Women's Business Center Safeguard Act

Mr. President, today I join my colleague, Senator Snowe, chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, in passing legislation to safeguard Women's Business Centers funded through the Small Business Administration. This legislation is identical to the Women's Business Center provision I introduced as part of S. 2186, the SBA Emergency Authorization Extension Act of 2004, on March 9, 2004, and it fixes a funding gap that exists for meritorious Women's Business Centers that are graduating from the first stage of the program and entering the sustainability portion.

I would first like to thank Chair Snowe for working very closely with me on this issue, as we have for the past year and a half. Senator Snowe has long been an advocate of the Women's Business Centers and was a cosponsor of the original legislation that created the sustainability pilot program in 1999. Now, her support for continuing the nationwide network of Women's Business Centers has been the catalyst for success in the Senate. I commend Chair Snowe for her strong leadership for women in business across this country. I would also like to thank all of the cosponsors of this legislation and of S. 2266, all of whom have shown resounding support for women entrepreneurs and recognize the positive impact the Women's Business Centers have on promoting and supporting women in business and on strengthening our national economy.

Second, I want to comment on the Bush administration's proposals to eliminate experienced, efficient, and effective Women's Business Centers in favor of new and untested centers. Unless this legislation can be enacted quickly, the administration will move forward with its proposal, which places in jeopardy experienced Women's Business Centers in 39 States and eliminates assistance for thousands of women in business. While, as this bill demonstrates, I support opening new centers to help women entrepreneurs who do not currently have access to this important assistance, this should

only occur when the existing centers, whether in their initial or a later funding period, are fully funded. Women entrepreneurs and their businesses are critically important to our economy and to U.S. job creation, and Women's Business Centers help them succeed. Passing S. 2267 today will send a strong message to the House of Representatives that time is of the essence with respect to this important program, and I hope the House leadership will allow immediate passage of this measure when they are next in session.

I would also like to express my dismay that, despite bipartisan support from members of this committee, the Republican majority has opposed helping women entrepreneurs and blocked the provisions of this bill from being included in the two extensions of all SBA programs that have already passed the Senate. Those who favor blocking enactment of these provisions in hopes of closing the most experienced existing Women's Business Centers are potentially depriving thousands of women in business access to much needed assistance. This bill is a bipartisan compromise intended to maintain an effective Women's Business Center network throughout this fiscal year--a compromise that was agreed to by Chair Snowe, myself, and the bipartisan leadership of the House Small Business Committee. It is supported by women's groups across the country.

This legislation contains a small adjustment to the Women's Business Center program that updates an outdated funding formula, without added cost to the Treasury. The adjustment changes the portion of funding allowed for Women's Business Centers in the sustainability part of the program to keep up with the increasing number of centers that will need funding this fiscal year. Currently there are 88 Women's Business Centers. Of these, 35 are in the initial grant program and 53 will have graduated to the sustainability part of the program in this funding cycle. These sustainability centers make up more than half of the total Women's Business Centers, but under the current funding formula are only allotted 30 percent of the funds. Without the change to 48 percent, all grants to sustainability centers could be cut in half--or worse, 23 experienced centers could lose funding completely. In short, this change directs the SBA to reserve 48 percent of the appropriated funds for the sustainability centers, instead of 30 percent, which will allow enough funding to keep open the most experienced centers, while still permitting the establishment of new centers and protecting existing ones. In the interest of compromise and prompt enactment of a workable solution, I fully support the formula change to 48 percent, although a change to 54 percent--as introduced as part of my Women's Business Center Safeguard Act, S. 2266--would be needed to fully fund all sustainability centers.

