Floor Statements

Mr. President, I am proud to re-introduce a bill that reauthorizes the landmark welfare reform legislation passed in 1996. It is basically the same bill as I introduced in the last Congress and it is designed to allow States to continue the important work to promote work and personal responsibility. This reauthorization bill is designed to allow States to continue to provide the flexible initiatives that have reduced national welfare caseloads by over 50 percent and moved millions of Americans from welfare to work.

Welfare reform was a bold experiment to dramatically change a major social program. In 1996, Congress ended the entitlement of eligible families with children to cash aid. The results five years later are impressive. Over two-thirds of the people who are leaving the welfare rolls have left for work.

Seven years ago, we agreed that the bipartisan goal of welfare reform should be to promote work and to protect children. We stood here together,

on unchartered ground, and endorsed significant policy changes that we believed would help families gain independence and economic self- sufficiency, while protecting the children. States began to revise welfare service delivery with guidance based on the new reforms. Each State designed and implemented programs that were unique and specific to their populations. While the results have been mixed, I believe that encouraging progress has been made. The challenge this year will be to continue to build on our foundation, and be sensitive to the current economic situation and the fiscal crisis States face today.

When we started welfare reform, we had a strong economy. Now, States are struggling and most of their reserves are gone. I believe we can continue the progress of welfare reform, but I strongly believe we must provide the key investments that help welfare parents make a successful transition from welfare to work, including increasing child care funding.

In West Virginia, welfare reform has brought bold changes. Parents on welfare get extra support as they face new responsibilities and obligations to make the transition from welfare to jobs. In 2001, I hosted a roundtable discussion to meet with individual West Virginians who were undergoing major life transitions. They told me that they were proud to be working, but that it was often still a struggle to make ends meet and do the best for their children. The goal of this legislation is to help those parents, and millions more, to promote the well-being of their children, even as they work.

Today, I am introducing the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act Amendments of 2003. States need help to continue making progress. We should continue to build on this foundation, and not reduce state flexibility. It is essential that we continue welfare reform, not unravel it, or restructure it.

This bill acknowledges that we must keep the focus on work, by both requiring and rewarding work. To ensure a real focus on helping parents leave welfare rolls for a job, this legislation gradually replaces the caseload reduction credit with an employment credit, designed by Senator Lincoln of Arkansas and Congressman Levin of Michigan. Under this important provision, States will only get a bonus toward their work participation requirement if parents move from welfare to a job. This credit will acknowledge the dignity of all work by providing a bonus for parents who get jobs, both full and part-time. A mother who has never worked in her life and then gets a part-time job has achieved a true accomplishment, and that deserves recognition. It is also the first step toward independence. It is an empowering approach to promoting work and sends the proper message to families who are striving to become self sufficient. I am pleased to incorporate their proposal into my bill, and I look forward to working with them closely throughout the welfare debates during this Congress to develop an employment credit that truly rewards work.

At this point, with a soft economy, I believe it is unwise to significantly change State TANF programs to impose drastically higher work participation rates requiring 40 hours per week of work and activities. Such changes, as suggested by the Administration, would double the work requirement for mothers with children under the age of 6, and that does not seem right. Increasing work requirement without new funding for child care, transportation, and job placement activities would be, plain and simple, an unfunded mandate. It could hinder state efforts to move parents into private sector jobs. It could undermine our progress.

State officials have testified before the Finance Committee that such changes would force states to restructure existing programs that are working and turn their focus away from those who need some assistance with child care or transportation, but are no longer dependent on a welfare check. We should not cut back on necessary child care and work supports for working families who are following the rules we set in 1996.

This comprehensive welfare reform bill makes the right investments. It invests $5.5 billion more in child care, which is the amount supported by the Finance Committee in a bipartisan vote last June.

This bill also increases funding for the basic TANF block grant by $2.5 billion because of state need. It provides full funding for the Social Services at $2.8 billion, which was promised to the states in 1996. My bill also would expand and increase the supplemental grants to help the states with high growth and high poverty deal with the challenges of welfare reform. With these new investments, states will be able to increase investment in the fundamental work supports like child care, transportation, and training, that help a parent succeed in moving from welfare to work. States would have flexibility in allocating the new resources, but I believe much of the funding can and will be directed into child care, which is a major priority.

This bill would continue the transitional Medicaid program so families can keep health care coverage for a year as they move from welfare to work. In 1996, I was proud to work with Senator Breaux and the late Senator John Chafee to protect access to health care for such vulnerable families. I have incorporated Senator Breaux's bipartisan bill to continue transitional Medicaid coverage, and I appreciate his leadership on this and other key issues. Our bill also gives states more flexibility and options to place parents in vocational training and English as a Second Language programs, so parents can get real jobs. In recognition of Maine's success with the Parents as Scholar program, States have the option to follow the Maine model for 5 percent of their caseload to combine work and education.

