for competitive grants to
local school districts and language providing that bilingual
education funds should only be used to support instructional
programs which ensure that students master English in a timely
fashion.
On page 45 is language providing that the National
Technical Institute for the Deaf and Gallaudet University may
use funds for their endowment programs at their discretion.
On page 46 is language providing that vocational education
research funds in the bill may be spent without regard to
section 451 of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied
Technology Education Act.
On page 46 is language providing that the maximum Pell
grant a student may receive in the 1996-97 academic year shall
be $2,440.
On page 46 is language providing that notwithstanding
section 401(g) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, if the
Secretary determines, prior to publication of the payment
schedule for award year 1996-1997, that the funds included
within this appropriation for Peal Grant awards for award year
1996-1997, and any funds available from the FY 1995
appropriation for Pell Grant awards, are insufficient to
satisfy fully all such awards for which students are eligible,
as calculated under section 401(b) of the Act, the amount paid
for each such award shall be reduced by either a fixed or
variable percentage, or by a fixed dollar amount, as determined
in accordance with a schedule of reductions established by the
Secretary for this purpose.
On page 47 is language providing that funds provided herein
for carrying out title III shall be available without regard to
section 360(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
On page 49 of the bill is language specifying that any
unobligated balances remaining from fixed fees previously paid
into the college housing loans account pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
1749d, relating to payment of costs for inspections and site
visits, shall be available for the operating expenses of that
account.
On pages 52-53 is section 305 of the bill which limits
administrative costs for the direct student loan program to
$320 million in FY 1996, of which $160 million shall be for
payment of administrative cost allowances to guaranty agencies.
It also prohibits the Secretary of Education from using funds
available for subsequent years during FY 1996.
On pages 54-55 is section 307 of the bill which amends the
General Education Provisions Act to make a technical correction
regarding student records privacy.
Under General Provisions, title III, is section 308 which
prohibits the Department of Education from enforcing title IX
of the Education Amendments of 1972 after December 31, 1995,
unless the Department has issued updated policy guidance to
institutions of higher education containing objective
compliance criteria.
On pages 56-57 of the bill is a provision waiving section
396(k)(3)(B)(iii) of the Communications Act of 1934 with
respect to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and a
provision requiring that all funds shall be made available to
the Corporation in accordance with the payment methods required
under OMB Circular A-110.
On page 58 of the bill is a provision requiring that
appropriations to the NLRB shall not be available to organize
or assist in organizing agricultural laborers or used in
connection with investigations, hearings, directives, or orders
concerning bargaining units composed of agricultural laborers
as referred to in section 2(3) of the Act of July 5, 1935 (29
U.S.C. 152), and as amended by the Labor-Management Relations
Act, 1947, as amended, and as defined in section 3(f) of the
Act of June 25, 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203), and including in said
definition employees engaged in the maintenance and operation
of ditches, canals, reservoirs, and waterways when maintained
or operated on a mutual non-profit basis and at least 95 per
centum of the water stored or supplied thereby is used for
farming purposes.
On pages 59-60 of the bill is a provision prohibiting the
NLRB from investigating certain unfair labor practice charges
until the Supreme Court decides whether certain individuals are
protected under the National Labor Relations Act and three
provisions limiting the Board's ability to seek section 10(j)
injunctions.
On page 64 is language providing that reimbursement for the
carrying out of sections 9704 and 9706 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 to the Social Security Trust Fund shall be made,
with interest, by September 30, 1997.
On page 65 is language providing that the total amount
provided for railroad retirement dual benefits shall be
credited to the Dual Benefits Payments Account in 12
approximately equal amounts on the first day of each month in
the fiscal year.
Sections 106, 107, 201, 202, 206, 207, 209, 301, 302, and
501, 502, 504, 505, 506, 507 and 510 of the bill are general
provisions, most of which have been carried in previous
appropriations acts, which place limitations on the use of
funds in the bill or authorize certain activities, and which
might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing the
application of existing law.
Under title V, General Provisions, are the following new
general provisions: (1) section 509 which provides that,
effective October 1, 1993 and thereafter, States may elect not
to fund abortions resulting from rape or incest; (2) section
511 which prevents the use of human embryos in medical
research; and (3) section 513 which expresses the sense of
Congress concerning the appropriate minimum length of hospital
stay for a routine delivery of a child.
Under title VI, Political Advocacy, is legislation to
prohibit recipients of federal funds from engaging in political
advocacy, either with Federal funds or with their own funds
under certain circumstances.
Definition of Program, Project and Activity
During fiscal year 1996 for purposes of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177),
as amended, the following information provides the definition
of the term ``program, project, and activity'' for departments
and agencies under the jurisdiction of the Labor, Health and
Human Services, and Education and Related Agencies
Subcommittee. The term ``program, project, and activity'' shall
include the most specific level of budget items identified in
the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996, the
accompanying House and Senate Committee reports, the conference
report and accompanying joint explanatory statement of the
managers of the committee of conference.
Appropriations Not Authorized by Law
Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of
Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations
in the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law:
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
community service employment for older americans
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
public health service
Health Resources and Services Administration
Community Health Centers
Migrant Health Centers
Health Care for the Homeless
Public Housing Health Service Grants
(Consolidated Funding)
Health Professions
Grants for Communities for Scholarships
Nurse Loan Repayment
Research on Health Professions Issues
Centers of Excellence
Health Careers Opportunity Program
Exceptional Financial Need Scholarships
Faculty Loan Repayment
Fin. Asst. for Disadv. HP Students
HPSL Recapitalization
Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students
Family Medicine Training/Departments
General Internal Medicine & Pediatrics
Physician's Assistants
Public Health and Preventive Medicine
Health Administration Traineeships/Projects
Area Health Education Centers
Border Health Training Centers
General Dentistry Residencies
Allied Health Special Projects
Geriatric Education Centers & Training
Interdisciplinary Traineeships
Podiatric Medicine
Advanced Nurse Education
Nurse Practitioners/Nurse Midwives
Special Projects
Nurse Disadvantaged Assistance
Professional Nurse Traineeships
Nurse Anesthetists
Chiropractic Demonstration Grants
(Consolidated Health Professions Funding)
Organ Transplantation
Health Teaching Facilities Interest Subsidy
Alzheimer's Demonstration Grants
Acquired Immunity Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)
AIDS Dental Services
Ryan White Programs
Emergency Assistance
Comprehensive Care Programs
Early Intervention Program
Pediatric Demonstration
Vaccine Inj. Comp.--HRSA Admin. (Trust Fund)
Bone Marrow Donor Registry Program
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Childhood Immunization
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration
Consolidated Mental Health & Subst Abuse Demos
Mental Health Block Grant
Children's Mental Health
Protection and Advocacy
AIDS Demonstrations
Substance Abuse Block Grant
Adolescent Family Life
Health Initiatives--Minority Health
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research
administration for children and families
Child Care & Development Block Grant
Temporary Child Care/Crisis Nurseries
Abandoned Infant Assistance
Native Americans
administration on aging
Grants to the States
Supportive Services and Centers
Nutrition
Congregate Meals
Home Delivered Meals
Frail Elderly In-Home Services
Grants to Indians
Program Administration
TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
special education
Preschool Grants
Grants for Infants and Families
Special Purpose Funds
Deaf-Blindness
Serious Emotional Disturbance
Severe Disabilities
Secondary and Transitional Services
Post-Secondary Education
Media and Captioning Services
Parent Training
TITLE IV--RELATED AGENCIES
Corporation for Public Broadcasting
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 1
Date: July 20, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Obey.
Description of motion: To strike 11 legislative provisions.
Results: Rejected 18 to 29.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Coleman Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dicks Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dixon Mr. DeLay
Mr. Durbin Mr. Dickey
Mr. Foglietta Mr. Forbes
Mr. Hefner Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Hobson
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Istook
Mr. Mollohan Mr. Kingston
Mr. Murtha Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Obey Mr. Kolbe
Ms. Pelosi Mr. Lewis
Mr. Sabo Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Skaggs Mr. Livingston
Mr. Stokes Mr. McDade
Mr. Thornton Mr. Miller
Mr. Torres Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Neumann
Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 2
Date: July 20, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Livingston.
Description of motion: To eliminate funding for the title X
categorical program and transfer this funding to the maternal
and child health block grant and community and migrant health
centers.
Results: Adopted 28 to 25.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Coleman
Mr. Bonilla Mr. Dicks
Mr. Bunn Mr. Dixon
Mr. Callahan Mr. Durbin
Mr. DeLay Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Dickey Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Forbes Mr. Hefner
Mr. Istook Mr. Hobson
Mr. Kingston Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Knollenberg Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Lightfoot Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Livingston Mr. Lewis
Mr. McDade Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Miller Mr. Obey
Mr. Mollohan Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Murtha Mr. Porter
Mr. Myers Mr. Regula
Mr. Nethercutt Mr. Riggs
Mr. Neumann Mr. Sabo
Mr. Packard Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Rogers Mr. Stokes
Mr. Skeen Mr. Thornton
Mr. Taylor Mr. Visclosky
Mrs. Vucanovich Mr. Wilson
Mr. Walsh Mr. Yates
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 3
Date: July 20, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Hoyer.
Description of motion: To increase funding to various
education programs and to cap the Federal matching rate for
Medicaid at 66 percent.
Results: Rejected 19 to 30.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Coleman Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dicks Mr. DeLay
Mr. Dixon Mr. Dickey
Mr. Durbin Mr. Forbes
Mr. Foglietta Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hefner Mr. Hobson
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Istook
Ms. Kaptur Mr. Kingston
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Obey Mr. Kolbe
Ms. Pelosi Mr. Lewis
Mr. Sabo Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Skaggs Mr. Livingston
Mr. Stokes Mr. McDade
Mr. Thornton Mr. Miller
Mr. Visclosky Mr. Myers
Mr. Wilson Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Yates Mr. Neumann
Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 4
Date: July 20, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Ms. Pelosi.
Description of motion: To increase funding to various
worker protection programs and to cap the Federal matching rate
for Medicaid at 69 percent.
Results: Rejected 19 to 32.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Coleman Mr. Bevill
Mr. Dicks Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Dixon Mr. Bunn
Mr. Durbin Mr. Callahan
Mr. Foglietta Mr. DeLay
Mr. Hefner Mr. Dickey
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Forbes
Ms. Kaptur Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Hobson
Mr. Murtha Mr. Istook
Mr. Obey Mr. Kingston
Ms. Pelosi Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Sabo Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Skaggs Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Stokes Mr. Livingston
Mr. Torres Mr. McDade
Mr. Visclosky Mr. Miller
Mr. Wilson Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Yates Mr. Myers
Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Neumann
Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mr. Thornton
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 5
Date: July 20, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mrs. Lowey.