I have serious concerns regarding an amendment to our original legislation by the Republican leadership. The amendment would allow the Small Business Administration to award grants at arbitrary and disproportionate levels, instead of following precedent and awarding Women's Business Center grants equally to all qualified and successfully performing centers. I am deeply concerned that the administration may use this authority to shortchange some existing centers in order to use part of the 48 percent reserve funding to open new centers. While this is within the language of the amendment, it is clearly the opposite of the legislation's intent, which is to increase available funds for the most experienced Women's Business Centers so that they remain in operation. To that end, it is my recommendation that the administration use the full 48 percent for sustainability centers and that the Agency award grants at equal, or close to equal, amounts. The committee has been told that providing any sustainability Women's Business Center with a grant less than the minimum grant awarded to sustainability centers in fiscal year 2003 would impede its ability to operate effectively and successfully under the current requirements established by the administration. I am willing to make this compromise because it will give all Women's Business Centers the opportunity to receive funding; however, it is not intended to undercut the funding to any center that has met the SBA's performance standards.

As the author of the Women's Business Centers Sustainability Act of 1999, I can tell you that when the bill was signed into law, it was Congress's intent to protect the established and successful infrastructure of worthy, performing centers. The law was designed to allow all graduating Women's Business Centers that meet certain performance standards to receive continued funding under sustainability grants. This approach allows for new centers to be established--but not by penalizing those that have already demonstrated their worth. It was our intention to continue helping the most productive and well-equipped Women's Business Centers, knowing that demand for such services was rapidly growing.

Today, with women-owned businesses opening at one-and-a-half times the rate of all privately held firms, the demand and need for Women's Business Centers is even greater. Until Congress makes permanent the Women's Business Center Sustainability Pilot Program, as intended in the Senate-passed legislation, an extension of authority and increase in the portion of appropriated funds available to sustainability centers is vital--not only to the centers themselves, but to the women's business community and to the millions of workers employed by women-owned businesses round the country.

This bill is urgently needed now to continue the good work of the SBA's Women's Business Center network, and I urge all of my colleagues in the Senate and the House of Representatives to show their support for the growing number of women in business by supporting immediate passage of this bill.

women's business center program

Mr. President, as we pass our legislation, S. 2267, the Women's Sustainability Recovery Act, I ask my colleague from Maine, the chairwoman of the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, how the SBA is to implement these changes to the Women's Business Center program? I know she has been a leader on this issue, and it is my understanding that she encourages the SBA to fully support sustainability centers at a level that will enable them to operate successfully, before opening new centers.

The committee has been told that many of the Women's Business Centers would be unable to meet minimum performance standards with a significant reduction in grant funding. Does the chairwoman agree that the funding for the sustainability centers last fiscal year would be an appropriate funding level for sustainability centers this year?

I commend Chairwoman Snowe for her persistent efforts on behalf of this legislation and the more comprehensive SBA Reauthorization legislation. Without her strong support and hard work on this issue, the future success of this important assistance for women entrepreneurs would be in jeopardy.

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues, Senators Inhofe, Landrieu, Lugar, and Lott, to introduce a bill to honor our service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan who have served and continue to serve their country by working for a free, independent, and stable Iraq and a new Afghanistan. These missions have been difficult and the cost has been high; nearly 600 Americans have been killed and almost 3,000 Americans have been injured in Iraq, while more than 500 Americans have been injured and more than 100 U.S. service men and women have been lost in Afghanistan.

More than a year after the initial invasion, nearly 110,000 troops are still stationed in Iraq, working to build a new, stable beacon of freedom in the region. My fellow Senators, the liberation of Iraq is turning out to be the most significant military occupation and reconstruction effort since the end of World War II. We cannot understate the importance of the work being done there today.

The administration's focus on Iraq leaves the mission in Afghanistan incomplete. Despite constant progress there, the fighting is still not over. Recent assassinations of government officials, car bombings, and the lingering presence of terrorist forces and former Taliban fighters force thousands of our troops to stay in-country.

For there courageous efforts, the Department of Defense has decided to award our brave young men and women with the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, GWOT, and no other medal. This is despite the fact the GWOT medal is meant for any individual who has served overseas during the war on terror and may have come within a few hundred miles of a combat zone. The dangers of serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are greater; therefore, along with my colleagues, Senators Lott, Landrieu, Inhofe, and Lugar, I propose to correct this mistake by passing legislation authorizing the Iraq and Afghanistan Liberation Medals in addition to the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal.