The bill also invests $200 million to create BusinessLink Grants, competitive grants to support public and private partnerships to help parents get jobs. The Welfare-to-Work Partnership is just one example of how nonprofits working with business leaders can make a real difference. The Partnership includes over 20,000 businesses that have provided more than 1 million jobs to parents moving from welfare to work. I have met with the board members of this group, and we should encourage such partnerships. I know that other groups, like the Salvation Army and Good Will, are doing important work on providing transitional job opportunities, and these organizations would be eligible for grants as well.

A job is the first step, but for welfare parents to make a successful transition to independence, they need a range of supports. To achieve this goal, the bill will create Pathways to Self-Sufficiency Grants to improve the support network for parents. These grants are intended to provide incentives and support to TANF caseworkers and nonprofit organizations to help improve the comprehensive network of supports for working families, including Medicaid, CHIP, child care, EITC, and a range of services. Working mothers deserve to know what type of support will be available so that they do not slip back into welfare.

Work is fundamental, but we also need to be concerned about important aspects of the lives of families and children. This legislation creates a Family Formation Fund to encourage healthy families, reduce teenage pregnancy, and improve child support and participation of parents in children's lives. The bill seeks to end certain discrimination and harsh rules for two-parent families in the current system. If our goal is to support marriage, we should not penalize married couples.

Our legislation also makes a simple, but important change. Under the current TANF program, each welfare parent has an Individual Responsibility Plan that serves as an assessment and work plan. In addition to having a responsibility to work, parents have a responsibility to protect their children's well-being. To emphasize this fundamental point, this bill adds language directing states to incorporate the concept of a child's well-being into each parent's Individual Responsibility Plan. States have great flexibility, but it is important to send a clear message that one of a parent's responsibilities is the well-being of their children.

This legislation builds on the foundation of the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. My hope is that this framework will help promote bipartisan discussion about how we can make even more improvements in our welfare system,

while maintaining our partnership with the States, particularly at this time of severe fiscal problems in our States.

Mr. President, this past Saturday, the world once again became painfully aware of the risks inherent in manned space travel. The Columbia tragedy has deeply wounded not only members of the NASA community, but also every American and indeed every person around the world who has ever looked up into the night sky and gazed in wonderment.

Of course, space exploration has always been a dangerous venture, and the seven astronauts who gave their lives on Saturday knew this full well and accepted their mission witout reservation. Their long dedication to public service and their willingness to sacrifice, even at the risk of their own lives, in pursuit of knowledge and the betterment of mankind should be celebrated. We honor these American heroes.

At the same time, all of our thoughts and prayers are with the families of the crew during this terrible and difficult time. May they know that every American is forever indebted to their loved ones for their bravery and devotion to the American space program.

As we sort out the causes of this tragedy over the next several months and years, however, we must not fear the exploration of outer space. We must strive to return to space as soon as possible, maybe with different means, maybe unmanned, until we can be most assured of improved safety, for the benefits of the space program are innumerable and irrefutable.

Because of research performed in outer space, people all over the world now benefit from, among other things, improved water and air purification systems, kidney dialysis machines, more efficient solar collectors, artificial hearts and limbs, improved emergency rescue equipment, and fire retardant materials, In fact, more than 100 documented NASA technologies from the space shuttle are now incorporated into the tools we use, the foods we eat, and the biotechnology and medicines used to improved our health.

In addition to these immense practical benefits, we must not forget the power of space flight to inspire and motivate that those who will eventually lead us in the future. In 1957, a group of six boys in my home State of West Virginia observed Sputnik flying high overhead and realized that rocketry was their calling in life. In the 45 years since, the group, now known as the Rocket Boys, has mad space exploration a reality for countless children and adults in West Virginia. Early space flight inspired them, and it inspired space education in West Virginia.

As a result of this inspiration, West Virginia is now the proud home of the NASA Independent Identification and Validation Center in Fairmont where 150 NASA employees and contractors play a critical role in space shuttle mission control software. Our State is also the proud home of the Challenger Learning Center at Wheeling Jesuit University which provides schoolchildren and teachers the chance to experience space simulation and many opportunities for math, science, and technology education.

It is easy to support the space program during times of great success and spectacular achievement. But it is perhaps during times of tragedy and confusion that the program needs our support the most. Just yesterday, President Bush expressed his support for the continuation of the space shuttle program, declaring that the ``American journey into space will go on.''

