Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

   104th Congress 1st   HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES        Report
         Session
                                                       104-209
_______________________________________________________________________



                                     
                                    
 
 DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED



                   AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1996

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                      COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS



                             together with



                     DISSENTING AND SEPARATE VIEWS



                        [To accompany H.R. 2127]




 July 27, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
State of the Union and ordered to be printed


   104th Congress 1st 
         Session        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES        Report
                                                       104-209
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     


                                     

                 DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN
                  SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED
                   AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1996

                               ----------                              

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                      COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                             together with

                     DISSENTING AND SEPARATE VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2127]




 July 27, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED 
AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1996

104th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                    104-209
_______________________________________________________________________



  DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1996

                                _______


 July 27, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


    Mr. Porter, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                     DISSENTING AND SEPARATE VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2127]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human 
Services (except the Food and Drug Administration, Indian 
Health Service, and the Office of Consumer Affairs), and 
Education (except Indian Education), Armed Forces Retirement 
Home, Corporation for National and Community Service, 
Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Federal Mediation and 
Conciliation Service, Federal Mine Safety and Health Review 
Commission, National Commission on Libraries and Information 
Science, National Council on Disability, National Labor 
Relations Board, National Mediation Board, Occupational Safety 
and Health Review Commission, Physician Payment Review 
Commission, Prospective Payment Assessment Commission, Railroad 
Retirement Board, the Social Security Administration, and the 
United States Institute of Peace for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1996, and for other purposes.

                        INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT

_______________________________________________________________________


                                                            Page number

                                                            Bill Report
Title I--Department of Labor:
        Employment and Training Administration.............     2
                                                                     14
        Office of the American Workplace...................
                                                                     23
        Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration........     7
                                                                     24
        Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation...............     7
                                                                     24
        Employment Standards Administration................     8
                                                                     25
        Occupational Safety and Health Administration......    12
                                                                     27
        Mine Safety and Health Administration..............    15
                                                                     28
        Bureau of Labor Statistics.........................    16
                                                                     28
        Departmental Management............................    16
                                                                     29
        Assistant Secretary for Veterans Employment and 
            Training.......................................    18
                                                                     30
        Office of the Inspector General....................    18
                                                                     31
        General Provisions.................................    18

Title II--Department of Health and Human Services:
        Health Resources and Services Administration.......    22
                                                                     31
        Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.........    25
                                                                     47
        National Institutes of Health......................    26
                                                                     56
        Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
            Administration.................................    31
                                                                     83
        Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health.......
                                                                     99
        Agency for Health Care Policy and Research.........    32
                                                                    103
        Health Care Financing Administration...............    32
                                                                    104
        Administration for Children and Families...........    34
                                                                    108
        Administration on Aging............................    38
                                                                    121
        Office of the Secretary............................    38
                                                                    124
        General Provisions.................................    40

Title III--Department of Education:
        Education Reform...................................    42
                                                                    129
        Education for the Disadvantaged....................    42
                                                                    130
        Impact Aid.........................................    43
                                                                    134
        School Improvement Programs........................    43
                                                                    135
        Bilingual and Immigrant Education..................    44
                                                                    141
        Special Education..................................    44
                                                                    141
        Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research....    45
                                                                    145
        Special Institutions for Persons with Disabilities.    45
                                                                    150
        Vocational and Adult Education.....................    46
                                                                    151
        Student Financial Assistance.......................    46
                                                                    156
        Federal Family Education Loans.....................    47
                                                                    159
        Higher Education...................................    47
                                                                    159
        Howard University..................................    48
                                                                    174
        Higher Education Facilities Loans..................    48

        College Housing and Academic Facilities Loans......    48
                                                                    175
        Historically Black College and University Capital 
            Financing......................................    49
                                                                    175
        Education Research, Statistics, and Improvement....    49
                                                                    176
        Libraries..........................................    50
                                                                    180
        Departmental Management............................    50
                                                                    182
        Office for Civil Rights............................    51
                                                                    183
        Office of the Inspector General....................    51
                                                                    183
        General Provisions.................................    51

Title IV--Related Agencies:
        Armed Forces Retirement Home.......................    55
                                                                    183
        Corporation for National and Community Service.....    56
                                                                    184
        Corporation for Public Broadcasting................    56
                                                                    185
        Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.........    57
                                                                    186
        Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission...    58
                                                                    186
        National Commission on Libraries and Information 
            Science........................................    58
                                                                    187
        National Council on Disability.....................    58
                                                                    187
        National Labor Relations Board.....................    58
                                                                    188
        National Mediation Board...........................    61
                                                                    188
        Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission...    61
                                                                    188
        Physician Payment Review Commission................    61
                                                                    188
        Prospective Payment Assessment Commission..........    61
                                                                    189
        Social Security Administration.....................    62
                                                                    191
        Railroad Retirement Board..........................    65
                                                                    189
        United States Institute of Peace...................    67
                                                                    194
Title V--General Provisions................................    67

Title VI--Political Advocacy...............................

        House of Representatives Report Requirements.......
                                                                    194

                Summary of Estimates and Appropriations

    The following table compares on a summary basis the 
appropriation including trust funds for fiscal year 1995, the 
budget estimate for fiscal year 1996, and the Committee 
recommendations for fiscal year 1996 in the accompanying bill.

           1996 LABOR, HHS, AND EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS BILL           
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Fiscal year--               1996 Committee   
                ----------------------------------     compared to--    
                                                  ----------------------
                    1995        1996       1996       1995        1996  
                 comparable    Budget   Committee  comparable    Budget 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of                                                           
 Labor.........     $11,947    $13,261    $10,292     -$1,655    -$2,969
                ========================================================
Department of                                                           
 Health and                                                             
 Human                                                                  
 Services:                                                              
    Public                                                              
     Health                                                             
     Service:                                                           
        Health                                                          
         Resour                                                         
         ces                                                            
         and                                                            
         Servic                                                         
         es                                                             
         Admini                                                         
         strati                                                         
         on....       3,230      3,301      3,121        -109       -180
        Centers                                                         
         for                                                            
         Diseas                                                         
         e                                                              
         Contro                                                         
         l.....       2,086      2,223      2,125         +39        -98
        Nationa                                                         
         l                                                              
         Instit                                                         
         utes                                                           
         of                                                             
         Health      11,297     11,764     11,939        +642       +175
        Substan                                                         
         ce                                                             
         Abuse                                                          
         and                                                            
         Mental                                                         
         Health                                                         
         Servic                                                         
         es                                                             
         Admini                                                         
         strati                                                         
         on....       2,181      2,247      1,789        -392       -458
        Assista                                                         
         nt                                                             
         Secret                                                         
         ary                                                            
         for                                                            
         Health         225        233        167         -58        -66
        Health                                                          
         Care                                                           
         Policy                                                         
         and                                                            
         Resear                                                         
         ch....         141        148         91         -50        -57
                --------------------------------------------------------
          Subto                                                         
           tal,                                                         
           Publ                                                         
           ic                                                           
           Heal                                                         
           th                                                           
           Serv                                                         
           ice.      19,160     19,916     19,232         +72       -684
                ========================================================
    Health Care                                                         
     Financing                                                          
     Administra                                                         
     tion......     129,429    146,817    146,700     +17,271       -117
    Administrat                                                         
     ion for                                                            
     Children                                                           
     and                                                                
     Families..      32,072     34,869     31,638        -434     -3,231
    Administrat                                                         
     ion on                                                             
     Aging.....         876        897        778         -98       -119
    Office of                                                           
     the                                                                
     Secretary.         228        207        220          -8        +13
      Total,                                                            
       HHS                                                              
       current                                                          
       year....     181,765    202,706    198,568     +16,803     -4,138
      Advances.      32,767     32,275     30,995      -1,812     -1,320
                ========================================================
Department of                                                           
 Education.....      26,801     28,220     23,063      -3,738     -5,157
Related                                                                 
 Agencies......      35,752     36,196     35,616        -136       -580
    Social                                                              
     Security                                                           
     Administra                                                         
     tion......      34,583     34,989     34,638         +55       -351
      Grand                                                             
       Total,                                                           
       current                                                          
       year....     256,265    280,383    267,540     +11,274    -12,844
      Advances.      40,322     42,001     40,625        +303     -1,376
                ========================================================
Current year                                                            
 total using                                                            
 602(b)                                                                 
 scorekeeping..     250,411    273,023    261,806     +11,395    -11,217
                --------------------------------------------------------
    Mandatory..     183,255    200,943    200,936     +17,681         -7
    Discretiona                                                         
     ry........      67,156     72,080     60,870      -6,286    -11,210
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                              DISCRETIONARY                             
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Fiscal year--               1996 Committee   
                ----------------------------------     compared to--    
                                                  ----------------------
                    1995        1996       1996       1995        1996  
                 comparable    Budget   Committee  comparable    Budget 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of                                                           
 Labor.........      $9,431    $11,315     $8,355     -$1,076    -$2,960
Department of                                                           
 Health and                                                             
 Human Services      29,221     31,042     28,212      -1,009     -2,830
Department of                                                           
 Education.....      24,415     25,804     20,647      -3,768     -5,157
Related                                                                 
 Agencies......       4,279      4,275      4,012        -267       -263
Scorekeeping                                                            
 Adjustments...        -190       -356       -356        -166          0
                --------------------------------------------------------
      Total                                                             
       discreti                                                         
       onary...      67,156     72,080     60,870      -6,286    -11,210
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Appropriations for Labor, Health and Human Services and Education 
                                Programs

    In addition to the amount included in the bill, very large 
sums are automatically appropriated each year for labor, health 
and human services, social security and education programs 
without consideration by the Congress during the annual 
appropriation process. The principal items in this category are 
the unemployment compensation, social security, medicare, and 
railroad retirement funds, federal payments for interest 
subsidy, default and servicing costs for the Federal Family 
Assistance Loan program and the full cost of loans made under 
the Direct Student Loan Program. The detailed estimates for the 
trust fund and permanent appropriations are reflected in the 
table appearing at the back of this report, a summary of which 
is included in the following table:

        TOTAL INCLUDING PERMANENT APPROPRIATIONS AND TRUST FUNDS        
                        [In millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Fiscal year--                
                         -----------------------------------------------
                               1995            1996           Change    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual appropriation                                                    
 bill, current year.....        $256,265        $267,540        +$11,274
Annual appropriation                                                    
 bill, advances.........          42,093          42,256            +163
Permanent appropriations         571,743         613,258         +41,515
Deduct interfund                                                        
 payments...............         -44,651         -76,908         -32,257
                         -----------------------------------------------
      Total.............         825,450         846,146         +20,695
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   use of federal funds for advocacy

    In order to assure that federal funds are not being used, 
directly or indirectly, to support the advocacy of public 
policy positions by contractors and grantees, the Committee 
instructs each of the Departments and independent agencies 
funded in this bill to provide the Committee with a list of 
grants and contracts that have, as part of their scope of work, 
the advocacy of public policy positions and specific statutory 
authority for such activities.
    The Committee also instructs each Department to include, in 
each grant or contract awarded with funds provided in this 
bill, a requirement that the recipient report to the awarding 
agency any federal funds directly or indirectly expended to 
support the advocacy of public policies.
    The Committee also instructs the Inspector General for each 
Department and independent agency funded in this bill to 
develop specific tests to assure that recipients of federal 
funds are not using those funds, directly or indirectly, to 
support advocacy of public policy activity except those 
specifically identified in their scope of work. The Committee 
further instructs each Inspector General to employ these tests 
as part of any audits it carries out of grantees and as part of 
the reviews it carries out of the work of independent audits of 
contractors and grantees receiving funds appropriated in this 
bill.
    Each Inspector General is instructed to provide the 
Committee with a report, no later than the date of the 
submission of the President's fiscal year 1997 budget, 
detailing the tests and assurances which they have developed 
and the instructions they have issued as to how and when such 
tests and assurances should be applied.

                           political advocacy

    Title VI of the reported bill is a legislative title 
dealing with political advocacy by federal grantees.

                         Highlights of the Bill

    In reaching the overall ceiling of $262,729,000,000 in 
budget authority and $270,163,000,000 in outlays, and the 
discretionary ceiling of $61,191,000,000 in budget authority 
and $68,117,000,000 in outlays, the Committee reviewed programs 
and made clear priority decisions. These decisions were based 
on the following criteria:
          We must pay for what we get from government;
          All functions of government must contribute to 
        bringing spending under control;
          Programs that work well, advance national interests 
        or obligations should be funded;
          Small, duplicative, administratively costly, 
        categorical programs serving narrow interests should be 
        terminated;
          Poor performing programs should be terminated and 
        those without evaluations should be frozen or reduced.
    Substantial increases in funding have been provided for the 
National Institutes of Health to allow it to continue levels of 
biomedical research that will revolutionize the understanding 
and treatment of disease, assist in the reduction in the growth 
of medical costs and continue to stimulate the growth of the 
biotech and other industries. Preventive health services in the 
Centers for Disease Control have also been increased as a 
proven investment in disease prevention. The Social Security 
Administration budget has been increased to assure the 
completion of its performance-based management reforms. Job 
Corps funding has been increased to allow for the opening of 
new centers. The Committee also invested in student aid by 
increasing the maximum Pell grant award by $100. This increase 
will fund the maximum grant at the highest level in history and 
equals the largest increase ever. In addition, the Committee 
preserved current year funding levels for federal supplemental 
educational opportunity grants and for federal work-study. Many 
other programs such as the maternal and child health block 
grant, the preventive health block grant, the mental health and 
substance abuse block grants, state grants for special 
education, and the child care and development block grant have 
been funded at or above their FY '95 levels, indicating a high 
priority for these broad-based programs.
    Smaller programs which focus on a narrow constituency, 
which are expensive to administer or which fund duplicative 
programs have not been funded in the bill. The bill provides no 
funding for 170 programs by eliminating those that have shown 
no positive results, are duplicative, or fund planning and 
other bureaucratic activity which are best supported and 
operated at the state or local level.
    The report instructs the Departments and agencies funded in 
the bill to identify grants and contracts in which the advocacy 
of public policy is an authorized activity, to require 
recipients to report any expenditures for public policy 
advocacy and to develop audit and other procedures to assure 
that federal funds are not being used, directly or indirectly, 
to support the advocacy of public policy.
    Bill Total.--As part of the overall effort of Congress to 
reduce the size and intrusiveness of government and to reach a 
balanced budget as outlined in H. Con. Res. 67, the Committee 
undertook a massive review of programs under its jurisdiction. 
This process began with the Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriation (H.R. 1158) and continued in the preparation of 
this bill. The result of this review is a bill that 
appropriates $261,806 million for the Departments of Labor, 
Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies for 
fiscal year 1996, and is within its 602(b) ceilings for both 
budget authority and outlays.
    Program Terminations.--In achieving the reduction needed to 
meet our ceiling levels under the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act, and as a result of the Committee's 
review of programs under its jurisdiction, it is recommending 
no funding for the following programs:

                          Program Terminations

                          department of labor

Summer Youth Employment
Youth Fair Chance
Rural Concentrated Employment
JTPA Capacity Building
National Commission for Employment Policy
American Samoans
Microenterprise Grants
National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee
Veterans' Homeless Programs
National Center for the Workplace
Office of the American Workplace

                department of health and human services

State Offices of Rural Health
Trauma Care
Black Lung Clinics
Payments to Hawaii-Hansen's Disease
Pacific Basin Initiative
Native Hawaiian Health Care
AIDS Education and Training
Family Planning
Rural Health Research
Health Care Facilities
Nat. Inst. Occupational Safety & Health-Training
Mental Health Clinical Training/AIDS Training
Community Support Demonstrations
Grants to States for Homeless (PATH)
Homeless Service Demonstrations
Treatment Grants to Crisis Areas
Pregnant/Post-Partum Women & Children
Criminal Justice Programs
Designated Populations
Comprehensive Comm. Treatment Prog.
Substance Abuse Training
Substance Abuse Training (AIDS)
Substance Abuse Linkage (AIDS)
Substance Abuse Outreach (AIDS)
Treatment Capacity Expansion Program
Substance Abuse Prevention Demos-High Risk Youth
Substance Abuse Prevention Demos-Pregnant Women & Infants
Substance Abuse Prevention Demos-Other Programs
Community Partnerships
Prevention Education/Dissemination
Substance Abuse Prevention Training
Office of Disease Prevention & Health Promotion
National Vaccine Program
Emergency Preparedness
Health Care Reform Data Analysis
HHS Streamlining Costs
Health Service Management
National AIDS Program Office
Insurance Counseling Program (HCFA)
Essential Access Community Hospitals
New Rural Health Grants
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program
SLIAG Civics & English Education Grants
Child Development Associate Scholarships
Runaway Youth Activities--Drugs
Youth Gang Substance Abuse
Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect
Dependent Care Planning & Development
Child Welfare Research
Social Services Research
Family Support Centers
Community Based Resource Centers
Developmental Disabilities Special Projects
Homeless Service Grants
Rural Housing
Farmworker Assistance
Demonstration Partnerships
Community Food & Nutrition
Community Schools
Ombudsman Services
Prevention of Elder Abuse
Pension Counseling
Preventive Health
Aging Research & Special Projects
Federal Council on Aging
White House Conference on Aging

                        department of education

Goals 2000 State and Local Grants
Goals 2000 National Programs
Goals 2000 Parental Assistance
School-to-Work National Programs
State School Improvement
Evaluation
Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property
Safe & Drug Free Schools--National Programs
Education Infrastructure
Law Related Education
Christa McAuliffe Scholarships
Women's Educational Equity
Training and Advisory Services
Dropout Prevention Demonstrations
Ellender Fellowships (Close-up)
Education for Native Hawaiians
Foreign Language Assistance
Train. in Early Childhood Ed. & Viol. Counseling
Comp. Regional Assistance Centers
Family and Community Endeavor Schools
Bilingual Ed. Support Services
Bilingual Ed. Professional Development
Early Childhood Education
Innovation and Development
Technology Applications
Special Studies
Personnel Development
Clearinghouses
Regional Resource Centers
Community Based Organizations
Consumer and Homemaker Education
Vocational Education--State Councils
Vocational Ed--Demonstrations
Adult Education--Evaluation & Technical Assistance
National Institute for Literacy
State Literacy Resource Centers
Workplace Literacy Partnerships
Literacy Training for Homeless Adults
Federal Perkins Loans-Capital Contributions
State Student Incentive Grants
State Post-Secondary Review Program
Aid for Institutional Development Endowment Grants
Historically Black Colleges & Universities Endowment Set-aside
Strengthening Institutions--Evaluation
Native Hawaiian & Alaska Native Cultural Arts
Eisenhower Leadership Program
Innovative Projects in Community Service
Institute for International Public Policy
Cooperative Education
Law School Clinical Experience
Urban Community Service
Student Financial Aid Database
Mary McLeod Bethune Mem. Fine Arts Center
Nat. Early Intervention Scholarships & Partnerships
Byrd Scholarships
National Science Scholarships
National Academy of Science, Space & Technol.
Douglas Teacher Scholarships
Olympic Scholarships
Teacher Corps
Harris Fellowships
Javits Fellowships
Faculty Development Fellowships
School, College and University Partnerships
Legal Training for the Disadvantaged
Howard University Endowment--Regular Program
Howard University Endowment--Clinical Law Center
Howard University Research
Howard University Construction
College Housing and Academic Facilities Loans--New Loan 
        Authority
International Education Exchange
21st Century Learning
Eisenhower Prof. Development-Nat. Programs
Eisenhower Math/Science Education Consortia
National Writing Project
National Diffusion Network
Star Schools
Ready to Learn TV
Telecommunications Demo for Math
Library Construction
Library Literacy Programs
Library Education and Training
Library Research and Demonstrations
Historically Black Coll. & Univ. Capital Fin. Advisory Board
Nat. Bd. of the Fund for the Improv. of Post Secondary Ed.
Jacob K. Javits Fellows Prog. Fellowship Board
Nat. Acad. of Science, Space & Technology Board
President's Ad. Comm. on Ed. Excellence For Hispanic Am.
President's Bd. of Advisors on Hist. Black Colleges & Univ.
National Educational Goals Panel
National Ed. Standards and Improvement Council
Vista Literacy Corps
Senior Demonstration Program

    The Committee is aware that the President has proposed 
significant consolidations of programs in his FY '96 budget 
request. The Committee on Economic and Educational 
Opportunities is considering several bills consolidating the 
many duplicative programs funded by this appropriations bill as 
are other committees in the House of Representatives and the 
Senate. Since the reform efforts in the Congress involve 
numerous provisions and the final outcome of these efforts 
remains unresolved at the time of mark-up, the Committee has 
displayed its funding decisions on the basis of current law. 
The Committee has attempted to provide funding for programs in 
such a way as to expedite the conversion to a new statutory 
regimen.
    There are also many programs within the jurisdiction of the 
Subcommittee on the Departments of Labor, Health and Human 
Services, Education and Related Agencies that are currently 
unauthorized. Given the large number of such programs in this 
Subcommittee's jurisdiction and the complexity of the 
reauthorization process, the Committee has chosen not to reject 
funding for programs solely due to their not being authorized. 
Overall, 77 programs within the Subcommittee's jurisdiction 
with a fiscal year 1995 funding level of $6.7 billion are 
unauthorized. A table listing the unauthorized programs is 
included in the back of this report.
    Mandatory programs.--The bill provides $200,936 million for 
entitlement programs in fiscal year 1996. 77% of the funding in 
the bill is for these mandatory costs. Funding requirements for 
these activities are determined by the basic authorizing laws. 
Mandatory programs include general fund support for the 
Medicare and Medicaid programs, Aid to Families with Dependent 
Children, Supplemental Security Income, Black Lung payments, 
and the Social Services Block Grant. The following chart 
indicates the funding levels for the major mandatory programs 
in fiscal years 1995 and 1996 and the growth in these programs.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Fiscal year--                           
                       Program                        -------------------------------------------------  Percent
                                                            1995            1996           +/-1995              
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Labor:                                                                                            
    Black Lung Disability Trust Fund.................        $974,805        $995,447         $20,642          2
Department of Health and Human Services                                                                         
    Health Care Financing Administration:                                                                       
        Medicaid current law benefits................      84,835,700      92,235,200       7,399,500          9
        Medicare Payments to Health Care Trust Funds.      37,546,758      63,313,000      25,766,242         69
    Administration for Children and Families:                                                                   
        Aid to Families with Dependent Children......      12,424,136      12,999,000         574,864          5
        Child Support Enforcement....................       1,155,000       1,068,000         (87,000)        -8
        Social Service Block Grant...................       2,800,000       2,800,000              --          0
Department of Education                                                                                         
    Federal Family Education Loan Program............       3,773,733       2,390,198      (1,383,535)       -37
    Federal Direct Student Loan Program..............       1,138,219       1,629,043         490,824         43
    Federal Family Education Loan Liquidating Account       1,344,545         595,248        (749,297)       -56
Related Agencies                                                                                                
    Social Security Administration:                                                                             
        Special Benefits for Disabled Coal Miners....         717,874         665,396         (52,478)        -7
        Supplemental Security Income.................      27,996,620      25,813,834      (2,182,786)        -8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reduction below 1995 funding.--Discretionary program 
funding of $60,870 million represents a level $6,286 million 
below the fiscal year 1995 level and $11,210 million below the 
amounts requested by the President in his February request.
    Department of Labor.--The bill appropriates $10,292 million 
for the Labor Department, a decrease of $1,655 million below 
fiscal year 1995 and $2,969 million below the amount requested 
by the President in the February request. This funding level 
includes $3,081 million in federal funds to carry out the 
provisions of the Job Training Partnership Act. The Committee 
recommends an increase in funding for the Job Corps of $32 
million to allow for the opening of four new centers. The bill 
includes no funding for summer youth employment and a reduction 
of $378.5 million to a level of $850 million for dislocated 
worker assistance. Funding of $290 million is provided for 
school-to-work activities funded in the Departments of Labor 
and Education and tech-prep in anticipation of a broader 
consolidation included in H.R. 1617, the Consolidated and 
Reformed Education, Employment and Rehabilitation Systems Act 
(CAREERS Act) reported by the Committee on Economic and 
Educational Opportunities.
    State Unemployment Insurance Administration.--The bill 
provides $2,309 million for State administrative costs, $5 
million below last year and $161.1 million below the 
President's request and provides $100 million for one-stop 
career centers. The Committee strongly supports this initiative 
and expects that additional support for it will come from the 
programs which are participating in the establishment of these 
centers.
    Occupational Safety and Health Administration.--The 
Committee recommends funding for OSHA at $264 million, $83 
million below the request and $49 million below last year's 
level. Within OSHA, funding for Federal enforcement is reduced 
by 33% while compliance assistance is increased by 19%.
    The bill includes language preventing the implementation of 
the President's executive order preventing federal contractors 
from employing striker replacements along with language to 
assure that pension funds have freedom to invest in the best 
interest of their participants, and to block the OSHA 
ergonomics standard.
    Program terminations.--The bill provides no funding for 11 
Labor Department programs that were funded in fiscal year 1995.
    Department of Health and Human Services.--The bill 
appropriates $198,192 million which is $2,835 million below the 
President's request and $17,203 million above the fiscal year 
1995 level. Funding for discretionary programs of $28,212 
million is $2,830 million below the President's request and 
$1,009 below last year's level.
    Health Resources and Services Administration.--Funding for 
HRSA programs is $2,927 million, $102 million below last year 
and $175 million below the President's request. Within HRSA, 
the maternal and child health block grant is funded at $800 
million, $121 million above the President's request. Community 
and migrant health centers are increased, as part of a 
consolidated appropriation, by $77 million. Health professions 
training programs are level funded. Ryan White AIDS Care Act 
programs are funded at $656 million, $23 million above last 
year and $68 million below the President's request.
    National Institutes of Health.--The Committee proposes 
$11,939 million for biomedical research activities at the 
National Institutes of Health. This funding level represents an 
increase of $175 million over the President's request and $642 
million over last year. This funding level indicates the very 
high priority that the Committee places on the activities of 
NIH and its expectation that, at this level, increased research 
activity can occur. The Committee has also removed the AIDS 
earmark in the bill from past years, believing that decisions 
as to appropriate levels of funding and appropriate avenues of 
research are best left to the scientists.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.--Overall 
funding for CDC is $2,125 million, $39 million above last year 
and $98 million below the President's request. Disease 
prevention activities under CDC are increased including 
childhood immunizations, sexually transmitted diseases, chronic 
and environmental disease prevention and breast and cervical 
cancer screening. Infectious disease programs receive a 23.7% 
increase. Level funding is provided for the preventive health 
services block grant. Crime bill activities are funded at the 
President's request of $39 million.
    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
Administration.--The bill provides current year funding for the 
mental health and substance abuse block grants and children's 
mental health services. Many other smaller, duplicative 
programs are consolidated or terminated. The Committee 
recommends $142 million under general authorities of the Public 
Health Service Act to allow the transition of these programs to 
other federal sources or to private funding.
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health.--The bill 
terminates the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, 
transfers the Assistant Secretary and several of the small 
programs within the office to the Office of the Secretary and 
terminates funding for the Surgeon General.
    Medicare and Medicaid.--The bill provides $82,142 million 
for Medicaid and $63,313 million in federal funds for the 
Government's share of payments to Medicare. Funding of $1,607 
million is provided for Medicare contractor payments, $3 
million below last year and $24 million below the President's 
request.
    Social Security Administration.--The bill reflects the 
establishment of the Social Security Administration as a 
separate agency as required by P.L. 103-296.
    Low Income Home Energy Assistance.--The Committee 
recommends no funding for LIHEAP.
    Child Care and Development Block Grant.--The bill provides 
$935 million for the Child Care and Development Block Grant, 
the same as last year's level and $114 million below the 
President's request.
    Funding of abortions.--The bill maintains current law 
permitting the funding of abortion only in the cases of rape, 
incest, or endangerment of the life of the mother, but includes 
new language to give States the option not to pay for abortions 
resulting from rape or incest.
    Program terminations.--This bill terminates funding for 66 
programs within the Department of Health and Human Services 
originally funded in fiscal year 1995.
    Department of Education.--The bill funds programmatic and 
support activities in the Department of Education at $23,063 
million, $5,157 million below the President's request and 
$3,738 million below last year's level.
    Education Reform.--The bill terminates funding for Goals 
2000.
    Education for the Disadvantaged.--Funding is severely 
restricted for activities under this account. Funding of $5,555 
million is provided for education for the disadvantaged local 
grants, a reduction of $1,143 million from last year and $1,445 
million from the President's request. The Committee remains 
concerned that evaluations of this program have shown it to be 
marginally effective and it has had seemingly little impact on 
the overall decline of the quality of education in school 
districts with large disadvantaged populations. The Committee 
is also concerned that under current formulas, funding for 
disadvantaged education goes to some of the richest districts 
in America, thus dissipating its impact.
    School Improvement Programs.--The bill funds title VI 
(Chapter 2), innovative education program strategies state 
grants, a program which like Goals 2000 provides assistance to 
states and localities in meeting national educational goals, 
and Eisenhower Professional Development State Grants at $500 
million. This level is $99 million below last year's level and 
$235 million below the President's request. This funding level 
is provided in anticipation of the consolidation of these 
programs into a larger block grant. Safe-and-drug free schools 
is funded at $200 million, $266 million below last year and 
$300 million below the President's request.
    Special Education.--The Committee recommends overall 
funding for special education programs of $3,092 million, $160 
million below last year's level and $249 million below the 
President's request. This funding level includes level funding 
for state grants and for direct support and demonstration 
services to disabled individuals. Other planning, research and 
dissemination programs are not funded.
    Student Financial Assistance.--The Committee places a high 
priority on direct assistance to students. The bill includes 
funding to allow the maximum Pell grant to rise to $2,440, an 
increase of $100, or 4.3%. In addition, federal supplemental 
educational opportunity grants and federal work-study grants 
are funded at last year's level.
    Program terminations.--Overall, 93 education programs 
originally funded in fiscal year 1995 are terminated in the 
bill.
    Related Agencies.--Funding for the related agencies title 
of the bill is $21,202 million. This level is $2,466 million 
below last year's funding level and $263 million below the 
President's request.
    Social Security Administrative Costs.--The bill includes 
funding for the Social Security Administration in the Related 
Agencies title of the bill. Funding for the cost of 
administering the social security programs is $5,910 million, 
$357 million over last year and $299 million below the 
President's request. This level of increase is provided to 
assure that SSA continues its progress toward service 
improvement, administrative efficiency and improved financial 
management.
    National Labor Relations Board.--Funding for the National 
Labor Relations Board is $123 million, $53 million below last 
year's level and $58 million below the President's request. 
This level of funding assumes the enactment of language 
included in the bill to limit the practice of issuing 10(j) 
injunctions at the board's own initiative which circumvents 
many of the procedures of the board. The bill would also 
prohibit the investigation of unfair labor practice cases 
involving ``salting'' until the Supreme Court resolves the 
issue of whether certain employees are protected under the 
National Labor Relations Act.
    Corporation for Public Broadcasting.--CPB is an advance 
funded account with funds already appropriated through FY '97. 
As a continuation of the Committee's policy of gradually 
withdrawing federal funds for CPB, the bill funds CPB at $240 
million in FY '98, $20 million below the FY '97 level of $260 
million and $56 million below the President's request. FY '96 
funding for CPB is $275 million. In addition, the bill requires 
the Treasury to disburse funds to the Corporation on an ``as 
needed'' basis, consistent with the cash management policies 
that apply to virtually all other recipients of federal 
funding.

                      TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

                       Job Training Block Grants

    The Committee is very much aware that the Committee on 
Economic and Educational Opportunities has reported out a bill 
(H.R. 1617) that would consolidate a large number of job 
training programs that are currently authorized by the Job 
Training Partnership Act, the School-to-Work Opportunities Act 
and other Acts into a Youth/Education block grant and an Adult 
Training block grant. Current funding levels would be reduced 
by 20%. This would take effect in fiscal year 1997. The 
Appropriations Committee therefore views fiscal year 1996 as a 
transition year for current programs. This appropriations bill 
has been drafted with a view that we are moving towards large 
block grants in these areas and away from categorical programs. 
A number of smaller programs have been eliminated in this bill, 
while the larger programs have been substantially scaled back. 
There is widespread agreement that the current number of 163 
Federal job training programs (as reported by the General 
Accounting Office) must be substantially reduced. This 
Committee intends to do its part in that, in conjunction with 
the efforts of the Economic and Educational Opportunities 
Committee.

                 Employment and Training Administration

                    training and employment services

    The Committee recommends $3,180,441,000 for this account 
which provides funding authorized primarily by the Job Training 
Partnership Act. This is a reduction of $776,329,000 below the 
1995 level as revised by the recently-enacted Rescissions Act 
for 1995, and a reduction of $2,284,043,000 from the budget 
request.
    Training and Employment Services is comprised of programs 
that are supposed to enhance the employment and earnings of 
economically disadvantaged and dislocated workers, operated 
through a decentralized system of skill training and related 
services. As required by the Job Training Partnership Act, this 
appropriation is forward-funded on a July to June cycle. Funds 
provided for fiscal year 1996 will support the program from 
July 1, 1996 through June 30, 1997.
    The account is comprised of two activities--Grants to 
States and Federally-administered programs. Grants to States 
give Governors the primary responsibility for the operation of 
training programs in their States. In partnership with the 
private sector and all levels of government, training programs 
are supposed to emphasize increasing participant skills and 
private sector placement.
    Separate programs designed to meet the training and 
employment needs of specific population segments experiencing 
unique problems account for the bulk of funds provided for 
Federally-administered programs. These include such programs as 
Indians and Native Americans, migrant and seasonal farmworkers, 
veterans in need of training and employment assistance, the Job 
Corps, and a program to provide improved school-to-work 
transition for youth.

Adult training--Title II-A

    For adult training programs under title II-A of the Act, 
the bill provides $830,000,000. This is a reduction of 
$166,813,000 below the 1995 comparable level and a reduction of 
$224,813,000 from the budget request. This will provide a 
program level of about 374,000 adult participants. This program 
is designed to prepare adults for participation in the labor 
force by increasing their occupational and educational skills, 
resulting in improved long-term employability, increased 
employment and earnings, and reduced welfare dependency. It is 
operated at the local level through service delivery areas 
designated by the Governors. Each area has a private industry 
council to provide guidance and oversight with respect to 
activities under that area's job training plan, in partnership 
with the unit or units of general local government in the 
areas. The private industry council includes representatives of 
the private sector, educational agencies, organized labor, and 
other groups in the area. All funds are allocated to the States 
by statutory formula.
    The Department's own reviews indicate that short-term job 
training is not very effective; that welfare receipt does not 
decline after people finish the program; and that most earnings 
gains result from increased hours of work and not from 
increases in wage gains.
    The most recent comprehensive Inspector General's audit 
report on the program indicated that only 53 percent of 
participants obtained jobs; furthermore, of the ones who got 
jobs, half said that they found them without JTPA assistance.

Youth training--Title II-C

    For youth training programs under title II-C of the Act, 
the bill provides $126,672,000. This is the same as the 1995 
comparable level and a reduction of $162,307,000 below the 
budget request. This will provide a program level of about 
87,000 youth participants. This program is supposed to improve 
the long-term employability of youth, enhance their 
educational, occupational, and citizenship skills, and 
encourage their school completion. Like adult training, the 
program is administered by local service delivery areas, as 
directed by private industry councils. Funds are allocated to 
the States by statutory formula.
    The Department's own evaluations show that this program has 
``been found to be unsuccessful in raising youth employment or 
earnings'' and that ``it does not appear that JTPA youth 
training has significant positive impacts.'' Furthermore, the 
Department indicates that ``the impacts of relatively short-
term classroom training have in most cases not been 
particularly positive, especially for youth.''

Summer youth employment--Title II-B

    The bill includes no funding for the summer youth 
employment and training program for the summer of 1997. The 
President had requested $958,540,000. All funding for the 
summer of 1996 was rescinded in the recently-enacted 
Rescissions Act for 1995. Thus, the summer of 1995 would be the 
last year of operation for this program.
    This program has not provided permanent skills training or 
education. It is basically an income supplement. The 
Department's own reviews indicate that ``subsidized employment 
programs alone have not been successful in producing lasting 
gains in employment or earnings for youth participants once the 
program was over'' and that ``temporary employment programs 
without additional services bring little or no post-program 
benefits to disadvantaged youth.'' The Department's reviews 
also indicate that subsidized work experience ``. . . has 
generally not had long-term positive effects on employment and 
earnings.'' This program should be picked up by States and 
localities if the need is great in their geographic area and by 
the private sector. There is no compelling reason for the 
Federal government to keep funding it.

Dislocated workers--Title III

    The bill provides $850,000,000 for dislocated worker 
programs. This is a reduction of $378,550,000 below the 1995 
level and a reduction of $546,000,000 from the budget request. 
An estimated 585,000 participants are expected to be served by 
this appropriation.
    The title III system provides for early identification of 
dislocated workers, the rapid provision of services to such 
workers, and job training. Among the program's components are 
universal rapid response capabilities, early intervention 
activities, the availability of needs-related payments to 
assist workers in training, and substate delivery systems. 
Funds are allocated to the States by statutory formula; 20 
percent is retained by the Secretary for discretionary 
purposes.
    The effectiveness of short-term training has been 
questioned by Department evaluations. According to the 
Department ``. . . short-term skills training has not been 
successful in producing earning gains for dislocated workers.'' 
Further, ``only a minority of displaced workers are likely to 
enter long-term training if the option is offered to them.'' 
According to the Department, ``in the case of workers displaced 
from high-tenure jobs, on average even a year or two of 
successful training often does not create income gains large 
enough to restore earnings to their pre-displacement level.''
    In a recent audit report by the Inspector General of the 
Department, the point was made that many participants were 
unable to obtain jobs related to retraining and that less than 
half were working in jobs related to their training; 
furthermore, participants believed that they could have 
obtained 60% of the jobs without the benefit of retraining.
    This program has grown rapidly since FY 1993; the 
percentage increase from 1993 to the President's request for 
1996 would be 146%. It would be an increase of $830 million in 
three year's time.
    The Committee is aware of a Department of Labor grant made 
earlier this year which brought together representatives from 
State and Federal government, business, labor and the 
outplacement industry, to participate in workshops across the 
country. The workshops identified the benefits of creating 
partnerships between the private and public sectors to provide 
cost-effective reemployment services. The Committee urges the 
Department to further facilitate such collaborative efforts and 
to demonstrate this partnership concept across the country.