Description of motion: To increase funding for Perkins
loans and SSIG State scholarships and CAP Federal matching rate
for Medicaid at 72 percent.
Results: Rejected 19 to 24.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Bunn
Mr. Chapman Mr. DeLay
Mr. Coleman Mr. Dickey
Mr. Dicks Mr. Forbes
Mr. Dixon Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Durbin Mr. Hobson
Mr. Foglietta Mr. Istook
Mr. Hefner Mr. Kingston
Ms. Kaptur Mr. Lewis
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Livingston
Mr. Murtha Mr. Miller
Mr. Obey Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Sabo Mr. Myers
Mr. Stokes Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Thornton Mr. Packard
Mr. Torres Mr. Porter
Mr. Visclosky Mr. Regula
Mr. Wilson Mr. Riggs
Mr. Yates Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 6
Date: July 20, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Stokes.
Description of motion: To increase funding for career and
youth training and CAP Federal matching rate for Medicaid at 65
percent.
Results: Rejected 19 to 26.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Chapman Mr. Bevill
Mr. Coleman Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dixon Mr. DeLay
Mr. Durbin Mr. Dickey
Mr. Foglietta Mr. Forbes
Mr. Hefner Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Hobson
Ms. Kaptur Mr. Istook
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Kingston
Mr. Murtha Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Obey Mr. Lewis
Ms. Pelosi Mr. Livingston
Mr. Sabo Mr. Miller
Mr. Skaggs Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Stokes Mr. Myers
Mr. Thornton Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Torres Mr. Packard
Mr. Wilson Mr. Porter
Mr. Yates Mr. Regula
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 7
Date: July 20, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Obey.
Description of motion: To increase funding for programs
serving vulnerable populations, mainly energy assistance, and
cap the Federal matching rate for Medicaid at 65 percent.
Results: Rejected 17 to 32.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Chapman Mr. Bevill
Mr. Coleman Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Dixon Mr. Bunn
Mr. Durbin Mr. Callahan
Mr. Foglietta Mr. DeLay
Mr. Hefner Mr. Dickey
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Forbes
Ms. Kaptur Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Hobson
Mr. Obey Mr. Istook
Mr. Sabo Mr. Kingston
Mr. Skaggs Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Stokes Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Torres Mr. Lewis
Mr. Visclosky Mr. Livingston
Mr. Wilson Mr. Miller
Mr. Yates Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Myers
Mr. Nethercut
Mr. Neumann
Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mr. Thornton
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 8
Date: July 20, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Porter.
Description of motion: Substitute amendment to the Dickey
amendment to prohibit funding to support the creation of human
embryos for research purposes.
Results: Rejected 26 to 26.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla Mr. Bevill
Mr. Chapman Mr. Bunn
Mr. Coleman Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dicks Mr. DeLay
Mr. Durbin Mr. Dickey
Mr. Fazio Mr. Forbes
Mr. Foglietta Mr. Hefner
Mr. Frelinghuysen Mr. Istook
Mr. Hobson Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Kingston
Mr. Kolbe Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Lewis Mr. Lightfoot
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Livingston
Mr. Miller Mr. McDade
Mr. Myers Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Nethercutt Mr. Murtha
Mr. Obey Mr. Neumann
Ms. Pelosi Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter Mr. Rogers
Mr. Regula Mr. Skeen
Mr. Riggs Mr. Taylor
Mr. Sabo Mr. Thornton
Mr. Skaggs Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Stokes Mr. Wicker
Mr. Visclosky Mr. Wolf
Mr. Yates Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall No. 9
Date: July 20, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Dickey.
Description of motion: To prohibit funding to create Human
Embryos for research purposes or for research in which human
embryos are destroyed or discarded greater than that allowed
under 45 CFR 46.208(a)(2) and 42 U.S.C. 289g(b).
Results: Adopted 30 to 23.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Bunn Mr. Chapman
Mr. Callahan Mr. Coleman
Mr. DeLay Mr. Dicks
Mr. Dickey Mr. Durbin
Mr. Forbes Mr. Fazio
Mr. Hobson Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Istook Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Kingston Mr. Hefner
Mr. Knollenberg Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Lewis Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Lightfoot Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Livingston Mrs. Lowey
Mr. McDade Mr. Miller
Mr. Mollohan Mr. Obey
Mr. Murtha Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Myers Mr. Porter
Mr. Nethercutt Mr. Riggs
Mr. Neumann Mr. Sabo
Mr. Packard Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Regula Mr. Stokes
Mr. Rogers Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Skeen Mr. Yates
Mr. Taylor
Mr. Thornton
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall No. 10
Date: July 21, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Bonilla.
Description of motion: To prohibit OSHA from developing any
standard or guideline regarding ergonomic protection or
reporting related injuries.
Results: Adopted 28 to 17.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla Mr. Bevill
Mr. Bunn Mr. Coleman
Mr. DeLay Mr. Dicks
Mr. Dickey Mr. Durbin
Mr. Forbes Mr. Fazio
Mr. Frelinghuysen Mr. Hefner
Mr. Hobson Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Istook Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Kingston Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Knollenberg Mr. Obey
Mr. Kolbe Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Lewis Mr. Sabo
Mr. Lightfoot Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Livingston Mr. Stokes
Mr. McDade Mr. Thornton
Mr. Myers Mr. Wilson
Mr. Nethercutt Mr. Yates
Mr. Neumann
Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 11
Date: July 21, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Delay.
Description of motion: To prohibit funding for any program
if that program subjects any health care entity to
discrimination if the entity refuses training or other
activities on induced abortions.
Results: Adopted 29 to 25.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Chapman
Mr. Bonilla Mr. Coleman
Mr. Bunn Mr. Dicks
Mr. Callahan Mr. Dixon
Mr. DeLay Mr. Durbin
Mr. Dickey Mr. Fazio
Mr. Forbes Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Hobson Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Istook Mr. Hefner
Mr. Kingston Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Knollenberg Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Lewis Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Lightfoot Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Livingston Mr. Obey
Mr. McDade Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Miller Mr. Porter
Mr. Mollohan Mr. Riggs
Mr. Myers Mr. Sabo
Mr. Neumann Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Packard Mr. Stokes
Mr. Regula Mr. Thornton
Mr. Rogers Mr. Torres
Mr. Skeen Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Taylor Mr. Wilson
Mrs. Vucanovich Mr. Yates
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 12
Date: July 21, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Obey.
Description of motion: To report the bill.
Results: Rejected 22 to 32.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Chapman Mr. Bunn
Mr. Coleman Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dicks Mr. DeLay
Mr. Dixon Mr. Dickey
Mr. Durbin Mr. Forbes
Mr. Fazio Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Foglietta Mr. Hobson
Mr. Hefner Mr. Istook
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Kingston
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Mollohan Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Obey Mr. Lewis
Ms. Pelosi Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Sabo Mr. Livingston
Mr. Skaggs Mr. McDade
Mr. Stokes Mr. Miller
Mr. Thornton Mr. Myers
Mr. Torres Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Visclosky Mr. Neumann
Mr. Wilson Mr. Packard
Mr. Yates Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 13
Date: July 21, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion By: Mr. Obey.
Description of motion: Substitute to the Istook amendment
to add rape or incest to the exceptions for funding of
abortions.
Results: Rejected 25 to 26.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Chapman Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dicks Mr. Callahan
Mr. Durbin Mr. DeLay
Mr. Fazio Mr. Dickey
Mr. Foglietta Mr. Forbes
Mr. Frelinghuysen Mr. Hobson
Mr. Hefner Mr. Istook
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Kingston
Ms. Kaptur Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Kolbe Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Lewis Mr. Livingston
Mrs. Lowey Mr. McDade
Mr. Obey Mr. Miller
Ms. Pelosi Mr. Myers
Mr. Porter Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Regula Mr. Neumann
Mr. Sabo Mr. Packard
Mr. Skaggs Mr. Riggs
Mr. Stokes Mr. Skeen
Mr. Thornton Mr. Taylor
Mr. Torres Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Visclosky Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wilson Mr. Wicker
Mr. Yates Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 14
Date: July 21, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion By: Mr. Istook.
Description of motion: To not require states to have to pay
for abortions if a State deems that appropriate except when the
life of the mother would be endangered.
Results: Rejected 29 to 23.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Chapman
Mr. Bonilla Mr. Dicks
Mr. Bunn Mr. Dixon
Mr. Callahan Mr. Durbin
Mr. DeLay Mr. Fazio
Mr. Dickey Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Forbes Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hobson Mr. Hefner
Mr. Istook Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Kingston Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Knollenberg Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Lewis Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Lighfoot Mr. Obey
Mr. Livingston Ms. Pelosi
Mr. McDade Mr. Porter
Mr. Miller Mr. Sabo
Mr. Myers Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Nethercutt Mr. Stokes
Mr. Neumann Mr. Thornton
Mr. Packard Mr. Torres
Mr. Regula Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Riggs Mr. Wilson
Mr. Skeen Mr. Yates
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 15
Date: July 21, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Istook.
Description of motion: To prohibit funding for higher
education institutions if such institutions use certain fees to
support groups who lobby or engage in political campaigns.
Results: Rejected 17 to 32.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. DeLay Mr. Bevill
Mr. Forbes Mr. Bunn
Mr. Frelinghuysen Mr. Chapman
Mr. Hobson Mr. Coleman
Mr. Istook Mr. Dickey
Mr. Kingston Mr. Dixon
Mr. Knollenberg Mr. Durbin
Mr. Kolbe Mr. Fazio
Mr. Lightfoot Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Livingston Mr. Hefner
Mr. McDade Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Myers Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Neumann Mr. Lewis
Mr. Packard Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Riggs Mr. Miller
Mr. Taylor Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Wicker Mr. Obey
Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Sabo
Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Stokes
Mr. Thornton
Mr. Torres
Mr. Visclosky
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wilson
Mr. Yates
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 16
Date: July 24, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Yates.
Description of motion: To strike the enacting clause.
Results: Rejected 18 to 29.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Chapman Mr. Bunn
Mr. Coleman Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dicks Mr. DeLay
Mr. Durbin Mr. Dickey
Mr. Fazio Mr. Forbes
Mr. Hefner Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Hobson
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Istook
Mr. Murtha Mr. Kingston
Mr. Obey Mr. Knollenberg
Ms. Pelosi Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Sabo Mr. Lewis
Mr. Skaggs Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Stokes Mr. Livingston
Mr. Thornton Mr. McDade
Mr. Wilson Mr. Miller
Mr. Yates Mr. Neumann
Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 17
Date: July 24, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Sabo.
