Veterans' Benefits Enhancement Act of 2008

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about our children and, more specifically, children from low-income and working families across the United States who need a good start in life and who need high-quality childcare each and every day while their parents must earn a living.

I believe that here in America every child is born with a bright light shining inside them, and it is our job as Senators to do everything we can, everything we can, to keep that light shining ever brightly.

A child's potential may be limited or boundless, but whatever it is, every child deserves the opportunity to become the person they were born to be. Here in America, every child deserves high-quality childcare and early education.

High-quality childcare gives low-income working families peace of mind while they work. Unfortunately, for the last 7 years, Federal funding for childcare has been essentially frozen. The neglect of Federal funding for childcare during this administration has been unconscionable. What this means is families have been locked out of access to high-quality providers. It means hundreds of thousands of children across the country have been put on waiting lists for childcare because there simply is not enough funding to provide enough slots.

Working parents struggle to find childcare that will be healthy, safe, and affordable. They worry every day about finding quality care. For so many families, this is a very personal issue, especially, of course, for mothers. I remember a mother to whom I spoke in Pennsylvania 10 years ago who was worried about being able to afford childcare for her children. She said something I will never forget. She said because of the worry about childcare, she had a knot in her stomach. I think a lot of families closely identify with and understand what she was talking about.

These are parents who must work. They must therefore leave their children in care that often does not meet all their needs because it is the only choice they can afford.

Here are the facts. The facts show an enormous unmet need in America when it comes to childcare. A couple of points: 365,000 children in America are on waiting lists. In my home State of Pennsylvania, almost 8,000 children are on waiting lists. Across the country, 13.5 million children who are eligible, eligible for Federal childcare assistance, do not get it. That is an abomination. That is an embarrassment. It is a black mark on America.

Let me say that number again: 13.5 million children who are eligible for childcare assistance are not getting it. The population of my home State of Pennsylvania is a little less than 12.5 million. So if that group of children who are eligible but not getting the childcare assistance, if that were considered a State, it would be about the fifth largest State in the country.

So 13.5 million children who should be getting help are not getting it through our childcare system.

Childcare providers working hard every day caring for and educating our children are barely paid above the poverty level, with little or no benefits. The average wage for a childcare worker is $9.05 an hour, which on an annual basis works out to $18,820, barely above the poverty level. Yet we charge them with the responsibility of caring for and nurturing and educating so many of our children.

Finally, the last fact: parents must struggle to afford childcare and face impossible choices between losing their jobs or leaving their children in less-than-ideal care. I believe the price for holding down a good-paying job should not be problems with and worries about childcare.

Low-income families also spend much higher percentages of their income on childcare, often bringing that family to the breaking point. This is all wrong. Our priorities are literally upside down.

That is why I am announcing today a bill I introduced today, the Starting Early, Starting Right Act. The Starting Early, Starting Right Act. I will go through a couple of the provisions.

In summary. First of all, my bill on childcare will move hundreds of thousands of children on State waiting lists into high-quality childcare. The bill will meet the needs of underserved children such as English language learners, children with developmental disabilities and other special needs, children living in very poor communities, and children in rural areas, to ensure we reach children most in need of high-quality childcare.

Next, our bill will ensure States will visit and monitor childcare providers on an announced as well as unannounced basis every year. Fourth, our bill will require childcare providers who are licensed or registered to participate in 40 hours of training before they work with children as well as 24 hours on an ongoing annual basis.

Next we will expand parents' access to high quality childcare opportunities by requiring States to pay childcare providers rates based upon the actual and current cost of care, what advocates know to be the 75th percentile level.

Finally, it encourages States to exceed this rate for special populations of children with greater needs. This bill will improve access to high quality care for infants and toddlers by setting aside 30 percent of the bill's funding for this underserved group of children. Finally, this bill will provide greater funding for quality initiatives and encourage more States to adopt quality rating provisions to improve the quality of their programs. Quality rating improvement systems, known by the acronym QRIS, such as the successful program in Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania STARS program, give providers benchmarks as well as resources to continually improve the quality of care.