Job Corps--Title IV-B

    For the Job Corps, the bill provides $1,121,010,000 for 
program year 1996. This is an increase of $31,550,000 over the 
1995 level and a reduction of $106,704,000 from the budget 
request. The amount in the bill includes $972,475,000, an 
increase of $15,044,000 over 1995, for center operations at 115 
centers. The Committee tightened up the President's request by 
taking the following actions: eliminating the increase 
requested for inflation (-$28,845,000); reducing funds for 
center management and administrative costs by 7.5% 
(-$13,812,000), the same as the percentage reduction made in 
the bill for Federal administrative costs; and eliminating 622 
slots associated with two centers, one of which recently closed 
and the other of which is closing in the near future 
(-$14,500,000). The bill also includes $148,535,000 for 
facility construction, rehabilitation, and acquisition, an 
increase of $16,506,000. The latter includes $99,311,000 for 
repairs and rehabilitation at existing centers and $49,224,000 
to continue progress on the 8 centers begun in prior years. 
Four of these are scheduled to open in 1996. The bill does not 
include funds for any additional new centers beyond the 8 that 
were previously approved and awarded. It costs about $16 
million to build one new center and about $10 million per year 
to operate each one. This kind of funding is not feasible in 
the current fiscal climate.
    The Committee urges the Department to continue to crack 
down on poor-performing Job Corps centers. A significant number 
of centers appears to be at the bottom of the performance 
rankings year after year. While recognizing that the Department 
has taken some steps to begin to address this situation, the 
Committee believes that more needs to be done. If changing the 
center operator and other management actions do not solve the 
problems, then the Department needs to think about closing some 
of the chronic poor-performers. The Committee notes that the 
bill repeals section 427(c) of the Job Training Partnership 
Act, as requested by the Administration. This will permit the 
Department to contract out those civilian conservation centers 
that are currently operated by the Federal government itself. 
If some of these centers continue to perform poorly, the 
Department should utilize this authority.
    The Committee notes particularly the concerns expressed by 
the General Accounting Office in its June 1995 report on the 
program. GAO is concerned about a number of issues, among them 
the fact that only a little more than a third of students 
complete their vocational training courses, the validity of job 
placement data is questionable, students are not remaining long 
in their initial jobs after completion, and the effectiveness 
of national vocational training contractors. The Committee will 
follow these concerns closely in the coming year and wants the 
Department to take whatever steps are necessary to improve the 
program.

School-to-Work

    The bill includes $95,000,000 for the school-to-work 
opportunities initiative under the School-to-Work Opportunities 
Act. This is a reduction of $27,500,000 below the 1995 
appropriation and a reduction of $105,000,000 from the budget 
request. This program is supposed to provide a national 
framework within which all States can create statewide systems 
to help youth acquire the knowledge, skills, abilities, and 
labor market information they need to make an effective 
transition from school to work, or to further education or 
training. It is jointly administered by the Departments of 
Labor and Education. A like amount is included for the program 
in the Department of Education. Funds support development 
grants to States to plan school-to-work systems to ease the 
transition from school to work and implementation grants 
provided competitively to States and local consortia to begin 
building such systems. Activities could include recruiting 
employers, obtaining in-depth information on local labor 
markets, designing school-based and work-based curricula, and 
training school-based and work-based staff.
    At the Committee mark, this program would still receive 
nearly twice what it received in FY 1994. It remains to be seen 
whether schools can develop effective partnerships with local 
industry, labor and other institutions to assure that education 
and training dovetail with the needs of these institutions.
    More planning and ``seed money'' may not help solve this 
endemic problem. It creates an expectation and demand for 
services that the states and localities must then fund, often 
cutting other local priorities, when the federal funding is 
terminated. Congress will be under pressure to turn this 
program into a permanent subsidy rather than a demonstration.

Native Americans

    For Native American programs, the bill provides 
$50,000,000. This is a reduction of $11,871,000 below the 
budget request and a reduction of $9,787,000 below the 1995 
level. These programs are designed to improve the economic 
well-being of disadvantaged Native Americans through vocational 
training, work experience, and other services aimed at getting 
participants into permanent unsubsidized jobs.
    In a recent program year, only 50% of those who completed 
the program were placed into jobs. A lack of private sector 
jobs on reservations is a major problem for reservation 
training programs. There appears to be a high degree of overlap 
and fragmentation among programs in various Federal agencies 
which serve the Indian population.

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers

    For Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker programs, the bill 
provides $65,000,000. This is a reduction of $13,303,000 below 
the budget request and a reduction of $14,967,000 below the 
1995 level. This program is aimed at alleviating chronic 
unemployment and underemployment being experienced by 
farmworker families. Training and employability development 
services are supposed to prepare farmworkers for stable, year-
round employment, both in and outside the agricultural 
industry. Supportive services such as health care, day care and 
housing are also provided. Over the 9-year period ending on 
June 30, 1992, of the 440,000 participants in the program, only 
27% had been placed into permanent unsubsidized employment.
    The Department is encouraged to continue the farmworker 
housing program at a level proportionate to the current year.

Veterans' employment

    For veterans' employment, the bill provides $7,300,000. 
This is a reduction of $1,580,000 below the budget request and 
the 1995 level. These funds provide special employment and 
training programs designed to meet the unique needs of 
disabled, Vietnam-era, and recently separated veterans.

Other Federally-administered programs

    For other Federally-administered programs, $35,459,000 is 
provided. This is $153,925,000 under the budget request and 
$23,894,000 under the 1995 level. The Committee allowance 
includes funding for research and evaluation ($6,196,000), 
labor market information ($5,489,000), the Glass Ceiling 
Commission for phaseout costs ($142,000), pilots and 
demonstrations ($19,022,000) Women in Apprenticeship 
($610,000), and the National Skills Standards Advisory Board 
($4,000,000).
    The Committee has provided full funding for the ongoing 
multiyear evaluation of the Job Corps program. This evaluation 
will proceed as planned and on schedule. A number of serious 
questions have been raised about Job Corps in the recent past, 
and we need to have answers for them.
    The Committee has placed the pilots and demonstrations 
activity on a phaseout path. The Department is expected to 
phase down funding of current principal grantees and not to cut 
them off in midstream. They need to have a period of time to 
make the transition to other sources of funding.
    No funds are provided for the National Occupational 
Information Coordinating Committee, $5,500,000 below the 1995 
amount and $5,000,000 below the Administration request. The 
NOICC has been funded jointly with the Department of Education 
since fiscal year 1978. NOICC funds are used for State 
Occupational Information Coordinating Committees (SOICCS) and 
for the development and delivery of information systems that 
assess current and future labor market conditions to 
communicate and coordinate activities, and provide 
administration to assist students, educators, and vocational 
education program planners. This funding decision is consistent 
with the Committee's decision to eliminate funding for 
duplicative, expensive and unnecessary advisory committees. If 
the States feel that this is a critical activity, they can fund 
it from other sources. No funds are provided in the Department 
of Education either.
    The Committee is concerned by the extent of unemployment 
among people with disabilities and urges the Department to 
provide support for employment and training assistance at the 
1996 Paralympic Games for people with disabilities. Job 
training could be made available to unemployed workers with 
disabilities in conjunction with the planning and program 
management for this event.

            community service employment for older americans

    The bill includes $350,000,000 for community service 
employment for older Americans. This is a reduction of 
$46,060,000 below the 1995 level and a reduction of $60,500,000 
below the budget request. The program, authorized by title V of 
the Older Americans Act, provides part-time employment in 
community service activities for unemployed, low-income persons 
aged 55 and over. It is forward-funded from July 1, 1996 
through June 30, 1997. The Committee believes that this program 
must take its proportionate share of the overall discretionary 
spending reduction in the bill. The Committee has funded the 
program under the basic law rather than continuing the past 
practice of earmarking 78% of the funds for national 
contractors and 22% for the States.

              federal unemployment benefits and allowances

    The bill includes $346,100,000, the same as the budget 
request and an increase of $4,600,000 above the 1995 comparable 
level. The FY 1996 allowance provides funding for four 
activities, all entitlements.
    The first activity, Trade Adjustment Assistance benefits, 
provides for special unemployment benefit payments to workers 
as authorized by the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. For this 
activity the bill includes $183,000,000. This is the same as 
the budget request and an increase of $4,000,000 above the 1995 
comparable level. These funds will permit payment of benefits, 
averaging $198 per week, to 34,000 workers for 1996. Of these 
workers, 19,300 will participate in training programs, 
receiving benefits for an average of 32 weeks. The remaining 
14,700 workers receiving benefits will receive training waivers 
and collect benefits for an average of 21 weeks.
    The second activity, Trade Adjustment Assistance training, 
provides training, job search and job relocation allowances to 
workers adversely affected by imports. The funding for this 
activity is also authorized under the Trade Act of 1974, as 
amended. The bill includes $96,600,000 for this activity. This 
is the same as the budget request and a decrease of $1,200,000 
below the 1995 comparable level. These funds will provide 
services for an estimated 24,200 workers of whom 23,600 will be 
enrolled in classroom training and 600 will receive on-the-job 
training. In addition a total of 2,400 will receive job search 
and job relocation allowances.
    The third activity, NAFTA Transitional Adjustment 
Assistance benefits, provides for weekly benefit payments to 
workers affected by imports from Mexico and Canada. These 
payments are also authorized by the Trade Act of 1974, as 
amended as a result of the signing of the North American Free 
Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The bill includes $34,000,000 for this 
activity. This is the same as the budget request and an 
increase of $1,000,000 above the 1995 comparable level. These 
funds will provide 5,400 eligible workers an average of 32 
weeks of benefits each, at an average weekly amount of $198.
    The fourth activity, NAFTA Transitional Adjustment 
Assistance training, provides funds for training, job search 
and job relocation to workers affected by imports from Mexico 
and Canada. The funding for this activity is also authorized by 
the amendment to the Trade Act of 1974 resulting from the 
signing of the NAFTA. The bill includes $32,500,000 for this 
activity. This is the same as the budget request and an 
increase of $800,000 above the 1995 comparable level. These 
funds will provide training for an estimated 7,650 workers, 
7,450 in classroom training and 200 in on the job training. In 
addition these funds will provide for job search and relocation 
allowances for 900 workers.

     state unemployment insurance and employment service operations

    The bill includes $3,240,236,000 for this account, a 
reduction of $89,126,000 below the FY 1995 comparable level and 
$301,747,000 below the budget request. Included in the total 
availability is $3,114,908,000 authorized to be drawn from the 
Employment Security Administration Account of the Unemployment 
Trust Fund. This is $200,964,000 below the budget request and 
$87,266,000 below the 1995 comparable level. Also included is 
$125,328,000 to be provided from the general fund of the 
Treasury, a reduction of $1,860,000 below the FY 1995 amount 
and a reduction of $100,783,000 from the budget request.
    The funds in this account are used to provide 
administrative grants and assistance to State agencies which 
administer Federal and State unemployment compensation laws and 
operate the public employment service. In addition, funds are 
provided for the one-stop career center program.
    For Unemployment Insurance Services, the bill provides 
$2,314,357,000. This total includes a regular contingency 
amount of $223,837,000, which may be drawn from the Employment 
Security Administration Account of the Unemployment Trust Fund. 
In addition, the bill further provides for a second contingency 
amount should the unemployment workload exceed an average 
weekly insured claims volume of 2,785,000. This second 
contingency amount would fund the administrative costs of 
unemployment insurance workload over the level of 2,785,000 
insured unemployed per week at a rate of $28,600,000 per 
100,000 insured unemployed, with a pro-rata amount granted for 
amounts of less than 100,000 insured unemployed. The Committee 
wishes to be promptly notified whenever this latter contingency 
mechanism is utilized.
    The Unemployment Insurance Service recommendation is 
$155,586,000 below the budget request and an increase of 
$285,000 over the 1995 comparable level. The Committee 
recommendation for FY 1996 will support an estimated 44,600 
State staff years. The Committee recommendation provides a 
small increase of $7,613,000 over the 1995 level for funds 
allocated to States. For national activities, the bill includes 
$10,000,000; this is a reduction of $7,328,000 below the 1995 
level.
    For the Employment Service, the bill provides $825,879,000 
which includes $25,328,000 in general funds together with an 
authorization to spend $800,551,000 from the Employment 
Security Administration Account of the Unemployment Trust Fund. 
These amounts are $89,411,000 below the 1995 comparable level 
and $46,161,000 below the budget request. Included in the bill 
for the Employment Service is $761,735,000 for State grants, 
available for the program year of July 1, 1996 through June 30, 
1997. This is $44,177,000 below the budget request and 
$77,177,000 below the 1995 comparable level. This is a 
reduction of 9%; the President has proposed a reduction of 5%. 
The effectiveness of the Employment Service has been in 
question for some time. Only 16% of ES applicants were placed 
in jobs in a recent year, only 3% received counseling and only 
2% were referred to training.
    The Committee has provided $100,000,000 for States to 
establish one-stop career centers to integrate the provision of 
labor market and training services to unemployed workers and to 
employers through collaboration of local service providers. 
This is a reduction of $100,000,000 below the budget request, 
but it is the same as the 1995 appropriation. Funds provided 
under the one-stop initiative must supplement, not supplant, 
other Federal, State or local funds committed to such centers. 
One-stop centers should provide access to the broadest range of 
workforce development and social support services needed to 
meet client needs, including, at a minimum, the unemployment 
and employment service programs, disclocated workers and other 
JTPA programs and the local Job Opportunities and Basic Skills 
(JOBS) program.
    This program was increased by $50,000,000 in 1995, an 
increase of 100% over 1994. Congress will be under intense 
pressure to turn this program into a permanent subsidy rather 
than a temporary system reform effort. It remains to be seen 
whether this program will succeed in simplifying and 
streamlining the Nation's myriad of 163 job training programs; 
Congress needs to consolidate these programs through 
legislation. It is doubtful that a new Federal grant program 
can do this job.

        advances to the unemployment trust fund and other funds

    The bill includes $369,000,000, the same as the budget 
request and a reduction of $635,485,000 below the 1995 
comparable level. The appropriation is available to provide 
advances to several accounts for purposes authorized under 
various Federal and State unemployment compensation laws and 
the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund, whenever balances in such 
accounts prove insufficient. The bill anticipates that FY 1996 
advances will be made to the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund.
    The separate appropriations provided by the Committee for 
all other accounts eligible to borrow from this account in FY 
1996 are expected to be sufficient. Should the need arise, due 
to unanticipated changes in the economic situation, laws, or 
for other legitimate reasons, advances will be made to the 
needy accounts to the extent funds are available. Funds 
advanced to the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund are now 
repayable with interest to the general fund of the Treasury.

                         PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION

    The bill includes total funding for this account of 
$124,479,000; this is a reduction of 7.5 percent below the 1995 
level. This is $22,936,000 below the request and $10,093,000 
below the 1995 comparable level. This includes $83,505,000 in 
general funds, a reduction of $12,008,000 from the budget 
request and a reduction of $6,771,000 below the 1995 comparable 
level. In addition, the bill includes authority to expend 
$40,974,000 from the Employment Security Administration Account 
of the Unemployment Trust Fund. This is a reduction of 
$10,928,000 from the budget request and a reduction of 
$3,322,000 from the 1995 comparable level.
    General funds in this account provide the Federal staff to 
administer employment and training programs under the Job 
Training Partnership Act, the Older Americans Act, the Trade 
Act of 1974, and the National Apprenticeship Act. Trust funds 
provide for the Federal administration of employment security 
functions under Title III of the Social Security Act and the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended.

                    Office of the American Workplace

                         salaries and expenses

    The Committee has provided no funding for this agency for 
1996. The 1995 appropriation was $31,194,000, and the 1996 
request was $41,845,000. The Committee has funded the Office of 
Labor-Management Standards, including the necessary 
administrative and financial management staff, that was 
formerly funded in this Office, in the Employment Standards 
Administration. The Office of Labor-Management Standards has 
the statutory responsibility to enforce the Labor-Management 
Reporting and Disclosure Act.
    The Office of the American Workplace was established in 
1993 to provide a national focal point for encouraging the 
creation of high performance workplace practices and policies 
and to encourage the development of work organizations and 
promote innovation in the workplace.
    The Committee proposes to eliminate this Office because it 
is not a necessary Federal function; some would argue that it 
is not even an appropriate Federal function.
    According to the Department of Labor, the mission of this 
Office is ``to encourage business competitiveness and the 
skills, involvement, and commitment of front-line workers, 
while promoting more effective worker-management relations'' 
and ``to increase the number of workplaces that engage in 
organizational change efforts through increased worker 
training, worker involvement, and worker-management 
partnerships.''
    It appears to the Committee that these things should be and 
are being done in the private sector. It should not be 
necessary to spend scarce Federal funds for these purposes.

              Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration

                         salaries and expenses

    The bill provides $64,113,000 for this account, a reduction 
of $17,069,000 from the budget request and a reduction of 
$5,198,000 below the 1995 comparable level. This is a reduction 
of 7.5% below the 1995 amount.
    The Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration (PWBA) is 
responsible for the enforcement of Title I of the Employee 
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) in both civil 
and criminal areas. This involves ERISA fiduciary and 
reporting/disclosure requirements. PWBA is also responsible for 
enforcement of sections 8477 and 8478 of the Federal Employees' 
Retirement Security Act of 1986 (FERSA). PWBA provides funding 
for the Enforcement and Compliance; Policy, Regulation, and 
Public Services; and Program Oversight activities.
    The bill includes language that prohibits the Department of 
Labor from taking any steps to promote so-called ``economically 
targeted investments (ETI's)'' by private pension funds covered 
by ERISA. These include such things as investing in low-cost 
housing, infrastructure improvement, and small business 
development. ERISA requires pension plans to invest their funds 
with prudence and loyalty to plan participants. Investing in 
ETI's could jeopardize pension funds. This bill language will 
block the Department from engaging in these activities, 
including the funding of a clearinghouse on this subject. The 
authorizing committee is working on legislation to deal with 
this; this rider is necessary in the meantime to remedy the 
situation.

                  Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

    The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation is a wholly-owned 
government corporation established by the Employee Retirement 
Income Security Act of 1974. The law places it within the 
Department of Labor and makes the Secretary of Labor the 
chairman of its board of directors. The Corporation receives 
its income from insurance premiums collected from covered 
pension plans, collections of employer liabilities imposed by 
the Act, and investment earnings. It is also authorized to 
borrow up to $100 million from the Treasury. The primary 
purpose of the Corporation is to guarantee the payment of 
pension plan benefits to participants if covered plans fail or 
go out of existence.
    The Corporation's estimate for FY 1996 includes benefit 
payments of $1,060,970,000, multi-employer financial assistance 
of $4,570,000, an administrative expenses limitation of 
$12,043,000, and services related to terminations expenses of 
$128,496,000. Only the administrative expenses limitation is 
subject to the appropriations process. In the administrative 
expenses activity, the Committee recommends $10,603,000, a 
reduction of $860,000 below the 1995 comparable level; this is 
a reduction of 7.5% below 1995. It is a reduction of $1,440,000 
below the budget request.

                  Employment Standards Administration

                         salaries and expenses

    The total combined general and trust fund amount for this 
agency is $273,990,000. This is a reduction of $62,810,000 
below the budget request and a reduction of $27,156,000 below 
the 1995 comparable level. The bill includes $246,967,000 in 
general funds for this account. This is a reduction of 
$59,509,000 from the budget request and a reduction of 
$24,965,000 below the 1995 comparable level. The bill also 
contains authority to expend $978,000 from the Special Fund 
established by the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation 
Act. This is $691,000 below the budget request and $79,000 
below the 1995 comparable. In addition, an amount of 
$26,045,000 is available by transfer from the Black Lung 
Disability Trust Fund. This is a reduction of $2,610,000 from 
the request and $2,112,000 below the 1995 comparable level.
    The Committee has funded in this account the Office of 
Labor-Management Standards, including the necessary 
administrative and financial management staff, that was 
formerly funded in the Office of the American Workplace; the 
Office of the American Workplace has been eliminated. The 
Office of Labor-Management Standards has the statutory 
responsibility to enforce the Labor-Management Reporting and 
Disclosure Act. This Act requires, among other things, proper 
handling and safeguarding of union funds and assets and 
reporting and disclosure of financial transactions and 
administrative practices of unions and prevents abuse in the 
administration of union trusteeships.
    The Committee has reduced this account overall by 7.5% from 
the 1995 comparable level. In addition, a reduction of 25% has 
been made for enforcement activities under the Davis-Bacon Act 
and the Service Contract Act. This begins a phaseout of 
enforcement staff in anticipation of these Acts being repealed.
    The Employment Standards Administration is involved in the 
administration of numerous laws, including the Fair Labor 
Standards Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Migrant 
and Seasonal Agricultural Workers' Protection Act, the Davis-
Bacon Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Federal 
Employees' Compensation Act (FECA), the Longshore and Harbor 
Workers' Compensation Act, and the Federal Mine Safety and 
Health Act (black lung). The agency also administers Executive 
Order 11246 related to affirmative action by Federal 
contractors.
    The Committee has been advised and is concerned that the 
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is not being enforced fairly 
and uniformly as to cable television installation companies in 
the New York/New Jersey area. The Secretary is instructed to 
allocate sufficient resources to ensure fair and uniform 
enforcement of the FLSA with respect to the cable television 
installation industry in that region.

                            special benefits

    The bill includes $218,000,000, the same as the budget 
request and a decrease of $40,000,000 below the 1995 comparable 
level. This appropriation primarily provides benefits under the 
Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA). The payments are 
required by law.
    The total amount to be available in FY 1996, including 
anticipated reimbursements from Federal agencies of 
$1,895,000,000, is $2,113,000,000, an increase of $39,000,000 
above the 1995 comparable level.
    The Committee recommends continuation of appropriation 
language that provides authority to use the FECA fund to 
reimburse a new employer for a portion of the salary of a newly 
reemployed injured Federal worker. The FECA funds will be used 
to reimburse new employers during the first three years of 
employment not to exceed 75% of salary in the workers' first 
year, 50% in the second year, and 25% in the third year. Costs 
will be charged to the FECA fund.
    The Committee recommends continuation of appropriation 
language to provide authority to deposit into the Special 
Benefits account those funds that the Postal Service, the 
Tennessee Valley Authority, and other entities are required to 
pay to cover their ``fair share'' of the costs of administering 
the claims filed by their employees under FECA. The Committee 
also recommends approval of appropriation language to provide 
that $11,383,000 of the funds transferred from the ``fair 
share'' agencies to pay the costs of administration will be 
available to the Secretary of Labor to finance capital 
improvements relating to upgrading and enhancing the Federal 
Employees' Compensation computer system's hardware and 
software. The remaining balance of the administrative costs 
paid by the ``fair share'' agencies will revert to Treasury as 
miscellaneous receipts.

                    black lung disability trust fund

    The bill includes authority to obligate $996,203,000 from 
the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund in FY 1996. This is an 
increase of $20,642,000 above the 1995 comparable level; it is 
$2,633,000 below the budget request.
    The total amount available for FY 1996, including 
$17,164,000 from the prior year, will provide $501,494,000 for 
benefit payments, and $45,953,000 and $756,000 for 
administrative expenses for the Departments of Labor and 
Treasury, respectively. Also included is $448,000,000 for 
interest payments on advances from the general fund of the 
Treasury. In FY 1995, comparable obligations for benefit 
payments are estimated to be $516,005,000, while administrative 
expenses for the Departments of Labor and Treasury respectively 
are $51,800,000 and $756,000.
    The Trust Fund pays all black lung compensation/medical and 
survivor benefit expenses when no responsible mine operation 
can be assigned liability for such benefits, or when coal mine 
employment ceased prior to 1970, as well as all administrative 
costs which are incurred in administering the benefits program 
and operating the Trust Fund.
    It is estimated that 81,500 people will be receiving black 
lung benefits financed from the Trust Fund by the end of FY 
1996. This compares with an estimated 86,500 receiving benefits 
in FY 1995.
    The basic financing for the Trust Fund comes from a coal 
excise tax for underground and surface-mined coal. Additional 
funds come from reimbursement payments from mine operators for 
benefit payments made by the Trust Fund before the mine 
operator is found liable, and advances from the general fund, 
estimated at $369,000,000 in FY 1996. The advances to the Fund 
assure availability of necessary funds when liabilities may 
exceed other income. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
1987 continues the current tax structure until 2014.

             Occupational Safety and Health Administration

                         salaries and expenses

    The bill includes $263,985,000 for this agency. This is a 
reduction of $48,515,000 below the 1995 comparable level and a 
reduction of $82,518,000 from the budget request. This agency 
is responsible for enforcing the Occupational Safety and Health 
Act of 1970 in the Nation's workplaces. The Committee has 
reduced the Federal enforcement activity by $47,834,000 below 
the 1995 level; this is a reduction of 33%. The Committee has 
reduced other activities in this agency, except for compliance 
assistance, by 7.5% below the 1995 level; executive direction 
activities were reduced by 10%. With respect to compliance 
assistance, the Committee has provided $53,601,000, an increase 
of nearly 20% over 1995. Compliance assistance activities 
include on-site consultation programs by designated State 
agencies for which the bill includes $40,000,000, an increase 
of $8,436,000; training and education grants; fostering and 
promoting voluntary protection programs that give recognition 
and assistance to employers who establish exemplary 
occupational safety and health programs; and the OSHA training 
institute.
    The Committee does not intend to abolish this agency. It 
serves a useful public purpose. However, the overemphasis on 
enforcement at the expense of compliance assistance needs to be 
changed. The authorizing committee is already moving in this 
direction with new legislation. The Committee has attempted to 
move that process along with its funding recommendations in 
this bill.
    The bill includes language prohibiting OSHA from developing 
or issuing any standard on the subject of ergonomic protection 
for workers during fiscal 1996. It would also prohibit 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements directly related to 
ergonomic-related injuries or illnesses.
    The Committee has included language carried in the bill 
since 1976 in one instance and 1979 in the other that restricts 
the use of funds for other purposes. First, the bill includes 
language that effectively exempts farms employing 10 or fewer 
people from the provisions of the Act except those farms having 
a temporary labor camp. Second, the bill includes language 
exempting firms employing 10 or fewer in industry 
classifications having a lost workday injury rate less than the 
national average from general schedule safety inspections.
    The bill would temporarily halt the implementation of the 
fall protection standard as promulgated by the Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration and return the standard back 
to its original level of 16 feet. In February 1995, OSHA 
revised the fall protection standard to lower the height 
requirements from 16 feet to 6 feet. This regulation has had a 
significant negative impact on various construction businesses, 
particularly single family home builders. As opposed to 
eliminating this OSHA requirement, this language instead would 
compel OSHA to more suitably revise the fall protection rule--
in consultation with those affected. The return of the standard 
to 16 feet would only be for the interim period while OSHA 
develops these new standards.
    The Committee believes that OSHA should review its Roof 
Harness Rule to determine its appropriateness and effectiveness 
in ensuring worker safety. The Committee expects OSHA to report 
back to the Committee the results of this review not later than 
January 1, 1996.

                 Mine Safety and Health Administration

                         salaries and expenses

    The bill includes $185,154,000 for this agency. This is 
$26,952,000 below the budget request and $15,492,000 below the 
1995 comparable level. It is a 7.5% reduction below the 1995 
level. This agency enforces the Federal Mine Safety and Health 
Act in underground and surface mines.
    The Committee is aware of recent proposals concerning the 
merger of this agency with the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration. If such a merger is to be accomplished, it 
needs to be done by the authorizing committees of jurisdiction 
by amending the basic laws.
    The Committee has continued language carried in the bill 
since 1979 prohibiting the use of funds to carry out the 
training provisions of the Act with respect to shell dredging 
or with respect to any sand, gravel, surface stone, surface 
clay, colloidal phosphate or surface limestone mine.

                       Bureau of Labor Statistics

                         salaries and expenses

    The total funding recommended by the Committee for the 
Bureau of Labor Statistics is $347,213,000. This is a reduction 
of $29,468,000 below the budget request and a reduction of 
$4,461,000 below the 1995 comparable level. The bill includes 
$296,993,000 in general funds for this account, a reduction of 
$23,338,000 from the budget request and a reduction of $579,000 
from the 1995 comparable level. In addition, the bill includes 
$50,220,000 from the Employment Security Administration Account 
of the Unemployment Trust Fund. This is a reduction of 
$6,130,000 from the budget request and a reduction of 
$3,882,000 below the 1995 level. The Bureau of Labor Statistics 
is the principal fact-finding agency in the Federal Government 
in the broad field of labor economics. Its principal surveys 
include the Consumer Price Index and the monthly unemployment 
series.
    The Committee has approved $11,549,000, the full amount 
requested by the Administration, for the Consumer Price Index 
revision. This revision is critical to the Nation's economy and 
to the Federal budget. The Committee directs the Bureau to give 
this matter the very highest priority.
    The Committee has reduced the base funding for the Bureau 
by 3% in total below the 1995 level.

                        Departmental Management

                         salaries and expenses

    The bill includes a combined general and trust fund amount 
for Departmental Management activities of $150,144,000. This is 
$42,566,000 below the budget request and a reduction of 
$28,217,000 below the 1995 comparable level. The bill includes 
$130,220,000 in general funds for this account. This is 
$42,527,000 below the budget request and $24,480,000 below the 
1995 comparable level. The bill also includes authority to 
transfer $303,000 from the Employment Security Administration 
account of the Unemployment Trust Fund. This is $39,000 below 
the budget request and $25,000 below the 1995 comparable level. 
In addition, an amount of $19,621,000 is available by transfer 
from the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. This is the same as 
the budget request and a reduction of $3,712,000 below the 1995 
comparable level.
    The Departmental Management appropriation finances staff 
responsible for formulating and overseeing the implementation 
of Departmental policy and management activities. In addition, 
this appropriation includes a variety of operating programs and 
activities that are not involved in Departmental Management 
functions, but for which other salaries and expenses 
appropriations are not suitable.
    The Committee has reduced the base funding for this account 
by 7.5% below the 1995 level. In addition, executive direction 
activities have been reduced by a further 7.5% for a total 
reduction of 15%. This includes the Offices of the Secretary 
and Deputy Secretary and such other offices as the Assistant 
Secretary for Policy, Congressional and Intergovernmental 
Affairs, and Public Affairs. In addition, the Committee has 
substantially downsized the Bureau of International Labor 
Affairs from $12,272,000 in 1995 to $1,850,000 in 1996. This 
action taken by the Committee will allow the Bureau to carry 
out its statutory responsibilities under NAFTA, but will 
eliminate all other activities currently conducted. The other 
activities carried out by the Bureau are primarily 
discretionary in nature and seem to be less than critical in 
times of severe fiscal constraints. These include: 
participating in the U.S. labor attache program in embassies 
abroad, overseas technical assistance projects, monitoring 
internationally-recognized worker rights, participating in 
multilateral and bilateral trade negotiations and on 
international bodies such as the ILO and the OECD and other 
U.N. organizations. It would appear that the State Department 
and the Office of the Trade Representative could handle most of 
these activities.
    The Committee notes that the Office of the Solicitor 
currently has 14 FTE's devoted to work under the Longshore and 
Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. This seems to be an excessive 
number in light of the Committee's understanding of recent 
court decisions which should require less work in this area. 
The Solicitor should also reexamine the role of departmental 
attorneys in the black lung program. Efforts should be 
refocused on the defense of claims chargeable to the Black Lung 
Disability Trust Fund.
    The bill includes language that would nullify Executive 
Order 12954, issued by the President on March 8, 1995, that 
would prohibit Federal contracts with companies that hire 
permanent replacement workers for striking employees. The 
Committee believes that Congress should legislate labor-
management relationships through amendments to the National 
Labor Relations Act. This should not be done through executive 
order by the President acting unilaterally. The authorizing 
committee has reported a bill on this subject. Until that can 
be enacted, this appropriations rider is necessary to block 
this executive order.
    Teamsters election.--The Committee supports the ongoing 
efforts of the Department of Justice to rid the International 
Brotherhood of Teamsters of organized crime influence. While 
the Committee agrees that it is in the best interest of the 
nation to have a union free of these influences, it is most 
beneficial to the union itself. The Committee also agrees that 
the Federal government should not bear the full cost of the 
supervision of the upcoming elections which the Committee 
understands will amount to approximately $21,000,000. The cost 
for the supervision of this election should be shared by the 
Justice Department, the Department of Labor and the 
International Brotherhood of Teamsters. As such, the Committee 
provides that up to $5,600,000 of the amounts available to the 
Department of Labor for fiscal year 1996 may be allocated for 
this purpose, subject to the normal reprogramming requirements 
of the Committee.

        assistant Secretary for veterans employment and training

    The bill includes $175,883,000 to be expended from the 
Employment Security Administration Account of the Unemployment 
Trust Fund. This is $11,231,000 below the budget request and 
$9,323,000 below the 1995 comparable level.
    For State grants, the bill provides $79,682,000 for the 
Disabled Veterans Outreach program. This amount is sufficient 
to finance 1,576 State staff. The bill also provides 
$73,854,000 for the Local Veterans Employment Representative 
program. This amount is sufficient to finance 1,348 State 
staff.
    For Federal administration, the bill provides $19,525,000, 
a reduction of $1,583,000 from the 1995 level. This is a 
reduction of 7.5% from the 1995 base level. Included here is 
$2,000,000 for the Transition Assistance Program, which, it is 
estimated, will provide reemployment assistance to 
approximately 164,000 people separating from the military.
    The bill provides $2,822,000 for the National Veterans 
Training Institute (NVTI). Since its beginning in 1986, this 
training institute has trained some 8,100 people in veterans 
employment issues. These are primarily State employees who 
provide employment services to veterans.

                          working capital fund

    The bill includes appropriations language expanding the 
Working Capital Fund authorizing language to establish an 
Investment in Reinvention Fund in the Working Capital Fund, and 
to allow the Department to utilize up to $3,900,000 in 
unobligated balances in Departmental salaries and expenses 
accounts to capitalize this fund. The Committee has taken this 
action in lieu of appropriating additional funds. This fund 
will become self-sustaining through the repayment of initial 
investments from savings generated through improvements and 
efficiencies.

                    office of the inspector general

    The bill includes a combined general and trust fund amount 
of $48,328,000. This is $5,119,000 below the budget request and 
$3,918,000 below the 1995 comparable level. This includes 
$44,426,000 in general funds for this account. This is 
$4,826,000 below the budget request and $3,602,000 below the 
1995 comparable level. The bill also includes authority to 
transfer $3,615,000 from the Employment Security Administration 
account of the Unemployment Trust Fund. This is $293,000 below 
the budget request and $293,000 below the 1995 comparable 
level. In addition, an amount of $287,000 is available by 
transfer from the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. This is 
$23,000 below the budget request and $23,000 below the 1995 
comparable level. The Committee has reduced this Office by 7.5% 
below the 1995 level.
    The Office of the Inspector General was created by law to 
protect the integrity of Departmental programs as well as the 
welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs. Through a 
comprehensive program of audits, investigations, inspections, 
and program evaluations, the OIG attempts to reduce the 
incidence of fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, and to 
promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness throughout the 
Department.

           TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

              Health Resources and Services Administration

                     Health Resources and Services

    The bill includes $2,927,122,000 for health resources and 
services programs. This is $101,837,000 below the comparable 
amount available for these activities in fiscal year 1995 and 
$175,273,000 below the amount requested in the President's 
budget.
    The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) 
supports programs which provide health services to 
disadvantaged, medically underserved and special populations; 
which improve infant mortality rates; which direct the 
education, supply and distribution of a wide range of health 
professionals; and which provide technical assistance regarding 
the utilization of health resources and facilities.

Consolidated health centers

    The Committee has provided funds for community health 
centers, migrant health centers, health care for the homeless, 
and public housing health service grants in a consolidated line 
rather than through separate activities. Each of these programs 
is being considered for reauthorization and their structure may 
well change. Community health centers are often the grantees 
for the other programs as well, and the Administration has 
already made some efforts to consolidate grant applications and 
reduce duplication. The Committee encourages the agency to take 
whatever additional administrative steps it can to build on 
these consolidation efforts.
    The Committee provides $833,518,000 for this consolidated 
health centers line, which is $77,000,000 above the 1995 level 
and $77,119,000 above the Administration request for this 
grouping of programs. The Committee urges HRSA to give priority 
to maintenance of existing services when setting its fiscal 
year 1996 funding plans for the community and migrant health 
centers program.

Community health centers

    The community health centers program helps support systems 
that provide access to comprehensive, case-managed primary 
health care services for populations at risk of numerous and 
complex medical problems who live in rural and urban medically 
underserved areas.

Migrant health centers

    The program helps provide culturally sensitive 
comprehensive primary health care services to migrant and 
seasonal farmworkers and their families. Over 80 percent of the 
centers also receive funds from the community health centers 
program.

Health care for the homeless

    The program provides project grants for the delivery of 
primary health care services, substance abuse services, and 
mental health services to homeless adults and children. About 
half of the projects are administered by community health 
centers. The other half are administered by non-profit 
coalitions, inner city hospitals, and local public health 
departments.

Public housing health service grants

    The program awards grants to community-based organizations 
to provide case-managed ambulatory primary health and social 
services in clinics at or in close proximity to public housing. 
More than 60 percent of the programs are operated by community 
health centers.
    The Committee is pleased that the program has fostered 
partnerships with local housing authorities and tenant 
management corporations resulting in a number of innovative 
approaches for the delivery of health care. Notable among these 
approaches is the training of public housing residents to 
participate in the delivery of health education, counseling, 
and outreach services to fellow residents.

National Health Service Corps: Field placements

    The Committee provides $41,979,000 for field placement 
activities, which is the same as the 1995 level. The 
Administration requested funding in a consolidated workforce 
development cluster. These funds are used to support the 
activities of National Health Service Corps obligors and 
volunteers in the field, including travel and transportation 
costs of assignees, training and education, recruitment of 
volunteers, and retention activities. Salary costs of most new 
assignees are paid by the employing entity.

National Health Service Corps: Recruitment

    The Committee provides $78,206,000 for recruitment 
activities, which is the same as the 1995 level. The 
Administration requested funding in a consolidated workforce 
development cluster. The program awards scholarships to health 
professions students and assists graduates in repaying their 
student loans. In return for every year of support, these 
students are obligated to provide a year of service in health 
professional shortage areas usually located in inner cities or 
rural areas, with a two-year minimum obligation. The Committee 
reiterates its intent that funds provided be used to support 
multi-year, rather than single-year, commitments.

Health professions

    The Committee provides $278,977,000 for all health 
professions training programs in a consolidated line item, 
which is the same as the 1995 level. The President requested 
funding in five clusters of programs, which would require the 
enactment of authorizing law. All of these programs are being 
reauthorized for 1996 and it is likely that their structure 
will change significantly, with consolidations of previously 
separate categorical programs and reduced authorization levels. 
The Committee has provided funding in a consolidated pool 
because of these uncertainties and directs the Department to 
provide an operating plan prior to conference on the 1996 
appropriations bill indicating the way in which the funding 
provided by the House would be spread, taking into account the 
progress of the reauthorizing legislation at that point.
    To the extent permitted under the authorizing statutes 
currently under consideration, the Committee encourages HRSA to 
include the discipline of social work in its training efforts, 
particularly in interdisciplinary health and mental health care 
settings in underserved communities.