While some of us in this body have not shared the administration's view on this war, we are united when it comes to supporting our troops. These young men and women from Active Duty, National Guard, and Reserves are all volunteers and exemplify the very essence of what it means to be a patriot. We believe that what they are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan today differs from military expeditionary activities such as peacekeeping operations or no-fly-zone enforcement.

They continue to serve, even though they do not know when they will return home to family and friends. They continue to serve despite the constant threat to their lives and the tremendous hardships they face.

There is a difference between an expeditionary medal and a campaign medal. We only need to look at an excerpt from U.S. Army Qualifications for the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and Kosovo Campaign Medal. In order to receive the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, you don't need to go to war. You only need to be ``placed in such a position that in the opinion of the Joint Chief of Staff, hostile action by foreign armed forces was imminent even though it does not materialize.''

To earn the Kosovo Campaign Medal, the standard is higher. A military member must:

Be engaged in actual combat, or duty that is equally hazardous as combat duty, during the Operation with armed opposition regardless of time in the Area of Engagement. Or while participating in the Operation, regardless of time, [the service member] is wounded or injured and required medical evacuation from the Area of Engagement.

Many within the military agree that there is a difference. According to the Army Times, ``Campaign medals help establish an immediate rapport with individuals checking into a unit.'' An expeditionary medal like the GWOT does not necessarily denote combat. A campaign medal is designed to recognize military personnel who have risked their lives in combat.

Campaign medals matter. ``When a Marine shows up at a new duty station, commanders look first at his decorations and his physical fitness score--the first to see where he's been, the second to see if he can hang. They show what you've done and how serious you are,'' said GySgt James Cuneo. ``If you're a good Marine, people are going to award you when it comes time. . . .''

My fellow colleagues, it is time. We must recognize the sacrifice of our young men and women who liberated Iraq, including great Americans like Army SPC Joseph Hudson from Alamogordo, NM, who was held as a prisoner of war. The Nation was captivated as we watched Specialist Hudson being interrogated by the enemy. Asked to divulge his military occupation, Specialist Hudson stared defiantly into the camera and said, ``I follow orders.'' Those of us with sons and daughters were united in worry with Specialist Hudson's family. The entire Nation rejoiced when he was liberated.

We have also asked much from our Reserve and National Guard Forces.

The reconstruction of Iraq would not be possible without the commitment and sacrifice of the 170,000 guardsmen and reservists currently on active duty.

My colleagues, Senators Lott, Landrieu, Inhofe, Lugar, and I are committed to honoring our over 200,000 heroes who liberated Iraq and Afghanistan. We believe that current administration policy does a disservice to our fighting men and women. Therefore we propose, in addition to the GWOT medal, new decorations that characterize the real missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, two that are distinctive and honor their sacrifice, the Iraq and Afghanistan Liberation Medals.

What we do today is not without precedent; Congress has been responsible for recognizing the sacrifice and courage of our military forces throughout history. Congress has had a significant and historically central role in authorizing military decoration. Our Nation's highest military decorations were authorized by Congress, including: the Medal of Honor, the Air Force Cross, the Navy Cross, the Army's Distinctive Service Cross, the Silver Star, and the Distinguished Flying Cross.

We have also authorized campaign and liberation medals similar to what we hope to accomplish with this legislation. A partial list includes the Spanish War Service Medal, the Army Occupation of Germany Medal, the World War II Victory Medal, the Berlin Airlift Medal, the Korean Service Medal, and the Prisoner of War Medal.

The list goes on and on. The great men and women of our military forces are doing their jobs every day in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is time to do our job and honor them with an award that truly stands for their heroic service, the Iraq and Afghanistan Liberation Medals.

I ask unanimous consent that an article from the Army Times and the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I am very pleased to be joined by my colleague, Senator Alexander, in introducing legislation to draw attention to the horrifying situation in northern and eastern Uganda.

