Tom Harkin

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I commend Chairman Baucus and Senator Daschle for their leadership and their determination on this important issue of the ever-deepening recession of the United States and the fact that so many people are out of work. They have consistently returned time and time again to make sure we commit to the real needs of the people in this country. But in our slowing economy, States are already facing a serious budget crunch, forcing some of our State leaders to make tough decisions. In fact, the recession would force Iowa to cut $18 million from its State Medicaid budget, funds that would have brought an additional $32 million in Federal money to our State. All of us, when we are talking about a stimulus, have to think about what is happening in the State budgets. I know the occupant of the chair is the former Governor of the distinguished State of Delaware and he knows, as well as others, that when recessions go up and unemployment goes up, the impact on the State budgets to meet their requirement for Medicaid increases dramatically. What happens is, as these rolls grow, then there is more of a demand on the State moneys. For example, there are already 240,000 Iowans on Medicaid, about 15 percent more than what the State expected to serve this year. The same providers who are facing the cuts will also be called upon to serve a growing number of people. When the providers are cut, the patients they serve feel it. As we look at what is going on in the country today, we cannot allow Medicaid recipients, some of the most vulnerable people in our country, the most vulnerable of my constituents in Iowa, to fall through the cracks. But unless Iowa and other States get help, they will have to either make deeper provider cuts take effect, make eligibility requirements tougher, or cut benefits, all of which are going to impact the most vulnerable people in our society. One provision in the stimulus bill is of particular importance to my State of Iowa, and I would say all States across the country. This provision will give States critical assistance in meeting their Medicaid responsibilities by increasing the Federal match for Medicaid, the FMAP, for 1 year. Under the Daschle amendment, every State would get a 1.5-percent increase in their 2002 FMAP. I do not know what it will mean to all the States, but I do know it will mean an additional $30 million to the State of Iowa. Again, while what is in the underlying bill is an important first step, we must remember it was developed when State-projected deficits were estimated to be a lot lower than they are today. On October 31 of last year, the National Association of State Budget Officers predicted a $15 billion shortfall for the States for 2002. On October 31, there was a $15 billion estimated shortfall in our State budgets. Six weeks later, on December 19, they updated that to a $38 billion shortfall in our State budgets. We all know when we talk about State budget deficits, we are talking in large part about their Medicaid budgets. In many States, that is the largest part. Because most States are required by their constitutions to balance their budgets every year, they have to look to Medicaid for cost savings. Without adequate State fiscal relief through a temporary increase in the FMAP, the Federal Medicaid matching rate, these cuts are likely to be approved. It could be even worse as the deficits worsen further. To help States avert these otherwise unavoidable cuts, I have offered an amendment which is in the lineup for tomorrow that will increase the Federal Government's match of State Medicaid spending by 3 percent instead of the 1.5 percent that is in the underlying amendment for the next fiscal year. If this amendment is agreed to, all States will receive an enhanced 3-percent increase on their FMAP. Also, the States that have high unemployment rates will still get their 1.5-percent bonus and all States will still be held harmless. Basically, my amendment takes the underlying 1.5 percent and makes it 3 percent in terms of the Federal match for Medicaid. It will provide about $3.5 billion more to the States than the pending legislation and over $7.5 billion more than the House-passed plan to help offset the impending State Medicaid cuts for providers and beneficiaries. Again, State fiscal relief is one of the best ways to stimulate the economy because Federal dollars used for this purpose help avert the State budget cuts and the tax increases that can be detrimental to any economic recovery. The people in Iowa and all across the Nation have enough trouble finding affordable quality health care. They need our help and support during this recession. When it comes to protecting the vulnerable in these difficult times while getting our economy back on track, putting Iowans and all Americans back to work, this proposal to increase the FMAP, the Federal match on Medicaid, is right on the mark. This amendment will be up tomorrow for a vote. I hope it will get overwhelming support because, again, we cannot afford to let the most vulnerable in our society fall through the cracks, and we have