Grants to communities for scholarships

    The program provides grants to States to provide financing 
for community organizations located in health professions 
shortage areas to make scholarship awards to health professions 
students in exchange for a service obligation in the community. 
Sixty percent of the costs of scholarships are paid by the 
State and sponsoring community organization.

Health professions data system

    This program supports the collection and analysis of data 
on the labor supply in various health professions and on future 
workforce configurations.

Nurse loan repayment for shortage area service

    This program offers student loan repayment to nurses in 
exchange for an agreement to serve not less than two years in 
an Indian Health Service health center, Native Hawaiian health 
center, public hospital, community or migrant health center, or 
rural health clinic.

Research on certain health professions issues

    This program supports research on issues such as the extent 
to which debt has a detrimental effect on students entering 
primary care and the effects that Federally-funded educational 
programs for minorities have on the number of such individuals 
attending health professions schools.

Centers of excellence

    The program is designed to strengthen the national capacity 
to educate minority students in the health professions by 
offering special support to those institutions which train a 
significant number of minority health professionals, including 
Hispanics and Native Americans. Funds are used for the 
recruitment and retention of students and faculty, information 
resources and curricula, faculty and student research, and the 
development of plans to achieve institutional improvements.

Health careers opportunity program

    This program provides funds to medical and other health 
professions schools for recruitment of disadvantaged students 
and pre-professional school preparation.

Exceptional financial need scholarships

    This program provides scholarship aid to exceptionally 
needy students enrolled in medicine, osteopathic medicine, or 
dentistry who agree to practice primary care for five years 
after completing training.

Faculty loan repayment

    The loan repayment for faculty services program provides 
for the repayment of educational loans for individuals from 
disadvantaged backgrounds who are health professions students 
or graduates, and who have agreed to serve for at least two 
years as a faculty member of a health professions school. The 
school matches the Federal contribution toward loan repayment. 
The program also supports fellowships for minority faculty 
members.

Financial assistance for disadvantaged health professions students

    This program provides financial assistance to disadvantaged 
students at medical, osteopathic or dental schools who agree to 
practice primary health care for five years after completing 
training.

Health Professions Student Loan recapitalization

    This program permits additional capital contributions to be 
made to school loan funds for loans to financially needy 
students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Scholarships for disadvantaged students

    The scholarship program provides grants to selected health 
professions schools to provide scholarships to individuals from 
disadvantaged backgrounds. By statute, 30 percent of the funds 
must go to schools of nursing. Up to 25 percent of a school's 
grant may be used to provide financial assistance to 
undergraduates. The Committee continues to intend that all 
health professions disciplines made eligible by statute once it 
is reauthorized be able to participate in the scholarships 
program.

Family medicine training and departments

    This program has four components: (1) grants to medical 
schools to promote the predoctoral training of medical 
students; (2) grants to support family medicine residency 
programs and their trainees; (3) grants to programs that train 
physicians who plan to teach in family medicine programs; and 
(4) grants to assist medical schools in establishing or 
improving family medicine academic administrative units.

General internal medicine and pediatrics

    The program is comprised of three different activities: (1) 
grants to medical schools and hospitals to plan and operate 
residency programs and to provide financial assistance for 
residents; (2) grants to institutions to meet the costs of 
training programs for physicians who plan to teach in general 
internal medicine and pediatrics, as well as to support the 
faculty trainees; and (3) grants to develop programs to support 
predoctoral activities, including ambulatory care experiences, 
curriculum development and student assistantships.

Physician assistants

    The program provides grants for the training of physician 
assistants and for the training of faculty who will teach in 
physician assistants programs. By law, no more than 10 percent 
of the funding may be used for faculty development.

Public health and preventive medicine

    The program is comprised of three elements: public health 
special projects, public health traineeships and preventive 
medicine residencies. Public health special projects provide 
grants to schools of public health for developing projects in 
the areas of preventive medicine, health promotion and disease 
prevention, improving access to and the quality of health 
services in medically underserved communities, and reducing the 
incidence of domestic violence. Public health traineeship 
grants provide graduate training to individuals in the fields 
of epidemiology, environmental health, biostatistics, 
toxicology, and public health nutrition. Preventive medicine 
residency grants assist schools in developing new residency 
training programs or improving existing programs and in 
providing financial assistance to residency trainees.

Health administration traineeships and special projects

    This program provides grants to graduate degree programs in 
health administration, hospital administration and health 
policy analysis for traineeships for students and for special 
projects to prepare students for employment with public or 
nonprofit private agencies.

Area health education centers

    The AHEC program links university health science centers 
with community health service delivery systems to provide 
training sites for students, faculty and practitioners. The 
program supports three types of projects: core grants to plan 
and implement programs; special initiative funding for schools 
that have previously received AHEC grants; and model programs 
to extend AHEC grants with 50 percent Federal funding.

Border health education centers

    The program funds schools of medicine and osteopathy to 
support health education and training centers to improve the 
supply, distribution and quality of health personnel along the 
border between the United States and Mexico and in other urban 
and rural areas with populations with serious unmet health care 
needs.

General dentistry residencies

    The program provides grants to dental schools to support 
residency programs and provide financial assistance to their 
students. In this primary care residency program, dentists 
learn to provide a broad range of services for patients 
requiring complex care, such as persons with disabilities, high 
risk medical patients and those with infectious diseases. All 
grantees include community-based rotations, where residents 
provide oral health care to underserved populations and 
communities.

Allied health special projects

    The program provides funding for allied health professions 
schools for establishing community-based programs, expanding 
enrollment, developing curricula in areas such as geriatrics, 
and establishing interdisciplinary training.

Geriatric education centers and training

    The program supports grants to health professions schools 
to establish geriatric education centers to provide training 
for faculty who teach geriatrics and health care professionals 
who provide treatment. It also provides grants to medical 
schools and hospitals for geriatric training fellowships for 
physicians and dentists who plan to teach geriatrics.

Interdisciplinary traineeships

    The program provides grants to health departments, academic 
institutions, and health professions schools to train 
practitioners to provide services in rural areas, to 
demonstrate models to improve access to health care, to deliver 
health care services to rural residents, and to increase the 
recruitment and retention of health professionals in rural 
areas.

Podiatric medicine

    The program supports grants to hospitals and schools of 
podiatric medicine for primary care residency programs that 
provide traineeships to residents.

Chiropractic demonstration grants

    The program provides grants to colleges and universities of 
chiropractic to carry out demonstration projects in which 
chiropractors and physicians collaborate to identify and 
provide effective treatment of spinal and lower back 
conditions.

Advanced nurse education

    The program provides institutional support to nursing 
schools to plan and operate or significantly expand masters or 
doctoral level programs for nurse educators, public health 
nurses, or other clinical nurse specialties.

Nurse practitioners/nurse midwives

    The program provides grants to public or nonprofit 
hospitals and schools of nursing, public health, and medicine 
to develop or significantly expand programs to train nurse 
practitioners and nurse midwives to provide primary health 
care.

Special projects

    This program provides grants to nursing schools and public 
and nonprofit private entities to expand enrollment in nursing 
programs; to provide nursing practice arrangements in non-
institutional settings; to support continuing education for 
nurses in medically underserved communities to provide 
fellowships to individuals who are employed in long-term care 
as paraprofessionals; and to demonstrate innovative nursing 
practices.

Nurse disadvantaged assistance

    The program provides grants to nursing schools and other 
entities to recruit individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds, 
to provide counseling and preliminary education for them, to 
support stipends and to train school faculty.

Professional nurse traineeships

    The nurse traineeships program provides individual support 
to nurses receiving masters and doctoral degrees as nurse 
practitioners, midwives, educators, public health nurses, and 
other clinical nursing specialties.

Nurse anesthetists

    This program funds grants to public or private nonprofit 
institutions to support the costs of traineeships for licensed 
registered nurses to become nurse anesthetists. The program 
also funds grants to institutions to develop or expand programs 
to train nurse anesthetists. In addition, the program supports 
faculty fellowships to permit instructors to obtain relevant 
advanced education.

Hansen's Disease services

    The bill includes $17,500,000 to support the operation of 
the Gillis W. Long Hansen's Disease Center in Carville, 
Louisiana, research in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and the Regional 
Ambulatory Care program for Hansen's Disease patients. This is 
$3,326,000 below both the amount requested in the budget and 
the amount provided in fiscal year 1995. The Gillis W. Long 
Center operates as a research and treatment center for persons 
with Hansen's Disease (leprosy). The Federal government is 
required to provide care for anyone presenting themselves at 
the facility for care of Hansen's disease. In 1995, the 
facility is expected to have an average inpatient census of 125 
patients. The Regional Ambulatory Care program provides 
secondary and tertiary care in support of direct care at the 
Center and regionalized care of patients on an outpatient 
basis. It is expected to serve 4,100 patients in 10 locations.
    The Committee has been concerned for some time about the 
expense and inefficiency of operating the center at Carville. 
Accordingly, it is the intent of the Committee that a portion 
of these funds be used for the offer of assisted living 
allowances to those of the long-term care residents at the 
Carville facility as of July 1995 who are able and willing to 
live independently. The Committee would hope that this transfer 
could be accomplished as soon as is practicable, but without 
causing unmanageable disruption. The Committee has been 
informed that such payments will help achieve an orderly 
transition from direct provision of long-term residential care 
at the historic site of the original leprosarium at Carville to 
more suitable facilities. Without these actions, the cost of 
operating the current 330 acre, 100 building complex will 
continue to increase, and could potentially compromise the 
quality of care.

Maternal and child health block grant

    The bill includes $800,299,000 for the Maternal and Child 
Health (MCH) Block Grant. This is $116,349,000 above the amount 
appropriated in fiscal year 1995 and $121,433,000 above the 
amount requested by the Administration. The block grant 
provides funds to States to meet a broad range of enhanced and 
wraparound health services, including personal health services; 
general, population-wide health services, such as screening; 
family support services; and integrated systems of care. About 
13 million women, infants, children, adolescents and children 
with special health care needs will be served in 1995. The 
authorizing statute provides that, up to a funding level of 
$600,000,000, 85 percent of the funds are distributed to the 
States, with 15 percent of the funds set aside by the Secretary 
for special projects of regional and national significance 
(SPRANS). When the appropriation exceeds $600,000,000, 12.75 
percent of the amount over $600,000,000 is directed to the 
Community Integrated Service Systems set-aside program. The 
remaining 87.25 percent is distributed by the same 85/15 
percent allocation as in the basic block grant formula.
    The Committee continues to support the demonstration 
projects for disabled children such as the CHOICES program 
funded through SPRANS set-aside funding.

Healthy Start

    The bill includes $50,000,000 for the Healthy Start infant 
mortality initiative, which is $55,000,000 below the 1995 level 
and $50,000,000 below the Administration request. Healthy Start 
is a five-year demonstration program to reduce infant mortality 
which currently provides assistance to 22 urban and rural 
communities. Grants support the development of local 
coalitions, outreach, public information, case management, and 
the coordination of services. The last year of funding is 1996. 
If localities wish to continue the program, they will need to 
provide 100 percent of the financing in 1997. This funding 
level provides a more gradual glidepath to financial 
independence than an abrupt shutdown in 1997. States can choose 
to support the demonstrations with funding from the $684 
million maternal and child health block grant. The 
demonstration has received $368 million since 1991. It was 
intended to test new ideas that could then be disseminated to 
other parts of the country; it was not intended to support on-
going services on a permanent basis.

Organ transplantation

    The Committee includes $2,400,000 for organ transplantation 
activities in 1996, which is $229,000 below both the 1995 
appropriation and the Administration request. The program 
supports a scientific registry of organ transplant recipients; 
the National Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, 
which matches organ donors with potential recipients; and 
grants and contracts with public and private non-profit 
organizations to promote and improve organ donations. The 
Committee notes that the contractor for the network and the 
registry receives over $9 million in patient registration fees 
that are financed by Medicare and third party payers. The 
Committee urges the contractor to plan over time to decrease 
its dependence on Federal funds, which constitute only a small 
share of its total budget.

Health teaching facilities interest subsidies

    The Committee provides $411,000 for facilities interest 
subsidies, which is the same as both the Administration request 
and the 1995 appropriation. This program continues support of 
interest subsidies and loan guarantees for three loans for 
construction of health professions teaching facilities under a 
now discontinued Public Health Service Act authority. The 
remaining Federal commitment on these loans will expire in the 
year 2004.

Bone marrow program

    The Committee provides $15,360,000 for the bone marrow 
program, which is the same as both the Administration request 
and the 1995 appropriation. The National Bone Marrow Registry 
has been operational for several years under authorities 
previously delegated to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
Institute of the National Institutes of Health. Beginning in 
fiscal year 1995, the authority for this program has been 
redelegated to HRSA. In addition to funding from HRSA, in 1996, 
the National Marrow Donor Program is expected to receive more 
than $23 million from the U.S. Navy and almost $36 million from 
other sources. Funds are used for donor medical costs, donor 
centers, tissue typing, research, minority recruitment, and 
program administration. The registry is run by contract.

Rural outreach grants

    The bill includes $26,091,000 for rural outreach grants. 
This is the same as the 1995 appropriation. The Administration 
requested this funding in a consolidated cluster. The program 
supports projects that provide health services to rural 
populations not currently receiving them and that enhance 
access to existing services. The program requires the formation 
of consortia of three or more existing providers to carry out 
the demonstrations. Funding in 1996 will complete the third and 
final year of the current round of grants. The Committee would 
not anticipate funding the program beyond 1996. It has been 
funded as a demonstration since 1991 with total funding of $118 
million over that time.

State offices of rural health

    The bill does not include funding for State offices of 
rural health, which is the same as the 1995 appropriation. The 
Administration requested this funding in a consolidated 
cluster. The program was terminated in the rescission bill 
agreed to by the House and Senate; there is no reason to 
restore it in 1996. The grants are used to establish offices of 
rural health. Most of the funding is used for staff and 
associated costs; no funding goes for the direct provision of 
care to patients. The average State grant is only $55,000. By 
law, by the third year of the grant, States are required to 
provide 75 percent of the cost of the office.

Trauma care

    The bill does not provide funding for the trauma care 
program, which is $293,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The 
Administration requested this funding in a consolidated 
cluster. Most of the funding supports grants to States to 
improve trauma care elements of their State health plan. Both 
the House and Senate agreed to terminate this program in the 
rescission bill; there is no reason to restore funding in 1996. 
None of the funding goes to the direct care of patients. 
Preventive health services block grant funds from the Centers 
for Disease Control and Prevention can be used for this purpose 
if States believe the activities are a high priority.

Emergency medical services for children

    The Committee has provided $10,000,000 for emergency 
medical services for children, which is the same as the 1995 
level. The Administration proposed consolidating this activity 
into an emergency medical services cluster. The program 
supports demonstration grants for the delivery of emergency 
medical services to acutely ill and seriously injured children.

Black lung clinics

    The bill does not include funding for black lung clinics. 
This is $4,142,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The 
Administration requested this funding in a consolidated 
cluster. This program supports 14 clinics which treat a 
declining population of coal miners with respiratory and 
pulmonary impairments. The clinics presently receive more than 
one-third of their funding from other sources, such as Medicaid 
and Medicare. Of the 14 clinics, seven actually receive 
community health center funding as well as black lung grants.

Alzheimer's demonstration grants

    The Committee provides $4,000,000 for Alzheimer's 
demonstration grants, which is $959,000 below the 1995 
appropriation. The Administration requested this funding in a 
consolidated cluster. The program provides grants to 15 State 
governments to help them plan and establish programs to provide 
health care services to individuals with Alzheimer's disease. 
Funds are used for respite care and supportive services, 
clearinghouses, training, and administrative costs for State 
offices. By law, States are required to match the Federal 
funding--40 percent by the third year of the grant.

Payment to Hawaii, treatment of Hansen's Disease

    The bill does not include funding for the treatment of 
persons with Hansen's Disease in the State of Hawaii. This is 
$2,976,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The Administration 
requested this funding in a consolidated cluster. There is no 
longer a compelling need for a special program. Most patients 
are now treated in the same way as patients on the mainland; 
their care can be supported through insurance or Medicaid if 
they are income-eligible. In addition, one of the Hansen's 
disease regional care centers supported by the Carville 
appropriation is located in Hawaii, making specialty care 
available to these patients without the need to travel long 
distances.

Pacific Basin initiative

    The Committee does not provide funding for the Pacific 
Basin initiative in 1995, which is $1,500,000 below the 1995 
level. The Administration requested this funding in a 
consolidated cluster. This activity supports two programs: 
health professions training and preventive services capacity 
building grants. The House and Senate agreed in the rescission 
bill to terminate the capacity building program and to phase 
out the training activities. The 1996 bill would complete this 
phaseout. $15 million has been provided for these programs 
since 1989. The territories receive funding under the 
preventive health services block grant that can be used for 
this purpose; in addition, Pacific Basin residents can 
participate in the regular health professions training programs 
funded by HRSA.

Native Hawaiian health care

    The bill does not include funding for Native Hawaiian 
health care, which is $4,336,000 below the 1995 appropriation. 
The Administration requested this funding in a consolidated 
cluster. This program funds Native Hawaiian health care 
organizations to provide health promotion and disease 
prevention activities for that population. The authorizing law 
also earmarks an administrative grant for a single 
organization, the Pap Ola Lokahi, as well as a health 
professions training program specifically for Native Hawaiians, 
to be administered by the Kamehameha/Bishops Estate 
organization. This program has been funded since 1990 with a 
total of $20.6 million. More general health services and health 
professions training programs are available to this population.

Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

    The bill includes $662,902,000 for HRSA programs related to 
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). This is $83,787,000 
below the amount requested in the President's budget and 
$6,713,000 above the 1995 appropriation.

Education and training centers

    The bill does not provide funding for AIDS education and 
training centers, which is $16,287,000 below both the 1995 
appropriation and the Administration request. The centers train 
health care personnel who care for AIDS patients and develop 
model education programs. This program was first funded in 1987 
at the early stages of the AIDS epidemic, when providers were 
not very familiar with the progression of the disease and the 
recommended treatments. Eight years and $125 million later, 
several hundred thousand providers have been trained. There has 
been adequate time for educators to incorporate AIDS 
information into the curricula at medical schools and in other 
health professions training; networks have been established to 
translate recent research findings to a broader audience of 
practitioners.

AIDS dental services

    The bill includes $6,937,000 for AIDS dental services, 
which is the same as both the President's request and the 1995 
level. The program provides grants to dental schools and 
postdoctoral dental education programs to assist with the cost 
of providing unreimbursed oral health care to patients with 
human immunodeficiency virus disease. 120 schools are expected 
to receive awards in 1995.

Ryan White AIDS programs: Emergency assistance

    The bill includes $379,500,000 for the Title I emergency 
assistance program, which is $27,500,000 below the 
Administration request and $23,000,000 above the 1995 
appropriation. These funds provide grants to metropolitan areas 
with very high numbers and/or per capita rates of AIDS cases 
for outpatient and ambulatory health and social support 
services. Half of the amount appropriated is allocated by 
formula and half is allocated to eligible areas demonstrating 
additional need through a competitive grant process. In 1995, 
42 metropolitan areas are eligible to receive formula grants. 
In 1996, up to 10 new areas are expected to be eligible for 
funding under Title I. Funds provided above the 1995 level are 
intended to address the funding pressures resulting from 
additional cities joining the program in 1996. The Committee 
realizes that changes to funding formulas and the authorization 
structure may be enacted as part of the reauthorization process 
for the Ryan White CARE Act. The Committee has appropriated on 
the basis of current law at this time, but expects to conform 
its appropriation to changes in the authorizing law which are 
enacted by the time of conference.
    The Committee recognizes the additional service delivery 
challenges faced by service providers in areas with co-
morbidity factors including tuberculosis, substance abuse, 
severe mental illness, sexually transmitted diseases, and 
homelessness. The Committee expects that HRSA will prioritize 
consideration of these co-morbidity factors in awarding Title I 
supplemental grants, to the degree that is compatible with 
eventual reauthorizing language. Linking supplemental grants to 
data driven indices of severe health needs among people with 
AIDS in Title I cities will serve to more effectively target 
Ryan White funds.

Ryan White AIDS programs: Comprehensive care programs

    The Committee provides $198,147,000 for Title II, 
comprehensive care programs, which is $23,750,000 below the 
Administration request and the same as the 1995 appropriation. 
The funds provided support formula grants to States for the 
operation of HIV service delivery consortia in the localities 
most heavily affected, for the provision of home and community-
based care, for continuation of health insurance coverage for 
infected persons, and for purchase of therapeutic drugs. Up to 
10 percent of the total may be retained by the Secretary for 
special projects of national significance.

Ryan White AIDS programs: Early intervention program

    The Committee provides $52,318,000 for Title III-B, the 
early intervention program, which is the same as the 1995 
appropriation and $10,250,000 below the Administration request. 
Funds are used for discretionary grants to migrant and 
community health centers, health care for the homeless 
grantees, family planning grantees, hemophilia centers and 
other private non-profit entities that provide comprehensive 
primary care services to populations with or at risk for HIV 
disease. The grantees provide testing, risk reduction 
counseling, transmission prevention, and clinical care; case 
management, outreach, and eligibility assistance are optional 
services. Approximately 125,000 HIV positive persons or persons 
at high risk for HIV infection are expected to be served in 
1995 at 140 sites.

Ryan White AIDS programs: Pediatric demonstrations

    The bill includes $26,000,000 for the pediatric AIDS 
demonstrations authorized under Title IV of the Ryan White 
C.A.R.E. Act. This is $6,000,000 below the Administration 
request and the same as the 1995 level. The program supports 
demonstration grants to foster collaboration between clinical 
research institutions and primary community-based medical and 
social service providers for the target population of HIV-
infected children, pregnant women and their families. The 
projects are intended to increase access to comprehensive care, 
as well as to voluntary participation in NIH and other clinical 
trials. 56 projects are expected to be funded in 1995.
    The Committee expects all programs funded under the Ryan 
White program to increase coordination with CDC outreach 
programs to prevent perinatal HIV transmission. Ryan White 
programs and other HRSA programs should take the lead in 
providing quality care to HIV-infected pregnant women to reduce 
the potential for infection of newborns. The Committee expects 
that HRSA program guidance to grantees will reflect the need to 
plan for and deliver services to pregnant women as part of 
priority setting.

Family planning

    The bill does not include funding for the family planning 
program, which is $193,349,000 below the 1995 appropriation and 
$198,982,000 below the Administration request. The Committee 
terminates the funding for the Title X categorical program and, 
instead, transfers $193,349,000 (the same level allocated for 
Title X in fiscal year 1995) to the Maternal and Child Health 
block grant and Community and Migrant Health Centers 
(Consolidated Health Centers) programs. Of the $193,349,000 
amount, $116,349,000 is transferred to the Maternal and Child 
Health block grant program and $77,000,000 is transferred to 
the Community and Migrant Health Centers (Consolidated Health 
Centers) Program. Block granting and consolidating the Title X 
funding into these two programs will reduce duplication and 
administrative costs and allow better distribution of important 
health care services for women and children. The additional 
funds transferred to these two programs are available for the 
same beneficiaries currently served under Title X but through 
programs that also provide other comprehensive health services 
to women and children.

Rural health research

    The Committee has not included funding for rural health 
research, which is $9,426,000 below both the 1995 appropriation 
and the Administration request. The Office supports several 
rural health research centers, the activities of the Office's 
advisory committee, and a telemedicine grant program. The House 
and Senate agreed to rescind $3,750,000 from this program in 
the rescissions bill. All of the research centers are up for 
recompetition in 1996, and consequently the Committee's action 
will not interrupt their grants; they could apply to HCFA or 
AHCPR for continued research funding. Rural telemedicine is 
also funded at HCFA and the National Library of Medicine. The 
Office provides no direct services to patients, and its size 
and location at HRSA limit its impact on Federal health 
reimbursement policies and other concerns of rural areas.

Health care facilities

    The Committee has not included funding for health care 
facilities. $10,000,000 was provided for this purpose in 1995, 
and $2,000,000 was included in the President's 1996 request. 
This expired authority provides funds to public and private 
nonprofit entities for construction or modernization of 
outpatient medical facilities. This activity has not been 
funded by the Committee on a regular annual basis. The 
Committee felt that provision of services rather than 
construction was a higher priority in the current stringent 
fiscal environment.

Buildings and facilities

    $933,000 is provided for buildings and facilities for 1996, 
which is the same as both the 1995 appropriation and the 
Administration request. These funds are used to finance the 
repair and upkeep of buildings at the Gillis W. Long Hansen's 
Disease Center at Carville, Louisiana.

National practitioner data bank

    The Committee does not provide funding for the national 
practitioner data bank for fiscal year 1996, which is the same 
as both the 1995 action on appropriations and the 
Administration request. The Administration request and the 
Committee recommendation assume that the data bank will be 
self-supporting, with collections of $6,000,000 in user fees.
    The national data bank receives, stores and disseminates 
information on paid medical malpractice judgments and 
settlements, sanctions taken by professional societies, and 
certain professional review actions. Insurance companies, State 
license boards and professional societies are required to 
report information to the data bank within 30 days of each 
action. The coverage of the data bank includes dentists and 
physicians, and with respect to malpractice settlements, other 
categories of licensed health professionals. Hospitals are 
required to search the data bank when a health care provider 
applies for employment and once every two years thereafter. 
State licensing boards and other health care entities also have 
access to the data bank. Traditional bill language is included 
to ensure that user fees are collected to cover all costs of 
processing requests and providing such information to data bank 
users.

Program management

    The bill includes $120,546,000 for the cost of Federal 
staff and related activities to coordinate, direct and manage 
the programs of the Health Resources and Services 
Administration. This amount is the same as the President's 
request and $363,000 below the amount provided for fiscal year 
1995. In accordance with the policy applied by the Committee 
throughout the bill, an undistributed administrative reduction 
of $16,000,000 has been applied to the HRSA account. This 
amount represents a 7.5 percent reduction in the 1995 level for 
administrative costs, with an additional 2.5 percent reduction 
for the congressional and public affairs functions. The agency 
is directed to apply this reduction only to the categories of 
funding that are included in the display of administrative 
costs on page 17 of the HRSA 1996 budget justification.
    The Committee is aware of legislation, Public Law 103-400, 
which authorizes and encourages the President to conclude an 
agreement with Mexico to establish a United States--Mexico 
Border Health Commission. The Committee understands that the 
legislation envisioned that the Department of Health and Human 
Services would assume the funding of the Commission from 
existing funds. The Committee re-affirms its support for the 
Border Health Commission and encourages the Department of 
Health and Human Services to move forward in establishing the 
commission within the existing funds of the budget provided for 
by this bill, and to report to the Committee on its program.

               Medical Facilities Guarantee and Loan Fund

           Federal Interest Subsidies for Medical Facilities

    The Committee provides $8,000,000 for the Medical 
Facilities Guarantee and Loan Fund, which is the same as the 
budget request and $1,000,000 less than the amount appropriated 
in 1995. Appropriations are used to pay interest subsidies on 
loans made or guaranteed prior to fiscal year 1977 for hospital 
construction. The bill includes language, as in prior years, 
which prohibits commitments for new loans or loan guarantees in 
fiscal year 1996.

               Health Education Assistance Loans Program

    The Health Education Assistance Loans (HEAL) program 
insures loans provided by non-Federal lenders to students in 
health professions schools. Under the accounting rules 
established in the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, one account 
is maintained to pay the obligations arising from loans 
guaranteed prior to fiscal year 1992. A second account pays 
obligations and collects income from premiums on loans 
guaranteed in fiscal year 1992 and beyond. Each annual cohort 
of loans is independently tracked in this account.
    The Committee provides $42,000,000 to liquidate 1996 
obligations from loans guaranteed prior to 1992, which is the 
same as the Administration request and $24,010,000 above the 
1995 appropriation.
    The Committee provides $13,500,000 for the payment of 
claims arising from the cohort of loans guaranteed in 1996, 
which is $4,544,000 below the Administration request and 
$8,550,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The funding provided 
by the Committee is based on a 1996 loan limitation of 
$210,000,000 which is $70,000,000 below the Administration's 
proposed level and $165,000,000 below the 1995 level. The 
Committee has provided a loan limitation level sufficient to 
support only the continuation costs of those students currently 
receiving HEAL loans and intends that the program be phased out 
as these students complete their studies. As the loan limits on 
guaranteed student loans administered by the Department of 
Education have been increased, the need for the HEAL program 
has declined. In addition, the Secretary of Education has 
discretionary authority to further increase annual and 
aggregate loan limits for the Federal Family Education Loan 
program for specialized training with exceptionally high cost. 
The Committee instructs the Secretary of Education to monitor 
the situation in the health professions and use this authority 
as appropriate. In any event, the financial terms of these 
loans are more favorable for students than those available on 
HEAL loans. Finally, health professions students in some 
disciplines have access to loan funds sponsored by their 
professional membership organizations.
    The Committee provides $2,703,000 for HEAL program 
management, which is $219,000 below both the Administration 
request and the 1995 appropriation. The 7.5 percent reduction 
of administrative expenses applied throughout the bill is 
incorporated into the funding level provided.

             Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Trust Fund

    The Committee makes available the release of $59,721,000 
from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund in 1996, which 
is the same as the Administration request and $2,245,000 above 
the total of trust fund monies made available in 1995.
    The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program provides a 
system of compensation for individuals with vaccine-associated 
injuries or deaths. Funds for claims from vaccines administered 
on or after October 1, 1988 are generated by a per-dose excise 
tax on the sale of selected prescribed vaccines. Revenues 
raised by this tax are maintained in a Vaccine Injury 
Compensation Trust Fund.
    Trust funds made available in the bill will support the 
liability costs of vaccines administered after September 30, 
1988. They will also support the $3,000,000 in costs incurred 
by the agency in the operation of the program, which is the 
same as both the 1995 level and the Administration request.

                      Vaccine Injury Compensation

    The bill provides $110,000,000 in general funds for vaccine 
compensation for claims associated with vaccines administered 
prior to October 1, 1988. This is the same as both the 
Administration request and the 1995 appropriation; it is the 
full authorized amount.

               Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

                 Disease Control, Research and Training

    The bill includes $2,124,931,000 for the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention, which is $39,100,000 above the 
1995 level and $97,729,000 below the 1996 Administration 
request. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 
assists State and local health authorities and other health-
related organizations in controlling the spread of infectious 
diseases, reducing chronic diseases, providing protection from 
environmental and workplace hazards, and reducing risk factors, 
such as smoking and high blood pressure. As described in the 
opening sections of the report, the Committee has allocated 
funding according to existing law rather than to the structure 
proposed in legislation by the Administration. The Committee 
does not intend through this action to indicate an 
unwillingness to consider the legislative changes being 
contemplated by the authorizing committees and hopes that these 
structural decisions are made in advance of conference action 
on the appropriations bill so that they may be incorporated at 
that time. Consistent with the decision to appropriate on the 
basis of current law, the $6 million in administrative savings 
assumed with enactment of the legislative proposals has not 
been included in the Committee's recommended funding levels.
    Despite severe fiscal constraints, the Committee made the 
difficult choices necessary throughout the bill to provide 
increased resources for a number of prevention programs, 
believing investment in this area is a high priority. As a 
result, increases above the 1995 level are included for 
childhood immunization, sexually transmitted diseases, chronic 
and environmental disease prevention, breast and cervical 
cancer screening, and infectious disease.

Preventive health and health services block grant

    The Committee recommends $157,918,000 for the preventive 
health and health services block grant, which is $3,580,000 
above the amount requested and the same as the 1995 level. This 
program, which was created by combining eight categorical grant 
programs, provides States with funds for programs addressing 
any of the Healthy People 2000 objectives, rodent control, 
community and school-based fluoridation programs, emergency 
medical services, and prevention of sex offenses. Despite 
fiscal constraints, the Committee felt it was important to fund 
this core activity at the 1995 level because it is available to 
all States and permits them broad flexibility to address those 
health needs they believe are most acute in their own 
communities.

Prevention centers

    The Committee recommends $7,724,000 for prevention centers, 
which is the same as both the Administration request and the 
1995 appropriation. Grants are made to academic institutions to 
operate centers which conduct applied research to promote 
health and disease prevention. These centers have been funded 
since 1986 with a total of $40.5 million and the Committee 
intends to review the need for an on-going Federal commitment 
to these activities. The research projects that they support 
are eligible for funding from other agencies within the 
Department of Health and Human Services.

Data initiative

    The Committee has not been able to provide first year 
funding for the data initiative requested by the 
Administration. In addition to the $6,000,000 requested in the 
CDC budget, the initiative would tap the other Public Health 
Service agencies for an additional $14,000,000. Since the 
Committee has not been able to fund many of these agencies at 
the 1995 level, it does not believe it is appropriate to 
further strain their resources with this new tap. The Committee 
would hope that the Administration, in the context of its 
ongoing review of health data collection for the reinventing 
government exercise, would assess whether this new effort is 
important enough to reallocate existing resources within the 
Department.

Childhood immunization

    The bill includes $475,497,000 for the childhood 
immunization program, which is an increase of $10,000,000 above 
the 1995 amount and $27,321,000 below the Administration 
request. In addition, the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program 
funded by Medicaid is expected to support $374 million in 
vaccine purchases in 1996, an increase of $34.9 million over 
1995.
    Project grants assist State and local agencies in planning, 
developing, and conducting childhood immunization programs, 
including enhancement of the vaccine delivery infrastructure, 
and in delivering vaccines. National activities include 
maintenance of a stockpile of vaccines; the consolidated 
purchase of vaccines for State and local health agencies; 
surveillance and investigations; and research into the safety 
and efficacy of new and presently used vaccines.
    The Committee recognizes the remarkable success that has 
been made toward eradicating polio globally and the potential 
for eliminating this disease by the year 2000. The Committee 
has provided increased funding in part to increase CDC's 
contribution to the worldwide effort to eradicate polio. This 
will ultimately result in savings of hundreds of millions of 
dollars when children in the U.S. no longer need to be 
immunized against polio.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus

    The bill includes $589,962,000 for activities related to 
the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This amount is the same 
as the 1995 level. The Administration proposed to consolidate 
these activities into an HIV/STD/TB partnership grant. CDC HIV 
programs support research, surveillance, epidemiologic and 
laboratory studies, and prevention through information, 
education, and risk reduction. Major information, education and 
prevention activities include counseling, testing, and partner 
notification; HIV prevention among high risk populations, 
including intravenous drug users, women and infants, and 
hemophiliacs; special minority initiatives; programs for school 
and college-aged youth; information campaigns for the general 
public; and tuberculosis control efforts. CDC provides funds to 
State and local health departments to develop and implement 
integrated community prevention plans. The planning process 
assesses unmet needs and sets priorities among them, 
coordinates services among various types of community 
providers, reduces duplication and encourages the conduct of 
program evaluations.
    The Committee commends CDC for implementing community 
planning for HIV prevention programs. In order to improve this 
process, CDC is encouraged to (a) work toward developing useful 
methods of conducting behavioral monitoring as part of local 
planning used to target prevention resources; (b) increase 
efforts to coordinate substance abuse treatment and prevention 
planning into local HIV prevention plans; and (c) provide 
continued funding for technical assistance in support of 
community planning and HIV prevention programs. CDC is further 
encouraged to continue their efforts to develop data monitoring 
systems through cooperative agreements with State and local 
health departments that would allow annual reporting on funds 
allocated by specific interventions to specific target 
populations.
    The Committee also commends CDC for leadership in 
preventing perinatal HIV transmission by developing the 
Guidelines for HIV Counseling and Voluntary Testing for 
Pregnant Women. Of the funds provided for HIV prevention, CDC 
is urged to conduct and evaluate outreach programs to encourage 
at-risk pregnant women to be tested for HIV and to provide 
referral for medical treatments which would reduce the 
potential for HIV transmission to newborns. CDC is encouraged 
to target these funds to the geographic areas with the highest 
concentration of HIV infected pregnant women and to plan and 
fund these outreach efforts through the existing structure for 
State and local community planning. These outreach programs 
should be evaluated independently to determine the extent to 
which the goals of the guidelines are being accomplished.
    To encourage CDC's efforts to coordinate HIV prevention and 
health care services with substance abuse treatment services, 
the Committee has provided funds to enhance existing HIV 
prevention programs to provide services in a substance abuse 
treatment setting.

Tuberculosis

    The Committee has included $119,582,000 for the 
tuberculosis program, the same as the 1995 appropriation. The 
Administration proposed to consolidate these activities into an 
HIV/STD/TB partnership grant. In addition to funding provided 
in this line item, CDC AIDS activities support HIV-related 
tuberculosis control efforts. The tuberculosis program supports 
grants to States and large cities. Funds are used to hire 
outreach workers who provide directly-observed therapy, to 
support local surveillance, and to conduct screening of high-
risk populations. In addition, funds support research to 
develop new prevention, diagnostic, and treatment technologies; 
assistance to upgrade State and local laboratories; 
epidemiological investigations; and educational and training 
activities.

Sexually transmitted diseases

    The Committee recommends $110,242,000 for sexually 
transmitted diseases (STDs), an increase of $5,000,000 above 
the 1995 amount. The Administration proposed to consolidate 
these activities into an HIV/STD/TB partnership grant. The 
Committee has provided full funding for the Tuskegee 
reimbursement program. Grants are awarded to State and local 
health departments and other nonprofit entities to support 
primary prevention activities, surveillance systems, screening 
programs, partner notification and counseling, outbreak 
control, and clinical skills training. Federal activities 
include technical assistance, special investigations, and 
surveillance and epidemiologic research. The Accelerated 
Prevention Campaign encourages innovative, interdisciplinary 
collaborative efforts and supports quality and access 
improvements. The infertility program conducts chlamydia 
testing in family planning and STD clinics in an effort to 
prevent STD-related infertility.