When most of my colleagues think of Uganda, they probably think, quite rightly, of Uganda's inspiring example of how a concerted effort on the part of government and civil society can save lives in the fight against HIV/AIDS. Or perhaps they recall the brutal history of the Amin era, and reflect on the extraordinary progress that the Ugandan people have made in closing that chapter of their history and rebuilding their country. Today, so much of Uganda is vibrant and exciting. A lively debate about the pace and depth of democratization has been underway for years. Ugandan leaders, including civil society leaders, work to fight against the insidious influence of corruption, just as leaders here in our country do. Ugandan officials devote time and energy to fostering a climate the encourages enterprise and increased trade and investment so that the next generation of Ugandans might know even more progress. And importantly Uganda is a strong partner in cooperating with the United States and with the rest of the vast global coalition committed to fighting international terrorist networks.

It is in part because there is so much that is positive and promising about Uganda and about our relationship with Uganda that the situation in northern and eastern Uganda is so very shocking. For more than 17 years, a conflict has raged between the Lord's Resistance Army and the Government of Uganda. All conflict comes with costs, but this one has been particularly atrocious. The LRA's campaign has been characterized by the forced abduction of thousands of Ugandan children--possibly over 25,000 children. These children have been terrorized, tortured, forced to participate in extraordinarily brutal acts, pressed into service as soldiers and used as cannon fodder, and forced into sexual servitude. Throughout the region, about 1.4 million people are displaced, often

forced into camps by the government. They cannot plant their crops, they cannot support themselves, and insecurity makes it difficult to get humanitarian assistance to these populations. Acute malnutrition is widespread, sanitary conditions often do not meet even minimal standards.

Worse, often these camps have insufficient protection, and the LRA has targeted these civilian communities of the displaced. Just last month, a displaced persons camp was attacked by the LRA, and in a 3- hour period, some 200 unarmed civilians were hacked, shot, and burned to death. Many fear that targeting of civilians will only increase with the government's efforts to arm and train local defense forces, and local leaders warn of the potential for these forces to take the form of ethnic militias, harkening back to some of the worst days of Uganda's history.

Reputable human rights organizations have reported disturbing abuses committed by Ugandan security forces in the region, and an absence of reliable mechanisms for holding those responsible to account. The recent history of Ugandan military adventures in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, particularly in Ituri, does not inspire confidence. Thankfully, Uganda has withdrawn from the DRC. But lingering questions about the military's commitment to basic human rights standards remain. I believe that the Ugandan military and the Ugandan government want to answer those questions definitively, and to reaffirm their commitment to developing professional and responsible forces. But pretending that these questions and concerns do not exist is not in the interest of Ugandans, it is not in the interest of Americans, and it is not in the interest of the kind of solid, frank, genuine partnership that I believe we all wish to cultivate with Uganda.

The Women's Commission for Refugee Women and Children reports that at least 50,000 people--the majority of them children an adolescents--flee their homes nightly in search of secure places to stay until dawn. Dusk brings seemingly endless lines of children walking into town centers from homes that are often miles away, sleeping en masse in makeshift shelters if they are very lucky, sleeping on the streets where they are extremely vulnerable to exploitation if they are not. This is not something that happens occasionally. This has become a nightly ritual, a way of life, for the civilians caught up in this nightmare. Children, some of whom have been abducted and have escaped only to be abducted again, know much about fear. But they know little about school. They know little about safety. They know very little about the promise of a better future. And the entire structure of their community has been shattered.

The human tragedy is devastating and the implications are quite serious. If Sudan is continuing to support the LRA, I am concerned about what this tells us about the nature of the Sudanese regime. I am troubled by the prospect that some will, for their own purposes, cast the conflict in northern and eastern Uganda in purely ethnic terms, lumping civilians who have been victimized in with the LRA forces responsible for their suffering. I worry about the potential for regional fractures when one part of the country lives in such a different world from the rest, enjoying none of the stability and development that we all so admire. I want Uganda to succeed. I want the volume of positive news to increase. And that means that we must address this serious issue frankly today.

