Wally Herger

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 4. The fundamental question in today's debate is what produces better results, the free market or the Federal Government? Medicare part D was founded on a belief that free markets get results. It is a system in which private companies compete with each other to meet the needs of our senior citizens. These private companies negotiate with drug manufacturers to get lower prices, and the results have been impressive. When the Congress created part D, we expected the average premium to be around $35 a month. Yet, thanks to the power of competition, Medicare beneficiaries actually paid an average of $24 per month, and that number is going down to $22 in 2007. Mr. Speaker, I hope we can stop and think about what that means. In every other area of health care, costs are rising far faster than inflation. Where else have we seen an actual decrease in health care cost? At the same time, we can also see the results of a system in which the government imposes price controls or as today's legislation basically proposes. In Canada, a government-run health care system has resulted in long waiting lists for medical care and a massive exodus of talented physicians. In our own country, our brief experiment with price controls in the 1970s ended with disastrous gasoline shortages. Mr. Speaker, I hope this Congress will consider the results and vote for the system that gets proven results. I urge my colleagues to soundly reject this legislation.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the minimum wage increase. Not only is this legislation detrimental to small business growth and job creation, but it has been brought to the floor outside the normal committee review process without the ability to consider an alternative. I have long stood against minimum wage hikes, which increase government interference in the labor market. Economists agree that when the cost of labor increases, it becomes more difficult for employers to hire new workers. Unfortunately, the burden of wage increases falls on small businesses which produce an estimated two-thirds of all new jobs in the United States. Minimum wage job seekers, often first-time employees looking to get their foot in the door, are most harmed by such increases. It is troubling that this bill gives no thought to softening the financial impact of our engines of new job growth when we could easily combine a wage increase with tax relief to help small businesses stay competitive and keep our economy growing. One provision not included in the minimum wage bill would extend small businesses expensing. Over the last few years, Congress has increased the expensing limit which allows firms to write off equipment purchases immediately. This allows small businesses to expand faster and hire new workers. I continue to support a permanent extension of this provision. Without extension, expensing will soon revert from its current $100,000 back to $25,000. Other relief not permitted in this is the elimination of the unnecessary 2 percent unemployment surtax. I joined my friend Jim McCrery in the 109th Congress to end the surtax and stimulate job creation and higher wages for those same workers who might lose jobs due to a minimum wage hike. Finally, discounting relief from the 41 percent minimum wage increase, the bill ignores other side effects, such as impacts on the workfare participants. Current law determines how long welfare beneficiaries may participate in workfare, which helps recipients develop good work habits. As the minimum wage rises, recipients have access to less work, even if that is what they most need to prepare for a new job. Mr. Speaker, by dismissing alternatives, the majority has generated a bill whose benefits to the American workers will be negligible, side effects real, and impacts on job creation palpable. I urge my colleagues to reject this measure.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, there are a number of provisions in this bill that I believe will improve our national security. For instance, I support increasing protections at our most important infrastructure facilities, like dams and power plants, and improving the Homeland Security grant allocation process so that it is truly risk-based. I also agree with the provisions in the bill that would strengthen sanctions on countries that participate in the proliferation of nuclear materials, equipment and weapons technology. However, I do have concerns with the bill's cargo inspection provision. We need to arrive at a system that ensures that all cargo entering the U.S. is safe. I believe the best way to approach supply chain security is through a risk-based approach, as endorsed by the SAFE Ports Act, which became law last fall. In particular, the SAFE Ports Act establishes a pilot program to test a system of 100 percent scanning at three ports. Then, based on lessons learned from that program, we could deploy a broader functioning inspection system. Although the goal of today's legislation is laudable, I am concerned that it imposes an arbitrary deadline for its new requirement for 100 percent scanning in all ports without first considering the effectiveness of such a proposal or our ability to carry it out. We must also consider who will pay for this new program--both inside and outside the United States. Mr. Speaker, I remain committed to working with others in the House to see that the provisions of last year's SAFE Ports Act are implemented, and believe that the feasibility of any new measures and mandates should be demonstrated before they're passed into law.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Sacramento River National Recreation Area Establishment Act of 2006. This bill was drafted with the direct input and involvement of locally elected leaders in Tehama County, California. It is the product of a citizen-led initiative. Written exchanges, phone calls, meetings, and an on-site visit were all part of the process that has led up to today. On two separate occasions the Tehama County Board of Supervisors endorsed the concept of creating a National Recreation Area at the Sacramento River Bend, including, most recently, a unanimous endorsement of this specific legislation, which was passed on December 6, 2006. The Shasta County Board of Supervisors and the City of Redding, California both have formally expressed support for the creation of a recreation area at the Bend Area. Various constituents and organizations have done so as well. Local officials expressed support for a national designation that focused on recreation and respected the nearby communities' goals and priorities. They wanted a designation to build on existing popular outdoors opportunities, such as horseback riding, hunting, fishing, and hiking. They wanted management of the land to attract tourists to the area in order to help the local economy. And they wanted to make sure that neighboring landowners and land uses were protected in the process. It was argued that a national designation for the Bend Area should be a ``win-win'' for everyone in the community. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to say that this legislation accomplishes this important priority. In carrying out the wishes of local officials, the Sacramento River National Recreation Area Establishment Act of 2006 focuses on three important local priorities: recreation, community involvement, and landowner protection. The bill directs the BLM to manage the Bend Area in a manner that encourages and promotes public recreation. The bill lists, at a minimum, sixteen separate recreational activities that are to occur and be enhanced for public enjoyment of the recreation area and, in turn, help create new economic opportunities for local businesses. Specific language is also included to ensure that this popular destination point for deer, wild turkey, dove, and pheasant hunting, and trophy-sized rainbow trout and salmon fishing remain open and accessible to the public. The bill also authorizes the Secretary to develop recreation related facilities, such as new trails, restrooms, parking areas, and campgrounds, all of which will help make experiencing the Bend Area more enjoyable for Northstate families. Additionally, the bill clearly states that no fees for same-day use or access to the recreation area may be charged by the BLM unless significant recreation services are provided. This provision will help the public access the Bend Area free of charge for activities like an afternoon hike or bike ride. Any modest fees that could be charged at the Bend Area would be developed in consultation with the public and proceeds would be reinvested in local recreation and safety facilities. Local involvement and participation is also required in the bill. The legislation would establish an ``Advisory Council'' to ensure that the ideas and concerns of local citizens are incorporated into a management plan for the area. The Advisory Council would be appointed by locally elected officials, and would consist of concerned citizens representing diverse backgrounds and viewpoints. And to ensure that everyone in the community has a chance to participate in the drafting of the management plan for the Bend Area, each meeting of the Advisory Council will be open to public observation and involvement. This important provision will ensure transparency without the unnecessary paperwork burdens and expense associated with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this bill protects private property rights. Local officials carefully drew the recreation area boundaries so as not to include private land. In addition, language was developed to ensure that landowners adjacent to the new recreation area are guaranteed full access to their property, and that efforts to improve or enhance such access are not limited in any way by this legislation. Existing water rights holders are also protected under this bill, as it plainly denies authority to the federal government to acquire water rights to further the purposes and needs of the recreation area. Lastly, livestock grazing, which is very important to the area I represent, is protected in this bill. Local officials supporting the legislation were clear: the right to continue to graze cattle in this area needs to be preserved. Mr. Speaker, it has been a great pleasure for me to work with local officials and concerned citizens to develop this legislation. But our work is not over. In my view, you can never have too much local participation. Initiatives like this one succeed not because they were created in Congress or by national interest groups. They succeed because they are the product of an on-the-ground effort, led by those who live near and are the most familiar with this special area. I look forward to continuing to work with my constituents who have been involved in this legislation to this point, and urge anyone else with an interest to participate to do so. This legislation is introduced in the spirit of local involvement and cooperation. It has been carefully written based on local needs and is worthy of the consideration and support of my colleagues in the House.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, economic growth through increased trade and investment is one of our most effective tools in our arsenal for fighting poverty around the world. It also creates opportunity at home by opening foreign markets to U.S. agriculture, goods and services. The legislation before us today extends several trade preference programs which benefit millions of workers in African, Andean and developing countries around the world. It also extends Permanent Normal Trade Relations to Vietnam which will officially join the World Trade Organization later this month. Vietnam's membership in the WTO will bring substantial economic benefits to American consumers, farmers, businesses and workers only if we approve this measure. Without PNTR, farmers, firms and consumers in the U.S. will not be able to take full advantage of Vietnam's WTO commitments. U.S. agricultural exports to Vietnam exceeded $192 million last year and represented nearly 17 percent of our total exports to the country. PNTR will reduce tariffs to 15 percent or less on most agricultural exports. Vietnam has also agreed to allow imports of all U.S. beef from animals under 30 months of age. Today's legislation paves the way for greater economic and strategic cooperation between our Nation and the many countries that will benefit from a broader trade relationship. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to thank Chairman Thomas for his work on this legislation. I urge its passage.