Chronic and environmental disease prevention

    The bill includes $150,000,000 for chronic and 
environmental disease prevention, an increase of $10,246,000 
above the 1995 amount. The Administration proposed to 
consolidate these activities into a chronic disease partnership 
grant. The chronic and environmental disease program supports 
surveillance, epidemiology, and laboratory evaluation of 
environmental exposures and resulting illnesses, chronic 
disease, behavioral risk factors, and injuries. It also 
supports applied research to develop control and prevention 
programs; provision of epidemiologic, laboratory, and 
management consultation and training services to State and 
local health professionals; and development of laboratory 
techniques to test for the presence of hazardous substances in 
human tissues and the effects of exposure to environmental 
hazards.
    Programs supported within this activity include the 
behavioral risk factor surveillance system; cancer registries; 
the community health promotion program; smoking cessation; 
health education for school and college-age youth; and efforts 
against diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular disease, especially 
among minorities, birth defects, disabilities, chronic fatigue 
syndrome, and fetal alcohol syndrome. The Committee urges CDC 
to conduct an evaluation of the program to set priorities among 
the many chronic conditions it could choose to address, 
determining which areas are most appropriate for Federal 
intervention for reasons of incidence, knowledge of successful 
interventions, or whatever other criteria CDC and its outside 
advisors develop. The Committee would like CDC to develop a 
strategic plan for presentation prior to the fiscal year 1997 
appropriations hearings that would identify the agency's long 
range plans for chronic disease prevention in an environment of 
steady or declining resources. The plan should identify those 
areas of high priority and their justification and the share of 
the financial burden CDC expects to be covered by its State and 
local partners. CDC should consult with the Committee on 
funding level assumptions to be used in the development of the 
plan. The plan should also incorporate any other programs that 
are blended into chronic and environmental disease prevention 
by authorizing legislation that may be enacted into law.
    The Committee has included funds to initiate a birth 
defects surveillance system. The funds would be targeted to 
regional centers to provide comprehensive surveillance data and 
applied epidemiological research to discover the causes of 
birth defects. Funds would also be used to enhance Statewide 
birth defects surveillance programs.
    The Committee encourages CDC to expand its diabetes control 
program to broaden the scope of State level activities.
    The Committee is pleased that CDC continues to make 
progress in establishing a prostate cancer awareness and 
outreach program targeted to high risk populations. Both the 
incidence of, and death rate from, prostate cancer continue to 
rise, with a disproportionate impact on African American men. 
Early detection and an understanding of the treatment options 
for prostate cancer is important. The Committee encourages CDC 
to target its outreach efforts to high risk populations, 
working with public and private nonprofit organizations with 
experience in cancer outreach and education.
    The Committee commends CDC's initial efforts to develop 
effective strategies to educate Americans about the health 
consequences of unprotected sun exposure. The Committee 
encourages CDC to make efforts to educate and inform children, 
including the children of migrant workers, about sun protection 
and to develop guidelines for school-based educational 
curricula related to the dangers of sun exposure.
    Most States lack resources to implement broad-based and 
integrated cardiovascular diseases prevention efforts. The 
Committee is pleased that CDC plans to launch a State-based 
cardiovascular disease prevention and control program to begin 
to address this need. This program will track and monitor the 
rate of disease and its risk factors and advance efforts to 
implement community-based programs promoting physical activity 
and healthy diet.
    The Committee is very supportive of the hemophilia 
consumer-based patient involvement programs that have been 
successful in HIV/AIDS risk reduction and in the prevention of 
the complications of hemophilia. The Committee has included 
funds to maintain and strengthen hemophilia and other 
hematologic program activities focused on preventing and 
reducing the crippling and debilitating complications and death 
caused by such bleeding disorders.
    At least a third of the people infected with hepatitis B 
and C have no known risk factors. The Committee encourages CDC 
to strengthen epidemiological studies, such as the Sentinel 
Counties project, to learn more about how these diseases are 
transmitted.
    The Committee encourages the completion and expansion of 
current chronic fatigue and immune dysfunction syndrome (CFIDS) 
surveillance projects at CDC. The Committee suggests that CDC 
commence a case-control phase of the community-based 
surveillance study recently completed in San Francisco. CDC is 
encouraged to conduct appropriate education programs and to 
commence studies on possible transmission routes for CFIDS, 
especially among health care workers, family members and 
maternal transmission to unborn children.
    The Committee is aware that the nation's leading science 
education centers have established a national health sciences 
consortium, and that the consortium has begun planning a 
women's health project. The Committee has provided one-time 
partial funding, to be competitively awarded, for a women's 
health project to create museum exhibitions focusing on the 
prevention and treatment of health conditions having a special 
impact on women. The Committee expects these funds to be 
matched with private funds.
    The Committee encourages CDC to maintain its support of the 
Hanford thyroid disease study and to accelerate the timeframe 
for its completion to the extent that resources permit.

Breast and cervical cancer screening

    The Committee has included $125,000,000 for the breast and 
cervical cancer screening program, which is $25,000,000 above 
the 1995 level. The Administration proposed to consolidate 
these activities into a chronic disease partnership grant. The 
breast and cervical cancer screening program supports 
screening, education, and followup services for low-income 
women, training for health care providers, quality assurance 
activities, national technical assistance and support, and 
surveillance and program evaluation. In 1995, 35 States will 
receive resources for comprehensive programs, and 16 States 
will receive capacity building grants.
    The Committee urges CDC to utilize funding for the breast 
and cervical cancer screening program to continue to build 
programs nationwide, and to develop programs consistently from 
State to State that include minimum standards for participating 
States. Continued priority for breast cancer screening should 
be given to postmenopausal, low-income, underinsured and 
uninsured women, and those women at high risk of breast cancer.
    The Committee is pleased that there has been a slight 
reduction in deaths from breast cancer. However, breast and 
cervical cancer will still kill more than one-half million 
women in this decade alone. The Committee continues to be 
concerned about the disproportionately high prevalence of 
cancer among disadvantaged and minority populations. Despite an 
overall drop in breast cancer rates, the rates for minority 
groups continue to increase. The Committee encourages CDC to 
give priority to these groups in its screening program.
    The Committee encourages CDC to support within its 
demonstration projects activity one or more demonstrations, to 
be competitively awarded, to establish community-based 
coalitions for breast and cervical cancer prevention and 
control, with the participation of academic health centers, 
county and municipal public health departments, and local 
community groups. Such demonstrations would initiate and 
coordinate education, prevention and screening programs with a 
research component to evaluate the success of prevention 
interventions.

Infectious diseases

    The bill includes $67,276,000 for infectious diseases, 
which is $12,874,000 above the 1995 level and $4,085,000 above 
the Administration request. The Committee strongly supports 
this core function of the agency and is aware of the continuing 
threats of new and reemerging infectious diseases. The program 
supports national surveillance of infectious diseases, the 
development of new or improved prevention and control methods 
and techniques, the acceleration of the general application of 
accepted prevention technologies, and strengthening of the 
capability to respond to outbreaks of new and reemerging 
infectious diseases. Some of the disease areas concentrated 
upon include Lyme Disease, drug resistant microorganisms, 
infectious diseases in child care settings, foodborne diseases, 
hospital infections, hantavirus, and pneumococcal disease.
    Infectious diseases such as drug-resistant tuberculosis, 
Lyme disease, cryptosporidiosis, and hantavirus pulmonary 
syndrome pose an increasing risk to the U.S., in human terms 
and in economic costs. In response to a report by the Institute 
of Medicine which determined that the U.S. public health system 
is generally unprepared to address emerging microbial threats, 
CDC has developed a comprehensive plan that consists of a four 
point strategy including surveillance; applied research; 
prevention and control; and infrastructure. The Committee 
encourages CDC to expand its surveillance efforts in 1996, 
which will improve the detection and response to emerging 
pathogens.
    The Committee is concerned that excessive use of 
antimicrobial drugs is increasing the prevalence of drug-
resistant infections. If this trend continues, the choices of 
effective therapy for common infections may become more and 
more limited. The Committee urges CDC and NIH to work in 
collaboration in this important area of drug resistance.

Lead poisoning prevention

    The bill includes an appropriation of $36,409,000 for the 
childhood lead poisoning prevention program. This is the same 
as the 1995 level and $18,000 above the Administration request. 
The program supports grants to States and localities for 
screening, followup, and education; laboratory proficiency 
activities; the development of better instruments for blood 
lead measurement; epidemiologic activities; and surveillance.
    The average blood level for persons in the U.S. has dropped 
78 percent from 1976 to 1991. The Committee urges CDC to make 
further efforts to target the program to those areas with the 
greatest level of need. In addition, the Committee notes that 
the law permits States to use their preventive health services 
block grant funds for lead poisoning control; indeed, the block 
grant was created in 1981 as a consolidation of numerous 
categorical programs, including lead poisoning. A separate 
categorical program was reestablished in 1990.
    The Committee encourages CDC to continue to develop more 
effective and portable hand screening tools for professionals 
to use in the field. Such tools will allow an almost immediate 
reading, which makes possible immediate intervention and 
treatment.

Injury control

    The Committee has included $43,679,000 for the injury 
control program, which is the same as the 1995 level and 
$982,000 below the Administration request. The injury control 
program supports intramural research to identify risk factors 
and interventions to prevent morbidity, mortality, and 
disability resulting from injury and trauma outside the 
workplace; injury control research centers; extramural research 
project grants; and technical assistance to State and local 
health departments. The program focuses on motor vehicle 
crashes, falls, fires and burns, poisoning, drowning, and 
violence, including homicide, suicide and domestic violence. 
The Committee urges CDC to reexamine its injury control 
portfolio to target available funding to activities for which 
CDC can develop and implement specific interventions and those 
that are not currently being addressed in some fashion by other 
Federal agencies, such as the Justice and Transportation 
Departments.

Occupational safety and health

    The bill includes $99,222,000 for the National Institute 
for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), which is 
$37,862,000 below the Administration request and $32,898,000 
below the 1995 level. NIOSH conducts applied research, develops 
criteria for occupational safety and health standards, and 
provides technical services to government, labor and industry, 
including training for the prevention of work-related diseases 
and injuries. Activities supported include surveillance, health 
hazard evaluations, intramural and extramural research, 
instrument and methods development, dissemination, and training 
grants.
    The Committee has eliminated funding for training because 
of budget constraints, considering it to be a less compelling 
Federal role. The majority of training funding is allocated to 
graduate student stipends. With the private and public sector 
demand for occupational safety and health experts unabated, the 
job placement outlook for graduates remains strong and students 
have access to general student financial aid. The Federal 
government makes available $36 billion each year for student 
financial assistance, of which $8.8 billion is allocated to 
graduate students. In-service training courses can be financed 
by the employers of those trained, since insurance and 
regulatory requirements provide strong incentives to have 
occupational safety specialists on staff.

Epidemic services

    The bill provides $73,325,000 for epidemic services, which 
is the same as the 1995 level and $7,000 above the budget 
request. The objectives of the program include the prevention 
and control of epidemics, the maintenance of surveillance 
systems, the training of public health epidemiologists, and the 
operation of the quarantine program. The program supports the 
Epidemic Intelligence Service program, the publication of the 
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, and a variety of infant 
and minority health programs.

National Center for Health Statistics

    The bill includes $53,575,000 in Federal funds for the 
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), which is the same 
as the 1995 level and $11,000 above the request. In addition to 
the amount appropriated, the bill makes available $27,862,000 
from the Public Health Service one percent evaluation set-
aside, which is the same as both the amount requested by the 
Administration and the 1995 set-aside amount. Taking into 
account funds from all sources, the Committee makes available 
$81,437,000 for NCHS. The Center is responsible for collecting, 
interpreting, and disseminating data on the health status of 
the U.S. population and the use of health services. Among the 
surveys supported are the National Vital Statistics System, the 
National Health Interview Survey, the National Survey of Family 
Growth, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 
and the National Health Care Survey.

Buildings and facilities

    The bill includes $4,353,000 for buildings and facilities, 
which is $778,000 above both the Administration request and the 
1995 appropriation. Funding supports ongoing maintenance 
projects, as well as safety repairs and equipment purchases. 
The Committee is aware that CDC faces some acute renovation 
needs, particularly in its laboratory facilities, and would 
entertain reprogramming requests to shift funding from other 
administrative activities to enhance this appropriation if CDC 
felt the situation warranted it.

Program management

    The bill includes $3,067,000 for program management, which 
is the same as both the budget request and the amount 
appropriated in 1995. This activity supports the overall 
planning, direction, and administration of the programs and 
activities of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 
Only a small portion of the total CDC administrative costs are 
captured in this line item; according to the budget 
justification, agency administrative costs in 1995 totaled 
$413.9 million. In accordance with the policy applied by the 
Committee throughout the bill, an undistributed administrative 
reduction of $31 million has been applied to the CDC account. 
This amount represents a 7.5 percent reduction below 1995 
levels and an additional 2.5 percent reduction below 1995 for 
congressional and public affairs functions. The agency is 
directed to apply this reduction only to the categories of 
funding that are included in the display of administrative 
costs on page 13 of the CDC 1996 budget justification.
    The Committee continues to be pleased with CDC's program 
activity and commitment to improving the health status of 
minority and disadvantaged individuals, and urges continuation 
of these efforts.
    The Committee is somewhat concerned about recent reports 
indicating that CDC may need to institute improvements in its 
management practices, for example, in the areas of employee 
wage grade classification and its allocation of resources to 
administrative versus scientific activities. The Committee 
expects that improved performance in these areas will be an 
integral objective in agency planning as it copes with 
financial and personnel downsizing over the coming years.
    In addition, the Committee wishes to express its 
disapproval of the apparently exorbitant expense of and the 
excessive number of CDC employees who attended a recent 
$1,000,000 immunization conference held in Beverly Hills, 
California. The Committee expects CDC to maximize the resources 
available for actual childhood immunization and to constrain 
the resources allocated to support activities such as the 
immunization conference. Prior to conference on the 1996 
appropriations bill, the Committee expects the agency to 
provide information detailing the purpose of the conference, 
the number of CDC employees who attended and their role in the 
conference which justified their attendance, the components of 
the cost of the conference and comparison of those costs to the 
conference held the prior year, and the reason the conference 
was not held in Atlanta to minimize Federal employee travel 
expenses.

Crime bill activities

    The bill includes $39,100,000 for crime bill activities, 
which is the same as the President's request. These programs 
are being funded for the first time in 1996. These activities 
will be funded through the Crime Bill trust fund. $35,000,000 
is provided for rape prevention and services; $4,000,000 is 
provided for community programs to prevent domestic violence; 
and $100,000 is provided for a study of the incidence of 
domestic violence.
    The $35,000,000 for rape prevention and services will be 
used by States to support rape crisis hotlines, victim 
counseling, professional training of police officers and 
investigators, educational programs in colleges and secondary 
schools, and offender rehabilitation. The $4,000,000 for 
community programs on domestic violence will provide funding 
for public and private non-profit organizations to coordinate 
intervention and prevention strategies in the area of family 
violence and to develop an integrated community plan of action 
to prevent family violence. $100,000 will be used by CDC to 
conduct a study to obtain a national projection of the 
incidence of injuries resulting from domestic violence and the 
cost of those injuries to health care facilities. These funds 
are intended to be awarded to grantees who have experience and 
a proven track record in providing these types of services, and 
are not to be used for lobbying, advocacy, or public relations.

                     National Institutes of Health

    The bill includes $11,939,001,000 for the 23 appropriations 
which together fund the programs of the National Institutes of 
Health (NIH). These include appropriations for the 17 research 
Institutes, the National Center for Research Resources, the 
National Center for Human Genome Research, the John E. Fogarty 
International Center, the National Library of Medicine, the 
Office of the Director, and Buildings and Facilities. The total 
in the bill is $174,935,000 above the President's budget 
request for 1996 and $642,455,000 above the comparable 
appropriations for fiscal year 1995.
    The Committee views NIH as one of its very highest 
priorities and has made difficult resource allocation decisions 
throughout the bill to preserve what it believes is the minimum 
necessary funding level for NIH. NIH is the world's leading 
biomedical research institution; its investments in research 
save lives and reduce health care costs while creating jobs and 
economic growth in a global economy. In recent years, this 
research has produced major advances in the treatment of 
cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and mental illness that have 
helped save lives and improved quality of life. NIH supports 
over 50,000 scientists at 1,700 universities and research 
institutes across the U.S. In 1993 alone, NIH contributed 
nearly $45 billion to the U.S. economy and over 700,000 jobs. 
NIH research has spawned the biotechnology revolution, whose 
products are projected to grow into a $50 billion industry by 
the turn of the century. The U.S.'s ability to translate 
scientific discoveries into new product development has 
resulted in its lead over the European Community and Japan in 
pharmaceutical and biotechnology patents. While the Committee 
is firm in its commitment to deficit reduction, it believes 
that funding of biomedical research is an important investment 
in the future health and economic well-being of our nation.
    Balance in the research portfolio.--The Committee believes 
that NIH should allocate the funding provided on the basis of 
scientific opportunity. The Committee heard compelling 
testimony from the Director of NIH during the appropriations 
hearings about the problems inherent in using other decision 
rules to allocate funding. While the Committee understands that 
other factors are relevant, such as the infectious nature of a 
disease, the Committee believes that judgments based on numeric 
measures or other factors are fraught with potential bias. The 
Committee wants to avoid endorsing any methodology that could 
be characterized as focusing on the ``disease of the month.'' 
The Committee believes that the advances made in research areas 
like Parkinsons and Alzheimer's disease are largely due to 
NIH's flexibility to fund promising research on the basis of 
scientific opportunity.
    As a result, the Committee has allocated the funding 
provided above the President's request consistent with the 
distribution reflected in the request, believing that it 
represents NIH's judgment of scientific opportunity. If NIH 
believes that adjustments to this allocation are necessary, the 
Committee would be pleased to consider them in later action on 
the bill. To enhance NIH's flexibility to allocate funding 
based on scientific opportunity, the Committee has attempted to 
minimize the amount of direction provided in the report 
accompanying the bill. For example, there are no directives to 
fund particular research mechanisms, such as centers or 
requests for applications. The Committee does believe it is 
appropriate to highlight disease areas of interest to Members 
of Congress, but does not intend for that to impede NIH's 
flexibility in decision-making.
    AIDS Funding.--Consistent with the philosophy outlined 
above, the Committee has not earmarked a specific dollar amount 
for AIDS research and has not continued the procedure of 
establishing a single appropriation for the Office of AIDS 
Research. Especially since the total provided for NIH is 
different than the President's request, the Committee believes 
the Director of NIH, acting in conjunction with the Director of 
the Office of AIDS Research, should decide how much of the 
total NIH appropriation should be allocated to AIDS research. 
The Committee intends that the funds devoted to AIDS should 
continue fully to exploit scientific opportunities and to 
fulfill scientific objectives in this critically important 
research program. The Committee expects the Director of NIH, 
through the Director of the Office of AIDS Research, to 
identify the total allocated for AIDS and his intended 
distribution by Institute under the House funding level prior 
to conference on the 1996 bill. The Committee has provided the 
Director transfer authority to reallocate funds among 
appropriations accounts, subject to consultation with the House 
and Senate Appropriations Committees. The Committee encourages 
NIH to use this authority whenever it believes that an 
adjustment in the allocation of AIDS funding between Institutes 
is appropriate to achieve scientific objectives or to 
facilitate promising research efforts.
    The Committee wants to make clear that it continues to 
support the Office of AIDS Research (OAR), its leadership, and 
its coordinated budget planning process and that it expects the 
individual institutes, centers and divisions to fully cooperate 
with OAR's work. The Committee assumes that the NIH Director's 
decisions on allocating AIDS funding will be fully consistent 
with the plan developed by the OAR and that he will ensure that 
the Institutes allocate their budgets accordingly. The 
Committee particularly applauds the formation of the OAR 
external review panel which is conducting a broad-based 
evaluation of the NIH AIDS research portfolio. The Committee 
would expect the recommendations of this panel to guide and 
inform the NIH Director's allocation of AIDS funding. Lastly, 
the Committee assumes that the OAR will maintain its current 
structure and responsibilities, including the allocation of an 
emergency discretionary fund.
    Management improvements.--Despite the Committee's 
wholehearted support of NIH's research efforts, it believes 
that improvements can and should be made to the management of 
its research enterprise, both in the administrative operations 
on the NIH campus and in its funding of extramural grants. The 
Committee believes that increased efficiencies are important to 
expand the share of funding actually going to research rather 
than administration, particularly in an environment of 
constrained resources. In later years, as spending caps 
government-wide continue to decline, the pressures to maximize 
the share of NIH funding going directly to research will be 
even greater. To that end, the Committee directs that research 
management and support costs at NIH will be reduced 7.5 percent 
below 1995 levels, and that costs associated with congressional 
and public affairs functions will be reduced a total of 10 
percent below 1995 levels. The calculation of research 
management and support costs should include those expenses at 
the National Library of Medicine, as well as within the Office 
of the Director, excluding the Director's discretionary fund 
and the Women's and Minority Health Initiatives. This is 
consistent with that policy followed throughout the bill by the 
Committee, except that in this case, the Committee has not 
reduced overall funding, instead preserving it within the NIH 
accounts to increase the amount of research supported. Any 
funding of research and management support costs in excess of 
these levels should be treated by NIH as a reprogramming 
subject to the approval of the House and Senate Appropriations 
Committees. The Committee does not direct NIH to take 
particular approaches in achieving these reductions, but does 
encourage NIH to consider two areas: (1) consolidation of 
certain functions across Institutes, such as personnel, 
legislation, planning and evaluation, and communications; and 
(2) dismantling issue- or constituent-specific offices within 
the Office of the Director or the individual Institutes which 
are not mandated by law.
    Indirect costs.--The Committee has expressed its concerns 
in the past about the current method for reimbursing the 
indirect costs associated with research. It continues to be an 
area of great concern. The Committee believes this is a key 
area in which savings could be generated, which could then be 
plowed back into the direct costs of research. It could also 
have the welcome side benefit of reducing administrative 
burdens, both for the Department and the institutions receiving 
NIH grants. The Committee views the Administration's indirect 
cost proposal as a useful start--particularly its proposal to 
end reimbursement for tuition payments for university employee 
dependents, which the Committee urges the Administration to 
finalize--but believes the system needs more fundamental 
reform. The Committee is intrigued by the development of the 
so-called ``Phoenix Plan'' by a group of university officials, 
which explores the potential of moving from a cost-based to a 
price-based system of reimbursement, comparable to the reforms 
implemented in the Medicare program in the 1980s. The Committee 
encourages the creators of the Phoenix Plan to conclude their 
study as quickly as they can, and urges NIH and the Office of 
Management and Budget to fully cooperate with their efforts. 
The Committee also notes that the House Science Committee is 
drafting legislation to require the Office of Science 
Technology and Policy to complete a study by the end of the 
year identifying the best ways to achieve a ten percent 
reduction in indirect cost reimbursement government-wide. The 
Committee awaits the outcome of that study with interest. In 
short, the Committee believes it is important to continue to 
scrutinize the current indirect cost system. While it is aware 
of the complexity and the controversy of the issue, it does not 
believe the status quo is sustainable or defensible in an 
environment of steady or declining resources.
    Policy planning.--The Committee believes that the concept 
of a central planning authority, such as that vested in the 
OAR, could have broader applicability to other research areas 
in NIH with trans-Institute scope. The Committee would like the 
NIH Director's assessment of the utility of establishing a 
broader central policy office, perhaps through consolidating 
portions of the planning and evaluation functions in the 
individual Institutes, that would handle crosscutting issues. 
The assessment should address issues such as the potential 
cost-savings from consolidation and the appropriateness of more 
central policy planning for a range of NIH issues. The 
Committee would like to receive this assessment prior to the 
1997 appropriations hearings.
    Communications.--The Committee continues last year's focus 
on NIH's external communications. The Committee believes it is 
critical for NIH to use all the media at its command to 
publicize the benefits and results of NIH research, in order to 
solidify the general public support of biomedical research and 
to identify NIH as the funding source for these breakthroughs 
in the public's mind. The Committee also urges NIH to take 
whatever steps are necessary to ensure that its grantees 
acknowledge NIH's funding contribution when they publicize 
their research findings. The Committee believes that these 
efforts can be supported within the funding levels already 
provided.

                       NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE

    The bill includes $2,251,084,000 for the National Cancer 
Institute (NCI), an increase of $31,287,000 over the amount 
requested and $114,676,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--The NCI conducts and supports basic and applied 
cancer research in early detection, diagnosis, prevention, 
treatment and rehabilitation. NCI provides training support for 
research scientists, clinicians and educators, and maintains a 
national network of cancer centers, clinical cooperative 
groups, and community clinical oncology programs, along with 
cancer prevention and control initiatives and outreach programs 
to rapidly translate basic research findings into clinical 
practice.
    Breast cancer.--The Committee recognizes that breast cancer 
research continues to require a significant allocation of NCI 
resources in order to decipher the complex mysteries of this 
disease. The Committee agrees with NCI which places breast 
cancer research as a high priority within the Institute. 
Therefore, the Committee directs NCI to continue to strengthen 
its commitment to breast cancer research, including the 
National Action Plan on Breast Cancer.
    Prostate cancer.--The Committee notes that the incidence of 
prostate cancer continues to rise, and urges that further 
effort be placed on research related to early detection, 
diagnosis, and treatment, particularly among minority 
Americans.
    Minority populations.--The Committee continues to be 
concerned about the disproportionately high prevalence of 
cancer among disadvantaged and minority populations. Despite an 
overall drop in breast cancer rates, breast cancer rates for 
African American women continue to increase. Also, African-
American males continue to experience the highest rate of 
prostate cancer of any population group in the world. The 
Committee encourages continued research emphasis in breast and 
prostate cancer and other high priority cancer areas in a 
concentrated effort to address the needs of minority 
populations.
    Leukemia.--The Committee recognizes the importance of 
continued research and clinical trials for leukemia. Noting 
that changes in health care financing have slowed the 
development of more effective treatment for leukemia, the 
Committee urges the NCI to support further leukemia-related 
translational research for innovative, peer-reviewed clinical 
trials.
    Neurofibromatosis.--The Committee remains fully committed 
to continuation of an aggressive program of research on 
neurofibromatosis throughout NIH and urges NIH to ensure that 
funding levels reflect that priority. This work has already 
produced major breakthroughs, particularly in areas of genetics 
and the links between neurofibromatosis, various cancers, and 
other devastating diseases. The Committee encourages the 
Institutes at NIH with NF projects to work together with the 
extramural research community to develop a coordinated plan to 
move this research forward. The Committee encourages NIH in 
managing this effort to support a variety of collaborative 
approaches including the possibility of jointly sponsored 
requests for applications and an NIH-wide consensus conference 
to bring together experts from throughout the world to make 
recommendations on research opportunities and priorities.
    Nutrition.--The Committee encourages the National Cancer 
Institute to continue its strong work in the nutrition field 
and to consider placing a priority within that field on breast 
cancer research and other research involved with women's 
health. Chemoprevention, an important activity of this 
Institute, often relates to substances in the diet. Support of 
clinical nutrition research units assures that basic 
information on chemoprevention is studied in the clinical 
arena.
    Translational research.--The Committee notes the importance 
of translational research in moving research advances from the 
``bench to the bedside.'' The Committee encourages NCI to 
address to the extent it can some of the barriers to conducting 
translational research that were identified in the National 
Cancer Advisory Board's 1994 report.
    Cancer coordination.--The 1994 report of the National 
Cancer Advisory Board entitled ``Cancer at a Crossroads'' 
outlined that the national cancer program suffered from an 
absence of a national coordination of cancer fighting efforts 
in the public, private and voluntary sectors. The Committee 
recommends that the NCI take the leadership working in 
coordination with the CDC and other Federal agencies to re-
establish coordination of the national cancer program. The 
Committee expects that other agencies will work with the NCI to 
facilitate this recommendation. Before hearings on the fiscal 
year 1997 budget, the Committee would like a brief report 
outlining the progress made to accomplish this recommendation.
    Study of campaign contributions.--The Committee was 
disturbed to learn that NCI has funded a research grant 
studying tobacco industry campaign contributions to State 
legislators and voting records by those individuals on tobacco 
control initiatives. While the Committee is not rendering 
judgment on the merits of the grant proposal, it feels strongly 
that such research projects do not properly fall within the 
boundaries of the NCI portfolio, especially when nearly three-
quarters of approved research projects go unfunded. 
Accordingly, the Committee does not provide any further funding 
for this research grant within the NCI appropriation.

               NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE

    The bill includes $1,355,866,000 for the Heart Lung and 
Blood Institute (NHLBI), an increase of $18,845,000 over the 
amount requested and $58,834,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 
provides leadership for a national research program in diseases 
of the heart, blood vessels, lungs, and blood, in transfusion 
medicine, and in sleep disorders through support of basic, 
clinical, and population-based and health education research.
    Cardiovascular diseases.--The Committee recognizes the 
seriousness of heart attack, stroke and other cardiovascular 
diseases and remains concerned that despite progress, 
cardiovascular diseases remain Americas No. 1 killer of men and 
women since 1919 and a major cause of disability. The Committee 
believes that additional cardiovascular research is very 
important and intends that the Institute give high priority to 
research on cardiovascular diseases.
    Heart disease in women.--Heart attack is the single largest 
cause of death of American women. Yet, reports indicate that 
women often receive less aggressive care than men. This problem 
appears to be related to difficulties in diagnosing chest pain 
in women. The Committee encourages NHLBI to support research to 
develop reliable, safe, efficient and cost-effective diagnostic 
approaches for evaluating women with suspected ischemic heart 
disease in order to decrease heart disease and death in women.
    Heart disease in African Americans.--Although death rates 
for heart disease have dropped significantly over the past 20 
years, the drop has been much greater for whites than for 
African Americans. The Committee urges the Institute to 
expedite research to advance understanding of heart disease in 
African Americans, using molecular biology, cellular and organ 
physiology and clinical medicine.
    Molecular genetics of high blood pressure.--High blood 
pressure is the most critical stroke risk factor and a leading 
cause of heart attack, congestive heart failure and kidney 
failure. Molecular and genetic research appear to offer an 
opportunity to develop improved treatments for high blood 
pressure. The Institute should consider expediting research to 
identify and map genes responsible for and to clarify the role 
of defective genes in the development and maintenance of high 
blood pressure.
    Cystic fibrosis.--The Committee notes the tremendous 
advances in cystic fibrosis research, which has extended the 
life expectancy of cystic fibrosis patients from five years of 
age 30 years ago to approximately 30 years of age for children 
diagnosed today. Among the most promising research on cystic 
fibrosis is that of gene therapy. The Committee encourages 
NHLBI to continue its support of this research activity to 
advance our understanding of cystic fibrosis, its treatment and 
cure.
    Asthma.--The Committee commends the Institute on its basic 
and applied asthma research programs and for its efforts in 
asthma education. Asthma prevalence, mortality, and 
hospitalization rates have increased in recent years, and 
minority populations are disproportionately affected. It is now 
recognized that asthma is a complex, chronic disease, triggered 
by a number of factors and requiring multiple medications for 
treatment and control. The Committee is particularly concerned 
about higher incidence and death rates among children living in 
poverty, including the disproportionately high incidence in 
African Americans and other minorities. The Committee urges the 
Institute to enhance its focus on asthma in at-risk 
populations. The Institute should also strengthen its 
collaboration in this area with both NICHD and NIAID. In 
addition, the Committee encourages NHLBI to consider supporting 
the development and evaluation of innovative model school 
programs to increase identification and appropriate referral of 
children with uncontrolled asthma and reduce exposure to known 
allergens and irritants.
    Sickle cell disease.--The Committee continues to be 
encouraged by research developments in sickle cell disease and 
the Institute's continuing emphasis of this area. New and 
evolving medical research techniques including those of gene 
therapy and biotechnology offer increased opportunities to make 
further advances in the study and treatment of sickle cell 
disease. Where appropriate, the Committee encourages the 
Institute to collaborate with other Institutes, centers, and 
divisions of NIH in addressing this disease.
    Hemophilia.--The Committee encourages NHLBI to enhance its 
promising hemophilia gene therapy program. Further, the 
Committee remains deeply concerned about insuring the safety of 
the nations blood supply and is concerned over the recent 
withdrawal of blood products contaminated with Creutzdfeldt-
Jakob Disease (CJD). Therefore, the Committee requests NHLBI to 
work in collaboration with CDC and FDA to investigate the 
potential impact of CJD on the safety of the U.S. blood supply 
and specifically on people with bleeding disorders and 
transfusion recipients.
    Transfusion medicine.--By holding consensus conferences on 
infectious disease testing for blood transfusion and by 
establishing research centers for transfusion medicine and for 
hematopoietic stem cells research, the NHLBI has demonstrated 
its commitment to assuring a safer blood supply and has 
recognized the potential of gene therapy to cure both genetic 
and acquired diseases. The Committee encourages NHLBI to 
support initiatives relating to viral inactivation of cellular 
blood components, improved platelet collection and storage 
techniques, and transfusion associated immunomodulation. To 
facilitate research initiatives in the stem cell area, the 
Committee is pleased to see that the NHLBI plans to coordinate 
umbilical cord blood and stem cell collection.
    Nutrition.--The Committee urges the NHLBI to continue its 
nutrition research initiative. The Committee also encourages 
NHLBI to include nutrition research in its critical care 
medicine initiative. NHLBI has been supporting productive 
research to prevent heart disease involving reduced dietary fat 
among children and lowering of triglyceride levels through 
diet.
    Sleep disorders.--The Committee notes the continued 
development of the National Center for Sleep Disorders Research 
and the expansion of the Center's research portfolio. The 
Committee is concerned, however, that the national sleep 
disorders education campaign has not moved forward, despite the 
Committee's encouragement. The Committee also recommends 
continued development of a plan for scientific collaboration 
among the National Center and other NIH institutes.
    Sarcoidosis.--Sarcoidosis is an inflammatory disease that 
can lead to scarring of the lung. Although the disease has been 
recognized for over 100 years, information on its incidence, 
prevalence, risk factors, and natural history remains limited. 
Geographic and racial variations in the incidence of 
sarcoidosis suggest that it may be caused by environmental 
factors. The Committee, therefore, encourages the Institute to 
explore environmental and genetic causes of sarcoidosis as an 
essential step toward identifying risk factors and improving 
treatment and prevention of the disease.

                 national institute of dental research

    The bill includes $183,196,000 for the National Institute 
of Dental Research (NIDR), an increase of $2,546,000 over the 
amount requested and $7,983,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--NIDR conducts and supports research and research 
training on the normal development, maintenance, and aging of 
the oral and craniofacial tissues and the disorders affecting 
these tissues, including the effects of systemic diseases and 
disease treatments. Major areas studied include craniofacial 
birth defects, periodontal diseases, dental caries, bone and 
joint diseases, chronic pain conditions, oral cancers, 
autoimmune disorders, infectious diseases, epidemiology, and 
biomaterials research.

    national institute of diabetes and digestive and kidney diseases

    The bill includes $771,252,000 for the National Institute 
of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), an 
increase of $10,719,000 over the amount requested and 
$34,226,000 over the comparable FY 1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--The NIDDK supports research in three major 
disease categories: diabetes, endocrinology, and metabolic 
diseases; digestive diseases and nutrition; and kidney, 
urologic, and hematologic diseases. The NIDDK supports a 
coordinated program of fundamental and clinical research and 
demonstration projects relating to the causes, prevention, 
diagnosis, and treatment of diseases within these categories. 
The Institute also supports efforts to transfer the knowledge 
gained from its research program to health professionals, 
patients, and the general public.
    Diabetes.--Diabetes is the fifth leading cause of death by 
disease in America, taking the lives of more than 160,000 
annually. The 14 million Americans with diabetes are at great 
risk of developing devastating complications, including 
blindness, kidney disease, heart disease, and the need for 
amputations. Diabetes disproportionately affects minority 
populations, especially African Americans, Hispanics and Native 
Americans, who are at greater risk for developing this disease 
and its complications.
    In light of the enormous financial and personal costs of 
diabetes, and given the new and promising gains in diabetes 
research, the Committee encourages NIDDK to redouble its 
efforts in research programs for diabetes. The Committee urges 
NIDDK to continue its current efforts to find the genetic 
defects which are likely to be responsible for Type I diabetes 
and which may be the basis for vulnerability to diabetes and 
its complications in all cases.
    Kidney disease.--Kidney diseases have tremendous morbidity, 
mortality, and economic costs. Every year 45,000 Americans 
develop chronic kidney failure, or end stage renal disease. The 
number of ESRD patients doubled between 1984-1991 and is 
expected to double again in the next seven years. Nephrology 
research such as the identification of genes critical to the 
delay of the progression of kidney failure in insulin-dependent 
diabetics is yielding promising results. The Committee is 
encouraged by these results and urges the Institute to provide 
strong support for research that may lead to reductions in the 
burden and cost of kidney diseases.
    Polycystic kidney disease.--Polycystic kidney disease (PKD) 
affects some 600,000 Americans. PKD causes several thousand 
deaths per year and annually generates more than 2,000 
additional cases of kidney failure. Great progress has recently 
been made toward an effective treatment and ultimate cure of 
PKD. Investigators working in this area have identified and 
cloned the gene responsible for 90% of PKD and this gene has 
now been fully sequenced. Researchers have also isolated the 
gene related to the regressive form of PKD which affects 
primarily children and is generally fatal. The Committee 
encourages NIDDK to continue its investment in this area.
    Urological diseases.--The Committee is pleased with the 
continued growth of research on urological diseases. Diseases 
of the prostate are a significant health burden. The Committee 
encourages the NIDDK to continue its research in the basic 
science of prostate growth. The Committee is also concerned 
about the high prevalence of prostate disease in minority 
population. In addition, the Committee urges the Institute to 
strengthen its research program on womens urological diseases 
by placing special emphasis on grants related to interstitial 
cystitis, urinary incontinence and urinary tract infections.
    Prostatitis.--The Committee has learned of the magnitude of 
the problems of prostatitis, which afflicts men in their 
twenties and thirties and becomes a lifelong disability. Yet, 
the Committee understands that little research is being done on 
this disease, and that there has been little progress in 
understanding and effectively treating it. The Committee 
encourages NIDDK to develop a research program in this area and 
to consider what steps are necessary to encourage greater 
interest in the disease in both the intramural and extramural 
communities. The Committee would like the Director to be 
prepared to address these issues in the hearings on the 1997 
appropriations.
    Liver disease.--The Committee heard testimony on the impact 
of hepatitis and other liver and gallbladder diseases, which 
affect 25 million Americans. They are the seventh leading 
disease related cause of death in the U.S. Over 5 million 
people suffer from hepatitis B and C, and many will suffer long 
term liver diseases, cirrhosis or liver cancer. The Committee 
encourages NIDDK to place an emphasis on liver disease 
research, with a particular focus on hepatitis C.
    Nutrition.--The Committee urges the NIDDK to continue its 
nutrition initiative and particularly its focus on obesity and 
on clinical research in nutrition. Obesity research has had 
significant impact recently as genes associated with obesity 
have been identified and clinical research has established the 
relationship between weight gain and loss and metabolic 
adjustment. Continued research in obesity should be pursued 
since obesity affects one-third of all Americans. Obesity is 
associated with cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and 
hypertension. The Committee remains supportive of the clinical 
nutrition research unit and obesity and nutrition research 
centers programs.
    Hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS).--This syndrome is caused 
by a bacterium that may be present in undercooked meat products 
which can result in sudden and severe digestive and kidney 
complications. The Committee encourages NIDDK to support 
research on HUS in order to develop effective treatments for 
the disorder.

        national institute of neurological disorders and stroke

    The bill includes $681,534,000 for the National Institute 
of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), an increase of 
$9,472,000 over the amount requested and $29,330,000 over the 
comparable 1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--NINDS supports and conducts basic and clinical 
neurological research and research training to increase 
understanding of the brain and improve the prevention and 
treatment of neurological and neuromuscular disorders. The 
NINDS mission encompasses over 600 disorders, including stroke; 
head and spinal cord injury; epilepsy; multiple sclerosis; and 
neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinsons disease.
    Stroke.--Stroke remains Americas third most common cause of 
death, the leading cause of serious disability and a major 
contributor to late-life dementia. Stroke will cost the U.S. an 
estimated $21 billion in medical expenses and lost 
productivity, including more than $3.5 billion in Medicare 
payments, in 1995. The Committee believes that stroke research 
is important and encourages the NINDS to strengthen its stroke 
education program and to continue innovative approaches to the 
diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation and prevention of stroke 
as identified in the status report of the Decade of the Brain.
    Parkinsons disease.--Parkinsonism, a neurological disorder 
which afflicts as many as 1.5 million Americans, costs society 
upward of $6,000,000,000 annually. Recent scientific 
breakthroughs may open new avenues of understanding and 
treating Parkinsons and the Committee urges NINDS in the 
strongest terms to make Parkinsons a very high research 
priority, enhancing and focusing the Institute's approach to 
research on the disease and ensuring that funding levels 
reflect that priority. The Committee acknowledges the 
importance of the 1995 research planning conference on 
Parkinsons and encourages NINDS to develop a research plan 
based on the conference recommendations and report on that plan 
at the Committee's 1997 hearings.
    Lou Gehrigs disease.--Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), 
commonly referred to as Lou Gehrigs disease, is a progressive, 
fatal neuromuscular disease for which no known cure or 
treatment currently exists. The first real finding of a cause 
of the disease recently occurred with the identification of a 
gene defect linked to some cases of familial ALS. But more work 
needs to be done to capitalize on these recent developments in 
order to successfully treat and cure this disease. The 
Committee encourages NINDS to maintain its commitment to brain 
research relevant to ALS.
    Neurofibromatosis.--The Committee remains fully committed 
to continuation of an aggressive program of research on 
neurofibromatosis throughout NIH. This work has already 
produced major breakthroughs, particularly in areas of genetics 
and the links between neurofibromatosis, various cancers, and 
other devastating diseases. The Committee encourages the 
Institutes at NIH with NF projects to work together with the 
extramural research community to develop a coordinated plan to 
move this research forward. The Committee encourages NIH in 
managing this effort to support a variety of collaborative 
approaches including the possibility of jointly sponsored 
requests for applications and an NIH-wide consensus conference 
to bring together experts from throughout the world to make 
recommendations on research opportunities and priorities.
    Gaucher's disease.--The Committee continues to be 
interested in research pertaining to Gaucher's disease and 
encourages the Institute to continue to place priority on 
research in this disease area.
    Dystonia.--The Committee has been pleased with NINDS 
efforts to encourage extramural research initiatives in 
dystonia-specific research, including a recent NINDS sponsored 
workshop on dystonia research opportunities. The Committee 
encourages NINDS to work closely with other organizations 
having an interest in dystonia research to collaborate on joint 
research programs encouraging investigators to study dystonia.
    Syringomyelia.--Syringomyelia is a complex neurological 
disorder that is characterized by cystic cavitation and 
degeneration of the spinal cord. Its study may lead to 
understanding of other types of spinal cord disorders. The 
Committee recognizes the success of the syringomyelia 
conference conducted last year, and urges the NIH to pursue the 
recommendations made by the experts at that symposium. In 
addition, the Committee urges the NIH to work with patient 
advocates and with investigators who wish to pursue research in 
this area.
    Niemann-Pick disease.--Niemann-Pick Type C is a rare 
degenerative disorder in which patients are unable to 
metabolize cholesterol properly. Cholesterol accumulates within 
the cells of the liver, spleen and brain, resulting in 
deterioration of the body. About 100 children are afflicted 
with Niemann-Pick and approximately 60,000 children in the U.S. 
have related pediatric neurodegenerative diseases. Some of the 
most promising research lies with genetic therapy and 
cholesterol metabolism research. The Committee encourages NINDS 
to enhance its research on isolating the gene that causes 
Niemann-Pick Type C.

         NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES

    The bill includes $1,169,628,000 for the National Institute 
of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), an increase of 
$16,256,000 over the amount requested and $73,171,000 over the 
comparable FY 1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--The NIAID supports and conducts basic and 
clinical research and research training programs in infectious 
diseases, including AIDS, and diseases caused by, or associated 
with, disorders of the immune system. The NIAID develops new 
and improved vaccines and supporting research on acquired 
immunodeficiency syndrome, tuberculosis, sexually transmitted 
diseases, and tropical diseases.
    Asthma.--The number of asthma cases and the number of 
asthma-related deaths has increased dramatically in the past 
decade, particularly among minority populations. The Committee 
has been very pleased with the continued activities of the 
National Cooperative Inner City Asthma Study, a comprehensive 
effort in eight cities to design and evaluate intervention 
programs to counter risk factors for inner city asthmatic 
children. The Committee urges continued attention to pediatric 
asthma, especially as it affects minority children.
    Hemophilia.--The Committee fully supports NIAID's 
continuing commitment to provide access to HIV/AIDS clinical 
trials for hemophilia patients, utilizing the existing network 
of hemophilia treatment centers, through the ``ACTU without 
walls'' clinical trials program.
    Microbicides.--The Committee acknowledges the progress that 
NIAID has made in funding research on microbicides for STD/HIV 
prevention. Of note are the establishment of program projects 
for topical microbicide research and clinical studies to 
evaluate existing and new products. The Committee believes that 
safe, effective topical microbicides are urgently needed to 
prevent the spread of STDs and HIV infection for both women and 
men. The Committee continues to encourage NIAID to make funding 
for the major areas of microbicide research a priority, 
including funding for basic research, product development, 
clinical evaluation, and behavioral research.
    Womens interagency HIV study (WIHS).--The Committee 
applauds the speed with which the WIHS has begun to enroll 
women and to obtain the needed data. The Committee urges 
continued funding for this study so that women can be followed 
prospectively to obtain the information critical to treatment 
and prevention efforts. The Committee believes that it is 
important to achieve geographical representation and to include 
an adequate number of women in the study to answer these 
important questions.
    Chronic fatigue and immune dysfunction syndrome (CFIDS).--
The Committee encourages NIAID to direct resources towards 
CFIDS research, particularly to extramural grants focused on 
promising areas of biomedical research and to investigations 
which seek to identify the etiological agents and markers for 
and the pathophysiology of CFIDS. The Committee encourages 
NIAID to consider appointing a CFIDS coordinator with 
institute-wide authority to provide leadership on CFIDS. The 
Committee looks forward to the deliberations of the NIAID 
Advisory Council meeting scheduled for the fall of 1995 which 
will focus on promising CFIDS research.

             NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES

    The bill includes $946,971,000 for the National Institute 
of General Medical Science (NIGMS), an increase of $13,162,000 
over the amount requested and $42,046,000 over the comparable 
1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--NIGMS supports research and research training in 
the basic biomedical sciences. Institute grantees, working in 
such fields as cell biology, biophysics, genetics, 
developmental biology, pharmacology, physiology, and biological 
chemistry, study normal biological processes to better 
understand what goes wrong when disease occurs. In this way, 
NIGMS supports the new knowledge, theories, and technologies 
that can then be applied to the disease-targeted studies 
supported by other NIH components. NIGMS-supported basic 
research advances also find applications in the biotechnology 
and pharmaceutical industries. The Institute's training 
programs help provide the scientists needed by industry and 
academia and have a special focus on increasing the number of 
minority scientists through programs such as Minority Access to 
Research Careers (MARC) and Minority Biomedical Research 
Support (MBRS). The Committee expects NIGMS to continue to 
support these training programs.

        NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

    The bill includes $595,162,000 for the National Institute 
of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), an increase of 
$8,272,000 over the amount requested and $26,339,000 over the 
comparable FY 1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--NICHD conducts and supports laboratory and 
clinical research on the reproductive, developmental, and 
behavioral processes that determine and maintain the health and 
well-being of children, adults, families and populations. In 
addition, research in medical rehabilitation is supported.
    Nutrition.--The Committee is very supportive of the new 
nutrition research initiatives at NICHD. Of particular 
significance is the research regarding folic acid and vitamin 
B-12 use during pregnancy and its reduction in the incidence of 
neural tube defects among infants. Further research should be 
supported regarding the role of nutrition in the support of 
very low birth weight children. The Committee is also 
supportive of the trial utilizing calcium to reduce the risk of 
preclampsia.
     Sudden infant death syndrome.--Sudden infant death 
syndrome (SIDS) accounts for approximately 7,000 unexplained 
infant deaths per year. The Committee is very pleased that the 
NICHD has vigorously pursued answers to SIDS through its 5-year 
research plans, and through its successful ``Back to Sleep'' 
campaign. The Committee has provided funding for continued 
activity in this important effort.
     Rett syndrome.--The Committee recognizes and applauds the 
progress which has been made over the past year in 
investigating a biological marker for Rett syndrome. The 
Committee hopes that such findings will lead to greater 
knowledge of the cause, treatment and cure for this 
debilitating disease, and encourages continued focus on this 
area of research.
     Demographic research.--Recent findings on the social, 
economic, health and personal benefits of marriage have 
received national attention. Those findings and other important 
research are supported by the demographic research program at 
NICHD. In addition to studying marriage and family dynamics, 
NICHD's population research program supports an array of 
population studies among which are fertility, mortality, 
population growth forecasts, and child care. The Committee 
recognizes the importance of demographic research and urges 
NICHD to continue giving its demographic research high 
priority.
     Autism.--Autism continues to be a prevalent neurological 
disorder that affects an estimated 400,000 Americans. The 
potential cost to society of an untreated, inappropriately 
educated person with autism could be $3-5 million over the 
course of his or her lifetime. The Committee commends NICHD for 
sponsoring the first ever conference on autism, recognizing the 
need for autism research at NIH, with a special emphasis on the 
study of the genetics of autism. The Committee encourages 
NICHD, in conjunction with NIMH, NINDS, and NIDCD, to pursue 
the comprehensive research recommendations resulting from the 
conference on autism. Further, the Committee will be interested 
in an update on the Institute's work in this area at next 
year's budget hearings.

                         NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE

    The bill includes $314,185,000 for the National Eye 
Institute (NEI), an increase of $4,367,000 over the amount 
requested and $13,595,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--NEI conducts and supports basic and clinical 
research, research training, and other programs with respect to 
blinding eye diseases, visual disorders, mechanisms of visual 
function, preservation of sight, and the special health 
problems and needs of individuals who are visually-impaired or 
blind. In addition, the NEI is responsible for the 
dissemination of information, specifically public and 
professional education programs aimed at the prevention of 
blindness.
    Eye health education.--NEI has developed a comprehensive 
eye health education program in diabetic retinopathy and 
glaucoma. The Committee is pleased that this program is being 
adapted to the specific needs of the Hispanic/Latino community, 
where diabetic retinopathy is especially prevalent. The 
Committee encourages NEI to evaluate and refine its 
communication strategies as new information emerges from 
ongoing research.
    The Committee also acknowledges the strategy of NEI to 
emphasize the investigator-initiated research grant. Turnover 
within this research portfolio frees funds for new grants even 
in times of restricted budgets. The Institute is encouraged to 
maintain this policy to the extent it believes it continues to 
be appropriate.

          NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES

    The bill includes $288,898,000 for the National Institute 
of Environmental Health Science (NIEHS), an increase of 
$4,015,000 over the amount requested and $16,165,000 over the 
comparable 1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--The NIEHS mission is to reduce the burden of 
environmentally related illness and dysfunction by 
understanding how environmental exposures affect our health, 
how individuals differ in their susceptibility to these 
effects, and how these susceptibilities change over time. This 
mission is achieved through multidisciplinary biomedical 
research programs, prevention and intervention efforts, and 
communication strategies that encompass training, education, 
technology transfer, and community outreach.
    Carcinogenicity tests.--The Committee remains concerned 
about the number of carcinogenicity tests being initiated under 
the National Toxicology program at NIEHS. The Committee 
requests a report prior to the fiscal year 1997 hearings on the 
number of chemicals tested or in the process of being tested 
each year. This should include the number of new chemicals for 
which full testing was initiated each year using the standard 
two year design model. The Director should be prepared to 
discuss this issue when he appears before the Committee next 
year.
    Parkinson's disease.--The Committee is encouraged that the 
Institute has sponsored a 1995 workshop on the link between 
toxic exposures and Parkinson's disease and other neurological 
disorders and the potential benefits of research in this area. 
The Committee encourages NIEHS to conduct further research in 
the area of the environment and neurological disorders.
    Training.--The Committee remains concerned about serious 
shortages of experts in the area of environmental health 
research and encourages the Institute to enhance its programs 
of training and professional development in these important 
disciplines.

                      NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING

    The bill includes $453,917,000 for the National Institute 
on Aging (NIA), an increase of $6,309,000 over the amount 
requested and $19,337,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--The NIA conducts biomedical, behavioral, and 
social research related to the aging process to prevent disease 
and other problems of the aged, and to maintain the health and 
independence of older Americans. Alzheimer's disease is a 
particular focus of the NIA.
    Alzheimer's disease.--The Committee is pleased to learn 
that the Institute continues to regard Alzheimer's disease 
research as one of its highest priorities. Alzheimer's disease 
is the most expensive illness threatening older Americans. 
Unless it is brought under control, the number of persons 
affected will explode, from 4 million today to over 14 million 
by the middle of the 21st century. On the other hand, if 
scientists can discover ways to delay onset of the disease by 5 
years, half the potential victims can live out their lives 
without serious impairment, and the nation will save billions 
of dollars a year in the cost of caring for persons with 
Alzheimer's disease. While science is drawing closer to 
breakthroughs, a strong and sustained commitment to basic 
research is necessary if an effective drug treatment is to be 
found. The Committee urges NIA to maintain that commitment.
    The Committee is aware that a planning process financed 
with private foundation support has recently been conducted by 
the Institute to identify promising strategies to prevent or 
delay the onset of Alzheimer's disease. This process has 
identified many promising research opportunities, including 
prevention of the formation of amyloid and the role of 
apolipoprotein E in causation of Alzheimer's disease. The 
Committee encourages the Institute to pursue these research 
opportunities and to enhance resources targeted to these areas.
    Cardiovascular aging research.--The Committee believes that 
research on cardiovascular aging is important and encourages 
NIA to maintain its innovative extramural and intramural 
cardiovascular research programs.
    Nutrition.--Nutrition is a significant factor in the aging 
process and in the recovery of hospitalized aged patients. The 
Committee continues to stress the importance of nutrition 
research at NIA, including continued research on the role of 
caloric restriction in reducing the incidence of disease among 
the aged and research regarding nutrition, frailty and 
sarcopenia. In addition, the Committee encourages NIA to 
consider supporting research on nutrition screening and 
malnutrition and nutrition-related problems among the elderly.
    Demographic research.--Informed policy-making on Federal 
entitlement programs which support this country's aging 
population is one of the benefits of the research currently 
underway at NIA's demographic, behavioral and social research 
program. The Committee continues to support such research and 
the analysis of its data, with special emphasis on the Health 
and Retirement and the AHEAD studies, and similar statistical 
surveys and data bases.

 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES

    The bill includes $241,828,000 for the National Institute 
of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), an 
increase of $3,361,000 over the amount requested and 
$10,429,000 over the comparable 1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--The NIAMS conducts and supports basic and 
clinical research and research training, and the dissemination 
of health information on the more than 100 forms of arthritis; 
osteoporosis and other bone diseases; muscle biology and muscle 
diseases; orthopaedic disorders, such as back pain and sports 
injuries; and numerous skin diseases.
    Osteoarthritis.--Osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint 
disease for which there is no known cure. It continues to be 
the most widespread of all the chronically disabling arthritic 
diseases. The Committee encourages NIAMS to continue to move 
forward with its commitment to osteoarthritis research. The 
Committee is aware that in the absence of a cure for 
osteoarthritis, total joint replacement has been successful in 
relieving pain, enhancing mobility and independent living for 
many people who would otherwise be substantially disabled. 
However, during its hearings, the Committee learned that wear 
related failure of the replacements has become a prevalent 
problem. The Committee urges NIAMS to strengthen its 
investigations of new materials and the interaction of implant 
devices and tissue, and to create a better understanding of 
wear processes that can prolong the life of the implant.
    Low back pain.--Low back pain continues to be a leading 
cause of limitation in adults and has become a major public 
health problem. Eighty percent of Americans will experience an 
episode of low back pain during their lifetime. The Committee 
commends NIAMS on its upcoming workshop on low back pain that 
will address future research needs to improve the understanding 
of this condition and the care of the patient. After the 
workshop, the Committee encourages the Institute to develop and 
disseminate its findings to the public and the scientific 
community.
    Repetitive motion.--The Committee is concerned about the 
rapid increase in the number of serious injuries being reported 
to the Bureau of Labor Statistics related to repetitive motion 
syndrome. In 1992 alone more than 300,000 occupational injuries 
were reported which were attributed to this problem. The 
Committee is pleased that the Institute sponsored a workshop on 
repetitive motion injuries in 1994 and encourages further 
research in this area during fiscal year 1996.
    Lupus.--The Committee encourages NIAMS to continue to 
support research aimed at furthering the understanding of the 
gender and ethnic related factors associated with the high 
prevalence of lupus in women and minorities.
    Fibromyalgia.--Fibromyalgia (FM), a chronic painful 
disorder characterized by widespread musculoskeletal pain, 
stiffness, chronic fatigue, and disturbed sleep, is reported in 
a recent study to affect at least 3.7 million Americans, over 
eighty percent of whom are women. Presently, there is no known 
cure or effective treatment for FM. The Committee commends 
NIAMS for stimulating research on FM by holding a scientific 
workshop and subsequently making a number of awards for 
research on this disabling disease. The Committee urges NIAMS 
to continue supporting research in this area in fiscal year 
1996 and collaborating with other Institutes.
    Psoriasis.--Psoriasis is a chronic skin disease 
characterized by thickened, red areas of skin with silvery 
scales. Of the 4 to 5 million Americans who suffer from 
psoriasis, about 1 million have the severe form. NIAMS-
supported researchers have demonstrated that the gene for 
familial psoriasis is located on chromosome 17 of the human 
genome. The Committee encourages NIAMS to continue to support 
genetic research to determine which gene is the specific gene 
for psoriasis as well as to pursue research on the mechanisms 
that lead to the onset of this disease. Through continued 
support for this research, new knowledge will be gained to 
develop improved therapeutic approaches for the treatment of 
this chronic skin disease.
    Connective tissue disorders.--The Committee is pleased that 
NIAMS has recently conducted a consensus workshop on heritable 
disorders of connective tissue and encourages NIAMS to pursue 
the workshops recommendations on new research opportunities in 
the field.
    Alopecia areata.--The Committee is pleased that NIAMS 
cosponsored a research workshop on alopecia areata last year 
and looks forward to seeing how this workshop builds on the 
public/private partnership in basic research in search of a 
cure.

    NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DEAFNESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION DISORDERS

    The includes $176,502,000 for the National Institute on 
Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), an increase 
of $2,453,000 over the amount requested and $7,569,000 over the 
comparable 1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--The NIDCD funds and conducts research in human 
communication. Included in its program areas are research and 
research training in the normal and disordered mechanisms of 
hearing, balance, smell, taste, voice, speech and language. The 
Institute addresses special biomedical and behavioral problems 
associated with people who have communication impairments or 
disorders. In addition, the NIDCD is actively involved in 
health promotion and disease prevention, and supports efforts 
to create devices that substitute for lost and impaired sensory 
and communication functions.
    Dysphonia.--Spasmodic dysphonia is a voice disorder that 
affects women predominantly, and usually renders a person 
difficult to understand because of uncontrolled voice and pitch 
breaks. NIDCD intramural scientists pioneered the development 
of a new treatment for spasmodic dysphonia using injections 
into the laryngeal muscle. The Committee recommends continued 
NIDCD intramural and extramural study into spasmodic dysphonia.

                 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH

    The bill includes $55,831,000 for the National Institute of 
Nursing Research (NINR), an increase of $776,000 over the 
amount requested and $3,074,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--NINR supports and conducts scientific research 
and research training to reduce the burden of illness and 
disability; improve health-related quality of life; and 
establish better approaches to promote health and prevent 
disease.

           NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON ALCOHOL ABUSE AND ALCOHOLISM

    The bill includes $198,607,000 for the National Institute 
on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), an increase of 
$2,760,000, over the amount requested and $8,540,000 over the 
comparable 1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--The NIAAA supports research to generate new 
knowledge to answer crucial questions about why people drink; 
why some individuals are vulnerable to alcohol dependence or 
alcohol-related diseases and others are not; the relationship 
of genetic and environmental factors involved in alcoholism; 
the mechanisms whereby alcohol produces its disabling effects, 
including organ damage; how to prevent alcohol misuse and 
associated damage and how alcoholism treatment can be improved. 
NIAAA addresses these questions through a program of 
biomedical, behavioral, and epidemiologic research on 
alcoholism, alcohol abuse, and related problems. This program 
includes various areas of special emphasis such as medications 
development, fetal alcohol syndrome, genetics, and moderate 
drinking.
    Genetics.--The Committee recognizes that significant 
strides have been made in recent years in research on genetic 
bases for a wide range of medical conditions and finds that 
such research has great promise in the area of alcohol abuse 
and alcoholism. The Committee encourages NIAAA to enhance its 
research into genetic bases for alcohol abuse and alcoholism.
    Medications development.--The Committee is pleased that 
research supported by NIAAA has led to the approval of 
naltrexone by FDA for alcoholism treatment. The Committee 
encourages NIAAA to support further research to determine the 
effects of naltrexones longer-term use, side effects, and how 
it reduces alcohol craving.
    Moderate drinking.--Excessive alcohol consumption is linked 
to higher risk of high blood pressure and hemorrhagic stroke as 
well as cirrhosis and early death. However, there is also 
evidence from epidemiologic studies suggesting that moderate 
wine and alcohol consumption may be positively associated with 
cardiovascular health. In addition to ethyl alcohol, wine 
contains antioxidants that may offer a protective element 
against cardiovascular disease. The Committee notes favorably 
that NIAAA has publicized its intention to support research on 
the health effects of moderate wine and alcohol consumption at 
a significant funding level. The Committee urges NIAAA and 
other Institutes to support and assist research efforts in 
these areas, especially the impact of alcohol on cardiovascular 
health and longevity and on the dietary role of antioxidants 
and moderate alcohol consumption.

                    NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE

    The bill includes $458,441,000 for the National Institute 
on Drug Abuse (NIDA), an increase of $6,372,000 over the amount 
requested and $20,998,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--NIDA supports much of the world's biomedical 
research in the area of drug abuse and addiction. NIDA's basic 
research furthers knowledge about the ways in which drugs act 
on the brain to produce drug dependence and about how the brain 
works. In addition, NIDA research identifies pharmacological 
and behavioral drug abuse treatments. NIDA conducts research on 
the nature and extent of drug abuse in the U.S. and monitors 
drug abuse trends nationwide to provide information for 
planning both prevention and treatment services. NIDA's mission 
is also to study the outcomes effectiveness, and cost benefits 
of drug abuse services delivered in a variety of settings.

                  NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH

    The bill includes $661,328,000 for the National Institute 
of Mental Health (NIMH), an increase of $9,192,000 over the 
amount requested and $30,053,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--The NIMH supports research to identify the causes 
of and the most effective treatments for mental illnesses. NIMH 
research brings a multidisciplinary approach to the human brain 
and behavior in health and in illness, integrating findings 
from the neurosciences, basic behavioral sciences, clinical 
research, epidemiology, prevention research, and mental health 
services research. In addition to research on the causes of and 
treatments for the most severe mental illnesses, the Institute 
supports studies of mood disorders, anxiety disorders, eating 
disorders, Alzheimer's disease, and childhood mental illnesses, 
as well as studies of the mental health needs of special 
populations that include rural communities, racial and ethnic 
minority populations, women, and individuals with the risk of 
developing AIDS.
    Prevention research.--In keeping with the Committee's 
interest in NIMH support for prevention research, the Committee 
commends NIMH for developing an implementation plan to address 
the recommendations of the 1994 Institute of Medicine report 
``Reducing Risk of Mental Disorders: Frontiers for Preventive 
Intervention Research,'' and urges timely implementation of two 
areas of primary importance. First, to meet the need to train 
mental disorder prevention researchers, the Committee 
encourages NIMH to maintain its support for the B-START 
program, both for those at the beginning stages of their career 
and for career transitions to behavioral science research. 
Second, the Committee urges NIMH to take the lead among Federal 
research agencies in coordinating research efforts to prevent 
mental disorders.
    Behavioral science.--The Committee continues its support of 
basic behavioral science research as recommended by the NIMH 
Advisory Council. In particular, NIMH is encouraged to consider 
the recommendation regarding increased emphasis on individual 
investigator grants. The Committee would like a progress report 
on implementing the Advisory Council recommendations before the 
fiscal year 1997 appropriations hearings.
    Autism.--Last year the Committee encouraged NIH to 
implement a nationwide epidemiological study to determine the 
incidence of autism in the U.S. NIMH is funding the UNOCCAP 
Project, a large-scale investigation of the prevalence of 
various disease and disorder symptoms in children. The 
Committee encourages NIMH to collaborate with NICHD and include 
the symptoms of autism in its nationwide screening and follow-
up efforts.
    Violence.--NIMH is encouraged to support research 
pertaining to behavior modification and attitude change within 
the general population and their role in increasing criminality 
and violence. This would also include the research questions 
involved in psychological profiling of violent, criminal, and 
destructive personalities.

                 NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES

    The bill includes $390,339,000 for the National Center for 
Research Resources (NCRR), an increase of $14,425,000 over the 
amount requested and $40,972,000 over the comparable FY 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--NCRR develops and supports critical research 
technologies and shared resources that underpin biomedical 
research. The NCRR programs develop a variety of research 
resources; provide resources for complex biotechnologies, 
clinical research and specialized primate research; develop 
research capacity in minority institutions; and enhance the 
science education of pre-college students and the general 
public.
    Extramural facilities.--The Committee has included 
$20,000,000 for extramural biomedical facility renovation and 
construction, as requested by the Administration. These funds 
are to be awarded competitively, consistent with the 
requirements of section 481A of the Public Health Service Act 
which allocates 25 percent of total funding to institutions of 
emerging excellence.
    Primate centers.--The Committee confirms its understanding 
that primate center grants are competitively awarded. The 
Committee urges NCRR to make clear to any institutions not 
currently receiving primate center grants that they are 
permitted and encouraged to apply for center funding as current 
grants expire. The Committee intends that NCRR will announce 
the opportunity to apply for primate center funding in the NIH 
Guide for Grants and Contracts as the current grants come up 
for renewal.

               NATIONAL CENTER FOR HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH

    The bill includes $170,041,000 for the National Institute 
for Human Genome Research (NCHGR), an increase of $2,363,000 
over the amount requested and $17,175,000 over the comparable 
1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--The NCHGR coordinates extramural research and 
research training for the NIH component of the Human Genome 
Project, an effort to determine the location and sequence of 
the estimated 100,000 genes which constitute the human genome. 
The Division of Extramural Research supports research in 
genetic and physical mapping, DNA sequencing and technology 
development, database management and analysis, and studies of 
the ethical, legal, and social implications of human genome 
research. The Division of Intramural Research focuses on 
applying the tools and technologies of the Human Genome Project 
to understanding the genetic basis of disease and developing 
DNA-based diagnostics and gene therapies.
    New strategies.--The Committee encourages NCHGR to take 
advantage of newly proposed strategies for sequencing the human 
genome that utilize the best available plans and technology and 
that may enable the Human Genome Project to complete the 
accurate sequencing of the human genome ahead of schedule and 
under budget.

 JOHN E. FOGARTY INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR ADVANCED STUDY IN THE HEALTH 
                                SCIENCES

    The bill includes $25,313,000 for the Fogarty International 
Center (FIC), an increase of $352,000 over the amount requested 
and $1,538,000 over the comparable 1995 appropriation.
    Mission.--FIC attempts to improve the health of the people 
of the United States and other nations through international 
cooperation in the biomedical sciences. In support of this 
mission, the FIC pursues the following four goals: mobilize 
international research efforts against global health threats; 
advance science through international cooperation; develop 
human resources to meet global research challenges; and provide 
leadership in international science policy and research 
strategies.
    Infectious diseases.--The Committee commends FIC for 
developing a long-range plan which identifies infectious 
diseases of international origin as a major concern and 
encourages the Center to continue its efforts in this area. In 
addition, the Committee recommends FIC consider other 
transnational factors that contribute to the world's burden of 
disease, such as biodiversity loss.

                      NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE

    This bill includes $141,439,000 for the National Library of 
Medicine (NLM), an increase of $1,966,000 over the amount 
requested and $12,745,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--The mission of the National Library of Medicine 
is to collect, organize, disseminate, and preserve the worlds 
output of biomedical literature in all forms. The resulting 
collection can be consulted at the Library's facilities on the 
NIH campus, requested by U.S. health professionals through 
interlibrary loan, or searched via online databases that the 
NLM makes available to health professionals around the world. 
NLM has a program of outreach to the health professions. The 
Library also has statutory responsibility to conduct research 
into biomedical communications and biotechnology; to award 
grants in support of health science libraries and the services 
they provide; and to create specialized information services in 
such areas as health services research, environmental health, 
hazardous substances, and toxicology.
    Outreach.--The Committee encourages NLM to continue its 
special outreach efforts to bring the benefits of its 
information systems to all American health professionals. 
Providing information access to health professionals in remote 
rural and inner city areas is a high priority. The Committee 
supports NLM's efforts toward improving health care information 
sharing among clinicians, researchers, educators, and other 
health professionals through the implementation of the national 
information superhighway, and programs such as Internet. In 
order to maximize the productivity of these activities, the 
Committee urges that they be effectively coordinated through 
the use of medical librarians and other health information 
specialists.
    In the late 1980's the Congress urged NLM to develop an 
outreach program to facilitate the transfer of scientific 
findings to the Nation's health professionals. The Committee is 
pleased that documents publicizing the availability of NLM 
products and services are being made available in print as well 
as electronically over the Internet.
    Telemedicine.--The Committee encourages NLM to continue its 
investment in telemedicine test-bed networks to evaluate the 
impact of telemedicine on cost, quality, and access to care. In 
addition, in a study funded by NLM, HCFA, and the Department of 
Veterans Affairs, the Institute of Medicine is currently 
identifying key criteria for evaluation of the impact of 
operational telemedicine projects. NLM will work with its 
existing test-bed sites to apply these criteria to its 
telemedicine projects.

                         OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR

    The bill includes $261,488,000 for the Office of the 
Director (OD), an increase of $3,634,000 over the amount 
requested and $21,629,000 over the comparable 1995 
appropriation.
    Mission.--The Office of the Director (OD) provides 
leadership to the NIH research community, and coordinates and 
directs initiatives which cross-cut the NIH. The OD is 
responsible for the development and management of intramural 
and extramural research and research training policy, the 
review of program quality and effectiveness, the coordination 
of selected NIH-wide program activities, and the administration 
of centralized support activities essential to operations of 
the NIH.
    Minority health initiative.--The Minority Health Initiative 
(MHI) is a coordinated set of programs designed to address the 
health needs of minorities across the lifespan and to expand 
the participation of minorities in all phases of biomedical and 
biobehavioral research. The MHI comprises a portfolio of multi-
year research projects as collaborative efforts with NIH 
Institutes, centers and divisions (ICDs) as well as new 
components developed to confront emerging and unaddressed 
health research areas.
    Women's health initiative.--This research is a large cross-
Institute initiative to study prevention of conditions unique 
to or more common in women--particularly breast cancer, heart 
disease, and osteoporosis. There are three components of the 
study: a clinical trial; an observational study; and a 
community prevention study. In fiscal year 1996, funds will be 
used to support continued activities in the coordinating center 
and the 40 clinical centers. Funds will also be used to plan 
the community prevention component.
    Office of Research on Women's Health.--The Office of 
Research on Women's Health (ORWH) works in collaboration with 
the ICDs of the NIH to promote and foster efforts to address 
gaps in knowledge related to women's health through the 
enhancement and expansion of funded research and/or the 
initiation of new investigative studies. The ORWH is 
responsible for ensuring the inclusion of women in clinical 
research funded by the ICDs, including the development of a 
computerized tracking system and the implementation of new 
guidelines on such inclusion. This Office is also involved in 
promoting programs to increase the number of women in 
biomedical science, and in the development of women's health as 
a focus of medical/scientific research.
    Cardiovascular disease and diabetes.--The Committee is 
pleased with the collaborative efforts already underway between 
the Office of Research on Womens Health (ORWH) and NIDDK to co-
fund research focusing on cardiovascular disease in women with 
diabetes. Diabetes is one of the leading risk factors for 
coronary artery disease among women between the ages of 30 and 
55 who have Type I diabetes. The Committee encourages the ORWH 
to develop and pursue new projects that could lead to the 
prevention and control of diabetes and its potentially 
devastating consequences in women.
    Lymphangioleiomyomatosis.--Lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM) 
is a rare disorder that occurs exclusively in women. It is a 
progressive disorder of women of childbearing age, marked by 
lesions of smooth muscle and fat cells. Over the course of 8-10 
years, the lesions destroy lung functioning and the result is 
respiratory failure and death. Unfortunately, the medical 
community knows little more about the pathogenesis of LAM now 
than was known 50 years ago when the first case was reported. 
The Committee believes that an important step in finding a cure 
for this disease may be through the establishment of a national 
registry for LAM patients which would allow the pooling of 
experience from the largest number of individuals possible. The 
Committee, therefore, encourages the Office of Research on 
Women's Health, in conjunction with NHLBI and the Office of 
Rare Disease Research, to fund research in this area, including 
a possible national patient registry.
    Office of Research on Minority Health.--The Office of 
Research on Minority Health (ORMH) serves as the coordinating 
office for minority health research and research training 
activities at NIH. Through partnerships with the ICDs, and 
other federal agencies and outside organizations, the ORMH 
strives to improve the health status of all minorities and 
increase the numbers of minority scientists. The ORMH provides 
supplemental support to ICD projects, develops programs to 
increase minority participation in clinical trials, and 
initiates and develops programs to increase the competitiveness 
of grant applications submitted by minority researchers.
    Diabetes.--The Committee is pleased with the collaborative 
efforts that the Office of Research on Minority Health (ORMH) 
has pursued with NIDDK on research to promote the health of 
minorities, particularly on the genetics of diabetes and the 
treatment and prevention of the disease in minority 
populations. The Committee urges the ORMH to continue its 
support of cooperative efforts with NIDDK through the Minority 
Health Initiative, and to continue to focus specifically on the 
genetics of diabetes and the treatment and prevention of the 
disease. The Committee also encourages the ORMH through the 
Minority Health Initiative to explore collaborative 
opportunities with the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention to support the expansion of the diabetes control 
program.
    Gastric cancer.--The bacterial infection H. pylori and 
gastric cancer are more common in African Americans and 
Hispanics than whites in the U.S. The Committee encourages the 
Office of Research on Minority Health to collaborate with 
NIDDK, NCI, and NIAID in research on H. pylori infection as it 
relates to peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancer in minority 
populations.
    Office of AIDS Research (OAR).--The OAR is responsible for 
coordination of the scientific, budgetary, legislative, and 
policy elements of the NIH AIDS research program. The OAR 
develops a comprehensive plan for NIH AIDS-related research 
activities which is updated annually. The plan is the basis for 
the President's budget distribution of AIDS-related funds to 
the Institutes, centers and divisions within NIH. The Committee 
expects the Director of NIH to use this plan and the budget 
developed by OAR to guide his decisions on the allocation of 
AIDS funding among the Institutes. In addition, the OAR 
allocates an emergency AIDS discretionary fund to support 
research that was not anticipated when budget allocations were 
made. As noted in the introduction of the NIH section of the 
report, the Committee continues to strongly support the OAR, 
its leadership, and its coordinated budget planning process, 
and it applauds the formation of the extramural review panel 
which is conducting a broad-based evaluation of the NIH AIDS 
research portfolio.
    Office of Rare Disease Research.--This office was 
established in recognition of the need to provide a focal point 
of attention and coordination at NIH for research on rare 
diseases. The office works with Federal and non-Federal 
national and international organizations concerned with rare 
disease research and orphan products development; develops a 
centralized database on rare diseases research; and stimulates 
rare diseases research by supporting scientific workshops and 
symposia to identify research opportunities. The Committee 
supports continued activity in this area, recognizing that 
research on rare diseases, such as Lesch-Nyhan Syndrome, to 
note one example, may well provide valuable scientific 
knowledge with applicability to many other, more common 
diseases.
    Department of the Army AIDS research.--The Appropriations 
Committee has transferred responsibility to NIH for primary 
support of the extramural AIDS research program presently 
funded by the Department of the Army; the Committee intends 
that NIH fund the continuation costs of this program. At the 
conclusion of the normal grant period, NIH will consider 
further funding of this research in the context of its entire 
AIDS research portfolio. The Committee expects NIH to support 
the Army research without interruption in fiscal year 1996. 
However, if NIH has concerns about funding some portion of this 
research activity, the Director may submit a reprogramming 
request to the Committee. The Committee expects research 
cooperation to continue between NIH and the Department of the 
Army.
    Pediatric research.--The Committee recognizes the 
substantial benefits that biomedical research offers to the 
health and well being of our nation's children. Savings from 
productive innovations in health care, derived from scientific 
investigations of the highest quality, can be significant in 
terms of dollars and quality of life for children. The 
opportunities for advancements in the prevention and treatment 
of diseases which affect children or begin in childhood have 
never been greater.
    The Committee is concerned that inadequate attention and 
resources are devoted to pediatric research conducted and 
supported by the National Institutes of Health. Most research 
on the cause, treatment and cure of diseases which affect 
children rely primarily on adults as subjects in clinical 
trials. Consequently, treatment options which may be effective 
for adults can have an adverse impact on the outcome of 
children as well as on their future growth and development. The 
Committee strongly encourages the NIH to strengthen its 
portfolio of basic, behavioral and clinical research conducted 
and supported by all of its relevant Institutes to establish 
priorities for pediatric research, and to ensure the adequacy 
of translational research from the laboratory to the clinical 
setting. The Committee encourages the NIH to establish 
guidelines to include children in clinical research trials 
conducted and supported by NIH. The Committee expects NIH to 
develop performance indicators to measure specific progress on 
the above, demonstrated by the development of new programs or 
strengthening of existing programs and to report to the 
Committee prior to the 1997 appropriations hearings.
    Osteoporosis.--The Committee urged in its 1995 report that 
NIH continue to increase its support for research on 
osteoporosis and related bone disorders and is pleased that 
funding for this important problem has grown substantially 
since 1991. The Committee believes these diseases should 
continue to be a priority and requests the Department to submit 
a report not later than January 15, 1996 on the specific steps 
which have been taken by NIH in support of research on these 
important problems, including a description of its research 
priorities for fiscal year 1996.
    Nutrition.--The Committee fully supports the new trans-NIH 
nutrition initiative to bring the findings of basic science to 
applications in human disease, and urges its continuation in 
1996. Diet is a major factor associated with cancer, heart 
disease, diabetes, hypertension, maternal and infant health, 
and the aging process. Through research, understanding of the 
impact of nutrition on disease as well as its clinical 
application can be enhanced. This will assist in preventing 
disease and its complications and provide savings for the 
health care system. Nutrition research is particularly 
important in the prevention of diseases associated with women's 
health, including breast cancer and osteoporosis.
    Clinical research.--The Committee is pleased that the NIH 
Director has taken the initiative to appoint an advisory 
committee on clinical research issues. The Committee agrees 
with the concerns expressed in a 1994 Institute of Medicine 
(IOM) report regarding the problems of training for and 
pursuing careers in clinical research and is anxious to see NIH 
implementation of some of the solutions identified in that 
report. The Committee requests a report from the NIH Director 
by January 1 as to the progress NIH is making toward three 
initiatives recommended by the IOM: the expansion of clinical 
research training opportunities, the expansion of the General 
Clinical Research Centers program, and the development of a 
loan forgiveness program for persons who pursue clinical 
research careers.
    Integrative medical sciences.--The NIH is encouraged to 
foster implementation of programs to provide sound peer review 
and funding of integrative medical sciences projects conducted 
in intact vertebrates including humans. Enhancement is needed 
both in the number of investigator-initiated research grants 
and in training grants designed to replenish the pool of 
scientists with the skills to conduct research at the level of 
the intact animal. Restoration of our national capacity to 
advance the understanding of human function and disease in the 
integrative context is essential to developing suitable 
preventions, treatments and diagnostic procedures.
    Diagnostic radiology.--With the Committee's support, 
research is now underway at the Laboratory for Diagnostic 
Radiology Research to more accurately detect early stages of 
breast and ovarian cancer, especially among younger women. As a 
central focus for radiology research, the intramural laboratory 
not only responds to these types of emerging health issues, but 
can also enhance, through non-invasive imaging procedures, the 
research capabilities of other intramural research teams as 
well as assist extramural programs in identifying promising 
areas of research. The Committee encourages this type of 
activity and urges NIH to continue its support for the 
laboratory.
    Sleep disorders.--The Committee is concerned that while 
NHLBI has proceeded with the establishment of the National 
Center on Sleep Disorders Research, no mechanism has been 
formally established to encourage grant collaboration between 
the National Center and other NIH institutes that have an 
interest in and a portfolio of sleep research activity. The 
Committee requests that the NIH Director, the NHLBI Director, 
the National Center and other Institutes conducting sleep 
research prepare a plan for the Committee to review before the 
1997 budget hearings that formalizes this mechanism of 
scientific and program collaboration.
    Transfer authority.--The Committee has included traditional 
bill language permitting the Director of NIH to transfer up to 
one percent of one NIH appropriation to another. The Committee 
emphasizes that such transfers are subject to the normal 
reprogramming procedures. The Committee notes that this 
transfer authority could be used if the Director believes that 
a reallocation among Institutes is necessary for implementation 
of the AIDS plan developed by the Office of AIDS Research.
    Minority issues.--The Committee notes that NIH has had a 
continuing problem with regard to discrimination against 
minorities and women, ranging from hiring to participation in 
research. The Committee expects the NIH to continue to address 
this problem and to provide a progress report at the time of 
next year's appropriations hearing.