NASA's remaining astronaut corps, as well as their flight directors and engineers, embody the very same bravery and dedication as their fallen colleagues. It is now up to all of us to echo support for our space program so that this bravery is not wasted, so that the immense benefits of the space program, as well as future astronauts, can be safely brought back to Earth.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that would promote the health and well- being of America's children by restoring funds to the Children's Health Insurance Program, known as CHIP. CHIP has been an unqualified success, helping millions of children. The program has the potential to help millions more. However, it is only as effective as we make it.

In 1997, I was joined by Senator Chafee in introducing the Children's Health Insurance Program as part of the Balanced Budget Act. At that time, 10 million children were uninsured. Today, 4.6 million have coverage; this includes over 21,000 children in the State of West Virginia. I believe the families touched by this program would agree it serves its purpose well.

Unfortunately, this purpose may be seriously undermined. On September 30, 2002, $1.2 billion in unspent CHIP funds reverted back to the national treasury because of a budget compromise. On September 30, 2003, an additional $1.5 billion will be returned to

the treasury. This combined $2.7 billion loss will serve a huge blow to the program. As a result of it, States may be forced to stop accepting new children and may have to cut current participants from their rolls. In the meanwhile, money intended for the care of children will be spent on other initiatives. Healthy kids will go without preventative care, and sick kids will go without treatment or medicine.

However, such a tragedy is preventable. Today, I am joined by Senators Chafee, Kennedy, Snowe, and others in introducing a bill that would restore full CHIP funding over 2 years and allow the program to continue its enormously important work without cutting the benefits of a single child.

I am pleased to tell you that our legislation enjoys bicameral, bipartisan support and is endorsed by the National Governors Association, NGA. Though it is not a permanent solution to the problems faced by CHIP, this proposal would go far in addressing them. Most notably, it would provide real relief to States struggling to cover beneficiaries under Medicaid and would allow them to offer the care that every child needs and deserves.

In order to achieve this, we must provide States with the resources they need. Today, we have introduced a bill which will do just that. However, this body must make its enactment a priority. The children we serve deserve nothing less.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that would promote the health and well- being of America's children by restoring funds to the Children's Health Insurance Program, known as CHIP. CHIP has been an unqualified success, helping millions of children. The program has the potential to help millions more. However, it is only as effective as we make it.

In 1997, I was joined by Senator Chafee in introducing the Children's Health Insurance Program as part of the Balanced Budget Act. At that time, 10 million children were uninsured. Today, 4.6 million have coverage; this includes over 21,000 children in the State of West Virginia. I believe the families touched by this program would agree it serves its purpose well.

Unfortunately, this purpose may be seriously undermined. On September 30, 2002, $1.2 billion in unspent CHIP funds reverted back to the national treasury because of a budget compromise. On September 30, 2003, an additional $1.5 billion will be returned to

the treasury. This combined $2.7 billion loss will serve a huge blow to the program. As a result of it, States may be forced to stop accepting new children and may have to cut current participants from their rolls. In the meanwhile, money intended for the care of children will be spent on other initiatives. Healthy kids will go without preventative care, and sick kids will go without treatment or medicine.

However, such a tragedy is preventable. Today, I am joined by Senators Chafee, Kennedy, Snowe, and others in introducing a bill that would restore full CHIP funding over 2 years and allow the program to continue its enormously important work without cutting the benefits of a single child.

I am pleased to tell you that our legislation enjoys bicameral, bipartisan support and is endorsed by the National Governors Association, NGA. Though it is not a permanent solution to the problems faced by CHIP, this proposal would go far in addressing them. Most notably, it would provide real relief to States struggling to cover beneficiaries under Medicaid and would allow them to offer the care that every child needs and deserves.

In order to achieve this, we must provide States with the resources they need. Today, we have introduced a bill which will do just that. However, this body must make its enactment a priority. The children we serve deserve nothing less.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

I am pleased to join my colleagues today in highlighting the need for timely congressional action to secure funding necessary to protect children on the S-CHIP health program. Nearly 21,000 children benefit from this program in my State of West Virginia. The S-CHIP program was created in 1997 with a bipartisan group of members to provide $40 billion over a 10-year period to extend health insurance to some uninsured children.

Senator Chafee and I, along with other Senators, worked last year to develop a proposal that would address the long-term funding shortfall confronting the S-CHIP program over the next several years. While this was not considered last year, in the end, we were able to develop this 2-year compromise with the authorizers in both the House and Senate as a first step towards a long-term solution for S-CHIP's funding issues. The compromise is a very reasonable one, providing assistance both to those States that have spent their allocations and need additional resources to serve their S-CHIP children as well as States that need a bit more time to utilize their S-CHIP allocations.

