Returned Americans Protection Act of 2006

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, one of the good things the Federal Government does is provide a lifeline to American citizens who suddenly find themselves in grave danger. That is exactly what has happened to 25,000 American citizens in Beirut who had signed in at the embassy when the Middle East crisis erupted.

There were plenty of pictures on the evening news of Americans desperately trying to flee the conflict. Many were able to escape on chartered flights. When they arrive back in the United States, a government employee will meet them at the airport and ask whether they need any assistance, including help in securing and paying for connecting flights, temporary lodging, food, or medical assistance.

Many don't need much help, but some do. And an important, but little known, program of the Social Security Act enables us to help Americans who escape the conflict with their lives and little else.

This is government at its best: helping our citizens in a time of crisis, responding quickly and effectively to meet the needs of our people. We are doing more than watching a crisis unfold on television. We are actually helping American citizens. And the Republicans, for some strange reason, want to kill this program. So much for the common good.

Now, this program has worked effectively for a mere $1 million a year in funding. But the crisis in Lebanon has drained the fund, and the administration has requested a temporary increase to $6 million.

That is all it will take to make sure that Americans have a lifeline to reach our own citizens. But the Republicans

intend to cut the lifeline. They will support an increase of $6 million to help Americans trying to flee a war, but only if the House kills the program.

Americans remain trapped in the middle of a war zone, and the Republicans cannot bring themselves to help without extracting a pound of flesh from ordinary Americans. They want to kill a $1 million program. This is with trillions of dollars in debt out there. And they claim they are cutting the trillion-dollar deficit. They want to cut a lifeline to ordinary American citizens, because rich people won't need the help and the rest of the American people don't matter.

We saw that same response in Hurricane Katrina, and we are seeing it here today. The philosophy of the Republicans that we should not prepare for a disaster is what made those awful pictures on television about Katrina; and they create the same thing here today, deliberately, when they are using the program, they are saying, it is like the house is on fire, yes, we should give some gas to the fire truck, but after the fire is over, sell the truck, we don't need it any more, we'll never need it again.

Anybody who knows about what is going on in the world can imagine that we may need this program again. Americans are fleeing a war-torn nation, and it is perfectly all right for the Republicans with the notion that they are on their own. They intend to terminate the program at the end of it.

They terminated their concerns for Americans a long time ago. They are telling us the only way to save the program this year is to kill it next year. Exactly what American value are they addressing by cutting a lifeline to Americans trying to flee a war? Democrats are outraged by this Republican hostility to our own people.

With my colleagues Sandy Levin and Ben Cardin, I introduced legislation yesterday that would simply provide a temporary increase in the repatriation program cap so that we can continue to help Americans leave Lebanon.

Now, there is no reason I can think of why that shouldn't be done. But it is just too easy for our friends on the other side of the aisle. They want to pretend they are fighting government spending. This is a million dollars, folks. That is not a rounding error. That is not drippings. That is practically nothing compared to what they have done in tax cuts for the rich.

Of course that zeal applies to the $5 million, but it doesn't apply to the $18.4 billion they gave to Halliburton, $5 billion of which nobody has any idea where it went. No oversight in this House on an issue like that. But on this, this $1 million, we can't have that program.

And we know we are going to need it. Now, the next time the problem happens, the program won't be there. We will have to come into the House in emergency session and create this program to help Americans get out of someplace that has become a war zone.

This sums up the values of the Republican leadership. Big bucks for the big donors and not even pennies for everyone else. We can do better than that in this House. I think the Senate will send us a better bill.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it is sort of amusing to me that one minute Mr. Herger and I can be working together, and the next minute we have little differences.

The Secretary of Health and Human Services, Mr. Leavitt, sent a letter up yesterday asking for this increase in financing. Nowhere in his letter does he say we ought to terminate it. They have a funding mechanism by which they think they have the money.

I am very seldom with the President, but sometimes I am when he is right. In this case I think we ought to keep the program. I really think that it is unusual that the theory gets out on the floor here that in order to have oversight over a program you have to kill it.

You don't have to have the body. I mean, it isn't like an autopsy. Sometimes you can do oversight on a living program, a program that is actually going on. Now maybe we need to kill the Halliburton program and just kill the whole $18 billion, then we can do oversight. But I think it would be much more reasonable to do oversight on a program that is going on.

I can't imagine how much abuse you could really have in a million dollars, in this sort of situation, given the kind of abuse that we have simply paid no attention to in the Halliburton situation.

So while I think that we can agree that we need some more money in this program, I don't think we want to just put ourselves in the situation of coming back one year from now and putting this program back in.

It may not be called the same thing. We will change the name. But the effectiveness of putting it in the law was that people anticipated that there would be situations like this before.

We have had situations in Rwanda, we have had situations in the Middle East, we have had situations in the Mediterranean, we have had all kinds of places where Americans get caught in a cross-fire and we have to extricate them, and we make available some money to take care of Americans.