                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

    The bill includes $146,151,000 for buildings and 
facilities, an increase of $2,031,000 over the amount requested 
and $32,031,000 over the comparable 1995 appropriation.
     Mission.--The Buildings and Facilities appropriation 
provides for the design, construction, improvement, and major 
repair of clinical, laboratory, and office buildings and 
supporting facilities essential to the mission of the National 
Institutes of Health. The funds in this appropriation support 
the 77 buildings on the main NIH campus in Bethesda, Maryland; 
the Animal Center in Poolesville, Maryland; the National 
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) facility in 
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina; and other smaller 
facilities throughout the United States. The NIH is developing 
updated campus plans for both the Bethesda campus and the NIH 
Animal Center in Poolesville, scheduled for completion in 
December 1995.
    Construction programs.--This account supports continued 
essential safety and health improvements to maintain the 
Clinical Center; the continuation of the campus infrastructure 
modernization program as well as programs for power plant 
safety, asbestos abatement, fire protection and life safety, 
the elimination of barriers to persons with disabilities, 
safety and reliability upgrades at the Rocky Mountain 
Laboratory, and indoor air quality improvement.
    Repairs and improvements.--Support is also provided for the 
continuing program of repairs and improvements required to 
maintain existing buildings and facilities.
    Clinical center renewal program.--The Committee is aware 
that NIH is considering a number of options to finance and 
construct a new clinical center hospital facility. The 
Committee expects to be notified of NIH's plans regarding 
design and construction, both immediate and long-term, as well 
as financing, before any financial or contractual commitments 
are made to begin the project.

       Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

               Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services

    The bill provides $1,788,946,000 for substance abuse and 
mental health services activities for fiscal year 1996, 
$392,384,000 below the 1995 appropriation for these programs 
and $458,446,000 below the Administration request. The 
Committee generally concurs with the Administration proposals 
to consolidate programs and to establish national goals as well 
as performance and outcomes measurements for substance abuse 
and mental health services. The Committee believes that the 
Administration should take the additional step of establishing 
national standards and conditioning all funding on grantees' 
demonstrated ability to achieve those standards and make 
progress toward achieving the goals. The Committee notes that 
the responsibility for providing substance abuse and mental 
health services rests primarily with state and local 
governments, and the private sector. The federal role should be 
constrained to 1) fostering the development of goals, standards 
and performance measures, 2) limited and shared demonstration 
and dissemination, and 3) limited financial assistance to 
states and providers.
    The Committee is concerned about SAMHSA implementation of 
the Government Performance and Responsibility Act (GPRA) and 
directs the Administrator to take immediate action to fully 
implement the law. The Committee further directs the SAMHSA 
Administrator to be prepared to testify during the 1997 budget 
hearings on all actions taken to implement GPRA.
    While the legal authority for most programs administered by 
SAMHSA has expired, the Committee has consolidated 26 programs 
into 6, as permitted under previously enacted law and pending 
enactment of new mental health and substance abuse legislation. 
Specifically, the Committee has established a consolidated 
demonstration program under general authority to support mental 
health, substance abuse prevention and substance abuse 
treatment activities which received separate line-item funding 
in 1995 but are not separately funded in the bill. The 
Committee has transferred funding from the pregnant women and 
infants, pregnant/post-partum women and children, and high risk 
youth programs--activities which it considers to be among the 
highest previously funded priorities--to fund this new line 
item. Activities previously supported under programs which have 
been consolidated may be continued under general authority if 
deemed by the SAMHSA Administrator to be a sufficiently high 
priority; however, consistent with the President's request, the 
Committee directs that no new grants be awarded for such 
activities in 1996. The Administrator may fund new 
demonstration programs as described in the Administration 
proposal to reauthorize SAMHSA where such demonstrations are 
authorized under previously enacted law.
    In general, the Committee is concerned that the 
relationship between federal, state, local and private 
responsibilities regarding mental health and substance abuse 
treatment and prevention has not been adequately delineated. 
The federal government currently funds direct treatment and 
prevention services as well as research and demonstration 
projects to determine which types of treatment and systems of 
delivery will work most effectively. The federal government 
also provides start up and operating funding to grantees to 
adopt successful strategies which have been demonstrated with 
federal funding. Clearly, the federal government is neither 
substantively competent nor financially able to assume 
effective responsibility for all of these roles. The Committee 
is especially concerned that the multi-billion dollar federal 
investment in demonstration programs, which exceeded half a 
billion dollars in 1995 alone, has not sufficiently impacted 
the practice of substance abuse treatment and prevention. While 
this investment has produced voluminous information on 
potential improvements in the practice of treatment and 
prevention, little has been disseminated and ultimately 
implemented. Rather, demonstration funding has often been 
treated as temporary operating capital with successfully 
demonstrated activities lapsing as federal grant funding 
expires. Therefore, the Committee has provided funding only to 
continue high priority demonstrations pending restructuring of 
the substance abuse prevention and treatment fields to more 
productively integrate demonstrated activities in general 
practice.
    SAMHSA is responsible for supporting mental health, 
alcoholism, and other drug abuse prevention and treatment 
services nationwide through categorical grants and block grants 
to States. The agency consists of three principal centers: the 
Center for Mental Health Services, the Center for Substance 
Abuse Treatment, and the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. 
In addition, the Office of the Administrator is responsible for 
overall agency management with the exception of the Office of 
External Review (OER) which administers grant selection for the 
three service agencies.
    The Committee is concerned about the administrative 
inefficiency inherent in operating three agencies to provide 
substance abuse and mental health services. It is particularly 
concerned about the maintenance of two agencies to administer 
substance abuse prevention and substance abuse treatment 
services, particularly since grants review--a principal 
function of substance abuse and prevention programs--is 
centralized externally to both at the Office of External 
Review. By contrast, 48 states operate a single administrative 
authority to provide substance abuse prevention and substance 
abuse treatment services. The Committee directs the 
Administrator to begin consolidating substance abuse treatment 
and prevention activities in a single administrative authority 
to the extent possible within the constraints of the law and 
further directs the Administrator to be prepared to report to 
the Committee during the fiscal year 1997 budget hearings on 
progress regarding consolidation of all three operating 
agencies.

Mental Health and Substance Abuse Demonstrations

    The bill includes funding pursuant to general authority 
provided in sections 501(d)(2), (4), (5), (8), and 501(m) of 
the Public Health Service Act to continue substance abuse and 
mental health activities funded in 1995 but not separately 
appropriated in the 1996 bill. This appropriation includes 
funds transferred from the pregnant and post-partum women and 
infants program at CSAT, and the high risk youth and the 
pregnant women and infants programs currently administered by 
CSAP. The Committee considers these programs to be the highest 
priorities among the programs not separately funded in the 
bill. However, the Committee wishes to emphasize that any 
mental health or substance abuse activity funded in 1995 but 
not separately funded in this bill may be continued with 
demonstration funding if it represents a sufficiently high 
priority in the judgment of the SAMHSA Administrator to merit 
additional support. The Committee expects that new 
demonstration grants, with the exception of those newly 
proposed in the Administration's reauthorization proposal, will 
not be initiated during this period of fiscal constraint and 
pending reauthorization.

Center for Mental Health Services

            Mental Health Block Grant
    The bill includes $275,420,000 for this block grant, the 
same as the 1995 appropriation. The budget included funding for 
this program as part of a larger consolidated block grant 
including the PATH grants for the homeless. The bill does not 
continue funding for the PATH formula grants to states for 
homeless activities which may be performed under authority of 
the mental health block grant.
    The mental health block grant provides funds to States to 
support mental health prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation 
services. The funds are allocated among the States according to 
a statutory formula. Comprehensive state mental health planning 
requirements are an integral part of the block grant program. 
State planning councils are designed to create strong networks 
of families, providers, and consumers to direct Federal 
resources to local needs. State plans must be submitted as part 
of the annual block grant application, and approval of the plan 
is necessary before a grant may be awarded. Each year, States 
also must submit an implementation report of the activities of 
the previous year, and the agency must determine whether the 
State has adequately implemented its plan for the previous 
year. States which fail to implement plans for each fiscal year 
are subject to a penalty against the block grant award.
    The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for 
the clinical and AIDS training programs, community support 
demonstrations, homeless services or AIDS demonstrations. The 
States are encouraged to evaluate projects previously funded by 
these programs and not supported with demonstration funding 
provided in the bill to determine whether they constitute 
sufficiently high priority to merit continued funding under the 
general block grant authority.

Children's mental health

    The bill includes $60,000,000 for the fourth year of 
funding for the grant program for comprehensive community 
mental health services for children with serious emotional 
disturbance authorized by part E of Title V of the Public 
Health Service Act. This appropriation is the same as the 1995 
amount and the Administration request. Despite the great need 
to downsize programs under its jurisdiction, the Committee 
believes this program serves an important and underserved need 
which merits continued funding. The Committee is particularly 
pleased with the strong evaluation component required for each 
approved grant and looks forward to reviewing the results of 
these evaluations. The bill provides full funding to continue 
all 22 demonstration projects through 1996.
    Grants and technical assistance support community-based 
services for children and adolescents up to age 22 with serious 
emotional, behavioral, or mental disorders. The program 
provides funding to States and local jurisdictions for the 
development of integrated systems of community care. Each child 
or adolescent served through the program receives an individual 
service plan developed with the participation of the family and 
the child. Grantees are required to provide increasing levels 
of matching funds over the five year grant period. The 
Committee believes that the existing 22 grants are sufficient 
to demonstrate the potential success of integrated systems of 
care for children. Further nationwide adoption of these models 
is the responsibility of state, local and private mental health 
service providers, and dissemination of these models and their 
results should be a primary responsibility of those national 
mental health organizations which are concerned about the needs 
of children.

Clinical training/AIDS training

    The bill does not provide separate funding for the clinical 
training and AIDS training programs in 1996 consistent with the 
President's proposal to consolidate this program into a larger 
demonstration activity. The President's proposal is not 
currently authorized by law. The Congress provided $5,394,000 
for these activities in 1995. The Committee believes that these 
activities are not primarily federal responsibilities and 
should not be separately funded during periods of fiscal 
constraint. The bill does provide $141,889,000 pursuant to the 
general authority accorded SAMHSA under section 501 of the 
Public Health Service Act which may be used to continue 
clinical and AIDS training if SAMHSA determines these 
activities are sufficiently high priorities to merit continued 
support with limited resources.
    The clinical training program awards grants to public and 
private non-profit institutions to train personnel to deliver 
services to specifically designated underserved populations and 
to train minority students and students preparing to work in 
rural areas.
    The AIDS training program awards grants and contracts for 
the education of mental health care providers to address the 
neuropsychiatric and psychosocial aspects of HIV infection. 
Trainees may include psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, 
psychiatric social workers, psychologists, marriage and family 
counselors, medical students, primary care residents, clergy, 
police, and alternative health care site providers.
    In general, the Committee believes that providing clinical 
training is not a primary federal responsibility. Further, 
assistance, when provided, should be more appropriately awarded 
to individuals rather than institutions as is the case with the 
current clinical training program. Regarding AIDS training, the 
Committee believes that the responsibility for educating 
providers in the provision of services to people with AIDS 
rests with first with the institutions which provide education 
in mental health treatment and second with the employers of 
social services providers. The Committee has taken similar 
action with regard to the HRSA AIDS education and training 
program.

Community support demonstrations

    The bill does not provide separate funding for the 
community support demonstrations consistent with the 
President's proposal to consolidate this program into a larger 
demonstration activity. Neither the community support 
demonstrations nor the President's consolidated demonstration 
proposal are currently authorized by law. The Congress provided 
$24,184,000 for this program in 1995. The bill does provide 
$141,889,000 pursuant to the general authority accorded SAMHSA 
under sections 501(d)(2), (4), (5), (8) and section 501(m) of 
the Public Health Service Act which may be used to continue 
existing community support demonstration projects if SAMHSA 
determines these activities are sufficiently high priorities to 
merit continued support with limited resources.
    The Committee notes that 303 community support 
demonstration projects will have been completed by the end of 
fiscal year 1995. The effectiveness and value of these types of 
demonstrations will have been well demonstrated by that time. 
Individual communities are now responsible for familiarizing 
themselves with effective federally-supported demonstrations 
and adopting successfully mental health strategies according to 
their own priorities and as limited public resources permit. 
The Committee notes that the child and adolescent service 
system program duplicates the purposes of the children's mental 
health program which is fully funded in the bill.
    Community support demonstration awards fund projects to 
increase the effectiveness of community-based mental health 
services for adults and statewide service systems. The 
Committee notes that CMHS used its 1995 appropriation to 
initiate programs to support strategies to empower consumer and 
family networks to strengthen their ability to participate in 
State and local mental health services planning, national self-
help technical assistance centers to support the development of 
consumer roles in service planning and delivery, and outreach 
counseling services to the families of displaced coal miners. 
Community support demonstrations also support projects designed 
to improve systems of service delivery for children and 
adolescents with severe emotional disturbance.

Grants to the States for the homeless (PATH)

    The bill does not provide separate funding for grants to 
the States for the homeless program. All activities currently 
funded under the PATH grants may also be funded under the 
mental health block grant. The budget request proposes to 
consolidate these two formula grants into one grant program. 
Congress provided $29,462,000 for this program in 1995. The 
Committee notes that neither the mental health block grant nor 
the PATH grants are currently authorized in law.
    Under both the mental health block grant and the PATH 
formula grants, the States have primary responsibility for 
identifying priorities and allocating funding among competing 
needs as limited resources permit. The Committee believes that 
States, by virtue of participation in the PATH grants program, 
are well aware of their responsibility to respond to the needs 
of the homeless and those at imminent risk of becoming 
homeless. The Committee has therefore consolidated these two 
grant programs to invest states with the authority to make 
priority decisions regarding the allocation of limited mental 
health services funding and to achieve federal administrative 
efficiency. All services and activities provided with PATH 
funding may also be provided under the general authority of the 
mental health block grant, and the States and SAMHSA are 
encouraged to continue to provide services and support to the 
homeless and those at imminent risk of becoming homeless when 
such service provision represents sufficiently high priority to 
merit continued support with limited resources.
    The PATH program provides formula grants to the States to 
assist individuals who suffer from severe mental illness alone 
or in combination with substance abuse and who are homeless or 
at imminent risk of becoming homeless. Grants may be used for 
outreach, screening and diagnostic treatment, rehabilitation, 
community mental health services, alcohol or drug treatment, 
training, case management, supportive and supervisory 
assistance in residential settings, and limited housing 
assistance.

Homeless service demonstrations

    The bill does not provide separate funding for homeless 
service demonstrations consistent with the President's proposal 
to consolidate this program into a larger demonstration 
activity. Neither the homeless service demonstrations nor the 
President's proposed demonstration program are currently 
authorized by law. The Congress provided $21,227,000 for this 
program in 1995. The bill does provide $141,889,000 pursuant to 
the general authority accorded SAMHSA under sections 501(d) 
(2), (4), (5), (8) and section 501(m) of the Public Health 
Service Act which may be used to continue existing homeless 
service demonstration projects if SAMHSA determines these 
activities are sufficiently high priorities to merit continued 
support with limited resources.
    The Committee notes that 16 homeless service demonstration 
grants in a variety of urban and rural settings will have been 
completed by the conclusion of 1995. The effectiveness and 
value of these types of demonstrations will have been 
adequately demonstrated by that time. Individual states and 
communities are now responsible for familiarizing themselves 
with effective federally-supported demonstrations and adopting 
successfully mental health strategies according to their own 
priorities and as limited public resources permit. The 
Committee notes that homeless services as demonstrated under 
this program may be provided with federal mental health block 
grant funding when grantees deem such services sufficiently 
high priority to merit the allocation of limited federal 
resources.

Protection and advocacy

    The bill provides $19,500,000 for the protection and 
advocacy program, a reduction of $2,260,000 below the budget 
request and $2,457,000 below the 1995 appropriation. This 
funding is distributed to States according to a formula based 
on population and income. This program assists State-designated 
independent advocates who provide legal assistance on behalf of 
mentally ill individuals during their residence in inpatient 
facilities and for 90 days following their discharge.
    The Committee believes that protection and advocacy is a 
sufficiently unique, effective and important program to merit 
continued funding during this period of fiscal constraint. The 
Committee further notes that the President and both 
Congressional committees of jurisdiction have indicated their 
intention to provide a separate authorization for this activity 
in the pending CMHS reauthorization.

AIDS demonstrations

    The bill provides $1,487,000 for the AIDS mental health 
demonstrations program, the same as the 1995 funding level. The 
President proposed to consolidate and then phase out this 
program as part of a larger consolidated activity which has not 
been previously authorized in law. This program provides 5-year 
grants to public and non-profit private organizations to assist 
individuals who are experiencing severe psychological distress 
as a result of being informed that they are HIV positive. The 
recommendation will provide the 3rd year of assistance to 11 
grantees to continue these projects.
    The Committee commends CMHS for leadership in working 
cooperatively with HRSA and NIMH to fund these cooperative 
agreements demonstrating delivery of mental health services to 
individuals affected by and living with HIV/AIDS and one 
coordinating center to independently evaluate the quality and 
effectiveness of these services. The Committee encourages the 
Secretary to maintain these agencies' support for this program.

Center for Substance Abuse Treatment

            Substance abuse block grant
    The bill includes $1,234,107,000 for the substance abuse 
block grant, the same as the 1995 funding level and $60,000,000 
below the President's request. The Committee notes that the 
block grant is not currently authorized in law but that the 
President and both Congressional committees of jurisdiction 
have indicated their intention to provide separate authority 
for this grant program in the substance abuse reauthorization.
    While the Committee wishes to provide more flexibility to 
States, it also believes the Administration must develop 
substance abuse prevention and treatment goals, standards and 
performance measures and incorporate substance abuse evaluation 
into all federal substance abuse programs. The Committee is 
aware of a substantial body of anecdotal evidence which 
purports to demonstrate the effectiveness and economic 
efficiency of substance abuse treatment. However, as the 1996 
budget hearings revealed, SAMHSA has developed few if any 
comprehensive evaluation tools, and the Committee has little 
basis on which to evaluate the effectiveness of the overall 
federal investment in substance abuse prevention and treatment. 
The Committee commends SAMHSA for its emphasis on developing 
goals and standards and requiring outcomes measurement. The 
Committee notes that these activities can be fully implemented 
without further legislation and directs SAMHSA to submit 
reliable and comprehensive information regarding the 
effectiveness of federal substance abuse programs in support of 
future requests for funding.
    The substance abuse block grant provides funds to States to 
support alcohol and drug abuse prevention, treatment, and 
rehabilitation services. Funds are allocated among the States 
according to a statutory formula. State applications, including 
comprehensive state plans, must be submitted annually and 
approved by SAMHSA prior to release of funds.

Treatment grants to crisis areas

    The bill does not provide separate funding for this 
program, a decrease of $35,520,000 below the 1995 level, 
consistent with the President's proposal to consolidate the 
program into a larger demonstration authority. Neither the 
treatment grants to crisis areas program nor the President's 
proposal are currently authorized by law. The bill does provide 
consolidated demonstration funding with which continuing crisis 
grants may be supported if deemed a sufficiently high priority 
to merit continued support in the judgment of the SAMHSA 
Administrator. In addition, States may use substance abuse 
block grant funding to support any of the activities previously 
supported by this program if they are deemed to be sufficiently 
high priorities to merit the allocation of limited resources.
    Projects funded by this program focus on the development of 
intergovernmental cooperative agreements designed to improve 
treatment systems in metropolitan areas and to integrate 
substance abuse services with other social services including 
health care, education, justice programs and labor services. 
Projects focus heavily on centralized intake, assessment, and 
referral systems. Little, if any, of the program funding 
provides actual substance abuse treatment. The Committee 
believes that these systems improvement activities, while 
important to improving social service delivery, are not the 
primary responsibility of the federal government and do not 
merit separate line-item funding during this period of fiscal 
constraint. Eight multi-year crisis area grants were funded to 
completion in 1994 and eleven others will be fully operational 
in 1995. The Committee believes that the value of systems 
integration as demonstrated by these 19 projects will have been 
well established by the close of fiscal year 1995, and the 
responsibility for continuing these systems improvements rests 
with the state and local institutions with primary 
responsibility for substance abuse and related social services 
delivery.

Treatment improvement demonstration grants

            Pregnant and post-partum women and children
    The bill transfers $54,228,000, an amount equal to the 1995 
appropriation for this program and $4,156,000 above the amount 
necessary to continue existing grants in 1996, to the new 
consolidated mental health and substance abuse demonstration 
program. The President's budget requests consolidation of this 
program in a larger demonstration program. Neither the 
President's proposal nor the pregnant and post-partum women and 
children program are currently authorized in law. The funding 
provided in the bill may support continuing multi-year grants 
for the pregnant and post-partum women and children program. 
The Committee considers these grants to be among the highest 
priority projects previously funded by SAMHSA. Nevertheless, 
the bill vests the Administrator with the final authority to 
determine independently which SAMHSA program grants among those 
continuing from 1995 are the highest priorities and merit 
continued federal support in 1996. Consistent with the 
President's SAMHSA reauthorization proposal, the Committee 
expects that no new multi-year pregnant and post-partum women 
and children grants will be funded under this program in 1996.
    Program funds provide grants for comprehensive treatment 
services in residential settings which permit infants and 
children to live with their mothers. In addition, grants may 
support a comprehensive array of health, education and other 
social services for mothers and their children. Grantees must 
provide between 10% and 25% of program funding during the 
three-year federal grant cycle.
    While the Committee has provided funding to continue the 
pregnant and post-partum women and children program in 1996, it 
wishes to indicate that these grants are made on a temporary 
basis for the purpose of demonstrating successful residential 
treatment options for mothers and children; they are not 
ongoing operating subsidies for treatment and other social 
services. With 71 projects currently awarded, the Committee 
believes that the value of residential treatment for mothers 
and children will have been adequately demonstrated by the 
close of 1996. States, local governments and private service 
organizations must then assume primary responsibility for 
learning of and implementing successful demonstrations with 
non-federal resources or with resources provided through the 
federal block grants.
            Criminal justice program
    The bill does not provide separate funding for the criminal 
justice program, a decrease of $37,502,000 below the 1995 
level, consistent with the President's proposal to consolidate 
these activities in a larger demonstration authority. Neither 
the criminal justice program nor the President's proposal are 
currently authorized by law. The bill does provide $141,889,000 
in consolidated demonstration funding to continue previously-
funded mental health and substance abuse demonstrations which 
the SAMHSA Administrator considers to be the highest priorities 
for the agency.
    The criminal justice program provides grants to state and 
local justice systems to demonstrate the effectiveness of 
treatment for incarcerated individuals and parolees. Projects 
may support diversion-to-treatment and alternative sentencing 
programs, treatment for prisoners, and treatment for high risk 
probation/parole clients.
    The Committee emphasizes that 91 criminal justice 
demonstration projects will have been funded to completion by 
the end of fiscal year 1995, and it believes that the relative 
value of the various programs of criminal justice treatment and 
systems improvement will have been thoroughly demonstrated by 
that time. State and local justice systems must now assume the 
responsibility for learning of and implementing successful 
federally-funded criminal justice strategies. States are 
permitted to use federal block grant funds for these purposes 
when, in the States' judgment, they represent sufficiently high 
priority to merit the allocation of limited substance abuse 
treatment resources.
    Consistent with the 1995 appropriation and the President's 
request, the bill does not provide separate funding for the 
National Capital Area Treatment Demonstration program 
authorized under section 571 of the Public Health Service Act.
            Designated populations
    The bill does not provide separate funding for treatment 
demonstrations involving designated populations, a decrease of 
$23,561,000 below the 1995 appropriation, consistent with the 
President's proposal to consolidate funding for these 
activities in a larger demonstration authority. Neither the 
designated populations program nor the President's proposal are 
currently authorized in law. The bill does provide a 
consolidated source of funding to continue demonstration 
programs funded in 1995 but not separately appropriated in 
1996. The SAMHSA Administrator may award funding from this new 
appropriation of $141,889,000 to support the highest priority 
continuing demonstrations, including those previously funded 
under the designated populations program. Consistent with the 
President's request, the Committee expects that no new grants 
serving designated populations will be awarded in 1996 during 
this period of constrained resources.
    The designated populations program awards grants to provide 
outpatient substance abuse treatment services for specified 
populations including individuals in rural areas, adolescents, 
racial and ethnic minorities, women and their children, and 
families at risk of entering the child welfare system. Projects 
are designed to initiate contacts with designated population 
groups and to encourage individuals to enter treatment.
    The Committee notes that 140 designated population grants 
will have been funded to completion by the end of 1995, a 
sufficient number to have substantially demonstrated the value 
of engaging designated populations in outpatient treatment. The 
Committee believes that the States, local governments, national 
substance abuse treatment organizations and other treatment 
services providers must now assume full responsibility for 
learning about, disseminating and implementing successful 
designated populations demonstrations as limited treatment 
resources permit. States are permitted to designate federal 
substance abuse block grant funding for the purposes of this 
program when such projects are deemed to be sufficiently high 
priority to merit the allocation of limited substance abuse 
treatment resources.
            Comprehensive community treatment programs
    The bill does not provide separate funding for the 
comprehensive community treatment programs, a decrease of 
$27,277,000 below the 1995 appropriation, consistent with the 
President's proposal to consolidate this program into a larger 
demonstration authority. Neither the comprehensive community 
treatment programs nor the President's proposal are currently 
authorized in law. The bill does provide $141,889,000 for a 
consolidated demonstration program under general authority from 
which the SAMHSA Administrator may fund the highest priority 
continuing demonstration projects from 1995, including projects 
previously funded under this program. Consistent with the 
President's request, the Committee expects that no new 
comprehensive community treatment programs will be awarded in 
1996.
    This program supports grants for a wide variety of planning 
and systems improvement as well as collaborative activities 
with other federal agencies. The Committee notes that many of 
the projects previously funded by this program duplicate the 
purposes of other federal programs including some at SAMHSA. 
The program has supported projects involving treatment in Job 
Corps centers, homeless individuals, individuals receiving SSI 
by virtue of a substance abuse-related impairment, strategies 
for diversion from incarceration, disaster areas, and projects 
in rural and remote areas focusing on Native Americans, 
Hawaiian Natives and Native Alaskans.
    The Committee believes that this program has supported 
projects of value, however limited federal resources should be 
focused on direct treatment and prevention rather than on 
systems improvement which is an essential responsibility of 
substance abuse treatment providers. The Committee notes that 
all activities previously conducted under this program may be 
continued with federal block grant funding if they are deemed 
to be sufficiently high priorities to merit the allocation of 
limited resources.
            Training
    The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for 
the substance abuse treatment training program, a decrease of 
$5,590,000 below the 1995 appropriation, consistent with the 
President's request to consolidate this program into a larger 
demonstration authority. Neither the substance abuse treatment 
training program nor the President's proposal are currently 
authorized in law. The bill does provide $141,889,000 for a 
consolidated demonstration program under general authority from 
which the SAMHSA Administrator may award funding to the highest 
priority projects funded in 1995 but not separately 
appropriated in 1996. Consistent with the President's budget 
request, the Committee expects that no new addiction training 
centers will be awarded in 1996.
    The training program supports two primary training 
activities. First CSAT has awarded eleven Addiction Training 
Centers (ATCs) primarily to universities to establish networks 
responsible for training a cadre of health and allied health 
practitioners in the addiction treatment and recovery field. 
These ATCs were established in 1993 and will be fully 
operational in 1995. Second, CSAT operates the Project for 
Addiction Counselor Training (PACT) to provide career 
development opportunities to assist individuals to obtain 
counseling accreditation. The budget request indicates the 
project will be phased down in 1995 with no further funding 
requested in 1996.
    The Committee believes that training of treatment services 
providers is an important element of the nationwide drug 
control effort but is not a primary federal responsibility and 
should not be funded separately during this period of fiscal 
constraint. Nevertheless, the States are permitted to use 
federal block grant funding for training activities when they 
are deemed to be sufficiently high priorities to merit 
allocation of limited substance abuse treatment resources.

AIDS demonstration and training

    The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for 
the AIDS demonstration and training programs, a decrease of 
$18,026,000 below the 1995 level. The President proposed to 
consolidate these programs into a larger demonstration 
authority. Neither the President's proposal nor the AIDS 
demonstration and training programs are currently authorized in 
law. The bill provides a total of $141,889,000 for a 
consolidated demonstration program under general authority from 
which the SAMHSA Administrator may fund the highest priority 
continuing demonstration projects which were funded 
categorically in 1995 but are not separately appropriated in 
1996. Consistent with the President's request, the Committee 
expects that no new grants will be initiated under this program 
in 1996.
    The AIDS outreach program awards grants to organizations to 
engage particularly difficult to reach populations, including 
injecting drug users, their sexual partners and other high risk 
substance abusers, in drug treatment and health services. The 
Committee is aware that evaluations of previously-funded 
programs indicate reductions in high risk abuse behavior as 
well as reduced transmission of HIV. The Committee notes that 
fourteen projects have already been completed, fourteen more 
will have been awarded by the conclusion of 1995, and 20 
projects in all will have been completed by the start of fiscal 
year 1996. The Committee believes that these 34 demonstrations 
will effectively demonstrate the relative value of AIDS 
outreach activities. State and local health and substance abuse 
officials and national representative organizations must now 
assume responsibility for learning of, disseminating and 
implementing successful AIDS outreach programs as resources 
permit.
    The AIDS linkage program is a collaborative effort with the 
Health Resources and Services Administration to coordinate a 
broad array of substance abuse treatment, health, and other 
social services for injecting drug users, their sexual partners 
and other high risk individuals. The Committee notes that this 
program substantially duplicates the purposes of the outreach 
program and does not believe it should be separately funded 
during this period of fiscal constraint. However, the 
Administrator may continue funding existing projects from the 
consolidated demonstration program fund, if, in her judgment, 
they represent sufficiently high priority to merit continued 
funding with limited federal resources.
    The AIDS training program, through a series of courses and 
workshops, supports the education of substance abuse treatment 
staff in providing HIV-related services. The Committee does not 
believe that the training of health care workers is a federal 
responsibility, and substance abuse and health care providers--
whether state, local or private--must assume the primary 
responsibility for these activities.
    While line-item funding has been discontinued for the AIDS 
Linkage and AIDS Outreach programs, the Committee believes that 
the important function of outreach to substance abusers should 
be fully integrated into the community-based HIV prevention 
programs at the CDC. Thus, the Committee strongly encourages 
CSAT and CDC to work together in assuring that outreach to 
substance abusers is given careful consideration in the HIV 
community planning process at the CDC.
    All of the activities previously funded by the AIDS 
demonstration and training programs may be supported with 
federal block grant monies if SAMHSA or the States consider 
them to be sufficiently high priorities to merit continued 
funding with limited resources.

Capacity expansion program

    The bill does not provide funding for the capacity 
expansion program consistent with the President's request. 
Congress provided $6,701,000 for the program in 1995 to finance 
the final year of continuing grants.

Center for substance abuse prevention

            Prevention demonstrations
    The bill provides $141,889,000 for a consolidated mental 
health and substance abuse demonstration program which is 
generally authorized under section 501 of the Public Health 
Service Act. This new program is funded in part through 
transfers from the high risk youth program and the pregnant 
women and infants programs previously funded through CSAP. This 
consolidated program will allow the Administrator to continue 
support for the highest priority projects continuing from 1995 
but not separately funded in the bill.
    The Committee is concerned that CSAP may have adopted an 
informal policy of funding only grantees which have not 
received funding from sources within the alcohol or tobacco 
industries. The Committee believes that grants should be funded 
solely on the basis of merit, not on the basis of whether 
individual grantees may have received funding from 
organizations of which the CSAP leadership does not approve. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs SAMHSA to discontinue any 
such policy whether formal or informal.
            High risk youth
    The bill transfers $65,160,000 for the high risk youth 
demonstrations program, the same amount appropriated for 1995 
and $15,088,000 above the amount necessary to continue ongoing 
grants in 1996, to the new consolidated mental health and 
substance abuse demonstration grants program. The President 
proposed to consolidate this program into a larger 
demonstration authority which is not currently authorized by 
law. The Committee considers high risk youth grants to be among 
the highest priority projects funded in 1995, and has provided 
funding to continue all 132 existing grants in 1996. The 
Committee encourages SAMHSA to focus resources on the children 
of substance abusers--those at highest risk. The Committee 
notes that 228 projects will have been completed by the 
conclusion of 1995 and when combined with the potential 132 
continuing grants in 1996 will have sufficiently demonstrated 
the value of focusing resources on high risk youth. State, 
local and private substance abuse professionals must then 
assume full responsibility for learning of, disseminating and 
implementing successful high risk youth substance abuse 
prevention strategies.
    The high risk youth program supports demonstration and 
evaluation of strategies to prevent and reduce the use of 
alcohol, tobacco and other drug use among specific populations 
of youth at risk for such use. In addition, some projects 
demonstrate strategies to prevent substance abuse-related 
violence among or affecting youth ages 6-14 and others focus on 
the specific needs of adolescent females.
    Finally, the Committee notes that high risk youth 
prevention activities may be funded with federal block grant 
monies and the States are encouraged to do so when these 
programs represent a sufficiently high priority to merit the 
allocation of limited resources.
            Pregnant women and infants
    The bill transfers $22,501,000, the same amount 
appropriated for this purpose in 1995 and $14,224,000 above the 
amount necessary to fully fund the 16 continuing grants in 
1996, to the new consolidated mental health and substance abuse 
demonstration grants program authorized under general 
authority. The President proposed to consolidate this program 
into a larger demonstration authority which is not currently 
authorized in law. The Committee encourages SAMHSA to focus 
resources on the children of substance abusers--those at 
highest risk. The Committee notes that 41 projects will have 
been completed by the conclusion of 1995 and when combined with 
the potential 16 continuing grants will have sufficiently 
demonstrated the value of focusing resources on pregnant women 
and infants. State, local and private substance abuse 
professionals must then assume full responsibility for learning 
of, disseminating and implementing successful pregnant women 
and infants substance abuse prevention strategies.
    The pregnant women and infants program awards grants to 
develop models for coordinating substance abuse and health 
promotion services to reduce substance abuse among pregnant 
women, prevent the birth of drug-addicted babies, and improve 
the general health of mothers and their infants. The Committee 
is aware of evidence indicating the success of individual 
projects in achieving these goals and encourages CSAP to 
refocus resources for all grants on measuring outcomes against 
control communities and quantifying the economic costs and 
benefits of implementing these demonstrations.
    The Committee notes that States may use federal block grant 
funding to support pregnant women and infants demonstrations 
and to generally implement successfully demonstrated strategies 
when such activities represent a sufficiently high priority to 
merit the allocation of limited resources.

Community partnership grants

    The bill does not provide separate funding for the 
community partnership grants, a decrease of $114,741,000 below 
the 1995 appropriation. The President's request proposes to 
consolidate the program into a larger demonstration authority. 
Neither the program nor the President's proposal are currently 
authorized in law. The bill does provide $141,889,000 for a new 
consolidated mental health and substance abuse demonstration 
program under general authority provided in section 501 of the 
Public Health Service Act. With this funding, the SAMHSA 
Administrator is authorized to fund the highest priority 
demonstration programs which continue from 1995 but are not 
separately funded in the bill for 1996.
    The Committee emphasizes that community partnership grants 
help to improve coordination of local service delivery and do 
not directly fund substance abuse services. Over 200 community 
partnerships will have been fully funded through completion by 
the conclusion of 1995, not including 100 new projects which 
will be awarded during the year. The federal government has 
provided these resources to exhaustively demonstrate and 
evaluate several hundred separate community-based strategies 
for improving substance abuse prevention, and the Committee 
believes this substantial investment is more than sufficient to 
adequately demonstrate the value of coordinating criminal 
justice, substance abuse, education, health and other services 
at the community level. Information on all demonstrated 
community partnerships will be available nationwide to all 
service providers, states and municipal governments interested 
in improving substance abuse prevention and other social 
services. The Committee expects that having fulfilled the 
federal responsibility to fund research to determine which 
prevention strategies are most effective, states and 
communities will fulfill their responsibility to implement 
successful prevention strategies with state and local 
resources. Failure of states and communities generally to do so 
would render the previous federal investment of several hundred 
millions of dollars meaningless.