to recognize that States are facing over a doubling of the initial estimate of what their State shortfalls would be in their budgets for this next fiscal year. Looking at all that, we need to make sure we increase the Federal share. For a small amount of money we put into it, considering the nationwide impact, the multiple effect it will have on our economy will be tremendous, especially as it affects those State budgets. Again, I commend Senator Daschle and Senator Baucus for the underlying amendment. If we had voted on this last year, perhaps 1.5 percent might have been sufficient with what we knew then. But with what we know now, 1.5 percent is not sufficient. I believe this amendment I have offered to double that from 1.5 percent to 3 percent will make it so that the States will not have to cut their Medicaid budgets this year. I hope we can adopt this amendment. I hope we can get the stimulus bill passed and get increased unemployment benefits out there, health care benefits, and help our States with their Medicaid budgets. This will do more to stimulate the economy than anything else we are doing. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I say to my colleagues here in the Chamber today that I announced last year before we adjourned for the holiday recess that because of the failure of the Senate to provide for cloture on the farm bill so that we could have a reasonable amount of time for debate and come to closure on it, the Senator from Iowa, this Senator, was not going to agree to any unanimous consent on any judges or anything else that came before the Senate until we completed the farm bill. I was approached the other day and was asked if we would let a couple of these judges go. It was my intention at that time to say no. I am not interested in anything passing here until we got a farm bill finished and sent to conference. But it has come to my attention that there seems to be some movement towards reaching some agreement to have either a defined list of amendments and/or a time limit so that we could bring this farm bill to some closure. So in the spirit of trying to work on a bipartisan basis and trying to reach some agreement, I withdrew my objection so we could go ahead and permit these two judges to go through. I asked for this 10 minutes of time only to hope that in the ensuing few days--I know that next week we are not going to be here much more than 1 day, and I think we are out Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday for the party conferences. That means we will have a short day Monday, a day Tuesday, and that is it. Then we are in the week after that. I am hopeful that sometime before we adjourn next week for our party conferences the leadership on the Republican side and on the Democratic side can reach an agreement on a defined list of amendments on the farm bill and/or some time limit so we can reach closure on it. Hopefully we will do that the week after next. This is becoming even more important because the Department of Agriculture just came out last week with their economic forecast for agriculture this year. I will read from the AP report on their forecast. With crop prices mired near record lows, the government says farm income will drop nearly 20 percent this year unless Congress enacts a new farm program quickly, or approve more emergency payments. There you have it. There are three things we can do: Sit back, do nothing, and let farm income drop 20 percent, we can come up with more emergency payments, or we can enact a new farm bill, go to conference with the House, and have a more reasonable approach. I hope we can do the latter; that is, pass the farm bill, go to conference, come back, and let the House and the Senate work its will. We have had a lengthy debate on the farm bill already. We have been here 12 days; 1 more day on the farm bill means we will have broken all records for length of time for the farm bill to be considered in this Chamber. Just 1 more day and we will have that. It looks as if we are going to break the record. We had three substitutes for this farm bill. It was well debated. We had the Lugar substitute, we had the Roberts-Cochran substitute, and we had the Hutchison substitute, which is basically the House bill. None of them got over 40 votes. One got 30, one got 38, one got 40. So it looks as if the bipartisan bill that we came out of committee with is the bill that has the most votes. I know there are things in the bill not everyone likes. There are some things in the bill I personally as chairman of the committee do not like. But I recognize there are other reasons for things and for different parts of the country. There is agriculture all over America. Maybe what is good in one place is not good in other places. That is why there are varying interests. I believe the bill we have on the floor does a good job of balancing those interests. We have a good bipartisan bill. That doesn't mean we can't have more amendments considered. Of course we can. There are payment limitation amendments. There are other amendments that will come up. That is just fine. I have never taken the position we should not have