This legislation asks the administration to report to Congress on a number of issues relating to the situation in northern and eastern Uganda. I ask for these reports because I certainly do not have all of the answers. But I know enough about the problem to know that these reports will help the Congress to make informed decisions about how to proceed in our relationship with Sudan and about how to most effectively help the people of northern and eastern Uganda.

Once again, I thank my colleague from Tennessee for joining me in this effort. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. President, I rise to support S. 2267, the ``Women's Sustainability Recovery Act of 2004'' which I recently introduced. There is today a critical need to preserve the operations of existing the Women's Business Centers currently serving women entrepreneurs in almost every State and territory. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by Senators Domenici, Chafee, Bond and others. Buy adopting this bill today, the Senate is signaling its intention to preserve much- needed funding for the business centers currently in operation.

Todaay, more than 10.6 million women-owned small businesses are helping to fuel our economic recovery: they employ over 19 million Americans and contribute $2.46 trillion in revenues. In my home State of Maine, there are more than 63,000 women-owned firms, generating more than $9 billion in sales. Numbers like these speak for themselves, clear evidence of the success of the Women's Business Centers Program, which helps women achieve their dreams of owning a small business, and other programs like it. As chair of the Small Business Committee, I am committed to a wide range of efforts designed to assist women business owners, so that they, in turn, can continue to make a significant contribution to our economy.

The Women's Business Center program was introduced through the Women's Business Ownership Act of 1988,and it was made permanent in 1997. Congress has demonstrated its support for this program time and time again; its appropriations have grown from $2 million in 1989 to $12.5 million in 2004, and the results of this investment have been impressive. In fiscal year 2002, centers reported clients realized a return of $161 in gross receipts for every dollar invested in the program.

Even more remarkable is the fact that the SBA's Women's Business Center have helped to create or retain almost 7,000 jobs in the United States, a success attributable to the centers unique training and counseling programs. In fiscal year 2003, the Women's Business Center program increased its expected level of delivered services by 17 percent, providing counseling and assistance to more than 106,600 clients and thereby exceeding its initial goal of 88,540 clients. To a large degree, this increased productivity has been triggered by the success of sustainability grants, which extend funding to eligible women's business centers.

This year, insufficient funding for the sustainability grant program may force 53 Women's Business Centers to close their doors. While current legislation reserves 30.2 percent of the Women's Business Center appropriation for the sustainability grant program, this amount is not enough to support the 53 centers in jeopardy. By supporting this bill, S. 2267, which increases the reserve forth sustainability grant program by 48 percent, Congress will ensure that each of the 53 Women's Business Centers eligible for sustainability has the opportunity to compete for a sufficient pool of funding for fiscal year 2004, and that centers will be able to effectively provide valuable technical assistance to women entrepreneurs.

Without this legislation, many of the center may be in jeopardy of closing their doors. This would be a significant loss given that some of these centers have been part of the program for as long as 9 years and, during that time, have proven themselves powerful engines of economic development in communities and States across the Nation.

These centers have been extraordinarily successful in providing assistance to women in all walks of life. Women who once received public assistance are now operating businesses and creating jobs. Other women are transitioning from employee to small business employer, and established business owners are creating and manufacturing products for sale at home and abroad. The centers nurture women entrepreneurs through business and financial planning and assist women business owners who need help securing funding for startup and expansion. Furthermore, this legislation requires no additional appropriation, just a reallocation of current funds.

I am committed to resolving the women's sustainability funding crisis through this bill, and I will continue to work with my colleagues to ensure the continued success of women-owned businesses.