Public education and dissemination

    The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for 
the CSAP public education and dissemination activities, a 
decrease of $13,465,000 below the 1995 level, consistent with 
the President's proposal to consolidate this program into a 
larger demonstration authority. The President's proposal is not 
currently authorized by law. The bill does provide consolidated 
demonstration funding under general authority from which the 
SAMHSA Administrator may fund the highest priority continuing 
demonstration activities which are not separately funded in 
1996.
    The Committee believes that this program supports several 
important national activities including the collection and 
reporting of data on drug use and abuse which would be more 
appropriately funded through the 5% federal administrative set-
aside in the substance abuse block grant. These activities are 
expressly identified in the block grant authorizing law.

Training

    The bill does not provide separate line-item funding for 
the CSAP training programs, a decrease of $16,049,000 below the 
1995 level, consistent with the President's proposal to 
consolidate this program into a larger demonstration authority. 
The President's proposal is not currently authorized by law. 
The bill does provide consolidated demonstration funding under 
general authority from which the SAMHSA Administrator may fund 
the highest priority continuing demonstration and training 
activities which are not separately funded in 1996.
    The Committee believes that training is not a primary 
responsibility of the federal government and should more 
properly be provided by schools of medicine and health and 
substance abuse professionals and their employers. This program 
supports three types of training: community prevention, health 
systems and professionals, and medical education. The community 
prevention program focuses on cultural diversity, violence 
prevention and community resource building in providing 
training to community residents and professionals. The CSAP 
training system has provided courses attended by physicians, 
physician assistants, dentists, nurses, social workers, mental 
health counselors, and health maintenance organization and 
migrant health center personnel. The medical education program 
provides 26 grants to schools of medicine, nursing and social 
work to incorporate drug prevention training in their regular 
curricula.
    The Committee notes that States are already permitted to 
use federal block grant funding for training programs when, in 
their judgment, they represent sufficiently high priorities to 
merit the allocation of limited resources.

Program management

    The bill provides $56,543,000 for program management, 
$4,585,000 below the 1995 appropriation and $1,499,000 below 
the Administration request. The President's proposal to reduce 
funding for these purposes is based on the consolidation of 26 
programs into 7 and the assumption that existing demonstration 
programs which consume substantial administrative resources 
relative to overall program funding will be phased out. 
However, the Administration has declined requests to indicate 
the level of out-year savings associated with the consolidation 
proposal as existing grants expire and free up administrative 
resources for other purposes. Because the President's 
consolidated demonstrations are not authorized by law and 
because the Committee has not received sufficient information 
regarding the out-year impact of the proposal on administrative 
costs, the Committee has adopted an alternative consolidated 
demonstration program which is permitted under previously-
enacted general authority. Based on information provided by the 
agency, the Committee approved the level of funding for program 
management necessary to administer the six remaining SAMHSA 
programs including the consolidated demonstrations.
    In addition to the general concerns cited above regarding 
the inherent inefficiency of operating three separate substance 
abuse and mental health agencies, the Committee is concerned 
about the level of duplication of activities supported with 
program management resources. For instance, each of the three 
operating agencies as well as the Office of the Administrator 
retain budget, public relations and congressional affairs 
operations--functions which should more appropriately be 
centralized within the Office of the Administrator. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs SAMHSA to re-examine its 
administrative structure and to streamline management of the 
agency to improve efficiency, reduce duplication of effort, and 
contain costs.
    The program management activity provides funding to 
coordinate, direct and manage the agency's programs. Funds are 
used for salaries, benefits, space, supplies, equipment, travel 
and overhead.

                     Assistant Secretary for Health

              office of the assistant secretary for health

    The bill terminates separate funding for the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH) and reassigns priority 
activities previously funded in the OASH to the Office of the 
Secretary. The Committee has been extremely disappointed with 
the lack of progress in downsizing and streamlining middle 
management activity within the OASH.
    The Committee notes that the Department recently indicated 
its intention to consolidate the management functions of the 
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health with the Office of 
the Secretary. Given the elevation of the Social Security 
Administration to independent status, the Committee supports 
the consolidation and downsizing of these health policy making 
and management functions. The Committee commends the 
Administration for the progress it has made in these areas but 
believes that far more progress is both possible and desirable 
in 1996.

Adolescent family life

    The bill transfers $6,698,000 for the adolescent family 
life abstinence counseling program, the same as the 1995 
appropriation and $554,000 above the President's request to the 
Office of the Secretary.

Disease prevention and health promotion

    The bill does not provide funding for the disease 
prevention and health promotion program, a decrease of 
$4,604,000 below the 1995 comparable appropriation and 
$4,601,000 below the President's request.
    According to the budget request, this program is designed 
to provide ``leadership, coordination, and policy development 
related to prevention,'' to assist the Assistant Secretary to 
``coordinate and work collaboratively with PHS agencies, other 
Federal departments, and private voluntary, professional, and 
trade associations to implement programs and provide services 
that support and monitor targeted improvements in key priority 
areas for health promotion and disease prevention,'' and to 
provide leadership in carrying out the Secretary's priorities. 
The Committee believes these activities should be carried out 
within the resources provided for the Office of the Secretary.

Physical fitness and sports

    The bill transfers $1,000,000 to the Office of the 
Secretary to continue operation of the President's Council on 
Physical Fitness & Sports, a decrease of $407,000 from the 1995 
comparable appropriation and $406,000 below the Administration 
request for 1996.

Minority health

    The bill transfers $20,631,000 for the Office of Minority 
Health to the Office of the Secretary, the same as the 1995 
comparable appropriation and $39,000 above the President's 
budget request.

National Vaccine Coordinating Office

    The bill does not provide funding for the national vaccine 
coordinating office, a decrease of $996,000 from the 1995 
comparable appropriation and $995,000 from the President's 
original budget request. The Secretary recently notified 
Congress of her decision to transfer the remaining 1995 funding 
for this office to the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention thereby terminating the separate National Vaccine 
Coordinating Office. The Committee notes that this office does 
not directly provide for the manufacture, purchase, 
distribution or delivery of vaccines. Rather, it attempts to 
coordinate the activities of various government agencies 
involved in these vaccine activities, and its mission is 
carried out in conjunction with another coordinating agency as 
well as a vaccine advisory committee. The Federal government 
spent over $1.4 billion on vaccine programs and activities in 
1995. The Committee does not believe that an additional level 
of management is necessary to ensure the effective delivery of 
vaccines to Americans and concurs with the Secretary's decision 
to terminate the vaccine office.

Office of Research Integrity

    The bill transfers $3,858,000 for the Office of Research 
Integrity (ORI) to the Office of the Secretary. This amount is 
the same as the budget request and $5,000 below the 1995 
appropriation.

Office on Women's Health

    The bill transfers $2,200,000 for the Office on Women's 
Health to the Office of the Secretary, a reduction of $362,000 
below the 1995 funding level and $352,000 below the 
Administration request.

Office of Emergency Preparedness

    The bill does not provide separate funding for the Office 
of Emergency Preparedness, $2,180,000 less than the 1995 
comparable level and $2,374,000 less than the Administration 
request. The Committee believes that this program has provided 
important coordinating services during recent disasters but has 
not been operated in an efficient manner. Therefore, activities 
previously supported with this separate appropriation may be 
continued within funds appropriated to the Office of the 
Secretary when they are deemed to be sufficiently high priority 
to merit the allocation of limited federal resources.
    The Office of Emergency Preparedness (OEP) coordinates 
various health services in response to major disasters. HHS is 
the primary agency for health and medical services under the 
Federal Response Plan, and responsibility for Departmental 
activities was delegated to OEP in 1990.

Health care reform data activities

    The bill does not provide funding for the health care 
reform data activities program, consistent with the President's 
request to transfer this funding to a new data development 
program. The Congress provided $2,760,000 for this program in 
1995 to directly support development of the President's health 
care reform plan. Because that plan is no longer under 
congressional consideration, both the House and Senate 
recommended terminating unspent funding for this program in 
H.R. 1158 and H.R. 1944.

Data Development Program

    The bill does not provide funding for a new data 
development program for which the Administration requests 
$3,854,000 in 1996. The President's proposal includes funding 
to be transferred from the health care reform data activities 
program as well as from program management. No funding was 
provided for this program in 1995.
    The President's proposal indicates that this program is 
designed ``to support the Assistant Secretary for Health in 
providing executive leadership to the Public Health Service 
(PHS),'' and staff will ``support the Assistant Secretary for 
Health in policy development, the management of multi-agency 
research and program initiatives, coordination of legislative 
and regulatory processes, direction of the PHS one-percent 
evaluation program, and providing general staff support for ASH 
interactions with the Congress, outside constituency groups, 
other Federal departments and government-wide commissions and 
committees.'' The Committee does not believe that limited 
federal funds should be expended for such excessive and 
unnecessary management activities. Further, the budget proposal 
to transfer funding from program management to this account, in 
effect masking a $1.3 million increase for Department overhead, 
is precisely the type of budgeting gimmick and management 
inefficiency that has convinced the Committee that it should 
discontinue separate funding for the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary for Health.

Public Health Service Management

    The Committee has transferred $3,000,000 to the Office of 
the Secretary for management of the public health service, 
$15,432,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The President 
requested an increase of $134,000 for program management 
activities including $1,262,000 which was proposed under the 
new data development program.

National AIDS Program Office

    The bill does not provide separate funding for the National 
AIDS Program Office, a reduction of $1,742,000 below the 1995 
comparable appropriation and $1,739,000 below the President's 
request. The Committee notes that the Secretary requested to 
reprogram $350,000 from this office in November, 1994.
    The National AIDS Program Office (NAPO) serves as the 
principal AIDS/HIV staff to the Assistant Secretary for Health. 
NAPO does not provide direct services. Rather, it provides 
administrative support to the Assistant Secretary and 
coordinates activities among various public health service 
agencies which do provide direct services. The Committee 
believes that limited federal resources ought to be expended 
for direct services to individuals impacted by HIV and AIDS, 
not for federal overhead. The Public Health Service will spend 
$2.6 billion on HIV/AIDS activities in 1995 and is entirely 
capable of coordinating its services through sound management 
and reasonable interaction with other federal and non-federal 
HIV/AIDS service providers within existing resources. The bill 
provides over $126,000,000 for the Office of the Secretary 
which may be used to support any AIDS management activities 
deemed sufficiently high priority to merit the allocation of 
limited federal resources. The Committee notes that the federal 
government will spend $6.9 billion in 1995 on HIV/AIDS services 
including $5.9 billion through the Department of HHS.

     retirement pay and medical benefits for commissioned officers

    The bill provides an estimated $166,925,000 for retirement 
pay and medical benefits, the same as the budget estimate and 
an increase of $7,604,000 over the estimated payments for 1995. 
This activity provides mandatory payments to Public Health 
Service commissioned officers who have retired for age, 
disability, or specified period of service. This appropriation 
also provides for the cost of medical care in non-Public Health 
Service facilities to dependents of the Public Health Service 
Commissioned Corps and payments to the Social Security trust 
funds for the costs to them of granting credits for military 
service.

               Agency for Health Care Policy and Research

                    Health Care Policy and Research

    The bill includes $85,423,000 in general funds for the 
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR), which is 
$49,986,000 below the 1995 level and $57,001,000 below the 
President's request. In addition, the bill makes available 
$5,796,000 in trust funds, which is the same as the request, 
and $34,284,000 in one percent evaluation funding, compared to 
the request of $45,284,000, for a total resource level of 
$125,503,000. This total resource level is $34,002,000 below 
the 1995 level and $68,001,000 below the request.
    AHCPR is charged with developing clinically-based, policy-
relevant information for use in improving the health care 
system and with supporting health services research.
    The bill includes $69,284,000 for health services research, 
which is $6,361,000 below the 1995 level and $33,433,000 below 
President's request. Areas of research focus include: how 
consumers make choices on health insurance; managed care; risk 
adjustment systems; health insurance reform; rural hospital 
closures and rural emergency medical services; cost 
effectiveness of preventing AIDS complications; and improved 
electronic medical records systems. Funds are also included for 
the third National Medical Expenditure Survey (NMES), which 
will be conducted in 1996. NMES is the only Federal survey to 
collect and compile data on nationwide health care expenditures 
and utilization. AHCPR also supports five rural centers 
addressing issues of cost and quality of and access to health 
services. In addition, AHCPR supports demonstrations of 
Statewide or regional managed care system initiation in rural 
areas.
    The Committee has consolidated the various line items 
within this activity to give AHCPR greater flexibility in 
managing the reduced funding levels contained in the bill. The 
Committee has increased the amount of funding available through 
the one percent evaluation tap in recognition of the increased 
costs of NMES in 1996. The Committee encourages the agency to 
implement as quickly as possible any cost-savings measures that 
result from a study currently underway of alternative ways to 
conduct the NMES. The Committee also encourages AHCPR to 
distribute necessary reductions among its various research 
activities in order to maintain a balanced program of grants 
and contracts for research.
    The bill includes $55,796,000 for medical treatment 
effectiveness, which is $25,640,000 below the 1995 level and 
$32,568,000 below the President's request. This program 
supports the following activities: effectiveness research, 
including Patient Outcomes Research Teams (PORTs) and Research 
Centers on Minority Populations; the development of clinical 
practice guidelines and their evaluation; the development and 
standardization of data bases for research, including the 
development of computerized medical records; dissemination of 
patient outcomes research and clinical practice guidelines; and 
assessment of new technologies under consideration for 
reimbursement by Federal agencies.
    As it develops strategies to manage the funding reductions 
contained in the bill for this activity, the Committee 
encourages AHCPR to reevaluate its approach to the development 
of clinical guidelines and technology assessments. With the 
widespread development of clinical guidelines in the private 
sector and by professional societies, the Committee questions 
the need for AHCPR to allocate its resources to this activity. 
Rather, the agency is urged to consider modifying its role to 
one of certifying the impartiality and thoroughness of 
guidelines that are developed by others. With regard to 
technology assessments, the Committee urges AHCPR to reassess 
its role in financing this activity in favor of greater 
financial participation by the beneficiaries of the 
assessments.
    To the extent that resources permit, the Committee 
encourages AHCPR to consider developing a children's research 
agenda on health care effectiveness, quality and outcomes 
measures that establishes research priorities for children on a 
three-to-five-year basis in consultation with experts in 
children's health care delivery and managed care.
    To the extent resources permit, the Committee encourages 
AHCPR to consider supporting research on clinical risk 
modification techniques in order to enhance patient safety 
through appropriate clinical practices throughout the health 
care system.
    The bill includes $2,423,000 for program support, which is 
$1,000 below the 1995 level and the same as the President's 
request. This activity supports the overall direction and 
management of AHCPR. Consistent with the policy followed 
throughout the bill, an undistributed reduction of $2,000,000 
is included for total agency administrative costs, to bring 
total costs to a level 7.5 percent below 1995. Administrative 
costs associated with legislative and public affairs functions 
should be reduced 10 percent below 1995 levels. The Committee 
intends that these reductions be taken only from the categories 
of costs identified on the table on page 11 of the 1996 budget 
justification.

                  Health Care Financing Administration

                     Grants to States for Medicaid

    The bill includes $82,142,072,000 for the Federal share of 
current law State Medicaid costs in fiscal year 1996. This 
amount includes $27,047,717,000 which was advance funded in the 
1995 appropriation. The amount recommended in the bill for 
fiscal year 1996 is the same as the amount requested by the 
Administration and $7,098,703,000 less than the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1995. Obligations in the Medicaid 
program are expected to decrease only slightly, by $413,649,000 
from 1995 to 1996, but the program is projected to have an 
unobligated balance of $13.8 billion carry over from 1995, 
reducing the new budget authority needs in the account. The 
unobligated balance results from the continuing difficulties in 
estimating actual State expenditures due to regulatory changes 
and demonstration waivers.
    Federal Medicaid grants reimburse States for 50 to 83 
percent (depending on per capita income) of their expenditures 
in providing health care for individuals whose income and 
resources fall below specified levels. Subject to certain 
minimum requirements, States have broad authority within the 
law to set eligibility, coverage and payment levels. It is 
estimated that nearly 37.6 million low income individuals will 
receive health care services in 1996 under the Medicaid 
program. State costs of administering the program are matched 
at rates which generally range from 50 to 90 percent, depending 
upon the type of cost. Total funding for Medicaid includes $412 
million for the entitlement Vaccines for Children program. 
These funds, which are transferred to the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention for administration, support the costs of 
immunization for children who are on Medicaid, uninsured or 
underinsured and receiving immunizations at Federally qualified 
health centers or rural health clinics. There is an offsetting 
reduction of $200 million for vaccines formerly purchased 
through the Medicaid program. Indefinite authority is provided 
by statute for the Vaccines for Children program in the event 
that the current estimate is inadequate.
    The Committee is aware that the authorizing committees are 
considering fundamental changes to the Medicaid program, 
including conversion to a block grant. The Committee has 
appropriated on the basis of existing law, but if such changes 
are enacted, will modify the appropriation in conference to 
comport to the new statute.

                  Payments to Health Care Trust Funds

    The bill includes $63,313,000,000 for the Payments to the 
Health Care Trust Funds account. This is an increase of 
$25,766,242,000 over the 1995 level and the same as the 
Administration request.
    This substantial increase is due to several factors: a 
large unanticipated shortfall in the Federal contribution for 
Supplementary Medical Insurance; a statutory change in the 
computation of the beneficiary contribution to Part B that 
takes effect in 1996; and the adjustment made once every five 
years to military service credits.
    This entitlement account includes the general fund subsidy 
to the Medicare Part B trust fund as well as other 
reimbursements to the Part A trust fund for benefits and 
related administrative costs which have not been financed by 
payroll taxes or premium contributions. The amount provided 
includes $145 million for program management administrative 
expenditures, which is the 1996 estimate of the general fund 
share of Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) program 
management expenses. This general fund share will be 
transferred to the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund to 
reimburse for the funds drawn down in 1996 from the trust fund 
to finance program management.

                           Program Management

    The bill makes available $2,136,824,000 in trust funds for 
Federal administration of the Medicare and Medicaid programs. 
This is $42,220,000 less than the amount available for this 
purpose for fiscal year 1995 and $116,970,000 less than the 
Administration request.

Research, demonstration, and evaluation

    The bill includes $40,000,000 for research and 
demonstrations. This total is $18,000,000 less than the amount 
requested by the Administration and $5,146,000 less than the 
amount provided in 1995. These funds support a variety of 
studies and demonstrations in such areas as monitoring and 
evaluating health system performance; improving health care 
financing and delivery mechanisms; modernization of the 
Medicare program; the needs of vulnerable populations in the 
areas of health care access, delivery systems, and financing; 
and information to improve consumer choice and health status. 
Funding for this activity was increased dramatically in 1995 
beyond historical levels to support particular research 
projects. The House and Senate agreed to rescind most of this 
increase. The Committee's recommendation returns this account 
to more typical funding levels, which will be sufficient to 
support the research projects developed by the agency in 
accordance with its strategic priorities.
    Health care represents one of the largest areas of 
expenditure for the Federal government. Most of that money is 
spent in hospitals, long-term care facilities, skilled-nursing 
facilities and clinics. Because of its interest in containing 
health care expenditures, the Committee encourages HCFA to 
review the training of administrators of health care facilities 
and report to the Committee what, if any, steps should be taken 
to improve that training.
    The bill does not include funding for health insurance 
information, counseling and assistance grants, which is 
$4,500,000 less than the President's request and $4,536,000 
less than the 1995 level. These grants provide funding to 
States to counsel Medicare recipients about insurance benefits 
and plans. The House and Senate approved a $5.5 million 
rescission of these funds; the phaseout of the program would be 
complete in 1996. All States have received grants--a total of 
$34 million in the last four years. The average State grant is 
now only $91,000. Fifteen States receive funding from other 
sources for this program. The counseling is largely done on a 
volunteer basis; State monies are used for a coordinator and 
some travel.
    $10,000,000 is included for the continuation costs of rural 
hospital transition grants, which is $7,584,000 less than the 
1995 level and $10,000,000 above the Administration request. 
These grants provide modest allocations to small rural 
nonprofit hospitals to help them adapt to changes in the demand 
for different types of services, changes in the populations 
served, or changes in the hospitals' ability to provide 
staffing. This program has distributed $135 million since its 
inception in 1989. The Committee does not intend to fund new 
grants in this program in 1996 or later years.
    No funding is provided for essential access community 
hospital/rural primary care hospital (EACH/RPCH) grants, which 
is $2,000,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the same as the 
President's request. The EACH/RPCH program provides grants to 
States for the establishment of rural health networks and 
designation of EACHs and RPCHs, as well as grants to hospitals. 
The House and Senate approved a $1.5 million rescission of 
these funds; the phaseout of the program would be complete in 
1996. Only seven States are currently authorized to participate 
in the program--Kansas, North Carolina, South Dakota, West 
Virginia, California, Colorado, and New York--and only a few of 
their hospitals remain eligible for additional funds. In 
previous years, appropriated funds have lapsed because not 
enough hospitals in these seven States chose to participate.
    No funds are provided for new rural health grants, which is 
$2,000,000 less than the Administration request and $37,000 
below the 1995 level. The House and Senate agreed to terminate 
this program in the rescission bill; there is no reason to 
resume funding in 1996. This funding is intended to assist a 
limited number of States in developing rural health system 
delivery models. These activities can be supported within the 
regular research account if the agency considers them to be 
high priority.

Medicare contractors

    The bill provides $1,607,058,000 to support Medicare claims 
processing contracts. This is $24,042,000 below the amount 
requested by the Administration and $2,613,000 below the 
operating level provided in fiscal year 1995.
    Medicare contractors are responsible for paying Medicare 
providers promptly and accurately. In addition to processing 
claims, contractors also identify and recover Medicare 
overpayments, as well as review claims for questionable 
utilization patterns and medical necessity. In addition, 
contractors provide information and technical support both to 
providers and beneficiaries regarding the administration of the 
Medicare program. In 1996, contractors are expected to process 
822 million claims. Within the resources provided, the 
Committee urges HCFA to maintain payment safeguard activities 
to the maximum extent possible.

State survey and certification

    The bill provides $152,000,000 for State inspection of 
facilities serving Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, which 
is $6,200,000 above the 1995 level and $10,100,000 below the 
Administration request.
    Survey and certification activities ensure that 
institutions and agencies providing care to Medicare and 
Medicaid beneficiaries meet Federal health, safety and program 
standards. On-site surveys are conducted by State survey 
agencies, with a pool of Federal surveyors performing random 
monitoring surveys. Almost 26,000 facilities are expected to be 
reviewed in 1996. By law, nursing homes and home health 
agencies must be surveyed on an average of once per year. In 
1996, it is expected that other facilities will be surveyed on 
an average of 20 percent per year.
    The Committee directs the Administrator to reexamine the 
Survey, Certification and Enforcement of Skilled Nursing 
Facilities, published at pages 56116 through 56252 in Volume 
59, Number 217 of the Federal Register on November 10, 1994. 
The Committee is concerned that the regulations have imposed an 
excessively high standard that will cause many acceptably 
performing facilities to be out of compliance. The Committee 
understands that no monetary penalties will be applied in most 
cases for 90 days following the survey and encourages HCFA to 
use this time period to assess whether the regulations are 
having any unintended impacts. The Committee strongly urges the 
Administrator to consider reopening the rule-making process on 
this regulation if the findings of the analysis provide 
justification and to report to the Committee the results of its 
analysis by December 31, 1995.

Federal administration

    The bill includes $354,266,000 to support Federal 
administrative activities related to the Medicare and Medicaid 
programs. This is $41,828,000 below the Administration request 
and $4,000 below the amount available in 1995. Consistent with 
the policy throughout the bill, the recommendation also 
includes $26.5 million in undistributed administrative savings, 
which represents a 7.5 percent reduction in salaries and 
expenses from 1995 levels and an additional 2.5 percent 
reduction in congressional and public affairs functions. This 
reduction is to be applied only to the Federal administrative 
costs in the Federal administration line item.
    The Committee directs that none of these funds may be used 
for the implementation of or planning for future implementation 
of the Medicare/Medicaid data bank. The Committee believes that 
the data bank as enacted should not be implemented. Since the 
Committee has not funded the data bank, and does not intend to 
fund the data bank in the future, penalties associated with the 
data bank's employer reporting requirements should not be 
imposed.

                     Undocumented Aliens Assistance

    The Committee has not provided the $150,000,000 requested 
by the Administration in fiscal year 1996 for a new State grant 
program for the medical costs of undocumented aliens. This 
program is not authorized.

      Health Maintenance Organization Loan and Loan Guarantee Fund

    The bill does not provide funding for the Health 
Maintenance Organization Loan and Loan Guarantee Fund, which is 
the same as the Administration request. $15,000,000 was 
provided for this account in 1995. The Fund was established in 
1975 to provide working capital during the initial operating 
period of a health maintenance organization (HMO). Direct loans 
were made to HMOs from the Fund. These loans were then sold, 
with guarantees, to the Federal Financing Bank. The Fund also 
guaranteed loans made by private lenders to HMOs. The last loan 
commitments were made in 1983. The Administration indicates 
that the current fund balance should be adequate to cover 
principal payments, interest charges, and prepayment penalties 
throughout 1996.

                Administration for Children and Families

                   FAMILY SUPPORT PAYMENTS TO STATES

    The bill includes authority to spend $18,014,307,000 during 
FY 1996 for Family Support Payments to States. This is 
$653,610,000 more than the comparable appropriation for 1995, 
and the same as the President's request. The FY 1996 amount 
includes $4,400,000,000 in advance funding that was provided in 
FY 1995.
    This appropriation combines funding for the assistance 
payments and child support enforcement programs. The assistance 
payments programs are administered by State welfare agencies 
under individual plans developed by each State consistent with 
Federal requirements. The largest of the programs is AFDC, 
which provides basic cash benefits for needy children. The 
Federal program, on average, finances 55 percent of the cash 
benefits provided to AFDC households. The Child Support 
Enforcement program was created to locate absent parents, to 
enforce their support obligations, and to establish paternity. 
The Federal government provides about 85 percent of the costs 
incurred by State and local governments in administering the 
program.
    The amount provided includes $954,000,000 for the child 
care expenses authorized by Title IV-A of the Social Security 
Act for participants in the JOBS program and transitional child 
care for up to 12 months for former AFDC recipients who have 
left the rolls due to increased income from employment. In 
addition to this amount, $300,000,000 is included for the At-
Risk Child Care program established in the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1990 to serve low-income working families 
in need of child care and at risk of becoming eligible for 
AFDC.

               job opportunities and basic skills (jobs)

    The bill provides $1,000,000,000 for the Job Opportunities 
and Basic Skills (JOBS) program, which is the same as the 
budget request and an increase of $30,000,000 over the 
comparable 1995 appropriation. The JOBS program provides 
education, training and employment services to AFDC recipients 
to help them obtain employment leading to self sufficiency and 
to avoid long-term welfare dependency. All 50 states and 76 
Native American Tribes and Alaska Native organizations operate 
JOBS programs which must include high school or equivalent 
education, basic and remedial education, and services for those 
with limited English proficiency. JOBS programs must also 
provide job skills training, job readiness, job development and 
placement services, and at least two of the following programs: 
group and individual job search, on-the-job training, work 
supplementation, and community work experience. States must 
provide matching funds and receive Federal funds up to the 
limit of their entitlements as determined by formula.

                   low income home energy assistance

                              (rescission)

     The bill rescinds the $1,000,000,000 advance 1996 
appropriation for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance program 
provided in previous legislation. The Committee notes that this 
program was initiated to temporarily supplement existing cash 
assistance programs to help low income individuals pay for 
escalating home fuel costs resulting from the second energy 
crisis and was not intended to meet the entire home energy 
costs of assisted individuals. Since the program's creation, 
real energy prices for all three sources have declined to pre-
1980 levels. The price of electricity, the most costly source 
of home energy, has decreased to pre-1974 levels according to 
Administration figures. In addition, the Administration 
informed the Committee in 1994 that low income families now 
spend \1/3\ less of their income on home energy than they did 
when the LIHEAP program was initiated. The Committee believes 
that the program has evolved from a temporary energy crisis 
assistance program into a narrowly focused income supplement 
program that does not target households with the greatest 
energy needs and fails to encourage reduced dependence on it. 
Moreover, the Committee believes the program is poorly 
targeted, providing average benefits of only $180 per year to 
over 5 million households rather than concentrating assistance 
on those with true crises. The Committee anticipates that the 
committees of jurisdiction will reexamine the structure and 
purpose of this program in the near future.
    The bill does not provide advance funding for 1997, 
$1,319,204,000 less than requested in the budget.

                     refugee and entrant assistance

    The bill provides $411,781,000 for refugee assistance 
programs which is $2,418,000 below the request and $12,009,000 
above the 1995 appropriation.

Transitional and Medical Services

    The bill provides $278,882,000 for transitional and medical 
services, an increase of $20,609,000 above the comparable 1995 
amount and $353,000 above the request. The transitional and 
medical services activity consolidates funding for the state-
administered cash and medical assistance program which assists 
refugees who are not categorically eligible for AFDC or 
Medicaid, the unaccompanied minor program which reimburses 
States for foster care, and the voluntary agency grant program 
in which participating national refugee resettlement agencies 
match Federal funds and provide resettlement assistance. The 
Committee expects that funding provided in the bill, along with 
language added to allow prior year funds to be available for 
1995 and 1996 costs, will allow the Administration to continue 
the eight month reimbursement policy for cash and medical 
assistance.

Social services and preventive health

    The bill provides $80,802,000 for social services, the same 
as the 1995 appropriation and the budget request. Approximately 
85 percent of these funds are distributed by formula and the 
remainder supports special discretionary projects. The bill 
also provides $2,700,000 for preventive health activities, a 
decrease of $2,600,000 below the 1995 level and $2,771,000 
below the request. The Committee is concerned that domestic 
refugee preventive health funds have been provided to the 
Public Health Service mainly for administrative activities, 
including activities overseas. The bill eliminates funding for 
this activity and expects the PHS to fund this activity within 
its 1996 appropriation. The Committee is also concerned that 
funding for States and local governments for domestic health 
assessment activities has not been administered in the most 
cost effective manner and directs that program activities be 
administered directly by the Office of Refugee Resettlement.
    The Committee notes with interest service providers 
offering treatment for persons who have suffered mental and 
physical torture by foreign governments. The Committee 
recommends that special consideration be given to supporting 
such efforts.

Targeted asssistance

    The bill includes $49,397,000 for the targeted assistance 
programs, the same as the budget request and the 1995 
appropriation. This program provides grants to States for 
counties which are impacted by high concentrations of refugees 
and high dependency rates. The Committee agrees that 
$19,000,000 is available for targeted assistance to serve 
communities affected by the Cuban and Haitian entrants and 
refugees whose arrivals in recent years have increased. The 
Committee has set-aside 20 percent of these funds for increased 
support to communities with large concentrations of refugees 
whose cultural differences make assimilation especially 
difficult justifying a more intense and longer duration level 
of Federal assistance.

                 Child Care and Development Block Grant

    The bill includes $934,642,000 for the Child Care and 
Development Block Grant program, which is the same as the 1995 
appropriation and $114,183,000 below the request. The Committee 
has proposed no reduction in this program in light of pending 
welfare reform and the need for child care that will result 
from that effort.
    The Child Care and Development Block Grant program was 
enacted in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 to 
increase the availability, affordability and quality of child 
care by providing funds to States, Territories and Indian 
Tribes for child care services for low-income families. Under 
the authorizing law, 75 percent of the Block Grant funds must 
be used for child care services provided to eligible children 
on a sliding fee scale basis, as a contracted service or 
through a certificate program; and for activities designed to 
improve the quality and availability of care. Of these 75 
percent funds, grantees must spend at least 90 percent for 
services, and no more than 10 percent on administration. Of the 
remaining 25 percent Block Grant funds, 75 percent must be used 
for early childhood development and before- and after-school 
services; 20 percent must be used for improvement in the 
quality of child care services; and the remaining 5 percent may 
be used for any of the stated purposes.

                      Social Services Block Grant

    The bill includes $2,800,000,000, the same as the budget 
request and the full amount authorized for fiscal year 1996. 
The 1995 appropriation was the same.
    The social services block grant program is designed to 
encourage each State, as far as practicable, to furnish a 
variety of social services best suited to the needs of 
individuals residing within the State. It is intended to: 
prevent, reduce or eliminate dependency; achieve or maintain 
self-sufficiency; prevent neglect, abuse or exploitation of 
children and adults; prevent or reduce inappropriate 
institutional care; and secure admission or referral for 
institutional care when other forms of care are not 
appropriate.
    Social services block grant funds are distributed to the 
territories in the same ratio such funds were allocated to 
territories in 1981. The remainder of the appropriation is 
distributed to the States and the District of Columbia 
according to relative State population.

                children and families services programs

    The bill includes $4,543,343,000, a reduction of 
$332,367,000 below the 1995 amount and a reduction of 
$690,913,000 below the budget request. This account finances a 
number of programs aimed at enhancing the well-being of the 
Nation's children and families, particularly those who are 
disadvantaged or troubled.

Head Start

    The bill includes $3,397,429,000 for the Head Start program 
for fiscal year 1996, a reduction of $137,000,000 below the 
1995 amount and $537,299,000 below the budget request. Because 
of overall constraints on discretionary spending in this year's 
budget process, the Committee was unable to maintain current 
funding levels for Head Start. The reduction below 1995 is 
3.9%; this compares to a reduction for discretionary programs 
for the bill as a whole of about 13%. The Committee notes that 
the program was increased by $2 billion from fiscal year 1990 
to fiscal year 1995; this was a 128 percent increase in five 
years.
    Head Start provides comprehensive development services for 
children and their families. Intended for preschoolers from low 
income families, the program seeks to foster the development of 
children and enable them to deal more effectively with both 
their present environment and later responsibilities in school 
and community life. Head Start programs emphasize cognitive and 
language development, emotional development, physical and 
mental health, and parent involvement to enable each child to 
develop and function at his or her highest potential. At least 
ten percent of enrollment opportunities in each State are made 
available to handicapped children.
    Grants to carry out Head Start programs are awarded to 
public and private non-profit agencies. Grantees must 
contribute 20 percent of the total cost of the program. The 
Head Start Act does not include a formula for the allotment of 
funds to grantees; however, it does require minimum State 
allocations. The Act requires 87 percent of Head Start's 
appropriation to be distributed among States based on: (1) the 
relative number of poor children; and (2) the number of 
recipients of Aid to Families with Dependent Children in each 
State as compared to all States. In addition, grants, 
cooperative agreements and contracts are awarded in the areas 
of research, demonstration, technical assistance and evaluation 
from the remaining 13 percent.
    There has been much concern expressed that the program has 
had difficulty in properly managing and programming the huge 
increase in funding over the past several years; local grantees 
in many cases have been hard pressed to find qualified teachers 
and decent facilities to accommodate increased enrollment.
    Despite the fact that the program is 30 years old, rigorous 
evaluation of it has been minimal. The evaluations that do 
exist suggest that whatever academic and other gains that 
children make in the program do not last. Further, solid 
performance standards have been lacking in Head Start, although 
the Department claims to be making some progress. The 
Department was unable to tell the Committee during the hearings 
how many grantees had been terminated from the program over the 
past 30 years for poor performance.
    The number of children in the program has increased from 
541,000 in 1990 to 752,000 in 1995; the percentage increase 
(39%) is much lower, however, than the percentage increase in 
the amount appropriated. One principal reason for this is that 
an estimated (by HHS) $594 million has been spent since 1990 on 
increasing teacher salaries in the program. The average salary 
has increased by an estimated 25% since 1990. The authorizing 
legislation requires the program to spend 25% of the increase 
in the appropriation each year for ``quality improvements'', at 
least half of which must be spent on salary increases.
    The Committee notes that the ``infants and toddlers'' 
initiative (0-3 years) would actually increase under the 
Committee bill, from $106 million in 1995 to $133 million in 
1996. This is because the basic law requires that 4% of the 
appropriation be spent on this in 1996 as opposed to 3% in 
1995.
    The Committee recognizes that homeless families represent 
the fastest growing portion of the homeless population. The 
Committee also recognizes that most early childhood programs do 
not have the specialized training and outreach necessary to 
serve homeless preschoolers and their families. The Head Start 
program has supported a number of innovative and high-quality 
demonstration programs to serve rural and urban homeless 
children, at substantial start-up costs. The Committee 
recognizes that this demonstration program will expire at the 
end of 1995, and believes that allowing these slots to expire 
would squander the federal investment made in these programs. 
Therefore, the Committee urges that the $3 million currently 
used to fund slots for homeless preschoolers through the 
demonstration program be converted into permanent Head Start 
slots to serve homeless children.
    Head Start facilities.--The Committee encourages the 
Department to study the feasibility of a Head Start facilities 
demonstration program that uses federal funds to leverage 
private investment and works with nonprofit community 
development finance organizations to manage the process. If the 
Department determines that the program is feasible, then it 
should initiate the program. The Department should work with 
local nonprofit community development finance organizations 
with expertise and experience in development and finance of 
Head Start and/or other child agencies. The awarding of grants 
to local organizations would be done through a competitive 
process.

Child development associate scholarships

    The bill includes no specific funding for child development 
associate scholarships, as the President requested. The budget 
request proposes to consolidate this program with the Child 
Care and Development Block Grant. The Committee concurs with 
this recommendation. The Administration believes, and the 
Committee agrees, that the States have authority to provide 
these scholarships under the Child Care Block Grant. The States 
will provide them if there is a need.
    These scholarships are awarded to financially eligible 
individuals who are candidates for the Child Development 
Associate credential. This is used as a certification 
credential for child care workers.