amendments. Let us have a reasonable time limit, get the amendments up, have a reasonable debate, and then move on. Again, I hope my friends on the other side of the aisle will permit us to move ahead week after next on this farm bill, either with a defined list of amendments or at least a time agreement or vote cloture on the bill so we can move ahead on it expeditiously. Again, I do not intend to hold up these judges in the spirit of comity and working together. But I say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, if we cannot get some reasonable agreement to have this bill up and passed the week after next, then this Senator from Iowa will again say nothing else is going to pass here until we get that farm bill passed. So I have removed my objection to these judges because of what I have heard. And I have talked with some people and have heard that there may be some movement to get this farm bill debated and passed. If that is the case, that is fine. I hope we can do that. But we cannot afford to tarry any longer. We have to get this bill passed, get to conference with the House, and, hopefully, get it to the President. We have farmers getting ready to go into the fields in the South already. I think the wheat harvest in Texas is probably going to start next month. We have farmers up in the northern parts of the country-- where I am from--who do not know whether they can go out and buy a new combine or a new tractor or something similar because they do not know what they are going to get this year. The bankers are uncertain. The President was just out at John Deere a couple weeks ago. I was with him at a John Deere plant in Illinois. The CEO of John Deere said that we have to get a farm bill passed because no one is buying the implements because they do not know what the bill is going to be. There is that uncertainty out there. So I know we are talking about a stimulus package, my friends, but stimulus in rural America is the farm bill. If we get that farm bill passed, it will stimulate economic activity in rural America. It will let bankers know how much they can lend. Farmers would then be able to say: OK, now I can buy that tractor or that combine or that new piece of equipment. But until we do that, all that uncertainty and that cloud is hanging over them. So, again, I took this time only to say that I will not object to these judges in that spirit of comity, but I hope by next Wednesday we will have an agreement worked out so when we come back the week after next, after the party conferences and the party issues conferences, we can bring up the farm bill, have a reasonable time for debate, and then have final passage on the bill. With that, Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. I thank my friend from Nevada for the very kind words. I, again, thank him for all of his great support and help as we tried to get the farm bill through, but it was stopped by the other side. I thank my friend from Nevada for his great help on getting our appropriations bill through. As Senator Reid said, this is the second largest appropriations bill--second only to Defense. But what is important is that this is the appropriations bill that binds our country together. This is the bill that makes America unique in the world. This is the appropriations bill that says to every kid in America: No matter where you are born, no matter the circumstances of your birth, you are going to get a good education; we are going to put the resources out there. No matter what your resources are, we are going to get you the funds you need to go to college, or for job training if you don't want to go to college. This provides the underpinning of our medical research. This bill underpins the health care of America in so many ways. This is the bill that provides all of the support for our jobs, our Job Corps, our training programs, all of the worker training programs that come through the Department of Health. This is the bill that covers the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of Labor, and all biomedical research. So I am very proud and I feel very privileged to be a Senator, but also to be on the Appropriations Committee and to chair this subcommittee that I believe speaks about what America really is. I am also on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. That is the committee that defends our interests around the globe. This is the subcommittee that makes America what America is in the world community--unique among nations. I am proud and privileged to bring to the Senate Chamber this morning the conference report on the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and related agencies appropriations bill. First, I thank my good friend and longtime partner in this effort, Senator Specter. We have had a great partnership for a number of years. Some time ago, I was chairman of this subcommittee, and he was my ranking member. Then when the other party took control of the Senate, he became chairman and I was ranking member. Now I am chairman again and he is ranking member again. We have had a great partnership, going back now just about an even dozen years. I