I share my colleagues' concerns that this issue is a very timely one, and demands fast action on our part. I recognize that the first step is to include the necessary funds for this bipartisan 2-year proposal in the fiscal year 04 budget resolution, and then to consider the specific legislation in the Finance Committee. I would hope that Chairman Grassley and Senator Baucus would work to schedule a markup of this proposal as quickly as possible after the budget resolution is approved. We cannot wait to act on this until later this year when it is expected that we would consider broader health care measures. Contrary to what some have said, this is an emergency for our States and uninsured children. I look forward to working with my chairman on the Finance Committee, who deserves credit along with Senator Baucus for developing this 2-year approach, to move this proposal through the Congress as quickly as possible.

We don't need that much.

Mr. President, following on what the Senator from Rhode Island said, it is extremely important that we get it done immediately. This is a two-part problem. One is the $1.5 billion shortfall in this fiscal year, and the $1.6 billion in the second fiscal year. The States have the money. Since we did not put the program under Medicaid at the very beginning, States started at various rates. Some were faster than others. Therefore, not all the money has been used. Rather than return it to the Treasury where it can't help any child at all--we still have 8 million, or 10 million, or 12 million children who need to be insured. We need to do the short-term fix, which is what this colloquy is about. Then we need to get to a longer term fix in the Finance Committee. I look forward to working with Chairman Grassley and Chairman Baucus to mark up a bill which will accomplish this objective on an annual basis, and then, of course, move on to the next logical step, which is to include the parent or parents of those same children.

I thank the Chair.

Mr. President, I have strong concerns about the very narrow manner in which this provision is written. In general, I am not in favor of legislating in a way that deals with one specific company. Furthermore, as a member of the Senate Committee on Finance and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation, I regret that this matter was not considered via the normal committee process. I hope that we can have a broad discussion in the days ahead about ways to address pension issues at struggling companies. Despite these concerns, however, I am supporting the amendment of the senior Senator from Pennsylvania, particularly since this provision will place no additional burden on the American taxpayer. I also support its goal of protecting employees' pensions. Furthermore, this provision is important to US Airways' effort to secure a loan from the Air Transportation Stabilization Board. As a critical provider of air service to West Virginia, I am committed to doing everything I can to ensure US Airways' long-term viability.

Mr. President, this budget cycle State legislators face the largest deficits in 50 years. To balance combined budget deficits of $60 to $85 billion, most States will be forced to raise taxes and cut spending. In July of last year, 75 Senators voted to provide meaningful fiscal relief to the states. That is why I return to the floor today to introduce ``The State Budget Relief Act of 2003,'' with my friends and colleagues Senators Collins, Ben Nelson, and Gordon Smith. This bipartisan legislation will provide $20 billion in immediate assistance to states to help pay for increases in Medicaid enrollment due to rising unemployment and to stop cuts in health insurance coverage, child care, education and other social services due to state budget crises.

As one of the largest State programs, Medicaid has become increasingly vulnerable as a target for cuts. In 11 States, legislators have proposed and adopted cuts that when fully implemented will strip health insurance coverage from approximately one million low-income people. Further, when governors release their budgets this month, that number is expected to climb much higher than one million. Most of these people are parents and children in working families that will go uninsured without Medicaid coverage.

If States are forced to institute further Medicaid cuts, our most vulnerable Americans will be left out in the cold. In West Virginia, Medicaid provides coverage to 14 percent of the population. Just this week, a West Virginia health clinic, which provides the only care for Medicaid patients in town, was forced to lay off 18 employees. The clinic is at risk because the State Medicaid program does not have the money to pay it for services.

These problems are not unique to West Virginia. Stories from across the country show that many states will be forced to seek solutions to their budget crises at the expense of low-income people covered by Medicaid. On December 30th, the LA Times reported that California is considering proposals that would cut coverage for 500,000 people by the end of fiscal year 2004. This is more than one-third of the total number of people, nationally, who lost coverage in all of 2001.

Some Senators might ask why we should help the States. The answer to that question is that the current economic downturn and the continuing State fiscal crises are hurting people across this country and a great many more people will be hurt in the next 18 months. The budget deficits are too large for States to cover alone without threatening the health and welfare of millions of Americans.

The bipartisan ``State Budget Relief Act'' provides a temporary increase in Federal Medicaid matching rates, which will help reduce the pressure on states to cut health insurance coverage for low-income families and individuals. It grants states money that they can use for social services such as education and child care. Finally, the bill holds States harmless for reduced Federal match rates in fiscal year 2002. As a result of these provisions, West Virginia would receive $127 million to help balance its budget.