(At the request of Mr. Daschle, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

I thank the Senator from Massachusetts for his question. As is evident in S. 1375, the bill to reauthorize the Small Business Administration, which passed the Senate last September, it is the intention of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee and of the full Senate to continue funding eligible Women's Business Centers before opening new centers. This legislation supports that important objective. To that end, I expect the SBA to award Women's Business Center grants for the coming fiscal year to each Women's Business Center that is properly meeting performance standards. Congress has appropriated $12.5 million in fiscal year 2004 for the Women's Business Center program. If the amount reserved for sustainability centers under this legislation is insufficient to award the full amount of $125,000 to each sustainability center that meets those standards, I expect the SBA to adequately fund eligible centers.

To ensure that each center that meets the SBA performance thresholds continues to serve women entrepreneurs in every state and territory, I expect the SBA to fully expend all the funds reserved under this bill for women's sustainability grants. This amount should be sufficient to provide funding to eligible women's business centers in the sustainability program at or above the minimum grants awarded in fiscal year 2003 to women's business centers.

Mr. President, today as ranking member of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I offer the Women's Business Center Safeguard Act, legislation to fix a funding gap that exists for the most experienced meritorious women's business centers.

I would first like to express my sincere disappointment that the Republican majority refused to include the bipartisan women's business center compromise that was agreed to by Chair Snowe and the bipartisan leadership of the House Small Business Committee, and, in the best interest of women business owners across the country, I urge them to reconsider.

I also want to comment on the Bush administration's proposals to eliminate experienced, efficient, and effective women's business centers in favor of new, untested, and inexperienced centers. Moving forward with the administration's proposal and failing to correct this funding gap immediately would jeopardize women's business centers in 39 States and eliminate assistance for thousands of women in business. While, as my bill demonstrates, I support opening new centers to help women entrepreneurs who do not currently have access to this important assistance, this should only occur when the existing centers, whether in their initial or a later funding period, are fully funded. The administration's policy to sacrifice successful, experienced centers in the interest of opening new centers is unwarranted and unwise. Women entrepreneurs and their businesses are critically important to our economy and to U.S. job creation, and women's business centers help them succeed. I intend to continue to advocate on their behalf.

This legislation contains a small adjustment to the Women's Business Center program that updates an outdated funding formula, without added cost to the Treasury. The adjustment changes the portion of funding allowed for women's business centers in the sustainability part of the program to keep up with the increasing number of centers that will need funding this fiscal year. In short, this change directs the SBA to reserve 54 percent of the appropriated funds for the sustainability centers, instead of 30 percent, which will allow for full funding of the most experienced centers, while still allowing for new centers and protecting existing ones.

Currently there are 88 women's business centers. Of these, 35 are in the initial grant program and 53 will have graduated to the sustainability part of the program in this funding cycle. These sustainability centers make up more than half of the total women's business centers, but under the current funding formula are only allotted 30 percent of the funds. Without the change to 54 percent, all grants to sustainability centers could be cut in half--or worse, 23 experienced centers could lose funding completely. Cutting funding for these, our most efficient and successful centers, would not only be detrimental to the centers themselves, but also to the women they serve, to their local communities, to their States, and to the national economy.

As the author of the Women's Business Centers Sustainability Act of 1999, I can tell you that when the bill was signed into law, it was Congress's intent to protect the established and successful infrastructure of worthy, performing centers. The law was designed to allow all graduating Women's Business Centers that meet certain performance standards to receive continued funding under sustainability grants. This approach allows for new centers to be established--but not by penalizing those that have already demonstrated their worth. It was our intention to continue helping the most productive and well-equipped women's business centers, knowing that demand for such services was rapidly growing.

Today, with women-owned businesses opening at one-and-a-half times the rate of all privately held firms, the demand and need for women's business centers is even greater. Until Congress makes permanent the Women's Business Center Sustainability Pilot Program, as intended in Senate-passed legislation, an extension of authority and increase in sustainability funds is vital--not only to the centers themselves, but to the women's business community and to the millions of workers employed by women-owned businesses around the country.

This bill is necessary to continue the good work of SBA's Women's Business Center network, and I urge all of my colleagues to support it and its inclusion as part of any extension of SBA programs. I ask that the full text of this bill be printed in the Record.

The bill follows.