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Suzanne Gonzales Suicide Promotion Punishment and Prevention Act of 2006 on behalf of families across the United States who have lost loved ones to suicide through information provided on Internet forums. On March 22, 2003, 19-year-old Suzanne Gonzales told her father, ``I love you, Dad. I'll see you soon.'' Hours later, she was dead. As a student attending college thousands of miles from home, Suzanne had become involved in an online discussion group that promotes suicide as a personal choice and a ``civil right.'' Other members of the group, using anonymous screen names, encouraged Suzanne to commit suicide and gave her step-by-step instructions on how to obtain and use potassium cyanide, a lethal substance used by jewelers to polish metal. It is difficult for most of us to imagine the grief of Suzanne's parents when they learned of their daughter's death. Their distress was only increased when prosecutors told them that there was no law under which the members of the online group, who had given Suzanne the necessary information to commit suicide, could be charged. While many states have laws prohibiting assistance to suicide, the individuals responsible for Suzanne's death could be residents of any state. Suicide is not just another personal choice. It is final and irreversible. Victims of suicide do not have an opportunity to learn from their mistake. And their actions have a lasting impact on their family and friends. The same Web site whose members encouraged Suzanne Gonzales to take her own life has been implicated in well over a dozen other suicides. Mr. Speaker, I believe it is time for Congress to take a stand. These sick and twisted individuals who prey on the despair and emotional distress of others ought to be held responsible for their actions. The legislation I am introducing would make it a federal crime to use facilities of interstate commerce, including the Internet, to provide a particular person with information or material support to commit suicide. It is narrowly tailored to avoid infringing on speech protected by the first amendment. And it recognizes the role of state governments as the primary sources of laws relating to suicide. This legislation is a sensible response to a real and growing problem, one that will bring wrongdoers to justice and hopefully help to prevent future tragedies like Suzanne Gonzales's. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the tax relief legislation before us today. I would also like to make a note of thanks to Chairman Bill Thomas. Bill is ending a prolific 6-year tenure as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, during which he has been responsible for the passage of each pro-growth and pro-family tax measure since 2001. I would like to thank Chairman Thomas and his staff for their work which has continued through the writing of today's legislation. Among the expiring tax relief measures is an extension and modernization of the research and development tax credit. In my own home State of California, more than 6,600 firms perform R&D, helping to make California number one in reported research and development activity. In the face of an extremely competitive global marketplace, the R&D tax credit helps keep America first among other nations in new cutting-edge innovation. Also included is a provision that helps bring equity to farmers and small businesses in rural areas such as my own home district in northern California. Agricultural aviators, who are exempt from fuel excise taxes, will now be able to claim tax refunds directly without having to rely on fuel suppliers to pass along this benefit. Even though this is a small change, it will help reduce fuel costs for ag aviators and spraying costs for farmers who employ ag aviators to plant and maintain their crops. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this bill.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I have long championed tax relief for small businesses because I believe such firms are the lifeblood of our economy. As a small businessman myself, I know how small business owners struggle to remain profitable in a highly competitive and extremely challenging environment. Yet they continue to be the drivers of much of our Nation's economic and new job growth. It is for this reason that I have strongly supported increases to the current section 179 small business expensing limits, an end to the onerous death tax, and the reduced double taxation of capital gains and dividends. I am concerned, however, that a little known revenue raising provision, passed as part of the tax reconciliation bill in May, will hamper small business' creative spirit by significantly and adversely changing the way governments pay for the goods they use and services they require. Effective in 2011, section 511 of the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 will require federal, state, and local governments to withhold 3 percent from payments for goods and services, excluding payments to non-profits and those made by governments with less than $100 million in annual expenditures. This onerous provision will not take effect for 4 years. But I believe we must begin addressing the impacts it will have on honest taxpaying businesses now, and actively seek alternatives to withholding in the meanwhile. Every day, thousands of businesses and individuals across the country are reimbursed by governments for various reasons. In my Northern California congressional district, governments rely on local and regional businesses all the time to maintain public services--from the electrician who rewires a city council chambers in Redding to the construction company that builds an interchange at a dangerous stretch of highway in Butte County. When the Feather River needs a new setback levee, or an existing levee in the network requires urgent repairs to protect the community, the Army Corps of Engineers employs local businesses for construction and materials. Similarly, when an escape route from a fire- prone community requires widening, the government turns to local sources to get the job done. In 2011, however, firms providing these necessary goods and services to governments will see 3 percent of their payments withheld. I am troubled that the withholding provision will effectively force firms to float a new interest-free loan to the federal Treasury if they do business with a local, state or federal government. In addition, unlike other income-based withholding, which is actually based on tax liability, the new government withholding provision is based on government payments with no relationship to a company's taxable income. This means that, while businesses will be deprived of much needed cash flows for day-to-day operations, the 3 percent provision could end up significantly over