I wanted to share one story before I conclude, a story about the powerful impact of high quality childcare on children and families. This story was shared with our office by a childcare provider from southeastern Pennsylvania about a family I will not identify to respect their privacy. One of the children was a 3-year-old boy. I will call him, for purposes of this presentation, Sammy. Sammy started in childcare along with his older sister and younger brother when his mother was evicted from her house following divorce. Sammy's father did not pay child support but, luckily, Sammy's grandmother took them in. They all lived in a tiny two-bedroom apartment.

Dropoffs at the childcare center were difficult for this young child. With all the recent changes and trauma in his life, he was scared about his mother leaving. His mother would apologize to the staff, saying she never worked before and the children were not used to childcare.

The childcare worker always assured Sammy's mother that it was no problem and that no apologies were necessary. Unfortunately, a few weeks later, Sammy's mom showed up one day in tears. She confided to the childcare worker that she had not been able to find a job and was now so desperate she had to use food stamps. She had gone to the store by bus, getting there through the public transit system. The cashier treated her disrespectfully. Because of that, she was understandably humiliated, and she began to feel hopeless and afraid she would never find a job to support her three children. But at that moment, when that mother was at her greatest need and when the family was in need, the childcare center in southeastern Pennsylvania rallied around this mother and her children. Over the next 2 years the staff of the center encouraged and supported her while she found a job, went back to school, and eventually moved out of her mother's house into an apartment of her own.

Her oldest daughter was very successful and attended school with the center through first grade. She was then evaluated for the gifted program when she went to public school and second grade. The youngest son blossomed and made it through family growing pains with little difficulty. Finally, Sammy had some problems, but they were able to get the help needed because of the generosity and commitment of the people who worked in this childcare center. During that time the staff, led by the director, helped raise money for Christmas presents, doctors' bills, and Sammy's mother's application to take her pharmacy assistant's license exam.

When this childcare worker left the center, Sammy's mom told her what a profound difference the staff at the center had made in her life and in the lives of her children. Like so many in our country, this group of skilled, caring, and professional early childhood educators made it possible for this family to overcome so many obstacles.

The childcare worker told our staff recently:

[Sammy] is the kid I think about when people ask me why I

do what I do.

That is what that childcare worker said about her commitment to the care of children and to that child and his family. This is what quality childcare can mean in the real world to a struggling family. It may be the difference between literally failure and success for countless families. Sometimes it can mean sheer survival. This is one example of childcare providers and families such as Sammy's all across the country. These are quiet victories we never hear much about, but they are literally life changing in impact.

Increasing funding for childcare is not only the right thing to do, it is the smart thing, especially for at-risk children and children from low-income families. Research shows that high quality childcare helps low-income children enter school ready to succeed. One study found that children in high quality childcare demonstrated greater mathematical ability and thinking and attention skills and had fewer behavioral problems than any other children in second grade. I won't put the entire report in the Record, but the title of that first study is ``The Children of the Cost, Quality and Outcome Study Go to School.'' This is a June 1999 report by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, University of California at Los Angeles, and Yale University. Several others have mentioned this, but other studies have shown that low- income children who enroll in high quality early care and education programs score higher on reading, vocabulary, math, and cognitive tests, and are less likely to be held back a grade or to be arrested as a youth, and are more likely to attend college than their peers who do not enroll in such programs.

Although the peace of mind for parents that comes from knowing their children are well cared for cannot be measured, the impact on stable employment can. Studies show that parents who receive childcare assistance are much more likely to remain in the workforce. The study I refer to that made these findings is a briefing paper by the Economic Policy Institute which is entitled ``Staying Employed After Welfare.'' The subheading is ``Work supports and job quality vital to employment tenure and wage growth.''

Finally, there is no question that starting early and right is truly the right thing to do. The evidence supporting high quality childcare is overwhelming and irrefutable. The evidence tells us we can keep that bright light alive in the heart and soul of every child. We can give them what they need to get a good, solid start in their lives, if only we make that choice to support high quality childcare, if only we make that a priority.

I urge my colleagues in the Senate to support this bill, the Starting Early, Starting Right Act. As of now nearly 50 national and State organizations across the country have endorsed this legislation. They know, as so many of us do, that investing in early care for children is the right and the smart thing to do. It is time we put our focus and priorities back where they belong, on our children. In doing so, it will help every child become the person they were born to be.