That is why this is a good idea and shouldn't be ended simply as a way of saying we are controlling a national budget deficit of $5 trillion, or whatever it is. This is $1 million, guys. Come on.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5865) to amend section 1113 of the Social Security Act to temporarily increase funding for the program of temporary assistance for United States citizens returned from foreign countries, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Returned Americans Protection Act, H.R. 5865. This legislation will help our Nation to continue to assist U.S. citizens fleeing the violence in Lebanon as they return home to the United States.

In recent days, thousands of Americans have fled the violence in Lebanon. Thousands already have landed in the United States, and thousands more will be arriving in the coming days. In all, as many as 15,000 U.S. citizens may be returning.

State workers are prepared to assist them, helping join them with family or friends, and even make arrangements for their connecting travel. If the arriving citizen has no other resources, provision will be made for a loan or, in exceptional circumstances, a grant to cover their continued travel expenses or temporary lodging costs, all of which costs money, including to reimburse States for caseworkers to offer this assistance.

In a program that is limited by a current $1 million cap on annual spending, experiencing this large influx of needy, especially at this time in the fiscal year, is a challenge. As the Secretary of Health and Human Services said in a letter to Speaker Hastert dated just yesterday, ``We need your assistance in lifting this cap as soon as possible.''

Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us, H.R. 5865, provides that assistance. It temporarily lifts the program's current $1 million funding cap, allowing for continued assistance for Americans returning from Lebanon. It also improves oversight over this little known program by making two additional steps.

First, it requires the HHS Inspector General to review program spending on those repatriated from Lebanon. The report will break down administrative costs versus costs for travel and lodging. That way, Congress will have more information about what this program actually does.

The second thing this legislation does to improve oversight is to sunset the current repatriation program at the end of fiscal year 2007, more than 13 months from now. This will provide Congress sufficient time to review the program and decide where improvements are needed.

This change also is estimated by the Congressional Budget Office as saving $4 million, fully offsetting the cost of the additional assistance to those evacuating Lebanon. So we will cover short-term needs and get better data that we will use to improve this program for the long run. That is a win-win for everyone.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill which pays for additional services by improved oversight. We should approve it. I call on the U.S. Senate to do the same as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5865, the Returned Americans Protection Act, provides emergency funding for the HHS repatriation program so it can assist U.S. citizens evacuating Lebanon after they return to the U.S.

That is exactly what HHS asked Congress to do in letters sent just yesterday to the Speaker and Senate majority leader. Instead of increasing the deficit, this legislation is fully paid for. It pays for this emergency assistance through increased program oversight, including by sunsetting the program after 2007.

It is totally appropriate for Congress to set a sunset date to ensure future program oversight. The 1996 welfare reform law did the same thing. It replaced the former AFDC program with the new TANF block grant program and only authorized the new program through fiscal year 2002.

The Child and Family Services Program Act of 2006, which the House agreed to just this morning, in bipartisan fashion, also does the same thing. It limits the authorization of the child welfare services program through only 2011, or for the next 5 years, instead of permanently, as under current law.

This was done and agreed to in bipartisan fashion by this House to ensure Congress reviews this program as it reviews the related Promoting Safe and Stable Families program, which also would authorize it through 2011.

Mr. Speaker, again I urge Members to join me in passing this legislation today. H.R. 5865 will ensure that those arriving in America from the strife and turmoil in Lebanon will continue to have service available to help them as they make their way home.

It also ensures Congress time and opportunity to review the repatriation program and consider ways to improve it to even better meet the needs of displaced Americans in the future.

In closing, I would like to thank the dedicated staff at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, State workers supported by this program, and especially the many volunteers who have pitched in to help Americans returning home from Lebanon in recent days.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. President, recent events in the Middle East have led to the evacuation of thousands of U.S. citizens from Lebanon. This evacuation is being conducted by the U.S. State Department.

However, the Department of Health and Human Services, or more specifically, the Administration for Children and Families, ACF, is responsible for assisting U.S. citizens upon their return to the United States.

Over the past several days, ACF has established repatriation facilities at the Baltimore/Washington airport, the Philadelphia airport, and McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey. More than 5,000 Americans have been offered assistance at these facilities in recent days. Thousands more are expected within the week.

These repatriation facilities are staffed by Federal and State employees who provide assistance with travel, lodging, and access to medical facilities, as necessary. These employees are doing a tremendous job assisting all of the evacuees.

Unfortunately, under current law, this critical assistance is subject to a statutory cap of $1 million dollars. Given the expected number of evacuees, the statutory cap could be reached at any moment. Unless Congress acts quickly to raise the cap, the ongoing repatriation efforts will be suspended. We must not allow that to happen.

The legislation I have offered today, along with my colleague from Montana, Senator Baucus, will raise the cap to $6 million through the end of this fiscal year. This increase is expected to fully cover the anticipated costs of the evacuation this year, as well as provide for the continued operation of the repatriation program next year.