thank him and his staff, who I will name after a bit, for helping put together this bill on a truly bipartisan basis. The conference report is a good bill. It is one I can strongly recommend to my colleagues. Senator Specter and I worked with our subcommittee members, the House leaders, Congressmen Obey and Regula, to help shape it. We have done our best to accommodate the literally thousands of requests we have received from our colleagues. I wish to highlight some of the main features of our conference report. First, it takes a number of important steps to improve the quality, affordability, and accessibility of health care in America. We included a record increase for the National Institutes of Health of $3 billion-- again, building upon the excellent work done when Senator Specter chaired this subcommittee, in meeting the stated goal of the Congress to double NIH funding over 5 years. So we put a record $3 billion into this bill for NIH. We have also combined with that an additional approximately $200 million in NIH resources related to bioterrorism, which is included not in this bill but in the supplemental appropriations bill. This keeps us on track in doubling our commitment. This action holds the hope of improving the lives of millions of Americans plagued by killers such as Alzheimer's, cancer, Parkinson's, heart disease, diabetes, osteoporosis, and so many other things. The conference agreement also makes a major improvement in access to affordable health care by providing a $175 million increase to community health centers and major increases in critical prevention activities, such as cancer and heart disease screening. These changes will save lives and improve health around the country. As a Senator from Iowa and cochair of the Rural Health Caucus of the Senate, I am pleased to report that the agreement includes a major new effort to improve health care in rural areas and small towns. We will bring more doctors, nurses, and other health professionals to places they are needed by expanding the National Health Service Corps and the Nurse Loan Repayment Program. Our struggling rural hospitals are given help to deal with Medicare paperwork and help to expand into other activities, such as adult daycare. This agreement also includes substantial new resources to improve education. While I am disappointed that additional funds were not provided by beginning to fully fund special education as a part of the education reform bill, I believe we did a good job with the resources we were provided. The agreement makes college more affordable for millions of young people by increasing the Pell grant maximum to $4,000. We increase the TRIO Program by $72.5 million, which brings total funding for the TRIO Program to $802 million. The bill also increases funding for title I reading and math by $1.6 billion for a total of $10.35 billion to title I. We increase afterschool programs by $154 million. We finally broke the $1 billion threshold. We provide for $1 billion in afterschool programs. We increase the funding for teacher quality by three-quarters of a billion dollars. The total we have in this bill for teacher quality is $2.85 billion. The Senate bill contained nearly $1 billion when we passed it to make needed repair to our schools, including security enhancements. We started this initiative last year. It has been a great success. I am very disappointed we could not reach an agreement to continue it this year. However, I have made it clear that I will bring the issue back again next year. We have schools crumbling all over America, and I think it is a legitimate role for the Federal Government to play to help our States and local communities repair, rebuild, and modernize their schools to make them adaptable for the 21st century. The average age of our schools now is well over 40 years, many 50 years old and over 75 years old. They need to be upgraded. They need to be modernized. Our property-tax payers in my State and I know in the Presiding Officer's State are overburdened as it is. Property tax is not a real reflection of one's ability to pay, and yet that is still how we fund the rebuilding of our schools across America. We started on this last year. I am disappointed we could not continue it this year, but hopefully we will be back again next year to meet that need. I am also pleased this agreement improves our commitment to worker training and safety. We funded our State unemployment offices to handle the increased caseloads they are facing now and probably will face for the remainder of the winter. At this time of economic downturn, these investments are crucial. I wish to highlight a substantial initiative in this bill to improve services to our Nation's elderly. We will allow more homebound seniors to receive Meals on Wheels. We provide a major increase in services, such as adult daycare, to help the elderly stay in their own homes and to give their loved ones who are taking care of them needed respite care and support. Finally, our subcommittee held a series of four hearings on the need to better protect Americans from the threat of bioterrorism. Based on these hearings, Senator