Mr. President, today, I am pleased to introduce the bipartisan Runaway and Homeless Youth Protection Act of 2008 along with Senator Specter, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee. This legislation would reauthorize and improve the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act, RHYA. The programs authorized during the past 30 years by the RHYA have consistently proven critical to protecting and giving hope to our Nation's runaway and homeless youth.

The prevalence of homelessness among young people in America is shockingly high. The problem is not limited to large cities. Its impact is felt strongly in smaller communities and rural areas as well. It affects our young people directly and reverberates throughout our families and communities. That this problem continues in the richest country in the world means that we need to redouble our commitment and our efforts to safeguard our Nation's youth. We need to support the dedicated people in communities across the country who work to address these problems every day.

On April 29, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing to focus the Senate's attention on these problems and to identify and develop solutions to protect runaway and homeless youth. It was the first Senate hearing on these matters in more than a decade. We heard from a distinguished panel of witnesses, some of whom spoke firsthand about the significant challenges that young people face when they have nowhere to go.

Our witnesses demonstrated that young people can overcome harrowing obstacles and create new opportunities when given the chance. One witness went from living as a homeless youth in his teens to earning two Oscar nominations as a distinguished actor. Another witness is working with homeless youth at the same Vermont organization that enabled him to stop living on the streets and is on his way to great things. Our witness panel gave useful and insightful suggestions on how to improve the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act to make it more effective. We have included many of these recommendations in our bill.

The Justice Department estimated that 1.7 million young people either ran away from home or were thrown out of their homes in 1999. Another study suggested a number closer to 2.8 million in 2002. Whether the true number is one million or five million, young people become homeless for a number of reasons, ranging from abandonment to running away from an abusive home to having no place to go after being released from state care. An estimated 40 to 60 percent of homeless children are expected to experience physical abuse, and 17 to 35 percent experience sexual abuse while on the

street, according to a report by the Department of Health and Human Services. Homeless youth are also at greater risk of mental health problems. While many receive vital services in their communities, others remain a hidden population, on the streets of our big cities and in rural areas like Vermont.

The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act is the way in which the Federal Government helps communities across the country protect some of our most vulnerable children. It was first passed the year I was elected to the Senate. We have reauthorized it several times since then, and working with Senator Specter and Senators on both sides of the aisle, I hope that we will do so again this year. While some have tried to end these programs, a bipartisan coalition has worked to preserve and continue the good that is accomplished through them. I remember Senator Specter's efforts early in his Senate career to preserve these programs when he chaired the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Juvenile Justice. The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act and the programs it funds provide a safety net that helps give young people a chance to build lives for themselves, and helps reunite youngsters with their families. Given the increasingly difficult economic conditions being experienced by so many families around the country, it is time to recommit ourselves to these principles and programs.

Under the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act, every State receives a Basic Center grant to provide housing and crisis services for runaway and homeless youth and their families. Community-based groups around the country can also apply for funding through the Transitional Living Program and the Sexual Abuse Prevention/Street Outreach grant program. The transitional living program grants are used to provide longer-term housing to homeless youth between the ages of 16 and 21, and to help them become self-sufficient. The outreach grants are used to target youth susceptible to engaging in high-risk behaviors while living on the street.

Our bill makes improvements to the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act reauthorizations of past years. It doubles funding for States by instituting a minimum of $200,000, which will allow states to better meet the diverse needs of their communities. This bill also requires the Department of Health and Human Services to develop performance standards for grantees. Providing program guidelines would level the playing field for bidders, ensure consistency among providers, and increase the effectiveness of the services under the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act. In addition, our legislation develops an incidence study to better estimate the number of runaway and homeless youth and to identify trends. The incidence study would provide more accurate estimates of the runaway and homeless youth population and would help lawmakers make better policy decisions and allow communities to provide better outreach.

In my home State of Vermont, the Vermont Coalition for Runaway and Homeless Youth, the New England Network for Child, Youth, and Family Services, and Spectrum Youth and Family Services in Burlington all receive grants under these programs and have provided excellent services. In one recent year, the street outreach programs in Vermont served nearly 10,000 young people.

The overwhelming need for services is not limited to any one state or community. Many transitional living programs are forced to turn away young people seeking shelter. We heard testimony of an exemplary program within blocks of our nation's Capitol that has a waiting list as long as a year. This is unacceptable. The needs in our communities are real, and reauthorizing the law will allow these programs to expand their enormously important work.