withholding for tax purposes. The Joint Committee on Taxation (Joint Committee) confirmed this in its description of the provision, stating ``sellers of goods and materials are more likely to have overwithholding and, thus, bear more of the burden of a flat rate because of the lower profit margin on such sales relative to sales of services.'' The provision would also disproportionately harm small-and medium- sized businesses that operate on low margins, and contractors that frequently employ subcontractors. It is conceivable that, faced with 3 percent withholding on a revenue source, companies that do business with governments may inflate contract costs to compensate, shift costs to subcontractors, or simply hire fewer employees over the course of the year. Others may resort to increased debt financing to make up for reduced cash flows. In addition, governments at all levels have expressed concerns over the new administrative burdens that such withholding will require. Among the reasons for inclusion of this provision was a desire to reduce America's tax gap, or the difference between the taxes we believe should be collected in a given year, and those that actually are. The Internal Revenue Service currently estimates the net tax gap to be in the area of $290 billion. Whether due to taxpayer error or willful tax avoidance, the tax gap is a very real problem that can undermine taxpayer confidence in the voluntary nature of our tax system, and encourage continued non-compliance. According to the National Taxpayer Advocate, the ``cost'' of the tax gap could be equated to a $2,000 annual ``surtax'' on each taxpayer to subsidize non-compliance. The result is that the tax gap ends up ``harming compliant taxpayers because they pay their correct tax liability while others do not.'' Like many, I believe that bridging the tax gap and encouraging tax compliance should remain a top priority of both Congress and the Administration. Where identification of specific non-compliant sectors of the economy has been difficult, the Administration should continue to investigate ways it can use its existing authority to improve the collection and utilization of non-wage taxpayer information for enforcement purposes. In addition, as better information on noncompliance is generated, Congress should actively consider whether additional legislation is needed to crack down on tax cheats. Prior to implementing a new tax collection regime, such as the 3 percent withholding provision, we should investigate what other methods are at our disposal to deal with the outstanding problems of non- compliance. To this end, I believe that any solution that aims to reduce the tax gap should consider the impacts of new burdens on taxpayers. For this reason, I am pleased to introduce the ``Withholding Tax Relief Act of 2006,'' a companion to legislation introduced in the Senate, S. 2831, by Senator Larry Craig of Idaho. While I recognize the underlying problem of tax compliance must be addressed, I believe this problem--as it pertains to businesses and individuals that provide goods and services to governments--can be tackled in a less intrusive manner than withholding, and with positive results. As reported by the Joint Committee, the withholding provision is estimated to increase revenues coming into the Treasury by $6.079 billion in its first year of implementation, and between $215 million and $235 million per year over the next four years. Further, the Joint Committee recognizes that the ``significant revenue effect'' in the year of implementation ``is largely attributable to accelerating tax receipts,'' indicating that the additional compliance sought by this provision is really in the ballpark of $235 million. Still, in order to recapture this amount of unpaid taxes, the withholding provision will affect over $6 billion of government payments tohonest business and individual taxpayers. It is probably unrealistic to think that we could ever reduce non- compliance to zero, especially given the enormous complexity of our CUlTent tax code. But apart trom fundamental tax reform and simplification, increased compliance should remain an objective. Congress and the Administration should continue to pursue increased compliance alternatives, including the use of the federal government's already broad authority to levy federal payments, improve coordination and use of taxpayer information, require new information reporting, or increase enforcement. Ultimately, though, any alternatives that focus on compliance should be balanced against the new burdens such compliance mechanisms would cause. We should avoid placing unnecessary burdens on all honest taxpayers in a particular sector of the economy to force the compliance of the few. Although I recognize that repeal of the 3 percent withholding provision will leave the actual problem of non-compliance unanswered, I believe withholding is the wrong policy approach to this issue. Repeal, as proposed in the ``Withholding Tax Relief Act of 2006,'' serves as a reminder of the importance of this issue, and the need to seriously address the impacts this policy will have on businesses in my congressional district and elsewhere in the country. In addition, we must also begin discussion of alternatives to withholding. I intend to continue working with the business community and others in the 110th Congress on ways to reduce any eventual burdens this provision will cause, as well as alternatives to withholding that will reduce taxpayer non-compliance.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) for your work in this area. I thank you for your support and work on this specific legislation. I look forward to working with you on the issue that you have just outlined, this issue, and many other issues in this area.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, the Child and Family Services Improvement Act is good legislation that will help ensure the safety of vulnerable children. It will hold States accountable for visiting children in foster care on at least a monthly basis. It will target existing resources to help States and local communities address the impact of parental substance abuse on child welfare programs. Again, I would like to thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) and all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their work in crafting this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I believe it will take an important step towards improving our Nation's child protection system.