Specter and I put together a comprehensive antibioterrorism funding plan. While the agreement before us contains a modest level of funding to address this need, our comprehensive $3 billion plan is included in the homeland security package which we will work on later today on the Defense appropriations bill. Between the two, we will be substantially improving the security of Americans against a bioterrorist attack. For the record, in the bioterrorism supplemental, we have provided $865 million to expand State and local public health capacity, to expand the health alert network, and for round-the-clock disease investigators in every State. We provided $512 million to acquire enough smallpox vaccine for every American, and hopefully the smallpox vaccine will be available for every American sometime towards the end of next year, maybe as early as September of next year. We included $593 million to beef up our entire vaccine stockpile in America; $135 million to help our hospitals with surge capacity. If, God forbid, we did have a terrorist attack, our hospitals in so many areas just would not be able to handle it. We have provided $135 million that will help hospitals meet that surge capacity if they require it. We provided $155 million to improve vaccine research and lab capacities at NIH. And we included up to $10 million for a new national tracking system for deadly pathogens such as anthrax. Right now, we track every microscopic ounce of radioactive material that is in our powerplants, in our laboratories, and weapons. We keep a good inventory and tracking system of radioactive nuclear materials, but we do not have such a capacity with our deadly pathogens, as we have seen with anthrax. It now looks as though the anthrax that was sent to Senator Daschle's office and Senator Leahy and others that came through the mail originated in this country. There are all kinds of stories in the press of it coming through Fort Detrick, MD, and Dugway in Utah, but no one knows because we have never had in place an inventory and tracking system for deadly pathogens. The money we appropriated will begin the process of making sure this situation does not happen again. We put in $71 million to improve security at our Nation's laboratories. That is all the money we put into the bioterrorism portion of the bill which will be in the Defense appropriations bill later today. I believe we have a good bill of which we can be proud. It is the product of a bipartisan compromise. As I said, it is not perfect. Some of us wanted different provisions. I wish we could have kept the money in for school construction, but that is the legislative process. We had good bipartisan cooperation in getting to the end result. I close by thanking my chairman, Senator Byrd, for all of his support and for the excellent leadership he has provided to make this bill and the bioterrorism package possible. I thank our ranking member, Senator Stevens. Again, at every step of the way he has been a strong supporter and has made sure we received the necessary allocations for our bill. Finally, this bill, as I said earlier, would not have been possible without the tireless and outstanding staff work. Our staffs have done a terrific job. I know they have not had much sleep in the process. In fact, I understand the night before last they broke at 6 o'clock in the morning. They worked all night to get this done. That is the kind of dedication and hard work of our Appropriations Committee staff of which I am proud. I especially note the great work of the staff director on the subcommittee, Ellen Murray, who worked tirelessly through the year to shape, form, and work on the allocations and bring this all together. Just as I have worked closely with Senator Specter, I know she has worked closely with another great staff person, Bettilou Taylor with Senator Specter, and all of our staffs. Bettilou and Ellen have just done an outstanding job of putting this together. It would not have been possible without them. I thank them both very much for their expertise and their hard work. I thank Jim Sourwine, Erik Fatemi, Mark Laisch, Adam Gluck, Lisa Bernhardt, Adrienne Hallett, and Carole Geagley, as well as Bev Schroeder and Chani Wiggins of my personal staff for their terrific and tireless efforts. As I said, the bill before us simply would not have been possible without them. I mentioned my staff. Let me also mention Mary Dietrich on Senator Specter's staff, Sudip Parikh--I do not know where Sudip is, but I thank him for all the great briefings he has given me in the past. I thank him very much. Maybe after all my briefings on anthrax he will let me know how it all works. Emma Ashburn, also I thank Emma for all of her great work. I say again, we have an outstanding staff, and I thank them all. I take this opportunity publicly to wish them a restful Merry Christmas. I hope they catch up on all the sleep they have lost over the last couple weeks. They have done a great job and have my undying appreciation and admiration and thanks for the great job they have done. I know a couple of other Senators were seeking time. How much time do I have remaining?

