LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Emergency Reform Act, which will put in place guidelines for the release of LIHEAP contingency funds.

The LIHEAP program, created in 1981, is the primary vehicle by which the Federal Government, through block grants to States, provides energy assistance to low-income families. I applaud the provisions contained in pending energy legislation that will raise the LIHEAP authorization from $2 billion to $3.4 billion for Fiscal Years 2004 through 2006. As in most parts of the country, demand for LIHEAP dollars far outpaces the supply in my home State of Washington, where, even when fully funded under the current authorization, only 19 percent of eligible families receive home energy assistance.

The legislation I'm introducing today, however, deals not with the

block-grant portion of the current program, in which allocations to States are determined via formula. Rather, it applies to the contingency fund, which was also authorized in 1981 ``to meet the additional home energy assistance needs of one or more States arising from a natural disaster or other emergency.'' As my colleagues are aware, this money is not released according to formula but solely at the discretion of the Health and Human Services Secretary.

The LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act does four things, designed to provide clarity to States that are in the unfortunate position of suffering from an emergency, as defined in the LIHEAP statute. My legislation: gives Governors the explicit authority to apply to the HHS Secretary for the release of LIHEAP contingency funds; adds transparency to the release of emergency money by directing HHS, in cooperation with the States and Department of Energy, to put in place procedures for the equitable consideration of these applications; requires HHS to include in these procedures the consideration of regional differences in sources of energy supply for low-income households, relative energy price trends and relevant weather-related factors such as drought; and finally, directs HHS to grant States' applications within 30 days unless the Secretary certifies that an emergency, as defined in the statute, has not been demonstrated.

Since 1990, a total of $2.67 billion in LIHEAP contingency funds have been distributed. And while there is no doubt in my mind that, in all cases, this money has helped meet the needs of low-income families across this Nation, I believe there have also been widely varying eligibility rules leading to instances in which HHS has overlooked very real energy emergencies.

In the Pacific Northwest, for example, we have over the past two years suffered from an unprecedented rise in retail energy rates, the burden of which has fallen disproportionately on low-income families. In fact, today, Washington State families at or below the 50 percent Federal poverty level spend 34 percent or more of their annual income on home energy bills. That is a huge burden, especially in view of our rising unemployment rate and the severe downturn in our economy.

Unfortunately, Northwest States have not received emergency LIHEAP funds consistent with their needs. In part, I believe this is because of the perception that our rates will, notwithstanding any increases we might suffer, always be lower, and because this money has traditionally been used to defray the costs of natural gas and home heating oil in the Midwest and Northeast.

This legislation requires HHS to consider regional factors such as the fact that home heating oil prices are not relevant to Washington State's low-income families, 77 percent of which have homes reliant on electricity.

In addition, it directs HHS to consider regional rather than absolute, price trends. This is a very important point, because, regardless of how low a State's prices might be compared to its neighbor's, a drastic run up in rates has devastating impacts when its manufacturing base, residential homes and truly its entire economy are built upon access to an affordable power supply.

In summary, LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act provides additional certainty to states across the country.

I understand that the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee will soon consider legislation to reauthorize the LIHEAP program. As my colleagues may recall, the provisions of the LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act were originally included in the Senate energy bill, now the subject of conference committee deliberations. During floor debate on that bill, I was pleased that the distinguished Chairman and Ranking Member of the HELP Committee, Senators Gregg and Kennedy, agreed to examine the contingency fund issue during reauthorization of the LIHEAP program. I believe that clear rules for the release of LIHEAP contingency funds will ensure that, in the unfortunate event of an energy emergency, low-income families will receive much-needed assistance in keeping the lights and the heat turned on, which is precisely what Congress intends when it appropriates money to the LIHEAP contingency fund. I believe the LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act will help provide this additional certainty.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Emergency Reform Act, which will put in place guidelines for the release of LIHEAP contingency funds.

The LIHEAP program, created in 1981, is the primary vehicle by which the Federal Government, through block grants to States, provides energy assistance to low-income families. I applaud the provisions contained in pending energy legislation that will raise the LIHEAP authorization from $2 billion to $3.4 billion for Fiscal Years 2004 through 2006. As in most parts of the country, demand for LIHEAP dollars far outpaces the supply in my home State of Washington, where, even when fully funded under the current authorization, only 19 percent of eligible families receive home energy assistance.

The legislation I'm introducing today, however, deals not with the

block-grant portion of the current program, in which allocations to States are determined via formula. Rather, it applies to the contingency fund, which was also authorized in 1981 ``to meet the additional home energy assistance needs of one or more States arising from a natural disaster or other emergency.'' As my colleagues are aware, this money is not released according to formula but solely at the discretion of the Health and Human Services Secretary.

The LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act does four things, designed to provide clarity to States that are in the unfortunate position of suffering from an emergency, as defined in the LIHEAP statute. My legislation: gives Governors the explicit authority to apply to the HHS Secretary for the release of LIHEAP contingency funds; adds transparency to the release of emergency money by directing HHS, in cooperation with the States and Department of Energy, to put in place procedures for the equitable consideration of these applications; requires HHS to include in these procedures the consideration of regional differences in sources of energy supply for low-income households, relative energy price trends and relevant weather-related factors such as drought; and finally, directs HHS to grant States' applications within 30 days unless the Secretary certifies that an emergency, as defined in the statute, has not been demonstrated.