Description of Motion: To amend the Istook amendment to
expand the applicability to include entities receiving contract
payments or loans or loan guarantees.
Results: Rejected 18 to 29.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Chapman Mr. Bunn
Mr. Coleman Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dicks Mr. Delay
Mr. Durbin Mr. Dickey
Mr. Fazio Mr. Forbes
Mr. Hefner Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Hobson
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Istook
Mr. Murtha Mr. Kingston
Mr. Obey Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Pelosi Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Sabo Mr. Lewis
Mr. Skaggs Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Stokes Mr. Livingston
Mr. Thornton Mr. McDade
Mr. Wilson Mr. Miller
Mr. Yates Mr. Neumann
Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 18
Date: July 24, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Istook.
Description of Motion: To prohibit entities who receive
grants from using these funds for political advocacy.
Results: Adopted 28 to 20 Voting Present 1.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla Mr. Bevill
Mr. Bunn Mr. Chapman
Mr. Callahan Mr. Coleman
Mr. Delay Mr. Dicks
Mr. Dickey Mr. Durbin
Mr. Forbes Mr. Fazio
Mr. Frelinghuysen Mr. Hefner
Mr. Hobson Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Istook Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Kingston Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Knollenberg Mr. Murtha
Mr. Lewis Mr. Pelosi
Mr. Lightfoot Mr. Porter
Mr. Livingston Mr. Regula
Mr. McDade Mr. Sabo
Mr. Miller Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Myers Mr. Stokes
Mr. Neumann Mr. Thornton
Mr. Packard Mr. Wilson
Mr. Riggs Mr. Yates
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Present: Mr. Obey.
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the result of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the name of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall No. 19
Date: July 24, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Istook.
Description of motion: To prohibit the enforcement of title
IX of the education amendments of 1972 with respect to gender
equity in intercollegiate athletics unless the Department of
Education issues updated guidance clarifying demonstration of
program expansion for the underrepresented sex.
Result: Adopted 30 to 23.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla Mr. Bevill
Mr. Callahan Mr. Bunn
Mr. DeLay Mr. Chapman
Mr. Dickey Mr. Coleman
Mr. Frelinghuysen Mr. Dicks
Mr. Hobson Mr. Dixon
Mr. Istook Mr. Durbin
Mr. Kingston Mr. Fazio
Mr. Knollenberg Mr. Forbes
Mr. Kolbe Mr. Hefner
Mr. Lewis Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Lightfoot Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Livingston Mrs. Lowey
Mr. McDade Mr. Obey
Mr. Miller Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Myers Mr. Sabo
Mr. Nethercutt Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Neumann Mr. Stokes
Mr. Packard Mr. Thornton
Mr. Porter Mr. Torres
Mr. Regula Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Riggs Mr. Wilson
Mr. Rogers Mr. Yates
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the result of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the name of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall No. 20
Date: July 24, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Miller of Florida.
Description of motion: To eliminate FY 1998 funding for the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Results: Reject 14 to 40.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla Mr. Bevill
Mr. DeLay Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dickey Mr. Callahan
Mr. Hobson Mr. Chapman
Mr. Istook Mr. Coleman
Mr. Kingston Mr. Dicks
Mr. Knollenberg Mr. Dixon
Mr. Kolbe Mr. Durbin
Mr. Livingston Mr. Fazio
Mr. Miller Mr. Forbes
Mr. Myers Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Neumann Mr. Hefner
Mr. Packard Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Wicker Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Lewis
Mr. Lightfoot
Mrs. Lowey
Mr. McDade
Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Obey
Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Sabo
Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Stokes
Mr. Taylor
Mr. Thornton
Mr. Torres
Mr. Visclosky
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wilson
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Yates
Mr. Young
Committee Votes
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
printed below:
rollcall no. 21
Date: July 24, 1995.
Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
Motion by: Mr. Young of Florida.
Description of motion: That the bill be reported, and that
the chairman be authorized to seek a rule on such terms and
conditions as he may deem appropriate, and pursuant to the
provisions of clause 1 of rule XX, the chairman be authorized
to move that the House disagree to the amendments of the Senate
and agree to the conference requested by the Senate on the
bill.
Results: Adopted 32 to 21.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla Mr. Bevill
Mr. Bunn Mr. Chapman
Mr. Callahan Mr. Coleman
Mr. DeLay Mr. Dicks
Mr. Dickey Mr. Dixon
Mr. Forbes Mr. Durbin
Mr. Frelinghuysen Mr. Fazio
Mr. Hobson Mr. Hefner
Mr. Istook Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Kingston Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Knollenberg Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Kolbe Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Lewis Mr. Obey
Mr. Lightfoot Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Livingston Mr. Skaggs
Mr. McDade Mr. Stokes
Mr. Miller Mr. Thornton
Mr. Myers Mr. Torres
Mr. Nethercutt Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Neumann Mr. Wilson
Mr. Packard Mr. Yates
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVID OBEY
As members of the Minority party, we face enormous
substantive differences with the Majority over the direction
this country should take with respect to many of the critical
activities contained in this bill. We disagree on what we
should do in terms of educating our kids, protecting our
workers, providing the necessary skills to our workforce and
seeing to it that the weakest and more vulnerable in this
society don't get left out.
This bill is qualitatively different from any bill reported
by this Committee in the post war era. It is the meanest, most
radical and most extreme attack on women, on children, on
workers and on the vulnerable which has been procured by the
Majority since their takeover of the House in January. And this
is only the first step. Under the budget plan passed by the
Majority, additional cuts will be required in Labor, Health and
Human Services, and Education programs in fiscal year 1997 at
least as large as the combined cuts produced in this bill and
in the rescission bills which have already become law.
These cuts far exceed what would be necessary to balance
the budge. They are necessary because the economic plan being
implemented by the Majority includes the elimination of the
alternative minimum tax on large corporations, and a dramatic
cut in the taxation of profits on stock and real estate sales.
These cuts are larger than necessary because half the
discretionary budget, all spending on defense, has been taken
off the table. Because of these policy decisions by the
Majority, the bill ends up attacking weak claimants rather than
weak claims.
The result is legislation which retreats from Federal
responsibilities with respect to the country's children, its
workers, its seniors and the most vulnerable in our society. It
abandons our economic future by cutting basic investments in
education and training. It abandons our present by gutting
programs to protect the health, safety, pensions and bargaining
rights of our workers. It eliminates basic services and
opportunities for our elderly. The bill which has traditionally
been used to empower and nuture a broad segment of the American
people, has now been used by the Majority as a vehicle to
impose a radical conservative agenda both fiscally and
philosophically. While we have attempted during Subcommittee
and Full Committee consideration to improve the bill, it is our
view as the bill is being reported that it is not fixable and
that the House should reject the legislation and insist that
the Committee readjust its spending allocations and prepare a
bill which more adequately finances the investments and
services within the agencies covered by this legislation.
Discretionary totals in bill.--The bill as reported
includes $60,870 million for discretionary programs. This is a
reduction of $6,347 million below the levels currently
available in 1995 after enactment of HR 1944, the Fiscal Year
1995 Rescission bill. It is $9,146 million below the comparable
amounts approved by the 103d Congress for these activities in
the original Fiscal Year 1995 Appropriations Act, P.L. 103-333.
The combined effect of this bill together with the enacted
rescission is a 13 percent reduction from last year's spending
levels. The totals for each Department are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill v. Bill v.
1995enacted 1995revised 1996Pres. 1996Bill 1995enacted 1995revised
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Labor................................. 11,033 9,431 11,315 8,355 -2,678 -1,076
Percent........................... ........... ........... ......... ......... -24.3 -11.4
HHS................................... 29,411 29,221 31,042 28,212 -1,199 -1,009
Percent........................... ........... ........... ......... ......... -4.1 -3.5
Ed.................................... 25,122 24,476 25,803 20,647 -4,475 -3,829
Percent........................... ........... ........... ......... ......... -17.8 -15.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical reductions in bill.--We agree that reductions are
possible in many sections of this bill. As an example, we have
supported elimination of significant numbers of small,
categorical programs in both the Department of Labor and the
Department of Education. We believe, however, that the bill as
currently presented goes too far in reducing critical resources
for American families. Among the reductions which we strongly
object to are the following:
--$3,829 million from education including $2.5 billion of
funds for local schools.
--$372 million from eliminating the Goals 2000 program.
--$1,143 million from title 1 assistance for disadvantaged
students.
--$251 million by terminating the Eisenhower professional
development program.
--$266 million from Safe and Drug-free Schools.
--$380 million from vocational education including $55
million cut in the new school-to-work program.
--$701 million from student financial assistance including
$219 million by terminating Federal contributions
to the Perkins loan program and the SSIG
scholarship program.
--$867 million by eliminating the 1996 Summer Jobs program.
--$1 billion from other training programs at the Dept. of
Labor.
--$180 million from worker protection programs such as OSHA,
MSHA, Employment Standards Admin., NIOSH, and the
National Labor Relations Board.
--$1 billion by terminating the Low Income Energy Assistance
program.
--$193 million by terminating the title X Family Planning
program.
--$137 million from Head Start.
--$55 million from Healthy Start.
--$392 million from substance abuse and mental health
services at the Dept. at HHS.
--$103 million from homeless programs including $77 million
in reductions in programs authorized under the
McKinney Act.
--$55 million from various HHS programs targeted to rural
areas.
--$162 million in programs for older Americans including
nutrition, employment and volunteer programs such
as RSVP and Foster Grandparents.
Legislative provisions in bill.--We are particularly
concerned that numerous legislative provisions have been
included in this appropriations bill which are under the
jurisdiction of other Committees of the House. Many of these
provisions involve highly complicated and controversial topics
which do not belong in appropriations bills. Because the
Majority party has evidently decided that many of these
proposals will not stand up to the detailed review which would
be provided under the normal procedures of the House, they have
loaded up this bill with the elitist agenda of their special
interests at the expense of workers, children and women. Among
the objectionable provisions are the following:
Language limiting the authority of the National Labor
Relations Board to enforce laws which protect workers'
rights to organize and bargain collectively.
Language restricting the Department of Labor's
enforcement authority in the area of occupational
safety and health.
Language prohibiting the Department of Labor from
developing new workplace standards for ergonomic
(musculoskeletal) injuries such as carpal tunnel
syndrome.
Language restricting the Department of Labor's
enforcement of various child labor laws.
Language blocking the President's executive order
regarding striker replacements.
Language effectively abolishing the Office of the
Surgeon General.
