Dale Kildee

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to introduce two bills, the Land and Water Conservation Fund Accessibility Act of 1997 and a proposal to establish the St. Helena Island National Scenic Area. It was President John F. Kennedy who had the infinite wisdom to propose legislation to create a land and water conservation fund. In 1964, Congress established, with bipartisan support, the land and water conservation fund [LWCF] for public acquisition of park and recreation lands for recreation planning, acquisition and development. To assure that the LWCF received sufficient funds to carry out the original intent of the law, in 1968, Congress decided to set aside the revenue received from oil and gas leasing on the outer continental shelf [OCS] to fund conservation efforts. The idea was simple. One resource, oil and gas, would be exploited, but the revenues generated would be invested in another resource, the purchase of lands and waters. Up to $900 million is collected for the use of the LWCF each year but Congress must first appropriate the money before it can be spent. Funds appropriated for the LWCF have been declining rapidly in recent years, with only $138 million being spent for the program last year. The State grant portion of the LWCF was not funded at all in fiscal year 1996 or 1997. Furthermore, the House Budget Committee in the last Congress proposed a 5-year moratorium on land acquisition and a phase out of the entire LWCF program. My legislation, the Land and Water Conservation Fund Accessibility Act, would remedy the funding problem by taking the entire LWCF off- budget thus ensuring that its funds will be spent for the purpose it was created. By doing this, the Federal land agencies would have more funds to better manage fragile habitat and endangered lands. This would also provide funds for States to improve parks for inter-cities, and other vital recreational areas. Furthermore, I want to point out that this bill leaves intact the current authority of Congress to make funding decisions about LWCF projects, as part of the annual Interior appropriations bill. Because the appropriations have been dwindling, it has been debated whether the funds from LWCF should be taken from Federal projects and moved to State initiatives. If my bill were passed, we would not have this decade. The LWCF affects every geographic region in America, from a small park or bike trail in Flint, MI, to a wilderness area in northern Michigan. Like myself, the National Audubon Society, the Nation Recreation and Park Association, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Wilderness Society, the Defenders of Wildlife, the Trust for Public Land, the National Parks and Conservation Association, the National Association of State Outdoor Recreation Liaison Officers, the National Wildlife Federation, the Sierra Club and many more organizations who represent various interests across our country agree that the real issue here is that we are not spending enough money on the State and Federal level to conserve our Nation's heritage. As the population increases, land is quickly being developed. We must have the foresight, as our predecessors did in 1964, to realize that we must act now so that future generations will also have the opportunity to enjoy our precious public resources. Mr. Speaker, the second bill I am introducing is the establishment of the St. Helena Island Scenic Area. St. Helena Island is a 241-acre island located in Lake Michigan about 6 miles west of the Mackinac Bridge. The island has been put up for sale by private landowners who are willing to sell it to the Federal Government. The island is contiguous to the Hiawatha National Forest. For the last 10 years, the Michigan Lighthouse Association and the Boy Scouts of America have been restoring a lighthouse on the island that was originally built in 1873. This beautiful lighthouse and its grounds are the only development on the entire island. St. Helena Island provides habitat for several endangered plants and animals, including the Pileated Woodpecker and the Bald Eagle. At the western end of the island, there is a 17-acre Great Blue Heron rookery which has been designated by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources as a refuge. In designating this island as a National Scenic Area, we will ensure that it is given permanent protection for the enjoyment of future generations. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the passage of these environmental initiatives.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, we learned of this amendment late yesterday afternoon, and had only a brief opportunity to go over it. However, we were able to work to make some changes in it. I believe the amendment now is acceptable. I believe it is important, however, that we reserve the right to look at it again in conference with the Senate.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I certainly support the amendment and urge its adoption.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, bills like this could not be written without the staff. I want to thank certain members of the staff who played a major role directly in this bill. On the Democratic side, Brian Kennedy, Marshall Grigsby, David Evans, and Margo Huber. On the Republican side, Mary Gardner-Clagett, D'Arcy Philps, Lynn Selmser, Vic Klatt, and Lauren Coberly. We thank you very much for your very, very hard work, day and night, on this bill.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer], along with his two sons, Matthew and Patrick.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Tierney]. (Mr. TIERNEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Sawyer], a former and much missed member of this committee. (Mr. SAWYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant]. (Mr. TRAFICANT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I would also like to thank the gentlewoman from New Jersey [Mrs. Roukema] for all her work on the committee. She is indeed a great Member of Congress and has been very helpful on this bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Woolsey].