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

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 3525, the Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006. I would like to thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) and many other Members for their support of this bipartisan legislation. This legislation reauthorizes and improves oversight and accountability of numerous child protection programs that will provide about $4 billion during the next 5 years to help keep children safe. In recent years, the subcommittee I chair has held a dozen hearings on our Nation's child protection system. Every witness testified about the need to reform this broken system, which too often has lost track of children or placed them in homes where they suffered continued abuse and neglect. The legislation before us today includes a number of provisions designed to improve the monitoring of children in foster care and to hold States more accountable for the care they provide. This legislation will require States to ensure that at least 90 percent of children in foster care are visited on a monthly basis in response to research highlighting the importance of frequent visits in promoting child safety. This legislation also makes substantial improvements to the Child Welfare Services program. For example, this program now is permanently authorized. As a result, there has been little oversight and monitoring of the Child Welfare Services program in recent decades. This legislation will authorize this program through fiscal year 2011, ensuring that future Congresses examine this program, as improved in this bill, to make sure that it is operating properly. This legislation also stresses preventing abuse and neglect from occurring, not just managing its effects. Among other measures, it targets new funds to a key cause of child abuse and neglect: parental drug abuse, including by parents who abuse methamphetamine, which is a major concern in my own northern California congressional district. A total of $145 million in program funds will be available to community groups working with child welfare officials to help keep parents off drugs. Mr. Speaker, I have highlighted just a few of the many improvements this legislation will make to our Nation's child protection system, but there is still much more work to do. Children still linger in foster care waiting for permanent families. Every year, almost 24,000 of these youths age out of foster care without a family of their own. We will continue to work to ensure this system protects these children and promotes a brighter future. We also will continue our efforts to ensure that Federal taxpayer dollars are being spent properly within these programs. Today marks one step forward towards those goals. This legislation has the support of numerous organizations including the Children's Defense Fund, the Child Welfare League of America, and the National Indian Child Welfare Association. I thank all the Members and staff who have worked to bring this legislation to the floor today. The Child and Family Services Improvement Act is good legislation, and I urge all my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 3525, the Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006. I'm pleased to be here today with the gentleman from Washington who is a cosponsor of this bipartisan legislation. I'd like to thank the many Members from both sides of the aisle for their support. This has been a truly bipartisan effort at all stages and I'm pleased we are here today to move this legislation forward to the President for his signature. This legislation reauthorizes and improves numerous child protection programs that combined will provide about $4 billion during the next 5 years to keep children safe. These programs are the Promoting Safe and Stable Families program, the Child Welfare Services program, the Court Improvement program, and the Mentoring Children of Prisoners program. S. 3525 takes an important step forward in our efforts to prevent child abuse and neglect by keeping families together and preventing, whenever possible, the unnecessary separation of children from their families. Over the past 6 years, the subcommittee that I chair has held 12 hearings to explore our Nation's child protection system. Every witness has testified to improvements and reforms that are necessary to fix this broken system. The legislation before us today includes a number of provisions that address these issues we have heard so much about. First, time and time again we have seen stories of children lost by caseworkers, children who have gone missing in the foster care system, or even worse, children who have suffered abuse in homes in which they are placed. No one who sat through these hearings will soon forget the images of four boys in New Jersey who were starved by their adopted parents and were discovered by a neighbor rummaging for food in the trash. There is little doubt that States need to increase oversight and monitoring of these children and the legislation before us today will ensure that happens. S. 3525 will require all States to ensure at least 90 percent of children in foster care are visited on a monthly basis by their caseworker, and to ensure that the majority of these visits occur in the child's residence. States will work with the Department of Health and Human Services to establish targets to reach this goal by fiscal year 2012. In any year in which a State fails to reach its target, we will continue to make the State's full Federal allotment available to them but the State will need to increase their own spending in order to access those funds. Further, to help States achieve this standard, the legislation directs $95 million to be spent on activities that help ensure children are visited on a monthly basis and that these visits are well-planned and focused on assessing the child's safety and well- being. Second, we have heard repeatedly how Federal funds for child welfare disproportionately assist kids after they have been removed from their homes, instead of preventing' the abuse or neglect that results in the need for their removal in the first place. This legislation will encourage States to invest more dollars in activities that keep families together when appropriate by limiting the amount that can fund basic administrative costs as well as by targeting these dollars for prevention and family support services. Also, States will be required to submit actual spending data for these programs, which will enhance our oversight of State activity on behalf of these