Language significantly restricting the Department of
Educations' implementation of the new Direct Lending
Program.
Language limiting the choices for women who have been
the victims of rape or incest.
Language intended to overturn private accreditation
standards for the training of obstetricians and
gynecologists.
Language blocking biomedical research regarding human
embryos.
Language restricting the authority of the Department
of Education to ensure the civil rights of women in
higher education.
Language restricting the rights of anyone who
receives a grant from the Federal Government from
engaging in political advocacy with their own funds.
etc., etc. etc
We object to the use of this bill for such far reaching
changes in the basic laws of the United States without
hearings. We particularly object to provisions which attempt to
stifle political debate and dissent. These provisions are a
fundamental assault on the First Amendment rights of every
American.
Areas of Special Concern
education
We believe that the bill's unprecedented $3,829,568,000
reduction from 1995 in overall discretionary spending for the
Department of Education represents an unacceptable reversal of
a decades-long, bipartisan Federal commitment to improving
educational opportunity for students of all ages. The
continuing decline of real wages for all but the college-
educated dramatizes the importance of education, and the
President's budget recognizes this by maintaining our
investment in education and job training. The Committee bill,
however, moves in the opposite direction, forcing many States
and communities to abandon or scale back education reform
efforts and undermining the ability of many cash-strapped
communities to meet the educational needs of their most
disadvantaged students. Make no mistake about the impact of
these cuts. The will inevitably lead to lower educational
standards and higher local property taxes.
Title I grants to local educational agencies for disadvantaged students
The majority bill attacks America's children with a
massive, billion-dollar reduction in the major vehicle for
helping elementary and secondary schools improve the academic
performance of poor and disadvantaged students. The bill would
appropriate $5,555,000,000 for Title I Grants to Local
Educational Agencies, a reduction of $1,143,356,000 from the
$6,698,356,000 appropriated for 1995. Title I enables schools
to provide extra help for poor, low-achieving children who do
not typically have access to the same education resources as
other children, either at home or at school. With the proposed
cut, schools would be forced to make tough, no-win choices
about which classrooms and disadvantaged children can do
without the essential help that Title I provides. Overall, as
many as 1.1 million low-achieving children (out of more than
6.4 million children currently being served by the program)
would be denied services. Such drastic cuts will prove yet
another obstacle to helping these children escape the cycle of
poverty. We supported an amendment that would have provided
substantial additional funds for Title I grants to local
educational agencies, but the amendment was voted down by the
Republican Majority.
Under the Committee bill, States and school districts would
experience sharp funding cuts, losing 17 percent of their Title
I funds at a time when many are already having trouble making
ends meet. For example, school districts in Wisconsin would
lose $21 million, New York City would lost $67 million, Los
Angeles County would lose $44 million, Cook County would lose
$55 million, Philadelphia would lost $14 million, Dade County
would lose $15 million, and Cuyahoga County would lost $8
million. Rural and small-town school districts would be equally
hard hit by the budget cuts. We do not support imposing such
drastic reductions at a time when most districts already have
cut to the bone in response to losses in State-level financial
support.
Since 1965, the Title I program has improved the basic
reading and mathematics skills of disadvantaged children in
school districts across the country, helping to close the
learning gap between those children and more advantaged
students. For example, the achievement gap between black and
white 9-year olds narrowed over the past two decades by 18
percent in math and 25 percent in reading. To ensure that
disadvantaged children make even more progress, the recent
reauthorization restructured the program to incorporate high
standards and expectations for Title I children, deemphasized
standardized testing, and discouraged instruction that isolates
students from the regular classroom. With adequate funding,
these changes will greatly strengthen the Title I program; at
the funding level provided in the bill, schools may find it
impossible to implement the most critical reforms.
Goals 2000: State grants
Just one year ago a bipartisan majority in Congress passed
the Goals 2000: Educate America Act with the enthusiastic
endorsement of such organizations as the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce, the Business Roundtable, the National Alliance of
Business, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the
National Parent Teacher Association. Despite this overwhelming
support for Goals 2000, the majority bill walks away from this
critical effort to raise academic standards and all but
abandons the National Education Goals agreed to 5 years ago by
the Nation's governors. The bill would terminate funding for
Goals 2000 State and local improvement grants in 1996, compared
to a revised 1995 appropriation of $361,870,000 and a 1996
budget request of $693,500,000.
Goals 2000 provides flexible, regulation-free grants to
help States and communities implement their own school
improvement plans to raise student academic achievement,
involve parents in schools, bring technology into the
classroom, upgrade teacher professional development, and create
partnerships with business and community groups to improve
schools. The President's budget proposal would provide
``venture capital'' permitting more than 16,000 schools to
focus on academic excellence and school improvement for nearly
9 million students. The majority bill denies funding to these
schools just as most States and communities have completed
their planning and begun to implement reforms. We supported
amendments at both the Subcommittee and Committee levels that
would have restored funding for Goals 2000 State grants, albeit
at a lower level, but each time the Republican majority
rejected this proposal.
Eisenhower teacher training and professional development
The bill would end funding for the Eisenhower Professional
Development program, compared with a revised 1995 appropriation
of $251,298,000 and an administration request of $735,000,000.
The Eisenhower program is the major Federal vehicle for
ensuring that the Nation's educators are able to teach children
to high standards, and for many school districts, the only
source of funding for any professional development activities
at the local level. For this reason, we supported an amendment
to restore funding for this program, but the amendment was
defeated by the majority. The Eisenhower Professional
Development program provides financial assistance to State and
local educational agencies and to institutions of higher
education to support sustained and intensive high-quality
educator professional development. Eisenhower funds support
professional development activities for nearly 900,000 teachers
in over 15,000 local educational agencies nationwide. Without
these funds, fewer teachers will be prepared for teaching a
diverse student population to meet challenging academic
standards, and fewer schools will be able to make significant
progress toward the National Education Goals.
Special education
During the past 20 years America has made tremendous
strides in educating children with disabilities, many of whom
were excluded from school altogether before the 1975 enactment
of Public Law 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped
Children Act. As a result of Federal law, most children with
disabilities are attending neighborhood schools and learning
alongside their non-disabled peers. Part of this success is
attributable to the investments we have made at the Federal
level in programs that support the research, training, and
technical assistance needed to help State and local school
districts meet the educational needs of 5.6 million children
with disabilities.
The bill reduces Federal support for these activities by
$162,543,000. For example, the bill would terminate the primary
sources of Federal funding to identify effective practices for
improving educational results for these children, including
infants and preschool children. The bill would eliminate all
funding for personnel development, despite State-identified
needs for 48,000 personnel trained to work with children with
disabilities. We believe the Committee-passed bill is short-
sighted. As with the cut in Title I, the majority has taken aim
at our most disadvantaged students. Eliminating these programs
is an abdication of Federal responsibility in areas critical to
effective special education.
Safe and drug-free schools
The bill cuts Federal support for drug-free schools and
communities programs by $266 million, or nearly 60 percent,
sharply reducing drug abuse and violence prevention activities
currently serving about 39 million students in 97 percent of
the Nation's school districts. This level of funding would
cripple our Nation's efforts to keep drugs and violence out of
our schools and away from our youth. This occurs at a critical
time when new surveys consistently show an increase in drug use
by our students as shown in the following chart showing drug
prevention funding and use:
vocational education
The majority's decision to cut $299,699,000, or 27 percent,
from the programs authorized by the Carl D. Perkins Vocational
and Applied Technology Education Act would seriously undermine
efforts to make America's workers more competitive in the
global economy. With more jobs requiring a high level of
technical expertise, our career development systems must
produce greater numbers of skilled and adaptable workers than
in the past. Perkins Act programs are crucial to the attainment
of this goal. Without adequate resources, States and local
school districts cannot develop high-quality career preparation
education systems that enable students to make the transition
from school to productive careers. We must strengthen, not
weaken, opportunities for youth to obtain the skills they need
for further education and careers.
Programs supported with Perkins Act funds serve more than
11 million students two-thirds at the secondary level and one-
third in post-secondary institutions. The Committee bill would
eliminate services to 3.1 million students nationally. For
example, the cuts could deny services to nearly 300,000
vocational students in California, about 280,000 in Florida,
277,000 in Texas, 185,000 in Illinois, 156,000 in New York and
53,000 in Wisconsin. Moreover, all States and local schools
would be severely hampered in their ability to serve special
populations. In addition, the elimination of vocational
education discretionary programs would terminate all on-
going research projects prior to their completion, resulting in
almost no return on the Federal investment in this area.
The bill's substantial reductions in Perkins Act funding
are magnified by the $55,000,000 (split between Education and
Labor) or 22 percent cut in the School-to-Work Opportunities
programs, which provide States, localities, and Indian tribes
with venture capital for creating systems that will enable all
students to make a successful transition from school to
postsecondary education and high-skilled, high-wage careers.
While the School-to-Work Opportunities Act was never intended
to be a permanent source of Federal support funding is
scheduled to decline in 1997 and phase out entirely by 2001 the
Committee's action would suspend many State and local efforts
at a critical point in the developmental process, when venture
capital is still badly needed. When compared to the budget
request of $400,000,000 (split between Education and Labor),
the majority bill would reduce grants to 43 States by more than
half.
We supported amendments that would have provided additional
funding for these critical programs, but the amendments were
rejected by the majority. In view of America's need for more
highly skilled workers, and the need of American workers for
the training that will allow them to increase their earning
power, we cannot support a proposal that would be so damaging
to our vocational educational system.
postsecondary student loans
Direct loans
We are gravely concerned that restrictive bill language on
Direct Loan administrative spending in section 305 could
jeopardize the Department of Education's ability to effectively
manage the Direct Loan program. The majority action represents
an effort to derail a successful new loan program, one that
better serves students and schools at a potential cost savings
to taxpayers of $12 billion, in order to protect subsidies
received by banks, guarantee agencies, and secondary markets
under the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) programs. The
bill limits administrative costs to $320,000,000 $230,000,000
below the $550,000,000 that the authorizing legislation
provides for 1996 and half of the funds are earmarked for
guaranty agencies. As a result, the bill would provide the
Department just $160,000,000 not only to continue
implementation of Direct Loans but also to maintain significant
administrative support for the FFEL programs. This limitation
would result in, among other things: (1) reduction in critical
default collection activities; (2) significant delays in
student aid application processing and delivery; (3)
elimination of support for all contract modifications to cover
unexpected increases in loan volume, and for guaranty agencies
experiencing financial difficulties; and (4) severe reductions
in school monitoring, training, and technical assistance.