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise to support H.R. 1385, the Employment, Training, and Literacy Enhancement Act of 1997. We have been talking for several years now about the need to create an integrated employment and training system that meets the challenge of preparing American workers for the jobs of the future. Last year our efforts collapsed in conference, I believe largely due to problems in the Senate. This year, however, the gentleman from California [Mr. McKeon], the subcommittee chairman, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling], the committee chairman, have approached this issue in a bipartisan manner, and I believe the bill before us today reflects the consensus approach they have taken to job training reform. In particular, I certainly appreciate the fact that they have ensured that the Federal investment in dislocated workers is maintained. While it is important to streamline and integrate job training programs, it would have been short-sighted to have done so in a way that reduced our ability to provide services to workers in transition. The guarantee of a separate funding stream within the adult block grant in H.R. 1385 is a major improvement over last year's legislation. I am also pleased to see the extent to which this bill builds upon what is already working in local communities. The bill also strengthens accountability in the job training system. First, all job training providers will be accountable to customers through a requirement that they provide annual information that will serve as a consumer's report card that will help guide customers' choices about which institutions have the best record of helping to acquire the skills necessary to get jobs. In addition, States and local areas will have to reach negotiated performance benchmarks that will serve to ensure that they are accountable for results. The accountability provisions are considerably stronger than last year's conference report, and I am particularly supportive of new safeguards which will ensure adults are not defrauded by unscrupulous or fly-by-night training providers. The bill consolidates programs for at-risk economically disadvantaged youth, integrating classroom and work-based learning, providing learning opportunities at work sites, linking secondary learning and postsecondary learning, and fully involving the private sector. The reintroduction of a substate formula for a portion of the funds in both adult and youth block grants will also be an important safeguard to ensure that local areas continue to get the resources to meet the needs of their population. I applaud the State and Local Coalition for reaching agreement to reinsert substate formulas as reflected in the Chairman's en bloc amendment. I think there are some areas in this bill which could still use improvement, and I hope that as we move in the Senate and then in the conference the spirit of bipartisan cooperation will continue to prevail. With respect to the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act provisions in this legislation, I am very pleased with what we have been able to accomplish and am especially gratified that we did our work in a spirit of true bipartisanship. In that regard, I want to pay special thanks again to both the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, my good friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling], who has long been a champion of adult education and family literacy, and to the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from California [Mr. McKeon], who has been very willing to work out differences in a very amicable fashion. This legislation keeps adult education as a part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. I believe this is critical in making it very clear that adult education is first and foremost an education program. There are other adult education provisions of this legislation that are also important; provisions such as the separate such sums authorization, continued funding for professional development, a more reasonable maintenance of effort standard, and the possibility of ongoing support for State literacy resource centers. There are several areas, however, where it might be helpful to have greater clarity regarding legislative intent. First, I view the provisions regarding the eligible agency in charge of adult education programs to be the State agency currently in charge of those programs, and that the reference to State law means State statutory law that cannot be overridden by a Governor's executive order. Second, the accountability provisions in this legislation certainly do not preclude the Secretary of Education from judging State plans on both quality and technical specifications. Quite to the contrary, I believe the Secretary has the clear authority to make such a judgment. Third, English literacy programs most definitely include English as a second language instruction. Fourth, when we go to conference, I believe we should fashion an agreement that will end the confusion of having to consult two different acts to obtain a full knowledge and understanding of the Federal adult education legislation. It is important that those at the State and local level be able to look at one act and get a full and complete understanding of Federal law in this area. While not every provision I wanted has found its way into this legislation, I am on the whole very pleased with the adult education provisions we have been able to work out. I believe they will move adult education forward and they will contribute immensely to both strengthening and expanding the very crucial work done by adult education programs in community after community across this land. I am also pleased to support the amendments to the Vocational Rehabilitation Act contained in H.R. 1385. Those amendments go a long way in streamlining and clarifying certain provisions of that act. Specifically, the revised individualized plan for employment will provide a greater opportunity for disabled persons to develop their own employment plans. The role and participation of program consumers in the individualized plan for employment will be strengthened as a result. Under current law, the individual's plan is jointly developed and approved by the eligible individual and the vocational rehabilitation counselor. Under this bill, an eligible individual would be allowed the option to assume primary responsibility in the development and direction of that employment plan. The bill also simplifies and clarifies existing requirements and eliminates burdensome process requirements without compromising consumer protections in order to streamline the process. Mr. Chairman, the bill under consideration also provides for a greater consumer involvement based upon informed choice options. State agencies would be required to develop written policies and procedures related to informed choice, including procedures for informing individuals about the availability and scope of informed choice, and for assisting individuals to acquire information necessary to exercise that choice. Finally, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1385 requires that Federal agencies provide certification of compliance with electronic and information technology accessibility guidelines under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. In other words, Mr. Chairman, this bill ensures that the Federal Government monitors its own requirements to assist disabled persons with respect to the accessibility of electronic and information technology. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to support H.R. 1385 and am very grateful to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling] and the gentleman from California [Mr. McKeon] for their very, very hard work, their very, very close cooperation and their willingness to compromise. We both compromised on this. Neither side is totally pleased, but this is, I think, a piece of work that we can support. Mr. Chairman, there has been some concern expressed that this bill will set up a parallel apprenticeship and training certification procedure in competition with the process administered by the Department of Labor's Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training and State apprenticeship agencies approved by the BAT. I am satisfied, however, that designation by Local Workforce Boards, in consultation with the State's Governor and legislature, of training programs eligible to receive funds under this bill is not intended to certify such programs for Federal purposes in the same manner as certification by the BAT and State apprenticeship agencies, and should not be regarded as such. Moreover, I am aware of concern that funds authorized by this bill will be used to provide financial assistance to apprenticeship training programs in industries, such as construction, that have been traditionally financed exclusively by private funds. I am confident that the outstanding training currently provided in these areas will continue to be financed by the private sector so that the limited financial resources authorized by this bill can be earmarked for training in these areas that have been neglected or, for some other reason, must rely on Federal financial assistance. I intended to work with Members of the Senate to clarify further this policy in the final bill.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. KILDEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment, but I ask unanimous consent that I may claim the time allowed under the rule.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Eshoo] who played a very crucial and essential role in perfecting section 508.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I would just say that these are clarifying and perfecting amendments which we agreed to. I would certainly support them, and urge their adoption. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. I concur with the statements made by my subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from California [Mr. McKeon], and urge the adoption of this amendment.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to three individuals who have given so much of themselves in their duties as public servants to the citizens of Michigan. On Thursday, May 15, the staff of the Michigan Jobs Commission will recognize Ms. Patricia Ford, Mr. Gerald Grantner, and Mr. Marvin McLaughlin as they retire after many years of dedicated service. Ms. Patricia Ford has been an advocate for disabled individuals for over the last quarter century. As a member of the group Disabled in Action, she successfully fought for the passage of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. She began her employment with the State of Michigan in 1978 as a vocational rehabilitation counselor. Throughout her career, Ms. Ford has worked diligently with severely and multiply disabled individuals and has become a strong community advocate as well, developing effective partnerships with other community agencies. Her selfless and pleasing manner was responsible for her being named Michigan Rehabilitation Services Counselor of the Year in 1989. Mr. Gerald Grantner is leaving after almost 30 years of service to the citizens of Michigan. Beginning in 1968 as a vocational rehabilitation counselor, Mr. Grantner became district manager of the office in Flint, MI, in 1970. In addition to his working tirelessly on behalf of the public, he has also developed affiliations with groups such as the Bentley School Board of Education, Goodwill Industries of Mid-Michigan, and the Burton, MI, Planning Commission, among others. Mr. Marvin McLaughlin also began his career with the State of Michigan as a vocational rehabilitation counselor, first in 1965, and then again in 1969 after receiving further education. In the nearly 30 years, he has worked with the jobs commission, the citizens he has worked with have benefitted greatly from his determination and ambition. To those close to him, Mr. McLaughlin has been called a man of high professional and ethical standards, qualities that he has exhibited time and time again in both his professional and personal life. Mr. Speaker, it seems only fitting that these three, who have practically begun their careers together as a team, shall bring their careers to a close together as well. I am exceptionally proud of the service they have provided to many throughout the State, and I am sure that their deeds shall provide a worthy example to emulate.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Guam [Mr. Underwood].