In addition to temporarily raising the cap, this legislation would provide the States with the option to use the National Directory of New Hires to verify eligibility under the Food Stamp Program. This language is similar to the provisions in current law now being used to verify eligibility for the SSI Program and to collect delinquent child support payments.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the utilization of this option in the Food Stamp Program would save roughly $1 million a year, thus offsetting the cost of raising the cap.

In contrast to the legislation passed by the House yesterday, this legislation does not sunset the repatriation program. The repatriation program has been in operation, in one form or another, since the 1930s. There is no reason to believe this program should be abolished. Thus, the sunset provision contained in the House bill is merely a gimmick to create the appearance that the bill is paid for when in fact it is not.

On another matter, the House language includes a requirement for an IG report on the repatriation program. However, it does not appear such a report is necessary.

According to ACF, under the emergency repatriation program each State has an approved plan which they implement when needed. They are allowed to assume costs for all of the activities contained in their approved plan. The States then submit a detailed explanation of how the funds were spent, along with supporting documentation.

Finally, it should be noted that the language in the House bill was intended to lift the million-dollar cap for the current fiscal year. But it is not entirely clear it accomplishes that goal. Under current law, the cap is effective for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2003. Under the House-passed language, the cap is effective for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2006. Since the current fiscal year occurs after 2003 but before 2006, that begs the question-- what is the cap for this year? The answer to this question should not be ambiguous. The Senate language clearly states the cap for the current fiscal year is $6 million.

Given all of these concerns, I urge my colleagues to reject the House language and support the Senate alternative. The Senate alternative will maintain the critical assistance now being provided to evacuees, while at the same time offsetting the cost of this assistance in a reasonable and responsible manner.

I urge its adoption.

Mr. Speaker, as sponsor of this bill, I support continuing to help the thousands of Americans fleeing the hostilities in Lebanon and returning to the safe confines of the United States.

As of Sunday, July 23, 20 flights had rescued 3,890 U.S. citizens from Beirut and the surrounding area. Of those rescued Americans, hundreds received aid from the Health and Human Services, HHS, repatriation program after they arrived in the U.S., including 25 unaccompanied minors and 21 special needs cases--of which 12 were medical cases.

However, under current law, there is a $1 million spending cap on this program, which is close to being reached. Without legislative action, the repatriation program will no longer be able to provide aid to Americans in need. There may be 10,000 more U.S. citizens repatriating from Lebanon in the coming days who might require assistance through this program.

To make this aid available to other Americans as they arrive from Lebanon, this bill temporarily lifts the $1 million annual spending cap on the current HHS repatriation program. The Congressional Budget Office predicts this will allow about $4 million in additional spending for the thousands of Americans evacuating Lebanon.

Additionally, today's action, while increasing aid, also increases program integrity and oversight. The bill requires that the HHS Inspector General report to Congress on how the money in the program is being spent and it requires congressional action for the continuation of this program beyond fiscal year 2007. Therefore, even with the one- time increase in the spending cap, CBO estimates that this bill will be cost neutral over the next 5 years and will achieve savings over 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is good policy that ensures the continuation of aid for Americans in need, while providing the opportunity to improve upon this program. It is timely and because of the ongoing situation in the Middle East, it is important that we act quickly.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation today and am hopeful that the Senate will consider this bill in short order so we can send it to the President for his signature.

Mr. President, I urge the Senate to adopt the Grassley- Baucus amendment to the bill H.R. 5864--The Returned Americans Protection Act of 2006. This bill provides needed resources to the United States Repatriation Program, which is currently assisting U.S. citizens who are returning to United States from Lebanon.

The United States Repatriation Program was established by title XI, section 1113 of the Social Security Act to provide temporary assistance to U.S. citizens and their dependents who have been identified by the Department of State as having returned, or been brought from a foreign country to the U.S. because of destitution, illness, war, threat of war, or a similar crisis. The program is currently being used to provide assistance to citizens returning from Lebanon, but estimates indicate that the program could reach its statutory spending cap at any moment. The cap is currently $1 million per fiscal year. We have been asked by HHS to increase the cap for fiscal year 2006 to $6 million.

The Grassley-Baucus amendment lifts the cap for fiscal year 2006 from $1 million to $6 million. The amendment also includes an offset from the President's fiscal year 2006 budget to use the National Directory of New Hires, NDNH, to improve the administration of the Food Stamp Program. Access to the NDNH will help USDA verify wage and employment information on food stamp applications. That proposal was scored by CBO has providing $11 million in savings over 10 years.

We have worked with the Department of Health and Human Services and other Government agencies in creating this legislation. We believe we have a reasonable and fiscally responsible solution to this relatively minor problem. We urge the Senate to adopt our amendment, pass the bill, and send the bill to the House for their immediate consideration.

This bill involves a small and, thankfully, seldom-used Federal program. But as recent news events have made clear, this is a program that can provide much-needed assistance to our constituents during difficult circumstances. We should not allow these

important resources to be needlessly delayed.