Since 1990, a total of $2.67 billion in LIHEAP contingency funds have been distributed. And while there is no doubt in my mind that, in all cases, this money has helped meet the needs of low-income families across this Nation, I believe there have also been widely varying eligibility rules leading to instances in which HHS has overlooked very real energy emergencies.

In the Pacific Northwest, for example, we have over the past two years suffered from an unprecedented rise in retail energy rates, the burden of which has fallen disproportionately on low-income families. In fact, today, Washington State families at or below the 50 percent Federal poverty level spend 34 percent or more of their annual income on home energy bills. That is a huge burden, especially in view of our rising unemployment rate and the severe downturn in our economy.

Unfortunately, Northwest States have not received emergency LIHEAP funds consistent with their needs. In part, I believe this is because of the perception that our rates will, notwithstanding any increases we might suffer, always be lower, and because this money has traditionally been used to defray the costs of natural gas and home heating oil in the Midwest and Northeast.

This legislation requires HHS to consider regional factors such as the fact that home heating oil prices are not relevant to Washington State's low-income families, 77 percent of which have homes reliant on electricity.

In addition, it directs HHS to consider regional rather than absolute, price trends. This is a very important point, because, regardless of how low a State's prices might be compared to its neighbor's, a drastic run up in rates has devastating impacts when its manufacturing base, residential homes and truly its entire economy are built upon access to an affordable power supply.

In summary, LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act provides additional certainty to states across the country.

I understand that the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee will soon consider legislation to reauthorize the LIHEAP program. As my colleagues may recall, the provisions of the LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act were originally included in the Senate energy bill, now the subject of conference committee deliberations. During floor debate on that bill, I was pleased that the distinguished Chairman and Ranking Member of the HELP Committee, Senators Gregg and Kennedy, agreed to examine the contingency fund issue during reauthorization of the LIHEAP program. I believe that clear rules for the release of LIHEAP contingency funds will ensure that, in the unfortunate event of an energy emergency, low-income families will receive much-needed assistance in keeping the lights and the heat turned on, which is precisely what Congress intends when it appropriates money to the LIHEAP contingency fund. I believe the LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act will help provide this additional certainty.

Mr. President, today Senator DeWine and I have introduced legislation that will help level the playing field for American manufacturers futilely struggling to keep pace with their Chinese competitors. My legislation, the Currency Harmonization Initiative Through Neutralizing Action (CHINA) Act of 2003, would allow for the use of tariffs to punish China for unfair trade practices that makes Chinese exports cheaper, in effect subsidizing them, and U.S. exports more expensive. Representatives English, Ballenger, and Mark Green, my colleagues on the other side of the Capitol, have already introduced this legislation in that body.

I am deeply concerned with the harm that the People's Republic of China (China) is doing to our economy by pegging the value of its currency, the renminbi, to the U.S. dollar because Ohio is a manufacturing State. Manufacturing contributes to the quality of life in Ohio by providing more than one million jobs for Ohio workers, an annual payroll of more than $45 billion, the second highest weekly earnings of any economic sector, support for local communities and schools with more than $1 billion in corporate franchise and personal property taxes, and more than $26 billion in products to more than 196 countries.

After a significant recession in 2001, the 2002-2003 manufacturing recovery has been the slowest on record; during this time, roughly 2.7 million jobs have been lost. In Ohio, we have lost 170,000 manufacturing jobs since July 2000--that's nearly 16 percent or one out of six. Over the past year, I have held numerous listening sessions throughout the State of Ohio to hear from these manufacturers and see what they attribute this loss of jobs to. Overwhelming, I have heard that China, and particularly its policy of pegging its currency to the dollar, is one of their top concerns and is costing Ohio manufacturing jobs. It is these concerns which have led me to introduce this legislation.

If the value of the renminbi is allowed to float freely, as the currencies of our other major trading partners do, it would reflect China's enormous trade surplus and increase significantly in value. China's systematic undervaluation of its currency makes its exports less expensive and puts U.S. workers at a severe disadvantage. This is both unfair and unacceptable.

I have long advocated free trade, provided it is fair trade. China's currency policy clearly tilts the international playing field against workers in Ohio and across the entire United states. This is unacceptable. As a major international trading nation, China's currency should be allowed to float and to have its value reflect its net trade positions with other nations. This is only fair.

My bill will help level the playing field by requiring the Secretary of the Treasury, within sixty days of enactment, to analyze and report to Congress whether China is manipulating its currency to achieve an advantage in trade. If the Secretary finds manipulation, the report to Congress will indicate the degree of manipulation against the dollar. Within thirty days after reporting manipulation to Congress, the Secretary is required to levy tariffs equal to the percentage of manipulation found. This is in addition to tariffs currently in place on Chinese imports.

Furthermore, the Treasury Secretary is directed to report to Congress thereafter on a yearly basis from date of enactment. Finally, the legislation expresses the sense of Congress that the Administration should pursue all means available (WTO, IMF and Sections 301-310 of the Trade ACt of 1974) to remedy China's currency manipulation.

If we are to stop the hemorrhaging of American manufacturing jobs, we must take strong measures to persuade China to abandon its peg policy and allow its currency to be set in the free and open marketplace. This is exactly what my legislation does.

I would ask that my colleagues, especially from those States that are feeling the effects of this manufacturing crisis deeply, support this legislation and consider cosponsoring it.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Government Affairs Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1761 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements regarding the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill I introduce today to amend title 35, U.S. Code, to modernize patent and trademark fees, be printed in the Record.