Mr. HARKIN. I agree with my colleague from California that vaccinating first responders should be given serious consideration as the CDC and the Office of Emergency Preparedness pursue bioterrorist activities.

Mr. HARKIN. You asked me a question. Now he won't let me answer it.

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, how much time is remaining?

Mr. HARKIN. So does the Congressman.

Mr. HARKIN. In that case, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, parliamentary inquiry: If a quorum call is instituted, does that time run against both sides?

Mr. HARKIN. How much time does Senator Specter have remaining?

Mr. HARKIN. The Senator knows full well that the other Senator from Arizona supports those.

Mr. HARKIN. Might I inquire of the Senator, what committee does the Senator----

Mr. HARKIN. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President: How much time remains on the conference report?

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, the Senator from Arizona never mentioned the projects in Arizona in the amount of $6.7 million. Let me read a couple: University of Arizona for a border health initiative. There is one for Pima Community College in Arizona for minority students to attend college. There is the Pima County Department of Health and the University of Arizona. Here is one for Herd Museum in Phoenix to develop exhibits and educational programs about the historic Phoenix Indian School and the Native Americans who attended the school. Does the Senator want us to knock all those out?

Mr. HARKIN. It is in Massachusetts.

Mr. HARKIN. The answer is there are 1,600 different items in this bill. If the Senator has about 60 seconds of patience, I will find out for him.

Mr. HARKIN. Again, I inquire, if there is a quorum call, then the time runs on both sides?

Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, before I yield time to my good friend from Minnesota, let me again thank Senator Specter, who showed up here from the hearing in which he has been tied up. Let me thank Senator Kennedy for his great leadership on the two areas on which he spoke. Basically, I want to speak about education. I am privileged to serve on his committee and have for almost all the time I have been in the Senate. There isn't anyone I could even think of mentioning here in the Chamber who has devoted more of his or her life to the education of our kids and making sure they have a good quality education than Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts. It has been a privilege and honor to work with him all these years. We have had a tough fight over the last year in reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. I believe we came out with a good bill, one that will move us forward. But now, as I said at the time when the authorizing bill passed: We have created the authorization, now show us the money. I think this is an appropriate time to say the President's budget will be coming down in a couple of months, the budget for next year. The President, I know, is a strong supporter of the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. It has all these requirements for schools for testing and teacher quality and improvement, all the things on which we agreed. But will we have the resources? Will this President, in his budget, provide those resources to back up the authorization bills we passed? That will be the real test. I hope this President will meet that test. I hope we get a budget from him next year that reflects those priorities. Again, on the issue of the mental health parity, we had it on this bill. As the Senator from Massachusetts said--I know Senator Wellstone will speak about it here in just a second--we had it in the bill, and it was widely supported, almost unanimously, in the Senate. It was widely supported in the House. But for some reason which I can't really divine and understand, the House Members decided they were going to vote against it. But it was the moment in time when we could have finally gotten over this, when we finally could have provided the same access to health care for mental health problems as we do for physical health problems. Quite frankly, I believe we have failed in this endeavor. It should have been done. We held as long as we could, but when the House decided they would not agree to it, we had to abide by that and come back to the Senate without that provision in it. It is perhaps the biggest glaring loophole in our entire appropriations bill that we are now reporting back to the Senate. My friend from Minnesota, Senator Wellstone, has been the leader in fighting for the people with mental health problems in this country to assure they have the same kind of health care coverage in their policies that people have for physical health problems. He has been the leader. He has led the charge on it. I know he is not going to give up. If I know anything about Paul Wellstone, he is not going to give up on this fight. We will be back again next year. I will look to him next year for the same kind of leadership he provided this year, and for so many years in the past, for finally breaking down this last civil rights issue. I think Senator Kennedy spoke about that. We have to confront it here in America. I yield the floor.

Mr. HARKIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HARKIN. You know, Madam President, I would just say to the Senator, he asked me a question----

Mr. HARKIN. The Congressman also supports them. I want to mention a couple of other projects. The Senator mentioned the Bishop Museum located in Hawaii. The other one mentioned was in Massachusetts. The Senator made fun of a horseback riding project that he kind of mocked. I don't know that program intimately, but I remember when it was brought up. This is a program in California for therapy for severely mentally retarded and brain-injured kids. It is a program where they have found that by using this kind of therapy, it allows these kids to have a little bit better life. I am not a medical expert. I don't know how this works. But according to the Member of Congress who brought this up, this is something the health care professionals believe is very important to these disabled kids. I am told that the Senator from Arizona may be slightly mistaken, that the Senator from Arizona did ask for some of these projects. The Pima County Department of Health in Arizona, a $400,000 grant was asked for by the Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain--I am sorry, Mr. Kyl. It was asked for by the other Senator from Arizona. Certainly, the other Senator from Arizona --I can't speak for him--would not say just this is mine and nobody else's. So I say that there are four projects in Arizona asked for by Senator Kyl from Arizona. I want the record to show that.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, December 20, 2001, at 11:30 a.m., in executive session to consider a civilian nomination and pending military nominations.

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Thursday, December 20, 2001, at 9:30 a.m., on the nomination of John Magaw to be Undersecretary of Transportation Security, (DOT).

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. I ask the leader, what nominees?

Mr. HARKIN. Reserving the right to object.