These topics are difficult but deserve our attention. Finding solutions to this growing problem is an effort we can all support. I thank Senator Specter for joining with me and urge all Senators to support prompt passage of this bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I am introducing the Free Speech Protection Act of 2008 to address a serious challenge to one of the most basic protections in our Constitution. American journalists and academics must have the freedom to investigate, write, speak, and publish about matters of public importance, limited only by the legal standards laid out in our First Amendment jurisprudence, including precedents such as New York Times v. Sullivan. Despite the protection for free speech under our own law, the rights of the American public, and of American journalists who share information with the public, are being threatened by the forum shopping of defamation suits to foreign courts with less robust protections for free speech.

These suits are filed in, and entertained by, foreign courts, despite the fact that the challenged speech or writing is written in the U.S. by U.S. journalists, and is published or disseminated primarily in the U.S. The plaintiff in these cases may have no particular connection to the country in which the suit is filed. Nevertheless, the U.S. journalists or publications who are named as defendants in these suits must deal with the expense, inconvenience, and distress of being sued in foreign courts, even though their conduct is protected by the First Amendment.

The impetus for this legislation is litigation involving Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, a U.S. citizen and Director of the American Center for Democracy, whose articles have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the National Review, and the Los Angeles Times. She has been a scholar with Columbia University, the University of New York School of Law, and Johns Hopkins, and has testified before Congress. Dr. Ehrenfeld's 2003 book, Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop it, which was published solely in the United States by a U.S. publisher, alleged that a Saudi Arabian subject and his family financially supported al Qaeda in the years preceding the attacks of September 11. He sued Ehrenfeld for libel in England, although only 23 books were sold there. Why? Because under English law, it is not necessary for a libel plaintiff to prove falsity or actual malice as is required in the U.S.

Dr. Ehrenfeld did not appear, and the English court entered a default judgment for damages, an injunction against publication in the United Kingdom, a ``declaration of falsity'', and an

order that she and her publisher print a correction and an apology.

Dr. Ehrenfeld sought to shield herself with a declaration from both Federal and State courts that her book did not create liability under American law, but jurisdictional barriers prevented both the Federal and New York State courts from acting. Reacting to this problem, the Governor of New York, on May 1, 2008, signed into law the ``Libel Terrorism Protection Act.'' Congress must now take similar prompt action. I note that the person who sued Dr. Ehrenfeld has filed dozens of lawsuits in England. There is a real danger that other American writers and researchers will be afraid to address this crucial subject of terror funding and other important matters. England should be free to have its own libel law, but so too should the U.S. England has become a popular venue for defamation plaintiffs from around the world, including those who want to intimidate our journalists. The stakes are high. This legislation is important.

This legislation creates a Federal cause of action and Federal jurisdiction so that Federal courts may determine whether there has been defamation under U.S. law when a U.S. journalist, speaker, or academic is sued in a foreign court for speech or publication in the U.S. The bill authorizes a court to issue an order barring enforcement of a foreign judgment and to award damages.

Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of expression of ideas, opinions, and research, and freedom of exchange of information are all essential to the functioning of a democracy. They are also essential in the fight against terrorism.

I thank Senator Lieberman for working with me on this important bill.

Mr. President, today I introduce legislation requested by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, as a courtesy to the Secretary. Except in unusual circumstances, it is my practice to introduce legislation requested by the Administration so that such measures will be available for review and consideration.

The Veterans' Benefits Enhancement Act of 2008 consists of several provisions addressing a range of VA care and services. Title I entails adjustments to education benefits currently offered by VA. Title II addresses disability claims adjudication, memorials affairs, insurance and specially adapted housing. Title III addresses health care matters, including nursing home care, contract-care payment, personnel pay and disclosure of private information and medical records. Title IV addresses VA police officers and VA medical facility leases.

Title I of the bill would make several administrative and housekeeping changes to VA's education programs, allowing for faster and more efficient claims adjudication. Among other changes, this title would eliminate the requirement that a student file an application with VA upon changing his or her program of study while remaining enrolled at the same school and eliminate the requirement that wages must be earned in order to participate in VA's full-time on-job training, OJT, program.