The language in section 305 constitutes authorizing
legislation in an appropriations bill and reflects
irresponsible Congressional micromanagement of a complex
program carrying significant risk of damage to taxpayer
interests. Rather than ``leveling the playing field'' in the
competition between guaranteed student loans and Direct Loans,
this language would sabotage Direct Loan program implementation
and jeopardize student access to college loans.
In addition, Department spending for Direct Loan public
information materials is forbidden under this bill language.
Such a restriction could deny students and schools an
opportunity to learn about Direct Loan benefits. Meanwhile, the
guaranteed student loan lenders and intermediaries face no such
restrictions as they promote guaranteed loans and spread
misinformation about Direct Loans, using guaranteed loan
program profits derived from taxpayer subsidies.
Perkins loans
The majority's decision to eliminate Perkins Loan Federal
Capital Contributions would deny campus-based, low-interest
loans to approximately 150,000 postsecondary students. Perkins
Loans averaged about $1,400, and nearly half of all borrowers
come from families with total incomes below $20,000. Borrowers
often find smaller loans more accessible under the Perkins Loan
program than under the FFEL program, because private lenders
generally prefer making larger, more profitable loans. We
supported an amendment to restore funding for Perkins Loans,
but the Republican Majority voted it down.
department of labor
Total discretionary spending.--The Committee bill cuts the
Department of Labor's discretionary spending to $8,355 million,
a reduction of $2,678 million below the original appropriation
provided for 1995. Reductions in this bill totaling $1,076
million together with massive rescissions already enacted
earlier this year for 1995 have the effect of reducing total
discretionary resources available for the Department by 24%
below the level which this Committee considered appropriate
less than one year ago. These trends are shown on the following
graph:
We are particularly concerned by reductions in funds for
various worker protection activities and for training programs
for both adults and youth.
Worker protections.--The Committee bill reverses decades of
progress by this country in creating effective systems to
protect its workers. These reductions will affect the health,
safety, pensions, wages, hours, and collective bargaining
rights of tens of millions of workers. The total reductions in
these activities is almost $180 million as shown on the
following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
fiscal year Reduction
1995 Committee bill (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Occupational Safety and
Health--OSHA........... 312.5 264.0 -48.5
(-15.5)
(OSHA enforcement)...... 145.8 98.0 -47.8
(-33)
Mine Safety and Health--
MSHA................... 200.6 185.2 -15.4
(-7.7)
Pension Welfare Benefits
Adm.................... 69.3 64.1 -5.2
(-7.5)
Employment Standards.... 273.0 247.9 -25.1
(Wage and Hour)......... 101.1 88.9 -12.2
(-12.1)
National Labor Relations
Board.................. 176.0 123.2 -52.8
(-30)
National Inst. of
Occupational Safety and
Health--NIOSH.......... 132.1 99.2 32.9
(-24.9)
Total............... 1,163.5 983.6 -179.9
(-15.5)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We strongly object to these cuts which we believe will have
the following impact:
1. Occupational safety and health.--The health and safety
of millions of workers will be adversely impacted. The
Department of Labor estimates that these cuts will result in
50,000 more workplace injuries and deaths each year. Currently
6000 Americans are injured on the job each day and these
injuries cost America more than $112 billion annually. Without
OSHA's efforts we believe that these numbers would be much
worse. Since the passage of occupational safety and health laws
25 years ago, the workplace fatality rate has declined by 57%.
Research shows unequivocally that OSHA inspections result in
fewer injuries and deaths.
2. Mine safety.--Fewer mines will be inspected exposing
more miners to injury. The mining industry which employs some
360,000 workers, remains one of the most dangerous occupations
in the world. Since 1989, 30 miners have been killed in mine
fires and explosions and another 90 have been killed in roof
cave-ins. During the last 25 years more than 50,000 miners have
died from black lung disease. Largely because of MSHA's
efforts, miners today are five times less likely to be killed
on the job. We should not reduce resources available in this
critical area.
3. Pensions.--The reductions proposed in the bill place in
jeopardy working families pensions. The Department of Labor
estimates that these cutbacks will result in pension plan
losses of at least $100 million and that the number of pension
fraud cases pursued will decline by 20%. This agency is
responsible for the oversight of 5.2 million pension plans with
over 3 trillion in assets. We should not put retirees savings
at risk.
4. Employment standards.--We believe that reductions in our
efforts to ensure fairness in the workplace by enforcing laws
such as those which prescribe child labor protections and wage
and hour standards are dangerous for American workers. As an
example the Department of Labor estimates that these reductions
will mean that $25 million in back wages owed to some 50,000
workers will not be recovered. The Employment Standards
Administration make sure that Americans get fair treatment in
the workplace--that people can take time off to care for a sick
relative or new child, that employers do not discriminate, that
minors aren't pressed into dangerous or illegal work, and that
people who work overtime get paid for it. We believe that
reductions totaling more than $25 million to this agency are
inappropriate.
5. Collective bargaining.--The 30 percent reduction
recommended in the bill for the National Labor Relations Board
is a punitive effort to restrict the agency responsible for
ensuring the rights of workers to organize and bargain
collectively. This agency was created in 1935 to bring order
and reduce violence in labor organization disputes. The effort
to gut this agency has been led by Minority Members of the
Committee who wish to punish the agency for its handling of
cases with which they have been involved personally as
advocates for private companies. The funding reductions
together with a series of restrictions on the Board's authority
to enforce the law will seriously undermine this agency and the
rights of workers.
6. NIOSH, Occupational safety and health research.--The $20
million cut in occupational safety and health research will
significantly undermine studies on critical issues such as the
toxic effects of industrial substances, hazardous contaminants,
and protective respirators used by miners and firefighters. The
Committee's recommendation to end all Federal assistance for
training of specialists in this field will cripple efforts to
protect workers in the future.
training opportunities
Training funds in bill.--The employment and training budget
at the Department of Labor is funded at a level $2.5 billion or
35% below the amount approved last year for these programs. We
believe that the $4.6 billion allocated for this purpose is
entirely inadequate given the need for essential investments to
train this country's workforce. New technologies, global
competition, and an increasingly integrated economy require an
exceptionally well trained workforce. It is clear that job-
related skills training is essential, paying off in terms of
increased productivity for industry and increased wages for
workers. Given these facts, we cannot comprehend why the
Congress should reduce funding in this critical area by more
than one-third. Such cuts will mean lost opportunities for
thousands who are striving for a better life or just to escape
welfare dependency.
Comparison with CAREERS bill.--We believe that the severe
cuts recommended in the bill will undermine efforts underway in
the authorizing Committees to restructure the Nation's
workplace development programs. We support efforts to
streamline this country's current collection of multiple
training programs. The CAREERS bill recently reported by the
Education and Economic Opportunities Committee consolidates
more than 90 programs establishing a new system that is market
driven, provides customer choice and is easily accessible. It
cannot succeed, however, if funding levels fall dramatically
below the levels contemplated by the reauthorization. The
following table shows that the funding levels included in this
appropriations bill are more than $2.5 billion below the
comparable training allocations last year and more than $1.5
billion below the levels authorized in the CAREERS bill as
reported for adult and youth training.
Adult training.--The Committee bill reduces funding for
adult training overall by 21 percent. Funding under title II-A
is set at $830 million, $225 million below the level for these
programs in the original 1995 bill. This will mean 84,000 fewer
adults will receive assistance. The Majority has justified this
reduction by saying the program doesn't work. The evidence
available to the Committee, however, shows the exact opposite.
The National JTPA Impact Evaluation shows that participants
increase earnings by 10-15% over comparable individuals who are
not trained; adult women trainees who were former AFDC
recipients earn $6,000 per year more than control groups and
earnings gains achieved as a result of training continue
throughout the lifetime of the individuals who participate.
Dislocated workers.--The second largest cut in the
Department of Labor occurs in the title III dislocated worker
program. The $850 million recommended in the bill is $446
million or 34% below the 1995 appropriations level. This means
that 193,000 workers who lose their jobs in 1996 through no
fault of their own will not receive training. Rapid
advancements in technology, defense downsizing, corporate
restructuring and intense global competition result in
structural changes necessary for economic growth. There is,
however, a human cost to this growth. The Department of Labor
estimates that 2.5 million American workers will be permanently
laid off in 1995 as a result of these forces. An example is the
recent round of Defense Department base closings announced last
month. This action alone is expected to affect 100,000 workers
who will have to switch careers. We believe that continued
investment in dislocated worker training is essential if
disruptions in the economy are to be manageable for the workers
and communities. We know this program works. 70 percent of
workers served by the program get jobs upon completion of
training and wages in their new jobs equal 92% of their
previous wages. The Inspector General has reported that workers
served by the program ``were reemployed, remained in the
workforce and regained their earning power''.
Youth training programs.--The bill reported by the Majority
makes dramatic and inappropriate reductions in Labor Department
programs serving youth. The $1,343 million recommended is 54%
below the levels recommended in the original 1995 bill. We
believe that it is unwise and unfair for the Federal government
to abandon the 800,000 youngster who will not be trained if
this is sustained.
The following graph displays the severity of the
unemployment problem for teenagers, particularly minority
teens, and the compelling case for investing more resources in
this problem:
Summer jobs.--The bill as reported completely eliminates
the Federal summer jobs program which has been Federally
financed for 30 years. This means that 615,000 youth will not
be given the opportunity next Summer to participate in the
workforce, many for the first time in their lives. Many of
these youngsters live in the inner cities or in rural areas
where private sector work opportunities are limited. The
Majority's recommendation is based on statements that the
program is ineffective. Again, as with adult program criticism,
this is not supported by analytic evidence. The Inspector
General's evaluation indicated that ``kids were closely
supervised, learned new skills they could apply in school, and
took pride in their employment.'' Other studies showed similar
positive results. There were no significant problems with
behavior, attendance or turnover. Kids and employers reported
that the work was needed and of value to the community. The
evidence indicates clearly that terminating the Summer jobs
program is a serious error. This country is in the midst of a
debate on welfare reform. For many youth, the Summer Jobs
program is their first opportunity to work and their first step
in learning the work ethic. We can't talk about moving people
from welfare to work and eliminate this program. This program
should be restored.
vulnerable populations
We object strongly to the extent of the reductions
recommended in the bill for programs which serve the most
vulnerable and the most needy in our society--the disabled, the
elderly, children, the homeless, and the poor. It targets weak
claimants rather than weak claims for the harshest cuts in
order to free-up resources to
finance tax cuts for the wealthy. During Subcommittee and Full
Committee consideration of the bill, we offered amendments to
try to ameliorate the harshest of these actions. Unfortunately
they were rejected on party line votes.