children. And third, substance abuse by parents and caretakers, particularly abuse of methamphetamine, is having a substantial impact on the child welfare system in some areas. This legislation will direct $145 million for grants to law enforcement personnel, court personnel, and others involved with the child welfare system to partner with the State child welfare agency to devise solutions to this problem. I'm pleased this legislation continues the Mentoring Children of Prisoners program and provides for a voucher pilot program to expand the availability of mentoring services for children. There are approximately 4,000 mentoring organizations nationwide, and these vouchers will enable families to select an organization from which children can receive these important services. Few dispute the tremendous impact a mentor can have in the life of a troubled child. I'm very pleased we have reached an agreement to include this program, a priority of the Bush administration, in this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I've highlighted just a few of the many improvements this legislation will make to our Nation's child protection system. But there is still much more work to do. Children linger in foster care waiting for permanent families. Every year almost 20,000 of these youths age out of foster care without a family of their own. We will continue to work to ensure this system protects these children and promotes a brighter future for them. Today is a major step forward towards that goal. I thank all the Members and staff who have worked to bring this legislation to the floor today. This legislation has the support of numerous child welfare organizations, including the Children's Defense Fund, Catholic Charities USA, Mentor, and the National Indian Child Welfare Association. This is an excellent bill and I urge all my colleagues to support it. Attached below is a summary of the legislation. Report Accompanying S. 3525, The Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006, as Amended Prepared by the Staff of the U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means and the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance--September 26, 2006 Section 1--Short title ``The Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006'' Section 2--Findings The legislation makes a number of findings regarding the provision of services under two child welfare programs authorized under Title IV-B of the Social Security Act, the Child Welfare Services (CWS) program and the Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) program. The findings note the importance of monthly caseworker visits in improving outcomes for children. They also outline the relationship between the entry of children into the child welfare system and their parent's abuse of methamphetamine and other substances. Section 3--Reauthorization of the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program Current Law For fiscal year (FY) 2006, authorizes mandatory funding of $345 million for the Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) program (Title IV-B, Subpart 2 of the Social Security Act) and discretionary funding of $200 million for each of FYs 2002 through 2006.

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), who is an active member of the committee and a former chairman of the committee.

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

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments to the House amendments to the Senate bill (S. 3525) to amend subpart 2 of part B of title IV of the Social Security Act to improve outcomes for children in families affected by methamphetamine abuse and addiction, to reauthorize the promoting safe and stable families program, and for other purposes.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 959, which recognizes and supports the success of the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 in increasing adoptions. I would like to thank the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Camp, for introducing this resolution and for his work to enact legislation to improve the lives of abused and neglected children. The number of children adopted from our nation's foster care system has substantially increased since enactment of the Adoption and Safe Families Act from 31,000 in 1997 to over 51,000 in 2004. I applaud the judges, attorneys, state officials, and other adoption professionals who have worked tirelessly to move foster children more quickly into permanent, loving families. National Adoption Day in November 2005 finalized the adoptions of more than 3,300 children from foster care and I hope the November 2006 National Adoption Day is even more successful. There are currently 118,000 foster children available for adoption and we must do more to find them loving families. Almost half of these children are aged 9 or older and therefore at risk of spending their entire childhood in foster care and aging out of the system without a permanent home. In 2003, President Bush signed the Adoption Promotion Act, which extended the availability of adoption incentive payments to the States while promoting the adoption of older children. We will continue to support policies that ensure children who cannot be safely reunified with their parents are moved quickly into permanent, adoptive homes. I also wish to recognize the many talented and hardworking staff at the Department of Health and Human Services for their outstanding work in this area. More than 6,000 children have been placed in adoptive homes since the launch of www.adoptuskids.org., a website which connects families with waiting children. We must do more to help connect would-be adoptive parents with these children to ensure every child grows up in a safe, loving family. Again, I wish to thank the gentleman from Michigan for introducing this resolution. I'd like to personally thank the many child welfare professionals and most importantly all the adoptive families across America who have made a permanent commitment to improve the lives of these vulnerable children. They are the real heroes behind the many improvements we have seen in recent years.