Title II would make changes to disability claims adjudication, memorial affairs, insurance and specially adapted housing. Specifically, it would explicitly authorize VA to stay temporarily its adjudication of a pending claim before a VA regional office or the Board of Veterans' Appeals, when a Federal Circuit appeal on the relevant issue is pending. It would also authorize the Board to decide cases out of docket-number order when a case has been stayed or when there is sufficient evidence to decide a claim, but a claim with an earlier docket number is not ready for decision. This title of the bill would also extend full-time and family SGLI coverage to Individual Ready Reservists.

Title III pertains to health care matters, including nursing home care, contract-care payment, personnel pay and disclosure of private information and medical records. It would make permanent VA's authority to provide non-institutional extended care services either directly, by contract, or by another provider or payor. It would also extend VA's obligation to provide nursing home care to veterans with a service- connected disability rated at 70 percent or greater until December 31, 2013, and VA's authority to establish non-profit research corporations through the same date. This title would also repeal requirements that VA produce certain reports and make permanent VA's authority to assign enrollment priority category 6 to those veterans who participated in chemical and biological warfare testing at DOD's Deseret Test Center from 1962 to 1973.

The fourth and final title of this bill would permit VA police officers to carry firearms and conduct investigations of crimes that occurred on VA property, while off VA property in an official capacity. It also would increase the uniform allowance of VA police officers, to ensure they do not have to pay out-of-pocket for uniform maintenance. Finally, it would raise the threshold for congressional authorization for major medical facility leases from $600,000 to $1,000,000.

I am introducing this bill for the review and consideration of my colleagues at the request of the Administration. As Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I have not taken a position on this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a letter of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I introduce legislation requested by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, as a courtesy to the Secretary. Except in unusual circumstances, it is my practice to introduce legislation requested by the Administration so that such measures will be available for review and consideration.

The Veterans' Benefits Enhancement Act of 2008 consists of several provisions addressing a range of VA care and services. Title I entails adjustments to education benefits currently offered by VA. Title II addresses disability claims adjudication, memorials affairs, insurance and specially adapted housing. Title III addresses health care matters, including nursing home care, contract-care payment, personnel pay and disclosure of private information and medical records. Title IV addresses VA police officers and VA medical facility leases.

Title I of the bill would make several administrative and housekeeping changes to VA's education programs, allowing for faster and more efficient claims adjudication. Among other changes, this title would eliminate the requirement that a student file an application with VA upon changing his or her program of study while remaining enrolled at the same school and eliminate the requirement that wages must be earned in order to participate in VA's full-time on-job training, OJT, program.

Title II would make changes to disability claims adjudication, memorial affairs, insurance and specially adapted housing. Specifically, it would explicitly authorize VA to stay temporarily its adjudication of a pending claim before a VA regional office or the Board of Veterans' Appeals, when a Federal Circuit appeal on the relevant issue is pending. It would also authorize the Board to decide cases out of docket-number order when a case has been stayed or when there is sufficient evidence to decide a claim, but a claim with an earlier docket number is not ready for decision. This title of the bill would also extend full-time and family SGLI coverage to Individual Ready Reservists.

Title III pertains to health care matters, including nursing home care, contract-care payment, personnel pay and disclosure of private information and medical records. It would make permanent VA's authority to provide non-institutional extended care services either directly, by contract, or by another provider or payor. It would also extend VA's obligation to provide nursing home care to veterans with a service- connected disability rated at 70 percent or greater until December 31, 2013, and VA's authority to establish non-profit research corporations through the same date. This title would also repeal requirements that VA produce certain reports and make permanent VA's authority to assign enrollment priority category 6 to those veterans who participated in chemical and biological warfare testing at DOD's Deseret Test Center from 1962 to 1973.

The fourth and final title of this bill would permit VA police officers to carry firearms and conduct investigations of crimes that occurred on VA property, while off VA property in an official capacity. It also would increase the uniform allowance of VA police officers, to ensure they do not have to pay out-of-pocket for uniform maintenance. Finally, it would raise the threshold for congressional authorization for major medical facility leases from $600,000 to $1,000,000.

I am introducing this bill for the review and consideration of my colleagues at the request of the Administration. As Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I have not taken a position on this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a letter of support be printed in the Record.