We are especially concerned by reductions in the following
areas:
Energy assistance.--The Subcommittee bill eliminates all
funding for this program which served 6.1 million households in
1994 of which one third were elderly and 25% were disabled. 80%
have income below $10,000 per year. This program is about
people who need help like the 367 deaths reported recently in
Chicago due to excessive heat. 60% of these people were
elderly. Governor Edgar released additional LIHEAP funds to try
to deal with the emergency but for many it was too late. Next
year if this bill is approved there won't be any funds to
release for cold or hot weather.
Other workers.--The Committee bill cuts funding by $46
million or 11 percent below last year's appropriation. This
will eliminate minimum wage jobs for 14,000 seniors with
incomes less than 125% of the poverty level. 70% of
participants are women. Even without this cut there are waiting
lists for these part-time jobs in every State.
Senior volunteers (RSVP & Foster Grandparent).--The
Subcommittee cuts funding for these two elderly volunteer
programs by $21 million or 15%. This affects the 23,000 Foster
Grandparents who cared for more than 80,000 disabled kids,
12,000 senior companions who kept 36,000 frail elderly in their
homes and more than 400,000 RSVP volunteers.
Other seniors programs.--The Committee bill cuts $71
million out of other senior programs. This includes $4.5
million for counseling programs to prevent rip-offs in the
Medigap insurance industry. The bill funds 12 million less
meals for the elderly at home and in centers. Senior citizen
centers lose $15 million.
Special Education.--The discretionary programs for
educating disabled students have been cut by $160 million. The
largest reduction comes from eliminating the $91 million of
Federal assistance to train teachers to work with the disabled.
13,000 students currently training to be teachers for the
handicapped would lose their Federal scholarship under the
Committee bill.
Healthy Start.--The Committee bill cuts Healthy Start
grants by more than half, from $105M to $50. This program was
started by President Bush to provide intensive efforts to lower
the infant mortality rate in communities whose rates were more
than double the National average. Many of these communities
have infant mortality rates which exceed levels in developing
countries. The program is making steady progress. As an example
Baltimore has cut its rate from 21.1 deaths per 100,000 to
14.1. This is still double the national infant death rate but
the Federal funds have saved lives. The Subcommittee reduction
will likely result in termination of 14 of the existing 22
grants. (Aberdeen, Baltimore, Birmingham, Boston, Chicago,
Cleveland, Detroit, Lake County Indiana, New Orleans, NYC,
Oakland, Phila., Pittsburgh, Wash. DC, Dallas, Essex County NJ,
Florida panhandle, Milwaukee, Mississippi Delta, Richmond,
Savannah).
Head Start.--Head Start is funded at $535 million below the
President's request and $137 million below last year. The Head
Start program is a major investment in the future of our
country. It provides essential education, health, mental
health, nutrition, and social services to 750,000 disadvantaged
preschool age children. Currently less than half of all
children eligible for the program are able to participate. This
bill will further exacerbate this problem. At the Subcommittee
level 45-50,000 children would have to be cut from current
rolls. Critical quality improvements mandated by Congress would
not take place. Head Start is a program which both Republican
and Democratic administrations have supported. It should be
expanded not cut.
Conclusion
We fear as we review the shape of this bill, that the
policies of the Majority party which are reflected in it will
make it harder for ordinary people to hold on to a middle class
life. They will make it more difficult for the disadvantaged to
get the education and training which they need to work their
way into the middle class. It will make millions of workers
more vulnerable to the whims of employers who wish to avoid the
the minimum wage, the 40 hour week, the rules of fair labor
practices, standards for a safe workplace. We are concerned
that this bill marks a retreat from our efforts to be one
people with common causes and common interests. It shuts down a
significant portion of the opportunities that people without
means have of gaining access to the rewards this country can
provide and it takes away the protections that help those in
the middle class stay there.
Surely this Congress in a bi-partisan way can do better.
The bill as currently written should be rejected and we should
start over. In the past the Labor, Health and Human Services,
and Education bill has been known as the ``people's bill''.
With hard work it can continue to earn that praise in this
Congress.
Impact on individual states.--The Minority believe that it
is important that all Members understand not only the national
impact of the reductions which are made by this bill but also
the direct effect on their States. The attached charts display
the State specific effect of the bill in selected areas where
such data is readily available. All amounts have been provided
by the Federal agencies with jurisdiction over these programs.
DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. NANCY PELOSI, HON. DAVID OBEY, HON. STENY
HOYER, HON. NITA LOWEY, AND HON. LOUIS STOKES
We, the undersigned, dissent from the provisions of the
bill regarding AIDS research at the National Institutes of
Health (NIH). The legislation fails to provide specific funding
for AIDS research and has not continued the procedure of
providing a single appropriation through the Office of AIDS
Research (OAR). Both actions are inconsistent with recent
reforms taken to strengthen our federal AIDS research program
and both actions are taken without sufficient justification.
Our concerns arise out of an appreciation for the history
of the federal AIDS research program. Because the AIDS epidemic
emerged in the U.S. after most of the institutes at NIH were
already established and because HIV manifests itself in so many
ways and acts against so many parts of the body, AIDS research
has taken place in all 24 NIH institutes, centers, and
divisions. As an infectious disease, AIDS naturally fell within
the purview of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases. As a cause of cancer, it was within the mandate of
the National Cancer Institute. As a cause of lung disease, it
has been studied by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood
Institute, and so on. But there was no AIDS institute and there
was no natural home for research on this new and complex
disease.
Moreover, since the disease arose suddenly and research
efforts were assembled without a central plan, many
individuals, groups, and labs began work on the disease because
of their background in immunology or virology, not because HIV
affected the organ system or disease that was in the name of
the institute within which they worked. There was no single
discipline or subspeciality of research that could turn its
attention to this new and multi-faceted syndrome.
The result of this history was the creation of a portfolio
of AIDS research without an authoritative central reviewing
process, without a comprehensive plan for the use of resources,
and without a method for evaluating research performance and
results. While individual research projects have produced
significant results and insights, there have been problems in
the overall structure of the AIDS program, including omission
of important areas of research, duplication of efforts, and a
lack of priority-setting for the use of limited funds.
In retrospect, perhaps everyone can agree that, if the
Congress had known what everyone now knows, it should have
created a National Institute on AIDS. The planning and
coordination that comes with such an institute structure is
what has been clearly missing until very recently.
Having not created a National Institute on AIDS in the
early 80's, the Congress found itself in the early 90's with a
dilemma: Research was ongoing in every location without
sufficient planning and coordination, but there was significant
resistance among scientists to uprooting and reconfiguring
ongoing projects and collaborations. Moreover, the NIH found
itself with a portfolio of research funding requests that had
not been ordered by priority or by research opportunity but
rather had simply grown within existing institutes, isolated
one from another.
With that in mind, the Congress created an ``institute
without walls'' by significantly strengthening the Office of
AIDS Research in the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993. After much
discussion, debate, and compromise, the authorizing committees
created a mechanism which had the advantages of an institute
structure without the disadvantages of having to move
scientists, break up research teams and labs, or recreate
review committees. The OAR was intended to be--and has
functioned as--the best of both worlds: consolidation for
better budgeting and planning, diffusion for better research
and collaboration.
The Act charged the OAR Director with developing a
Comprehensive Plan and Budget for all AIDS research conducted
by the 24 NIH institutes and directed that the OAR receive and
distribute all funds appropriated to the NIH for AIDS research
in accordance with the plan. The annual plan is developed
through a unique process involving broad representation of the
scientific community, in collaboration with all individual
institutes, and linked with the AIDS budget. The rationale for
a consolidated budget and appropriation rests on fundamental
management principles that link budgeting with planning.
The authorizing committees did not arrive at this solution
alone. Recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences,
scientific review groups, and AIDS advocates almost all pointed
in the same direction. While some general biomedical research
organizations were initially trouble by questions of timing of
implementation, participation in planning, and predictability
of funding streams, significant concessions and compromises
were made during the process and final support for the bill was
broad and bipartisan.
All evidence is that the OAR is working well and as
intended. Administrators agree, including the Director of the
NIH, who has repeatedly expressed his preference for a single
appropriation through OAR. Researchers agree, including both
funded and non-funded scientists. And advocates agree,
including some of those who have been most critical of the
government's response to date.
The OAR is now conducting the first comprehensive
scientific peer review of the entire NIH AIDS research program.
The review involves over 100 scientists, including Nobel
laureates and members of the National Academy of Sciences. It
will help scientists examine areas of overlap and gaps in the
AIDS research program, weaknesses of structure, and methods of
economizing and supporting research. The single appropriation
provides only mechanism to assure the implementation of the
recommendations of this review across the institutes.
The OAR process is only now being fully implemented. All
tangible evidence is that it is working as intended. Only an
extraordinary reason should be allowed to interrupt this
process mid-stream, but the Committee is doing so for no valid
reason whatsoever.
The Committee maintains that it is acting in an effort to
eliminate ``earmarks'' for disease-specific research. We are
also opposed to disease-specific earmarks, but we consider the
use of a single appropriation for the Office of AIDS Research
to be no more an earmark than a single appropriation for the
National Cancer Institute. The Congress arrived at the
``institute without walls'' not as an earmark, but out of a
recognition that for better budgeting and management decisions
an institute-like structure was needed. For the Committee now,
in the name of ending earmarks, to eliminate this distinct
budget would weaken the management for AIDS research, and would
leave all observers and participants without the simplest
benchmarks.
We have the highest respect for the courageous men and
women working at the NIH and at academic research centers
around the country who have devoted their lives to vanquishing
this disease, in spite of the scientific and bureaucratic
obstacles that stand in their way. We hope that the Congress
will realize that continuing the procedure of providing a
single appropriation through the Office of AIDS Research is in
the best interest of a strong national AIDS research program.
Because AIDS remains a national and world-wide priority, a
robust, efficient, and well-managed research program is vital
if we are to develop treatments, vaccines, and a cure for this
deadly disease and end the vast burdens the AIDS epidemic
imposes on our Nation. We pray for the day when the epidemic
can be said to be over. This bill must help speed that day.
Nita Lowey.
Steny Hoyer.
Nancy Pelosi.
Louis Stokes.
David Obey.
DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. NITA M. LOWEY, AND HON. SIDNEY YATES, HON.