I want to stress that this proposal is a critical component of economic stimulus. In this time of economic downturn, we need to ensure that there will be a safety net for low-income people and that states are not placing a further drag on the economy in efforts to balance their budgets. Several States have completed Medicaid economic impact studies within the last year. These reports conclude that in addition to the personal toll that loss of coverage takes on people, Medicaid cuts create an economic ripple effect by contributing to job and income losses for individuals and reduced output for businesses. The President's proposed economic stimulus package ignores this storm brewing in the States. It provides no fiscal relief for states and, in fact, worsens the problem by reducing state revenues by more than $4 billion a year through the individual tax cut on dividends.

In contrast, our bipartisan proposal provides immediate, temporary relief to States that will complement other economic stimulus strategies while protecting the health of millions of Americans. It will be effective for 18 months from April 2003. I am extremely disappointed that the Administration failed to include any real relief for the states in its own massive stimulus package. I think that is a serious mistake, and I will fight to include the proposal introduced by Senators Collins, Ben Nelson, Gordon Smith and myself in any stimulus package we deal with in the Senate Finance Committee or on the floor.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, this budget cycle State legislators face the largest deficits in 50 years. To balance combined budget deficits of $60 to $85 billion, most States will be forced to raise taxes and cut spending. In July of last year, 75 Senators voted to provide meaningful fiscal relief to the states. That is why I return to the floor today to introduce ``The State Budget Relief Act of 2003,'' with my friends and colleagues Senators Collins, Ben Nelson, and Gordon Smith. This bipartisan legislation will provide $20 billion in immediate assistance to states to help pay for increases in Medicaid enrollment due to rising unemployment and to stop cuts in health insurance coverage, child care, education and other social services due to state budget crises.

As one of the largest State programs, Medicaid has become increasingly vulnerable as a target for cuts. In 11 States, legislators have proposed and adopted cuts that when fully implemented will strip health insurance coverage from approximately one million low-income people. Further, when governors release their budgets this month, that number is expected to climb much higher than one million. Most of these people are parents and children in working families that will go uninsured without Medicaid coverage.

If States are forced to institute further Medicaid cuts, our most vulnerable Americans will be left out in the cold. In West Virginia, Medicaid provides coverage to 14 percent of the population. Just this week, a West Virginia health clinic, which provides the only care for Medicaid patients in town, was forced to lay off 18 employees. The clinic is at risk because the State Medicaid program does not have the money to pay it for services.

These problems are not unique to West Virginia. Stories from across the country show that many states will be forced to seek solutions to their budget crises at the expense of low-income people covered by Medicaid. On December 30th, the LA Times reported that California is considering proposals that would cut coverage for 500,000 people by the end of fiscal year 2004. This is more than one-third of the total number of people, nationally, who lost coverage in all of 2001.

Some Senators might ask why we should help the States. The answer to that question is that the current economic downturn and the continuing State fiscal crises are hurting people across this country and a great many more people will be hurt in the next 18 months. The budget deficits are too large for States to cover alone without threatening the health and welfare of millions of Americans.

The bipartisan ``State Budget Relief Act'' provides a temporary increase in Federal Medicaid matching rates, which will help reduce the pressure on states to cut health insurance coverage for low-income families and individuals. It grants states money that they can use for social services such as education and child care. Finally, the bill holds States harmless for reduced Federal match rates in fiscal year 2002. As a result of these provisions, West Virginia would receive $127 million to help balance its budget.

I want to stress that this proposal is a critical component of economic stimulus. In this time of economic downturn, we need to ensure that there will be a safety net for low-income people and that states are not placing a further drag on the economy in efforts to balance their budgets. Several States have completed Medicaid economic impact studies within the last year. These reports conclude that in addition to the personal toll that loss of coverage takes on people, Medicaid cuts create an economic ripple effect by contributing to job and income losses for individuals and reduced output for businesses. The President's proposed economic stimulus package ignores this storm brewing in the States. It provides no fiscal relief for states and, in fact, worsens the problem by reducing state revenues by more than $4 billion a year through the individual tax cut on dividends.

In contrast, our bipartisan proposal provides immediate, temporary relief to States that will complement other economic stimulus strategies while protecting the health of millions of Americans. It will be effective for 18 months from April 2003. I am extremely disappointed that the Administration failed to include any real relief for the states in its own massive stimulus package. I think that is a serious mistake, and I will fight to include the proposal introduced by Senators Collins, Ben Nelson, Gordon Smith and myself in any stimulus package we deal with in the Senate Finance Committee or on the floor.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.