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, at the hearing on the costs of higher education, I expressed deep concern over the rising costs of a college education. At that time I also expressed concern that we avoid Federal intrusion into the day-to-day operations of American higher education. As I see it, our job is to work with our colleges as they, and not we, seek to bring costs under control. I do not believe that the American people want the Federal Government to step into the management of our colleges and universities, and I for one would oppose any such move. I voted to report this legislation out of committee and shall vote for its passage today. I do so, however, with both concerns and misgivings. I believe, for example, that the executive branch should have equal representation on the commission. Examining the costs of a college education is not a partisan issue, and I fear that not giving the executive branch equal participation gives the commission a possible partisan tinge it should not have. I also believe that we are asking the commission to issue a final report in too short a time. The issues to be addressed by the commission are very complex, and I am not at all sure that we can get the substantive answers we are seeking in a 4-month period. Despite these and other reservations, Mr. Speaker, I am willing to give the gentleman from California [Mr. McKeon], my very good friend, and chairman of the Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education, Training and Life-Long Learning, the benefit of the doubt, and not to oppose adding this legislation to H.R. 914. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Luther].

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Ford].

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. LaFalce]. (Mr. LaFALCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to join my good friend, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney], and myself in supporting H.R. 1173, the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 1997. So far 70 Members of the House, both Republicans and Democrats, have added their names as cosponsors of this bill. H.R. 1173 recognizes the fundamental right of police and firefighters to form and join unions and to bargain collectively with their employers over wages, hours, and working conditions. H.R. 1173 does not create a Federal mandate. It does not affect existing State collective bargaining laws and it would prohibit strikes and lockouts. This bill is supported by the International Association of Firefighters, the Fraternal Order of Police, the International Union of Police Associations and the National Association of Police Organizations. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join us in support of H.R. 1173.