LOUIS STOKES, HON. CHARLES WILSON, HON. NORMAN DICKS, HON. MARTIN SABO,
HON. JULIAN DIXON, HON. VIC FAZIO, HON. STENY HOYER, HON. RONALD
COLEMAN, HON. JIM CHAPMAN, HON. DAVID SKAGGS, HON. NANCY PELOSI, HON.
EDWARD VISCLOSKY, AND HON. EDWARD TORRES
We, the undersigned, dissent from the provisions in the
bill which prohibit the funding of certain activities related
to women's reproductive health. These provisions eliminate
Medicaid coverage for abortion services for victims of rape and
incest, prohibit accreditation committees from requiring that
educational curriculum for obstetricians and gynecologists
contain training in abortion techniques, and ban research on
early stage human embryos that could lead to advancements in
the fights against infertility, genetic disease and birth
defects. Furthermore, the bill eliminates Title X family
planning services for low income women. These provisions put
the health and welfare of American women and their families at
risk.
First, we are deeply concerned by the provision in the bill
that only obligates a state to provide Medicaid coverage for
abortion services in the case of life endangerment of the
mother. This provision is a drastic change from existing law,
embodied in the Hyde Amendment, which dictates that states must
provide Medicaid coverage for abortion services in the cases of
life endangerment, rape and incest. Although the new provision
is theoretically about state's rights, its intent is clearly to
deny abortion services to the most vulnerable in our society--
victims of rape and incest.
Under current law, states do not have a right to pick and
choose which procedures they will cover under Medicaid.
Although a state's participation is voluntary, once a state
chooses to participate it must comply with all federal
statutory and regulatory requirements. The issue is not one of
states' rights, but of the rights of indigent victims of rape
and incest to decide not to carry the children of the men who
assaulted them.
In addition, some have suggested that the Hyde amendment
left open a question of whether states had to provide abortion
services to victims of rape and incest. This is simply not the
case. Since the 1993 statute change, three federal appellate
courts and federal district courts in 10 states have rejected
challenges brought by states that did not want to comply with
the rape and incest language. Also, Supreme Court Justice
Antonin Scalia, an abortion opponent, refused to stay an order
to a state to pay for abortion services for victims of rape and
incest. The reason for his refusal was that the law was clear
that states were obligated to pay. The new provision in the
bill does not clarify existing law, it changes it.
Second, we are also concerned about the provision that
would bar organizations like the Accreditation Council on
Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) from dispensing requirements
for medical schools and training programs that include training
in abortion techniques. This provision is an unprecedented
interference by the federal government into the decision making
processes of a private organization.
These guidelines ware implemented to insure that doctors
are qualified to protect the health and save the lives of
American women. Basic women's health care includes the full
range of reproductive health services. It is unconscionable
that this body would interfere with a decision that insures
that doctors are fully capable of serving all the medical needs
of our nation's women. The guidelines currently contain a
conscience clause that allows both individuals and institutions
to opt not to participate.
In addition, this provision would circumvent members of the
medical community who are empowered to make decisions about the
content of graduate medical education in our nation. In
essence, this provision replaces the medical expertise of the
medical experts who sit on the ACGME with the medical expertise
of the lawyers and business people who sit in Congress. We
refer our colleagues to a recent letter that the American
Medical Association sent to Congressman Hoekstra regarding his
bill to alter the ACMGE's abortion training requirements, which
said:
The AMA strongly opposes any precedent which would
compromise professional responsibility to develop and
uphold educational standards by which these programs
are evaluated, should not be subject to federal or
state legislative initiatives, and not politicized by
governmental regulation.
We agree that the Congress should not insert itself into
the determination of the details of an educational curriculum
in this manner.
Third, we are concerned about the provision of this bill
that bans all federal funds for human embryo research. This
provision goes much further than President Clinton's current
policy, which only prohibits federal funds for the creation of
human embryos for research purposes. We feel that the
President's is the wiser policy, and that the current provision
will deprive the American people of the medical advancements
that such research would provide.
Early stage embryo research involves examining how cells
develop and divide once sperm and egg meet and form an embryo.
This research could lead to advancements in the prevention of
pregnancy loss and infertility, the diagnois and treatment of
genetic disease, the prevention of birth defects, and the
prevention and detection of childhood and other cancers.
The embryos used in the research are donated by couples who
have undergone medical fertility treatments that involve the
fertilization of a number of embryos outside of the womb. Once
fertilized, some embryos are returned to the womb with hopes
that a pregnancy will result. The remaining embryos are stored
for later use. When a couple no longer needs or wishes to
continue storing the embryos, they can donate these ``spares''
to research. The spares would otherwise be discarded.
A recent panel appointed by the National Institutes of
Health recently issued stringent guidelines for this research.
Ironically, a ban on all federal funding would segregate this
research into private laboratories, which are not subject to
any set scientific or ethical guidelines. The panel concluded
that carefully guided early-embryo research can benefit
millions of people and is worthy of federal support.
Lastly, we are deeply concerned that the Committee voted to
approve an amendment which eliminates funding for the Title X
Family Planning program. There are many members who serve on
this Committee who disagree about the right to choose. However,
it is extremely frustrating that we could not work together to
support a program to prevent unwanted pregnancies and
abortions. Title X does not fund abortions; it is prohibited by
law from doing so.
The elimination of Title X family planning funds from the
bill will compromise the health of millions of American women,
particularly the working poor who lack either private insurance
or Medicaid coverage. Last year's appropriation of $193 million
enabled clinics to provide services to more that 4 million
clients in over 4,000 cities.
Title X sets the national framework for the delivery of
complete family planning services. The program began with wide
bi-partisan support. Its lead co-sponsors, 25 years ago, were
President George bush as a Republican Congressman from Texas
and Rep. James Scheuer, Democrat of New York. It was signed
into law by President Nixon.
Title X is cost-effective. Family planning services prevent
unintended and teenage pregnancies and thus avert the need for
abortions. However, eliminating Title X affects more than the
availability of family planning services. Title X clinics
provide additional health care services to women such as pap
smears and exams for cervical and breast cancer.
Earlier this year, the House passed the Personal
Responsibility Act, which stated that the ``reduction of out-
of-wedlock births is an important government interest.'' It is
contradictory to aim to decrease out-of-wedlock births but
eliminate the centerpiece of the nations family planning
efforts.
We are deeply concerned about the way in which women's
reproductive health is jeopardized by this bill. Millions of
American women and their families will be directly impacted.
Sidney R. Yates.
Norm Dicks.
Esteban E. Torres.
Julian Dixon.
Vic Fazio.
Charles Wilson.
Steny Hoyer.
Jim Chapman.
Nita Lowey.
Peter J. Visclosky.
Martin O. Sabo.
Nancy Pelosi.
David Skaggs.
Ron Coleman.
Louis Stokes.
SEPARATE VIEWS OF HON. DAVID E. SKAGGS
This bill has many serious shortcomings, including severe
reductions in funding for many programs that are of great
importance to people throughout our society.
But this bill should be rejected by the House if for no
other reason because of its heavy-handed provisions to curtail
political advocacy, designed to intimidate recipients of
federal grants, and associates of such recipients, from
exercising their constitutional right to free expression of
political views and their right to petition their government.
While supporters claim these provisions are intended merely
to keep federal dollars from being used to lobby the federal
government, in fact they would have much greater reach--using
the long arm of the federal government to fundamentally
restructure the ability of universities, research
organizations, non-profits, and their employees and suppliers,
to communicate with policy-makers and to participate in the
political life of America.
This is a ``Big Brother'' proposal that would bring about
creation of a national data base of political activity--
covering everything from communications to contributions made
by individual citizens--managed by the United States
government. All individuals and organizations falling under the
reporting terms of the amendment would have to file annually an
itemized statement of political activity with the Federal
government. Sound like ``1984''?
Enactment of these provisions would mean that we would soon
face a new section in many employment forms and purchase
orders, necessitated by the accounting regime imposed by the
amendment, in which the question would be: ``Are you now, or in
the last five years have you, engaged in lobbying or political
activity of any kind? If the answer is `yes,' complete schedule
D, itemizing the type and date of such activity, the amount you
spent on the activity, and the percentage of your annual income
devoted to all such political activity expenditures.'' Sound
like 1953?
The provisions not only prohibit direct use of federal
grants funds for political advocacy,\1\ but prohibit any grant
to an entity which has exceed something called a ``political
advocacy threshold'' for any of the preceding five years. So,
the provisions would restrict political expression using even
the grantee's private resources and even for years in which no
federal grant was involved.\2\
\1\ Section 1(a)(1) of amendment as offered in Committee. All
citations are to sections of the amendment.
\2\ Section 1(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A guarantee would also be prohibited from doing business of
any sort with any other person or entity which has spent more
than 15% of his/its budget on ``political advocacy'' during the
preceding year, at penalty of having any such expenditure count
as if it were the grantee's own ``political advocacy.'' \3\ To
comply with this provision, a grantee would have to require all
employees and every person with whom the grantee does business
to disclose their political activities and expenditures. In
other words, the provisions not only seek to control the
political activity of the grantee, but all persons with whom
the grantee does business.
\3\ Section 1(a)(4) and 1(c)(1)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidentally, all calculations of these thresholds are to
be based on the federal fiscal year.\4\ So, if grantees, or the
persons with whom a grantee is doing business, happen to have a
different fiscal year (as most do), they will have to convert
their books to the federal year to determine compliance.
\4\ Section 1(a)(2),(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The provisions have another Big Brother feature--the burden
of proof regarding compliance with these limits on so-called
``political advocacy.'' This feature is particularly troubling
because the provisions place limits on activities of a grantee
of the type that are protected under the First Amendment. While
it usually falls to the government to prove that someone has
done something wrong (an approach consistent with the
presumption of innocence), here the bill provides that the
burden of proof will be on the grantee to establish that he's
done everything right! \5\ And, as if that weren't enough,
under these provisions the grantee must carry that burden of
proof, not by the usual standard of civil law, a preponderance
of the evidence, but rather by the far more exacting and
difficult standard of clear and convincing evidence, a standard
usually reserved for extraordinary matters such as punitive
damages.
\5\ Section 1(b)(1) (C)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This burden of proof is all the more objectionable when
coupled with a further provision, discussed below, that would
allow private citizens to sue a grantee and split treble
damages with the government.\6\
\6\ Section 1(b)(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To understand the full import of the bill's restrictions,
we must consider the question, what is ``political advocacy''?