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Chairman, although I agree with the central goal of H.R. 2965, I had some concerns with several provisions in the bill. I believe contracts should be awarded on a competitive basis, with private businesses having a fair chance to participate. And if H.R. 2965 merely ended the noncompetitive nature of Federal Prison Industries, FPI, contracts, I would have supported it. However, the legislation contained some other provisions that, in my view, undermined the effort to make Federal contracting more competitive. Specifically, the bill requires that the Federal Government scale back its total purchases from FPI, regardless of whether FPI's bids are competitive. It also mandates a substantial increase in the wages paid to inmates employed by FPI, apparently with an eye toward making FPI less competitive. I am concerned that this policy could increase costs to Government agencies by forcing them to agree to more expensive contracts. Furthermore, in order to make up for the potential loss of FPI employment, H.R. 2965 includes several expensive new prison rehabilitation programs. Since FPI currently receives no taxpayer money, I am not convinced that this approach makes sense in our tight budget climate. Thus, while I support doing away with the current preferential treatment of FPI in Government contracting, I opposed H.R. 2965 for these reasons.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 5865) to amend section 1113 of the Social Security Act to temporarily increase funding for the program of temporary assistance for United States citizens returned from foreign countries, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, and concur in the Senate amendment.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill, H.R. 5865.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5865, the Returned Americans Protection Act, provides emergency funding for the HHS repatriation program so it can assist U.S. citizens evacuating Lebanon after they return to the U.S. That is exactly what HHS asked Congress to do in letters sent just yesterday to the Speaker and Senate majority leader. Instead of increasing the deficit, this legislation is fully paid for. It pays for this emergency assistance through increased program oversight, including by sunsetting the program after 2007. It is totally appropriate for Congress to set a sunset date to ensure future program oversight. The 1996 welfare reform law did the same thing. It replaced the former AFDC program with the new TANF block grant program and only authorized the new program through fiscal year 2002. The Child and Family Services Program Act of 2006, which the House agreed to just this morning, in bipartisan fashion, also does the same thing. It limits the authorization of the child welfare services program through only 2011, or for the next 5 years, instead of permanently, as under current law. This was done and agreed to in bipartisan fashion by this House to ensure Congress reviews this program as it reviews the related Promoting Safe and Stable Families program, which also would authorize it through 2011. Mr. Speaker, again I urge Members to join me in passing this legislation today. H.R. 5865 will ensure that those arriving in America from the strife and turmoil in Lebanon will continue to have service available to help them as they make their way home. It also ensures Congress time and opportunity to review the repatriation program and consider ways to improve it to even better meet the needs of displaced Americans in the future. In closing, I would like to thank the dedicated staff at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, State workers supported by this program, and especially the many volunteers who have pitched in to help Americans returning home from Lebanon in recent days. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Returned Americans Protection Act, H.R. 5865. This legislation will help our Nation to continue to assist U.S. citizens fleeing the violence in Lebanon as they return home to the United States. In recent days, thousands of Americans have fled the violence in Lebanon. Thousands already have landed in the United States, and thousands more will be arriving in the coming days. In all, as many as 15,000 U.S. citizens may be returning. State workers are prepared to assist them, helping join them with family or friends, and even make arrangements for their connecting travel. If the arriving citizen has no other resources, provision will be made for a loan or, in exceptional circumstances, a grant to cover their continued travel expenses or temporary lodging costs, all of which costs money, including to reimburse States for caseworkers to offer this assistance. In a program that is limited by a current $1 million cap on annual spending, experiencing this large influx of needy, especially at this time in the fiscal year, is a challenge. As the Secretary of Health and Human Services said in a letter to Speaker Hastert dated just yesterday, ``We need your assistance in lifting this cap as soon as possible.'' Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us, H.R. 5865, provides that assistance. It temporarily lifts the program's current $1 million funding cap, allowing for continued assistance for Americans returning from Lebanon. It also improves oversight over this little known program by making two additional steps. First, it requires the HHS Inspector General to review program spending on those repatriated from Lebanon. The report will break down administrative costs versus costs for travel and lodging. That way, Congress will have more information about what this program actually does. The second thing this legislation does to improve oversight is to sunset the current repatriation program at the end of fiscal year 2007, more than 13 months from now. This will provide Congress sufficient time to review the program and decide where improvements are needed. This change also is estimated by the Congressional Budget Office as saving $4 million, fully offsetting the cost of the additional assistance to those evacuating Lebanon. So we will cover short-term needs and get better data that we will use to improve this program for the long run. That is a win-win for everyone. Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill which pays for additional services by improved oversight. We should approve it. I call on the U.S. Senate to do the same as soon as possible. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4472, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. This is good legislation that will go a long way towards keeping our children safe from harm. I am especially pleased this legislation includes an important provision that I believe will help improve our Nation's child protection system. As part of the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, Federal law was amended to require that States complete background checks prior to approving a prospective foster or adoptive home. If these background checks reveal that would-be foster or adoptive parents have been convicted of certain felonies including murder and crimes against children, such adults are permanently disqualified from receiving Federal funds as foster or adoptive parents. Felony convictions for physical assault, battery, or drug- related offenses disqualify an adult from receiving Federal payments for the child for 5 years. To be clear, States could still place foster children in those homes, they just couldn't use Federal dollars to pay such adults for the care of the children. These provisions are designed to ensure children are placed in safe homes and Federal funds are used properly. Currently, 43 States including the District of Columbia comply with these requirements. However, because Federal law currently gives States a choice, eight States opt out of this requirement, which allows them to apply weaker standards concerning which adults are to be entrusted with foster or adoptive children and when Federal funds can be used in such homes. In practice, it is our understanding that most of the States actually follow Federal guidelines, leaving only a handful of States that actually apply weaker standards than Federal law expects. H.R. 4472 will allow States that opt out of the current Federal standards to continue to do so for the next 2 years. But then all States must comply with the current requirements, which most already follow. States will continue to have the flexibility to define requirements that are stronger than Federal law. It is my hope that during the next 2 years the States that apply weaker standards for who can be a foster or adoptive parent and receive Federal funds will examine their policies an take steps to bring them in line with Federal policy, as the overwhelming majority of States already do. It is important that all States satisfy minimum requirements to ensure the safety of children. Children in foster care are literally our responsibility. It is not too much to expect certain minimum standards involving who can be entrusted with their care, especially when Federal tax dollars are paid to such adults. Amazingly enough, some suggest this provision may not increase child safety. I disagree. It is difficult to understand how some can insist that Federal taxpayers must pay adults to be foster or adoptive parents when a background check has uncovered their involvement in past crimes such as murder and crimes against children. Again, States may choose to do whatever they wish with their own dollars, but we have a responsibility to see that children are protected and Federal tax dollars are used wisely. I'm pleased H.R. 4472 will ensure all States follow the same minimum standards for determining who may be entrusted with these vulnerable children and receive Federal funds for their care. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. HERGER

Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 3525, as amended. As amended, this legislation reflects provisions as reported by the Committee on Ways and Means on June 29 and included in H.R. 5640, the Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006. I am pleased to be here with the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) who is a cosponsor of this bipartisan legislation. I thank him for his work and leadership on this legislation. I would also like to thank the many Members from both sides of the aisle for their support. Mr. Speaker, this legislation reauthorizes and improves numerous child protection programs that combined, would provide about $4 billion during the next 5 years to keep children safe and ensure they are raised in safe and loving families. These programs are the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program, the Child Welfare Services Program, the Court Improvement Program and the Mentoring Children of Prisoners Program. This legislation supports State efforts to prevent child abuse and neglect by keeping families together and preventing, whenever possible, the unnecessary separation of children from their families. For example, the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program provides resources for family support services, family preservation services, time-limited reunification services and post-adoption services. We know that one of the best ways to give a child a chance of a bright future is to ensure that that child is raised in a safe, loving family. The services supported by this legislation are targeted where they are needed most, to help parents at risk of abusing or neglecting their children or to prevent repeated abuse and neglect. On May 23, the Ways and Means Human Resources Subcommittee, which I chair, held a hearing on this legislation. We heard from a broad array of voices in support of the extension of these programs and in support of changes requiring States to focus resources more on services for children and at-risk families. Earlier this year, the President signed the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, which provided $200 million in new funds for services to better protect children over the next 5 years. I am very pleased that this legislation targets these increased resources so more foster children are visited on a monthly basis. The Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General recently reported that these visits were not occurring. Only 20 States could tell whether the caseworkers actually visited children in foster care on a monthly basis. In seven of these 20 States, the reports found that fewer than half of the children in foster care were visited on a monthly basis. Research shows that children who are visited on a more frequent basis are more quickly placed in permanent homes and experience other positive outcomes, compared to children not visited. Newspapers are frequently reporting the horrors of children neglected by the very system charged to protect them. The increased monitoring promoting by this bill makes sense and would go a long way towards better protecting these vulnerable children. Mr. Speaker, we still have more work to do to improve our Nation's foster care system. Time and time again, we hear of children lingering in foster care, bounced from home to home. In some cases, foster children have lived in more than 50 homes. This is unacceptable, and we will continue to work to improve this program so that all children can live with a family that loves them. This legislation brings us one step closer to that important goal. It has widespread bipartisan support, and I urge all my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.