For all practical purposes, its definition encompasses all
manner of communication and conduct normally protected by the
First Amendment: engaging in publicity, making contributions
(cash or in-kind), campaigning, distributing statements,
participating in litigation, challenging a government agency
action, and so on, whenever the objective is getting someone
elected or defeated, or exerting some influence on government
policy or decisions at any level--state, local, or federal.\7\
There are several exceptions: a grantee can respond to a
government's written request for technical assistance, or make
available the results of ``nonpartisan analysis, study,
research,'' or communicate with its own members (provided that
any such communication is not designed to encourage the members
themselves to engage in any political advocacy).\8\
\7\ Section 1(c)(1), (2)
\8\ Section 1(c)(1)(B), (C)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The disclosure requirements of this part of the bill are
likely to have an especially onerous and intimidating effect. A
grantee that engages in any political advocacy must file with
its grant-making agency each year a certified statement,
describing all its political advocacy activities, listing the
name and ID number of any person with whom it spent any grant
funds, and estimating the amount spent on advocacy and the
amount of the grantee's prohibited political advocacy
threshold. The bill also provides that each grant-making agency
will then send all these disclosure statements to the Census
Bureau, where they'll be collated and put out on the Internet.
Enforcement of the limits on political advocacy will occur
through GAO or IG audits,\9\ through False Claims Act
investigations by the grant-making agency, False Claims Act
civil actions brought by the Attorney General, and, as
mentioned above, by private lawsuits brought under the so-
called ``private attorney general'' provisions of the False
Claims Act.\10\ (The lengthy and detailed provisions of the
False Claims Act are incorporated by reference into this part
of the bill.)
\9\ Section 1(b)(1)
\10\ Section 1(b)(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
That means a grantee could face liability under the False
Claim Act for a penalty of $10,000, plus up to three times the
amount of the grant, for submitting a false statement in
support of a claim--in this context, a grant--if the grantee
``acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the
information''.\11\ That might sound reasonable, until one
recalls the provisions concerning the burden of proof regarding
compliance--the grantee must show compliance by clear and
convincing evidence. Absent some clarification, it appears that
this burden of proof is to be transposed into the False Claims
Act. So, if this part of the bill were to become law, we would
be faced with the bizarre prospect that a zealous private
citizen could sue a grantee for treble damages, alleging that
the grantee's annual certification of political advocacy was
false, and thus put the grantee to the task of proving the
negative, which is tough enough to do under any circumstances,
let alone under the requirement that the proof be by clear and
convincing evidence.
\11\ 31 U.S.C. 3729(b)(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the potentially perverse effects of this part of
this bill can be no better illustrated than by its application
to a hypothetical, but typical, set of facts involving an NSF
research grant. The grantee would likely be a university
professor, heading a research team of several colleagues, post-
doc fellows, graduate students, and lab assistants. They would
purchase lab equipment and supplies from several companies.
Now under the bill's restrictions, the professor could have
spent no more than 5% of his own income on political activity
for the previous five years. Heaven only knows how he would be
supposed to deal with the political expenditures of his
independently wealthy and activist wife, assuming they file a
joint return. Meanwhile, he would have to have his entire
research team and all the lab equipment and supply firms
complete the questionnaire I mentioned earlier and account for
their political activity. Again, what if one if them should
have been so enthusiastic about civic responsibilities that he
spent over 15% of his income on political advocacy that year?
Presumably, he's off the team. Or, what if the same facts
applied to the company that's the only source of an essential
piece of equipment? There goes the project. And, of course, if
any of these folks did even a little political advocacy, that
would have to be disclosed and reported to NSF, which would
have to report it to the Census Bureau, which would make sure
that the information about the political activity of the
professor and his team was as near as the Internet.
Is there any doubt that academic freedom, and freedom of
expression more generally, is put at grave risk by all this?
Would anyone in the House like to try to explain to the
colleges in his or her district how we could endorse such a
Rube Goldberg contraption, especially one so patently
unconstitutional?
No doubt, there have been some transgressions, some misuse
of federal grant money to push what some consider a biased
political agenda. But for many of those, these provisions would
constitute capital punishment for a misdemeanor. And for all
the vast majority of federal grant recipients who've tried to
work in good faith for the national interest, this part of the
bill would be a slaughter of the innocents.
I'm embarrassed to have to be associated with such a sorry
idea as this part of this bill even long enough to argue and
vote against it. However else this bill may be improved, if
these provisions are retained the bill should not become law.
David E. Skaggs.
DISSENTING VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE LOUIS STOKES
The callous actions taken by the majority leadership--
making life-threatening funding cuts in critical quality of
life programs in order to provide a tax cut for the wealthy,
and to increase defense spending well above the increase
recommended by the administration--is unconscionable and
inhumane. To make matters worse, the leadership forces two of
the 13 appropriations subcommittees, the Labor-HHS-ED and VA-
HUD subcommittees to absorb the bulk of the 602(b) cuts. These
are the same two subcommittees that were hit with the bulk of
the rescission cuts. The 602(b) allocation for the FY 1996
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education
and Related Agencies Appropriations bill is $9 billion, or 13
percent below the FY 1995 allocation.
Throughout the history of the subcommittee, the Labor-HHS-
ED bill has been proudly referred to as the ``people's bill''
in recognition of its responsiveness to the needs of the
American people. In an unprecedented action, the Republican
leadership has converted the measure into an attack weapon
designed to launch a calculated and concentrated assault on the
most vulnerable in our society--children, the elderly, and
families.
While some of the cuts can be justified, far too many of
them will create critical quality of life problems. In its
current state, the Labor-HHS-ED majority's bill deprives
families of the programs and services that have allowed them to
achieve the American dream--including employment training,
education, and health care services. As a result, their
standard of living and quality of life is threatened.
EDUCATION
The 16 percent, or $4 billion, cut in education programs
under the auspices of the Department of Education threatens
students' academic achievement, safety, teacher development,
parental involvement, and education technology. Nearly 70
percent of the cut is taken in elementary and secondary
education programs. The $1.1 billion cut in Title I
concentration grants means that more than one million
educationally disadvantaged students would be deprived of the
academic assistance they require, especially in reading and
math. These children would be denied the help they need to
achieve the same high academic standards as other children.
With accountability based on improved student learning, the
Title I program helps parents, teachers, and community leaders
improve their schools.
While 94 percent of the Nation's schools, or 39 million
students, depend on the Safe and Drug-Free Schools program to
provide the resources they need to help remove guns, drugs and
violence from the classroom, funding for the program is cut by
$266 million, or nearly 60 percent below the current funding
level.
Funding for Goals 2000 is eliminated. This action
undermines what was once a bipartisan effort to ensure the
development of goals, standards, accountability, and
innovations in education across the nation. Federal efforts
underway in 47 states and hundreds of communities across the
country to raise academic standards, to increase students
performance, and to enhance parental participation in education
would be terminated. The magnet schools program also suffers a
devastating reduction, funding is cut $17 million below the
current funding level.
With respect to higher education, funding is drastically
reduced including that the Perkins loans, Howard and Gallaudet
Universities, and state student incentive grants.
Critical funding cuts are made in a number of other
education and related programs as well including scholarship
and fellowship programs, special education, vocational and
adult education, teacher development and in libraries.
LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT TRAINING
In overall discretionary programs, the cut for the
Department of Labor is 24 percent, or $2.7 billion below the FY
1995 appropriation level. Within the labor account, youth
employment and training programs are hardest hit. Funding for
the summer jobs program is eliminated denying jobs to over
600,000 young people who need and want to work. The youth
employment training program is gutted. Funding is cut
approximately 80 percent below the FY 1995 appropriation level
depriving young people of the training and skills they need to
successfully compete in the job market.
Adult employment opportunities also suffer critical funding
cuts. While CBO data projects that 2.5 million workers will be
permanently laid-off in 1995, and another 2.4 million in 1996,
funding for the dislocated workers program is cut 34 percent,
or $446 million below the FY 1995 appropriations level. This
means that 194 thousand fewer workers would be helped. Funding
for the adult employment training program is cut $167 million
below the rescission level. This means that nearly 80,000 fewer
adults would be able to receive the job training assistance
they need.
Drastic cuts are also made in community service employment
for older Americans, unemployment insurance, employment
service, veterans employment and training, and in the school-
to-work initiative. Worker protections are also abandoned with
critical funding reductions made in the employment standards
administration, OSHA, Mine Safety, and the National Labor
Relations Board.
HUMAN SERVICES/HEALTH
The elimination of funding for the low income home energy
assistance program means that nearly 6 million families will no
longer have the heating and cooling assistance they need. By
denying the elderly energy assistance, they will be forced to
choose between health care and heating, or food and heating, or
housing and heating. Drastic cuts are also made in a number of
other programs which are vital to elderly citizens including
preventive health, pension and medicare counseling, congregate
meals, and home-delivered meals. With respect to the nutrition
programs, the majority's action would result in 6.2 million
fewer congregate meals being served, and 5.6 million fewer
home-delivered meals.
The $55 million, or over 50 percent, cut in the healthy
start program means that up to 14, or over 60 percent, of the
existing healthy start projects would be terminated. Over one
million women would be denied the comprehensive prenatal and
other health care, social and support services they need. The
Nation's efforts to combat infant mortality at a time when
progress is just beginning to be made in addressing this
national health problem would be devastated. With respect to
Head Start, the $137 million cut means that nearly 50 thousand
fewer children will be served. Funding for family planning is
completely eliminated.
Other drastic cuts include funding for Food and Nutrition
and other community services, Health Prevention, Services for
the Homeless, Rural Health Services, Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services, the Office of the Surgeon General, and the
agency for health care policy.
The absurdities do not stop here. The majority leadership
has delegated authorizing powers to the appropriations
committee, as such the bill includes major authorizing
legislation. Liberties taken range from abolishing the office
of the U.S. Surgeon General, to restricting women's rights, to
dedicating the limits of political advocacy, to denying worker
protections. Such an abuse of power is a blatant insult to the
American people.
This is just a cross-section of the GOP targeted assault.
It is absolutely essential for the American people to be
mindful that the majority on the committee repeatedly voted
against measures to even partially restore some of the funding
cuts that they made in critical quality of life programs that
the American people utilize to improve their standard of
living. There is no excuse for the majority's callous and
blatant disregard for children, the elderly, and families. The
GOP's actions do not even make good economic sense, and will
devastate the economy and the lives of millions of hard working
Americans. On behalf of the American people, the Labor-HHS-ED
measure must be corrected, and if it is not, it must be
defeated. This we must do for the sake of our children and the
Nation.
Louis Stokes, MC