Runaway and homeless youth

    The bill includes $54,107,000 for runaway and homeless 
youth activities, a reduction of $14,466,000 below the amount 
available for 1995 and a reduction of $14,465,000 below the 
budget request. The budget request proposed to consolidate 
these programs; the Committee has not done this because it is 
not authorized by law.
    The basic program, for which the bill includes $40,458,000, 
the same as the 1995 amount, is intended to help address the 
needs of runaway and homeless youth and their families through 
support of activities sponsored by State and local governments 
and private nonprofit agencies. Grants are used to develop and 
strengthen community-based facilities which are outside the law 
enforcement structure and the juvenile justice system. The 
Runaway and Homeless Youth Act mandates that funds for this 
program be allocated to each State on the basis of its youth 
population under 18 years of age in proportion to the national 
total. Runaway Youth programs have been very successful in 
reuniting runaway children with their families and preventing 
runaways which, in turn, decreases the number of high school 
dropouts, incidents of juvenile drug abuse, crime and 
incarceration.
    The Committee has provided $13,649,000 for the transitional 
living program for homeless youth, the same as the 1995 amount. 
The program was created to serve those young people who cannot 
return home. Funds are used to provide appropriate shelter and 
services for up to 18 months for youths ages 16-20 who have no 
safe available living arrangements. Services are designed to 
help youth move towards self-sufficient and independent living, 
and to prevent long-term dependency on social services. In 
addition to shelter, such services may include education, 
vocational training, basic life skills, interpersonal skills 
building, and mental and physical health care. Grants are 
available to public and private programs.
    The bill includes no funding for the drug education and 
prevention program for runaway and homeless youth. The purpose 
of this program is to reduce and prevent the illicit use of 
drugs by runaway and homeless youth. This same purpose can be 
achieved more efficiently by the States through the Federally-
funded substance abuse block grant which is funded at $1.2 
billion for 1996. The elimination of small categorical programs 
also saves Federal administrative costs, and it reduces 
bureaucratic paperwork and grant forms that must be filled out 
by the local providers.

Youth gang substance abuse

    The Committee recommends no additional funding of a youth 
gang drug education and prevention program. The purpose of this 
program is to reduce and prevent the participation of youth 
gangs in illicit drug activities. This same purpose can be 
achieved more efficiently by the States through the Federally-
funded substance abuse block grant which is funded at $1.2 
billion for 1996. Further, this program is a demonstration 
program that funds about 15 grantees. It has been operating for 
a number of years and should have been able to demonstrate what 
works and what doesn't by now. There is no justification for 
funding demonstration programs indefinitely, particularly in 
times of severe fiscal constraint.
    In addition, there are other gang-related programs funded 
in the Federal government. This includes two in the Justice 
Department and one in the Treasury Department

Child abuse

    For child abuse prevention and treatment, the Committee 
recommends $38,239,000, a reduction of $288,000 below the 1995 
level and the budget request. The total amount recommended 
includes $22,854,000 for State grants and $15,385,000 for 
discretionary projects; these amounts are the same as the 1995 
amounts. The small reduction below 1995 is accounted for by 
eliminating funding for the Advisory Board on Child Abuse and 
Neglect. The child abuse programs attempt to improve and 
increase activities at all levels of government which identify, 
prevent, and treat child abuse and neglect through State 
grants, technical assistance, research, demonstration, and 
service improvement.
    The bill continues language carried last year that 
prohibits HHS from withholding funds to States under the Child 
Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act by reason of a determination 
that a State is not in compliance with the religious exemption 
regulations. This language would expire upon the 
reauthorization of the Act.

Temporary child care/crisis nurseries

    The bill includes $9,835,000 for temporary child care for 
handicapped children and crisis nurseries. This is $2,000,000 
below the 1995 amount and the budget request. These funds 
support demonstration grant programs to help private and public 
agencies and organizations to provide temporary non-medical 
child care for handicapped children and children with chronic 
or terminal illnesses; and provide crisis nurseries and 
referral to support services for abused or neglected children 
or children at risk of abuse and neglect.

Abandoned infants assistance

    The Committee recommends $12,406,000 for the Abandoned 
Infants Assistance Act, a reduction of $2,000,000 from the 1995 
appropriation and from the budget request. The purpose of this 
program is to provide financial support to public and non-
profit private entities to develop, implement, and operate 
demonstration projects that will prevent the abandonment of 
infants and young children; identify and address their needs, 
especially those infected with AIDS; assist such children to 
reside with their natural families or in foster care, as 
appropriate; provide respite care for families and caregivers; 
and recruit and train caregivers. Grantees must establish a 
care plan and case review system for each child.

Dependent care planning and development

    The bill includes no specific funding for this activity, as 
the President requested. The budget request proposes to 
consolidate this program with the Child Care and Development 
Block Grant. The Committee concurs with this recommendation. 
The Administration believes, and the Committee agrees, that the 
States have authority to provide these activities under the 
Child Care Block Grant. The States will provide them if there 
is a need.
    This program provides 75 percent Federal matching grants 
for dependent care services, including before- and after-school 
care and local resource and referral systems providing 
information on dependent care services.

Child welfare services

    The bill includes $291,989,000 for child welfare services, 
the same as the 1995 amount and the budget request. This 
program provides grants to States to assist public welfare 
agencies establish, extend, and strengthen child welfare 
services in order to enable children to remain in their homes 
under the care of their parents, or, where that is not 
possible, to provide alternative permanent homes for them. 
Current law requires States to meet certain conditions in order 
to receive additional ``incentive'' funds. The Committee feels 
that this program should not be reduced at this time. It may 
eventually be included in a child protection block grant as 
proposed by H.R. 4 as passed earlier this year by the House.
    The bill includes $2,000,000 for child welfare training, a 
reduction of $2,398,000 below the amount available for 1995 and 
the budget request. This program provides teaching and 
traineeship grants to schools of social work to train social 
workers in the specialty of child welfare.
    The bill includes no separate funding for child welfare 
research. This program provided grants and contracts for 
projects in areas such as child welfare, child care, youth 
development, and child and family development. Research and 
demonstration activities can be centralized in the Secretary's 
office under the Assistant Secretary for Planning and 
Evaluation. That office already has an extensive research 
program; there is no need to replicate research accounts 
throughout the Department. By not funding separate research 
accounts throughout the Department, Congress can force the 
Department to carefully set research priorities and to 
coordinate all research activities that are currently scattered 
throughout the Department. These include such things as social 
services research, child welfare research, aging research, 
health services research, rural health research, health 
financing research, maternal and child health research and 
prevention research.

Adoption opportunities

    The Committee recommends $11,000,000 for adoption 
opportunities, a reduction of $2,000,000 below the 1995 amount 
and the budget request. This activity funds a national adoption 
data gathering and analysis system, including a national 
information exchange, and implements adoption training and 
technical assistance programs.

Family violence

    The Committee recommends $32,645,000 for family violence 
prevention and services, which is the same as the 1995 level 
and the budget request. This program is designed to demonstrate 
the effectiveness of assisting States in efforts to prevent 
family violence and to provide immediate shelter and related 
assistance for victims of family violence and their dependents, 
and to provide for technical assistance and training relating 
to family violence programs to State and local public agencies 
(including law enforcement agencies), nonprofit private 
organizations, and persons seeking such assistance.
    The bill includes $400,000 to continue funding of a 
domestic violence hotline that was funded in 1995, and $400,000 
to fund four model projects for youth domestic violence 
education. This is pursuant to last year's Crime Bill. These 
funds are intended to be awarded to grantees who have 
experience and a proven track record in providing these types 
of services, and are not to be used for lobbying, advocacy, or 
public relations. The President has requested an additional 
$104,500,000 to fund other programs under the Crime Bill; the 
Committee does not recommend funding for these programs. Most, 
if not all, of these additional activities, including community 
schools, community economic partnership, runaway youth 
programs, and battered women's shelters, can be funded under 
other Federal programs. Throughout the bill, the Committee has 
endeavored to eliminate small programs that duplicate 
authorities in larger state and block grants. In this case, the 
Committee has provided current level funding for family 
violence programs; HHS block grants dealing with preventive 
health, substance abuse, and mental health; and injury control 
programs in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 
addition, funds for research and demonstration programs are 
available in the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), 
the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research and Special 
Programs of National Significance in the Maternal and Child 
Health Block Grant (MCH). The Committee has provided increased 
funding for NIMH.

Social services research

    The bill includes no separate funding for social services 
research. These funds have supported research, demonstration, 
evaluation and dissemination activities. This includes such 
things as welfare reform, youth services and child support 
enforcement. Demonstrations related to the AFDC program have 
also been carried out.
    Research and demonstration activities can be centralized in 
the Secretary's office under the Assistant Secretary for 
Planning and Evaluation. That office already has an extensive 
research program; there is no need to replicate research 
accounts throughout the Department. By not funding separate 
research accounts throughout the Department, Congress can force 
the Department to carefully set research priorities and to 
coordinate all research activities that are currently scattered 
throughout the Department. These include such things as social 
services research, child welfare research, aging research, 
health services research, rural health research, health 
financing research, maternal and child health research and 
prevention research.

Community-based resource centers

    The bill includes no funding for this program for 1996. The 
1995 amount was $38,734,000. This program as it now exists was 
created in FY 1995 through a change in the authorizing 
legislation. It combined several programs into one, including 
family resource centers, family support centers, child abuse 
challenge grants and emergency child abuse activities related 
to substance abuse.
    According to the Department, the purpose of the program is 
``to assist each State in implementing/enhancing a statewide 
system of family resource services through innovative funding 
mechanisms . . . and to support . . . community-based child 
abuse and neglect prevention activities . . .''. It would seem 
that the States should be doing these things on their own 
without financial assistance from the Federal government. It 
would just be sound management on the part of the States to 
pull together and coordinate various social service programs 
for families. Further, child abuse activities are already 
funded under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
grants to States.
    This is another example of a small Federal program that 
requires Federal administrative costs and paperwork that should 
be accomplished by the States themselves. The House-passed 
welfare reform bill (H.R. 4) would roll this program into a 
much larger child protection block grant.

Developmental disabilities

    For programs authorized by the Developmental Disabilities 
Assistance Act, the Committee recommends $77,156,000, a 
reduction of $44,694,000 below the amount available for fiscal 
year 1995 and below the budget request. The total includes 
$40,438,000 for allotments to the States to fund State 
Councils. These Councils engage in such activities as planning, 
policy analysis, demonstrations, training, outreach, 
interagency coordination, and public education. They do not 
provide direct services to the developmentally-disabled 
population. At a time of severe fiscal constraint, these are 
not the highest priority activities for the Federal government 
to be funding. The Councils are State agencies staffed with 
State employees. It would seem reasonable that the States 
should pick up part of the cost of operating them.
    In addition, $26,718,000 will be available to the States to 
be used for operating an advocacy program to protect the rights 
of the developmentally disabled. This is the same as the 1995 
level.
    The bill includes no funding for special discretionary 
projects for training, technical assistance and demonstration. 
These activities are clearly not a high priority in times of 
severe fiscal constraint, and they do not provide any direct 
services to developmentally-disabled people.
    The Committee approves a total of $10,000,000 for grants to 
university affiliated facilities and satellite centers to 
support the cost of administering and operating demonstration 
facilities and interdisciplinary training programs. These are 
discretionary grants to public and private non-profit agencies 
affiliated with a university. These grants provide basic 
operational and administrative core support for these agencies. 
In addition, these funds support interdisciplinary training, 
community services, technical assistance to State agencies and 
information dissemination. Funding has been reduced by 47% from 
the 1995 level. The States could certainly pick up part of the 
funding for this program; there is no reason for the Federal 
government to pay the entire cost. Some of these activities can 
also be funded in the Vocational Rehabilitation program in the 
Department of Education.

Native American programs

    The bill includes $35,000,000, a reduction of $3,461,000 
below the 1995 level and the amount requested in the budget. 
The Administration for Native Americans assists Indian Tribes 
and Native American organizations to plan and implement their 
own long-term strategies for social and economic development. 
In promoting social and economic self-sufficiency, this 
organization provides financial assistance through direct 
grants for individual projects, training and technical 
assistance, and research and demonstration programs.

Community Services Block Grant

    The bill includes $428,604,000 for Community Services 
activities, which is $29,029,000 below the 1995 level and 
$11,352,000 over the budget request.
    For the State Block Grant, the bill includes $389,600,000, 
which is the same as the 1995 level and $1,900,000 below the 
budget request. This program provides grants to States for 
services to meet employment, housing, nutrition, energy, 
emergency services, and health needs of low-income people. By 
law, 90% of these funds are passed directly through to local 
community action agencies which have previously received block 
grant funds.
    The bill includes no specific funding for community 
services grants for the homeless. These funds support homeless 
individuals to enable them to move out of poverty and meet 
their social and maintenance needs. The Committee believes that 
exactly the same activities can be, and are being, funded 
through the State block grant. The local community action 
agencies can certainly provide all necessary services to 
homeless people; there is no need for a separate categorical 
program with its own grant application, rules and regulations 
and Federal staff.
    The bill includes $23,733,000 for community economic 
development grants, which is the same as the 1995 level. These 
activities provide assistance to private, locally-initiated 
community development corporations which sponsor enterprises 
providing employment, training and business development 
opportunities for low-income residents. The bill also includes 
$3,271,000 for rural community facilities, the same as the 1995 
level. These grants are provided to multi-state, regional, 
private nonprofit organizations to provide training and 
technical assistance to small, rural communities in meeting 
their community facilities needs. The Committee believes that 
these two activities would not be done by local community 
action agencies.
    The bill includes $12,000,000 for the National Youth Sports 
Program, which is the same as the 1995 level. These funds are 
made available to a private, non-profit organization to provide 
recreational activities for low-income youth, primarily in the 
summer months. College and university athletic facilities are 
employed in the program.
    The bill provides no funding for the Community Food and 
Nutrition program, which was funded at $8,676,000 in 1995. The 
program does not provide any direct feeding services. It 
provides grants to public and private agencies to coordinate 
existing food assistance programs, to identify sponsors of 
child nutrition programs and attempt to initiate new programs 
and to do advocacy work at the State and local levels. These 
are activities that could just as easily and probably more 
appropriately be funded by the States and local governments. It 
is important to try to eliminate these kinds of small 
categorical Federal funding streams, each with its own set of 
rules and regulations, grant applications and Federal staff.

Program direction

    The Committee has approved $150,933,000 for program 
direction expenses of the Administration for Children and 
Families, a reduction of $12,238,000 below the 1995 level and 
$23,050,000 below the budget request. This represents a 7.5% 
reduction below the 1995 level.

Electronic benefit transfer (EBT) task force

    The bill includes the budget request of $2,000,000 for this 
new activity. The Administration has proposed a small temporary 
interagency team to oversee the implementation of a nationwide 
EBT program for Federal cash benefit programs. This is the 
result of a National Performance Review recommendation. In FY 
1996, the Agriculture, Health and Human Services, and Treasury 
Departments, and the Social Security Administration are 
scheduled to participate and provide funding.

                    family preservation and support

    The bill includes $225,000,000 for Family Support and 
Preservation, an increase of $75,000,000 over the 1995 amount, 
and the same as the request. This capped entitlement program 
established in 1994 provides grants to States to develop and 
expand innovative child welfare services including family 
preservation, family reunification, and community-based family 
support services for families at-risk or in crisis.

       payments to states for foster care and adoption assistance

    The bill includes $4,307,842,000 for Payments to States for 
Foster Care and Adoption Assistance, an increase of 
$710,471,000 over the 1995 and the same as the budget request.
    The amount includes $3,749,825,000 for the Foster Care 
program, which provides maintenance payments for children who 
must live outside their homes. This is an increase of 
$621,802,000 above the 1995 appropriation, and the same as the 
budget request. The appropriation for Foster Care is sufficient 
to fund estimated costs under current law, and is based on an 
estimated average of 272,900 children per month, an increase of 
16,500 over the 1995 monthly average.
    The total also includes $488,017,000 for Adoption 
Assistance, which represents an increase of $88,669,000 over 
the 1995 appropriation and the same funding level as the 
request. This program provides an alternative to long, 
inappropriate stays in foster care by helping to develop 
permanent placements with families. In 1996, all states and the 
District of Columbia are expected to participate in this 
program. The 1996 amount reflects increased State expenditures 
and continued growth in the number of assisted children to 
nearly 118,800 a month, an increase of 16,300 over the 1995 
monthly average.
    The Committee has included $70,000,000 for the Independent 
Living program, the same as the 1995 funding level and the 
budget request. This program provides services to foster 
children age 16 or older to help assist them make the 
transition to independent living by helping them earn a high 
school diploma or receive vocational training; receive training 
in daily living skills such as budgeting, locating housing, 
career planning and job finding; or otherwise make the 
transition to independent living. Funds are awarded to States 
in the form of grants. Each State is eligible to receive a 
proportion of the funds appropriated that is equal to the 
State's proportion of the national total of foster care 
children receiving maintenance payments under the title IV-E 
Foster Care program.

                        Administration on Aging

                        aging services programs

    For programs administered by the Administration on Aging, 
the Committee recommends a total of $778,246,000, which is 
$97,849,000 below the 1995 level and $118,902,000 below the 
budget request. This account finances all programs under the 
Older Americans Act, with the exception of the Community 
Services Employment Program under title V, which is 
administered by the Department of Labor.

Supportive services and centers

    The Committee has included $291,375,000 for support 
services and centers. The amount provided is $15,336,000 below 
the 1995 level and the budget request. Funds for this program 
are awarded to each State with an approved State plan. The 
formula under title III of the Older Americans Act mandates 
that no State be allotted less than the total amount allotted 
to it in fiscal year 1987. The statute also requires that 
additional funds be distributed on the basis of each State's 
proportionate share of the total age 60 and over population, 
with no State receiving less than one-half of one percent of 
the funds awarded. The funds contained in the bill will support 
coordinated, comprehensive service delivery systems at the 
local level.
    The program is reduced by 5% below the 1995 level. The bill 
as a whole is reduced by about 13% below the 1995 level for 
discretionary programs. This program is certainly not taking a 
disproportionate reduction as compared to the bill as a whole. 
A number of other service programs throughout the bill are 
being reduced as well.
    The States should pick up more of the costs in this area. 
The title XX social services block grant could also be utilized 
to fund some of the costs associated with operating senior 
centers.
    The States have the ability under the basic law to transfer 
up to 20% of funds appropriated between the senior centers 
program and the nutrition programs; this allows the State to 
concentrate its resources in the program it deems most 
critical. Many States do transfer funds into this program from 
the congregate meals program.

Ombudsman/elder abuse

    The bill includes no separate funding for the State long-
term care ombudsman activities. This separate appropriation is 
a funding stream to finance the staffing of State Offices of 
Ombudsman Services for older people. This funding is a 
relatively small portion of total funding for this purpose; 
States use funding under title III of the Older Americans Act, 
the basic senior centers and nutrition programs, and they also 
use some of their own funds. In 1993, over $37 million was 
spent for this purpose. It is not necessary to also have this 
small separate appropriation for this purpose.
    The bill includes no funding for the elder abuse prevention 
program authorized by title VII of the Older Americans Act. 
This is basically a public relations program to call attention 
to the problem of elder abuse. It would not appear to be a 
Federal responsibility to pay for this. This is certainly 
something that could be financed through the private sector 
through the use of public service ads.
    The Committee is trying to reduce the number of small 
categorical programs, all of which have separate grant 
applications, rules and regulations and Federal staff. This is 
especially true where there are other funding sources available 
to accomplish the same purpose.

Pension counseling

    The bill includes no funding for an outreach and counseling 
program authorized under section 741 of the Older Americans 
Act. This activity should be carried out by the local area 
agencies on aging with funds provided under title III of the 
Older Americans Act. There is really no justification for a 
separate small categorical program to counsel older people 
about Medigap policies, long-term care insurance, pensions, 
public assistance programs and food stamps. Information on 
these activities is available in a number of different places. 
Further, this is a State formula grant program that sends small 
amounts of money to all 50 States. A number of States receive 
as little as $10,000 a year under the formula, hardly enough to 
accomplish anything worthwhile.

Preventive health

    The bill includes no funding for preventive health services 
authorized under part F of title III of the Act. This activity 
should be carried out by the local area agencies on aging with 
funds provided under title III. There is really no 
justification for a separate small categorical program to 
provide certain preventive health services. Further, there are 
other Federal programs that provide similar kinds of services. 
These would include the preventive health services block grant, 
the breast cancer screening and control program and the chronic 
diseases program in the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention. In addition, the private sector does some health 
screening activities as well. This would include such groups as 
the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society.

Nutrition programs

    For congregate nutrition services, the Committee includes 
$357,019,000, a reduction of $18,790,000 below the 1995 level 
and below the budget request. For home-delivered nutrition 
services, the Committee provides $89,362,000, a reduction of 
$4,703,000 below the 1995 amount and below the budget request. 
These programs are intended to address some of the difficulties 
confronting older individuals, namely: nutrition deficiencies 
due to inadequate income, lack of adequate facilities to 
prepare food, and social isolation. About 228 million meals 
will be provided either in congregate sites or through the home 
delivery program.
    These programs are reduced by 5% below the 1995 level. The 
bill as a whole is reduced by about 13% below the 1995 level 
for discretionary programs. These programs are certainly not 
taking a disproportionate reduction as compared to the bill as 
a whole. A number of other service programs throughout the bill 
are being reduced as well.
    The States should pick up more of the costs in this area. 
The title XX social services block grant could also be utilized 
to fund some of the costs associated with operating senior 
nutrition programs.
    The States have the ability under the basic law to transfer 
up to 20% of funds appropriated between the senior centers 
program and the nutrition programs; this allows the State to 
concentrate its resources in the program it deems most 
critical.
    The nutrition programs also collect substantial sums each 
year in voluntary contributions from participants; private 
sector funds are also contributed. In 1993, over $98 million 
was collected for the congregate nutrition program and over $72 
million for the home-delivered program. Volunteers also make a 
significant contribution to these programs.

Frail elderly services

    For frail elderly in-home services the bill includes 
$9,263,000, the same amount as the 1995 appropriation and the 
budget request. These funds will be used to assist frail older 
persons in maintaining their independence and self-sufficiency. 
By supporting the provision of services to frail older people 
in their homes, the funds will help the vulnerable elderly 
avoid institutionalization and increase their access to needed 
assistance.

Grants to Indian tribes

    The bill provides $16,057,000 for grants to Indian tribes. 
This is $845,000 below the 1995 amount and $2,345,000 below the 
budget request. This represents a 5% reduction in the program's 
funding level. Funds under this program are awarded to tribal 
organizations to be used to promote opportunities for older 
Indians, to secure and maintain independence and self-
sufficiency, and to provide transportation, nutrition, health 
screening and other services to help meet the needs of this 
population.

Research, training and special projects

    The bill provides no funding for research, training and 
special projects under title IV of the Older Americans Act. 
Funds under this program were used to support education and 
training activities for personnel working in the field of aging 
and to finance research, development, and demonstration 
projects. Examples of things funded in the past with this 
appropriation include: national resource and policy centers, a 
national aging information center, resource centers on native 
American elders, Older Americans Month activities, disaster 
assistance, dissemination, interagency agreements, workshops 
and White House Conference on Aging mini-conferences.
    Research and demonstration activities can be centralized in 
the Secretary's office under the Assistant Secretary for 
Planning and Evaluation. That office already has an extensive 
research program; there is no need to replicate research 
accounts throughout the Department. By not funding separate 
research accounts throughout the Department, Congress can force 
the Department to carefully set research priorities and to 
coordinate all research activities that are currently scattered 
throughout the Department. These include such things as social 
services research, child welfare research, aging research, 
health services research, rural health research, health 
financing research, maternal and child health research and 
prevention research.

White House Conference on Aging

    The bill includes no further funding for the White House 
Conference. The Conference took place in May of 1995. Congress 
to date has appropriated a total of $6,000,000 to carry out the 
Conference. An additional $500,000 is requested in the 
President's 1996 budget for the writing and publishing of the 
final report of the Conference. It should not be necessary to 
appropriate additional funds for this purpose; the cost should 
be absorbed within the $6,000,000 that has already been 
appropriated.

Program administration

    The bill includes $15,170,000 for program administration 
expenses of the Administration on Aging. This is $1,230,000 
below the 1995 amount and $2,229,000 below the budget request 
This is a 7.5% reduction below the 1995 level. This activity 
provides administrative and management support for all Older 
Americans Act programs administered by the Department. No 
funding is allowed for the Federal Council on Aging.

                        Office of the Secretary

                    general departmental management

    The bill includes $116,826,000 for general departmental 
management, an increase $28,460,000 over the amount for 1995 
and an increase of $30,664,000 over the budget request. The 
increases are accounted for by the transfer of several budget 
activities to this account from the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary for Health. The Committee has eliminated the 
appropriation for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Health. Also included is authority to spend $6,813,000 from the 
Medicare trust funds, $12,164,000 below the comparable 
authority granted in 1995 and $391,000 below the budget 
request. The numbers reflect the budget amendment transmitted 
as a result of the Social Security Administration becoming an 
independent agency on April 1, 1995. The Committee has reduced 
the traditional departmental management functions by 7.5% below 
the 1995 level. In addition, executive direction activities 
have been reduced by a further 7.5% for a total reduction of 
15%. This includes the Offices of the Secretary and Deputy 
Secretary and such other offices as the Assistant Secretary for 
Legislation, Intergovernmental Affairs, and Public Affairs.
    This appropriation supports those activities that are 
associated with the Secretary's roles as policy officer and 
general manager of the Department. The Office of the Secretary 
also implements Administration and Congressional directives, 
and provides assistance, direction and coordination to the 
headquarters, regions and field organizations of the 
Department. For these activities the bill provides $86,252,000. 
It also supports several small health activities that were 
formerly funded in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Health.
    The Committee is concerned that the fragmentation of 
research, demonstration and evaluation authorities is a 
significant problem for the Department and that there seems to 
be little coordination among these different authorities.
    The Committee instructs the Department to, within 30 days 
of the passage of this bill in the House of Representatives, 
provide the Committee with a listing of all research, 
demonstration and evaluation authorities and the funding levels 
provided for each in fiscal year 1995. Further, it instructs 
the Secretary to appoint a senior official of the Department to 
coordinate all Departmental research, demonstration and 
evaluation activities.
    The Committee also instructs the Department to develop and 
submit to the Committee, as part of the President's budget 
request each year, a comprehensive research, demonstration and 
evaluation budget and plan that indicates Departmental 
programmatic goals to be achieved through its research, 
demonstration and evaluation activities and how each separate 
program or activity supports these overall goals.

Adolescent family life

    The bill provides $6,698,000 for the adolescent family life 
abstinence counseling program, the same as the 1995 
appropriation and $554,000 above the President's request.

Physical fitness and sports

    The bill transfers $1,000,000 to the Office of the 
Secretary to continue operation of the President's Council on 
Physical Fitness and Sports, a decrease of $407,000 from the 
1995 comparable appropriation and $406,000 below the 
Administration request for 1996. While the Committee believes 
the Council provides valuable service to the country, some of 
its activities are widely duplicated throughout the economy and 
can be provided with non-federal support.
    The Council seeks to improve the level of physical fitness 
nationwide through professional consultation, technical 
assistance, public information, program evaluation and program 
development which is provided to school systems, government 
agencies, employee organizations, private business and 
industry, and professional organizations. The Committee notes 
that these services are also available to users from sources 
other than the President's Council.

Minority health

    The bill transfers $20,631,000 for the Office of Minority 
Health to the Office of the Secretary, the same as the 1995 
comparable appropriation and $39,000 over the President's 
budget request.
    According to the budget request, the Office of Minority 
Health works with PHS agencies and other agencies of the 
Department in a catalytic, coordinative, advocacy and policy 
development role to establish goals and coordinate other 
activities in the Department regarding disease prevention, 
health promotion, service delivery and research relating to 
disadvantaged and minority individuals; conclude interagency 
agreements to stimulate and undertake innovative projects; 
support research, demonstration, and evaluation projects, 
coordinate efforts to promote minority health programs and 
policies in the voluntary and corporate sectors, obtain 
bilingual health professionals assistance; operate a national 
minority health resource center; and develop health information 
and health promotion materials.
    The Office of Minority Health and the Office of Research on 
Minority Health, NIH are the focal point for the formulation 
and development of policy issues affecting minority health. The 
Committee commends the Offices and the Secretary for their 
leadership and commitment to improving minority health, and 
working to ensure that all Americans benefit from advances in 
biomedical research, disease prevention, and other health 
promotion quality of life initiatives under the auspices of the 
Department. The Committee expects this emphasis to continue.

Office of Research Integrity

    The bill transfers $3,858,000 for the Office of Research 
Integrity (ORI) to the Office of the Secretary. This amount is 
the same as the budget request and $5,000 below the 1995 
appropriation. The Committee has provided funding at the 
requested level to fund the investigation, prosecution and 
deterrence of scientific misconduct.
    The Nation's $12 billion investment in biomedical research 
is among its highest fiscal priorities. The Committee believes 
that the Department must have a strong investigative and 
deterrent capability in order to ensure the integrity and 
effectiveness of that investment as well as the public's 
confidence in it. The ORI is responsible for investigating 
individual allegations of waste and misconduct as well as 
ensuring institutional compliance with federal misconduct 
procedures.

Office on Women's Health

    The bill transfers $2,200,000 for the Office on Women's 
Health to the Office of the Secretary, a reduction of $362,000 
below the 1995 funding level and $352,000 below the 
Administration request. The Committee notes that each of the 
Public Health Service agencies under its jurisdiction supports 
an office or program which focuses on women's health. The 
Office on Women's Health will be elevated to the Office of the 
Secretary to advise the Secretary directly and to provide 
Department-wide coordination of programs focusing specifically 
on women.
    The AIDS epidemic is expanding increasingly and 
disproportionately into communities of color, especially in 
African American and Hispanic women and their children. The 
Committee urges the Secretary to strengthen efforts at CDC, 
NIH, HRSA, and other components of the Department to address 
this escalating AIDS problem.

Public Health Service Management

    The Committee has transferred $3,000,000 to the Office of 
the Secretary for management of the public health service, 
$15,432,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The President 
requested an increase of $134,000 for program management 
activities including $1,262,000 which was proposed under the 
new data development program. The Committee is concerned that 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health remains, and 
is likely to remain under the President's reorganization plan, 
a largely unnecessary and excessively inefficient management 
and overhead layer. The Office has failed to take serious 
action regarding budget and staff streamlining despite repeated 
instructions and assistance from previous Congresses to do so. 
In fact, the report of the Assistant Secretary regarding the 
allocation of $1.5 million in streamlining assistance provided 
by Congress last year indicates that over half--$920,000--was 
allocated for staff salaries directly contrary to the 
instructions of the House-Senate conference committee. The 
decision to allocate streamlining funding for staff salaries 
was subsequently overturned. The Committee believes that this 
significant reduction in health service management funding will 
be enough to support necessary health management activities.
    The Committee continues to be concerned about the 
disproportionately high rate of diabetes in people of color, 
especially among African Americans and Hispanics. The Committee 
is also concerned about the excessive amputations that both 
populations have suffered from the disease. The Committee 
expects the Secretary to strengthen diabetes efforts across the 
CDC, NIH, AHCPR, and other appropriate components of the 
Department. The Secretary should also determine what outreach 
and consensus development initiative might be necessary to 
address this critical health problem, and provide the Committee 
an update at next year's appropriations hearing.

                    office of the inspector general

    The bill includes $73,956,000 for the Office of the 
Inspector General, which is a reduction of $15,652,000 below 
the 1995 level and $5,981,000 below the budget request. This 
includes Federal funds of $56,333,000, together with a trust 
fund transfer of $17,623,000. The numbers reflect the budget 
amendment transmitted as a result of the Social Security 
Administration becoming an independent agency on April 1, 1995. 
The original 1996 request for the Inspector General was reduced 
by $21,789,000 as a result of SSA independence, or about a 21% 
reduction. These funds were moved to the Social Security 
Administration, Office of Inspector General.
    The Office of the Inspector General was created by law to 
protect the integrity of Departmental programs as well as the 
health and welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs. 
Through a comprehensive program of audits, investigations, 
inspections and program evaluations, the OIG attempts to reduce 
the incidence of fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement, and to 
promote economy, efficiency and effectiveness throughout the 
Department.

                        office for civil rights

    The bill includes $10,249,000, a reduction of $7,982,000 
below the 1995 level and $7,309,000 below the budget request. 
Also included is authority to transfer $3,251,000 from the 
Medicare trust funds, a reduction of $351,000 from the budget 
request and $529,000 below the 1995 amount. Total resources 
available to the Office are $13,500,000, a reduction of 
$8,511,000 below 1995. The numbers reflect the budget amendment 
transmitted as a result of the Social Security Administration 
becoming an independent agency on April 1, 1995.
    The Office for Civil Rights is responsible for enforcing 
civil rights statutes that prohibit discrimination in health 
and human services programs. OCR implements the civil rights 
laws through a compliance program designed to generate 
voluntary compliance among all HHS recipients.
    The Committee has fully funded protection and advocacy 
activities for the developmentally-disabled and the mentally 
ill elsewhere in the Department. This ensures the protection of 
legal rights for these groups.

                            policy research

    The bill includes $9,000,000, a reduction of $417,000 below 
the amount available in 1995 and $3,278,000 below the budget 
request.
    The Policy Research account, authorized by section 1110 of 
the Social Security Act, is the Department's principal source 
of policy-relevant data and research on the income sources of 
low-income populations; the impact, effectiveness, and 
distribution of benefits under existing and proposed programs; 
and other issues that cut across agency lines. The program is 
intended to analyze issues that cannot be carried out by other 
departmental research programs or under existing evaluation 
activity.

                   Title III--Department of Education

                         Education Block Grants

    The Committee is very much aware that the Committee on 
Economic and Educational Opportunities has reported out a bill 
(H.R. 1617) that would consolidate a large number of education 
programs. Current funding levels would be reduced 
substantially. These reforms would take effect in fiscal year 
1997. The Appropriations Committee therefore views fiscal year 
1996 as a transition year for current programs. This 
appropriations bill has been drafted with a view that we are 
moving toward large block grants in these areas and away from 
categorical programs. A number of smaller programs have been 
eliminated in this bill, however, funding for larger, core 
state grant programs has been maintained at as close to current 
level funding as possible. There is widespread agreement that 
the current number of education programs must be substantially 
reduced. This Committee intends to do its part in that, in 
conjunction with the efforts of the Economic and Educational 
Opportunities Committee.

                            education reform

    The bill includes $95,000,000 for Education Reform 
programs. This amount is $855,000,000 less than the 
Administration's 1996 budget request and $399,370,000 below the 
1995 amount. This appropriation account includes Goals 2000 
under the Goals 2000: Educate America Act and School-to-work 
opportunities under the School-To-Work Opportunities Act.
    The Committee specifically instructs the Department not to 
employ any other funds to carry out Goals 2000 activities which 
are currently funded or proposed to be funded by the Department 
as part of its fiscal year 1996 budget request. If the 
Department feels that such programs should be funded, they 
should do so only after full consultation with the Committee.

Goals 2000: Educate America Act: State and local education systematic 
        improvement grants

    The bill includes no funding for carrying out the State and 
local education systemic reform grant program authorized by 
title III of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. This is 
$693,500,000 below the budget request and $361,870,000 below 
the 1995 appropriation level for this activity. This formula 
grant program supports State and local efforts to engage in 
systemic education reform. The Committee is concerned that the 
rapid escalation in demand for funding for this program, as 
evidenced in the President's request, cannot be accommodated in 
the tight budgetary environment in which the Committee must 
operate. Moreover, these broad planning, policy development and 
policy advocacy programs must be of lower priority than those 
programs that directly address needs of the students in the 
classroom.

Goals 2000: Educate America Act: National programs

    The bill includes no funds for national programs, 
$46,500,000 below the budget request and the same as the 1995 
appropriation level for this activity. The purpose of these 
programs is to provide support and guidance to States and local 
school districts in their reform efforts. The Committee has 
provided no funds for these program-based assessments, 
development of standards (including ``opportunity-to-learn'' 
standards), research, and technical assistance (including 
assistance in achieving ``school finance equity''). The 
approach taken in funding this account is consistent with the 
concerns over the multiplicity of small research, demonstration 
and technical assistance activities expressed in the 
Committee's report of last year. The Committee believes that 
any activities funded under this account which have impact 
beyond the implementation of Goals 2000 can be funded by the 
Secretary from funds made available in the Office of Education 
Research and Improvement.

Goals 2000: Educate America Act: parental assistance

    The bill includes no funding for parental assistance under 
Goals 2000. This is $10,000,000 below both the budget request 
and the 1995 level. This program provides assistance for parent 
information and resource centers. With the proposed termination 
of the Goals 2000 program, this program is no longer justified.

School-to-work opportunities: State grants and local partnerships

    The bill includes $95,000,000 for State grants and local 
partnerships under the School-to-Work Opportunities Act. This 
is $105,000,000 below the budget request and $27,500,000 below 
the 1995 level. Funds support grants to States to plan school-
to-work systems to ease the transition from school to work and 
implementation grants provided competitively to States and 
local consortia to begin building such systems. Activities 
include recruiting employers, obtaining in-depth information on 
local labor markets, designing school-based and work-based 
curricula, and training school-based and work-based staff.
    At the Committee mark, this program would still receive 
nearly twice what it received in FY 1994. It remains to be seen 
whether schools can develop effective partnerships with local 
industry, labor and other institutions to assure that education 
and training dovetail with the needs of these institutions. 
More planning and seed money may not help solve this endemic 
problem. It creates an expectation and demand for services that 
the States and localities must then fund, often cutting other 
local priorities, when the federal funding is terminated. 
Congress will be under pressure to turn this program into a 
permanent subsidy rather than a demonstration.

School-to-work opportunities: National programs

    The bill includes no funds for national programs, 
$15,000,000 below the budget request and $6,875,000 below the 
1995 amount. This program allows the Department of Education to 
conduct various activities, including collecting and 
disseminating information on successful School-to-Work 
Opportunities initiatives and methods for recruiting and 
building the capacity of employers to provide work-based 
learning opportunities, and to support the work being carried 
out by States and localities. The approach taken in funding 
this account is consistent with the concerns expressed in the 
Committee's report of last year indicating ``. . . [M]uch more 
can be done to consolidate and focus Departmental research 
activities. . . . In fact, the Committee notes that more 
research funds remain outside of OERI in the budget request 
than within OERI.'' The Committee believes that any activities 
funded under this account which have broader impact should be 
funded by the Secretary from funds made available in the Office 
of Education Research and Improvement.

                    education for the disadvantaged

    The bill includes $6,014,499,000 for education for the 
disadvantaged programs. This amount is $1,426,793,000 less than 
the Administration's 1996 budget request and $1,213,617,000 
less than the 1995 appropriation. This appropriation account 
includes compensatory education programs authorized under title 
I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), 
and two migrant education programs authorized by the Higher 
Education Act of 1965 (HEA).

Grants to local educational agencies

     Of the amounts provided for Title I programs, 
$4,949,505,000 is available for basic grants to local education 
agencies and State administration. This is $317,358,000 below 
the request and $1,018,730,000 below the 1995 funding level. 
Funding for concentration grants, which targets funds to Local 
Education Agencies in Counties with high levels of 
disadvantaged children, is funded at $549,945,000, $115,192,000 
below last year and $115,192,000 below the request level. The 
Committee provided no funding under Targeted Grants which 
focuses even more funding on the most disdvantaged LEA's. This 
level is $1,000,000,000 below the request level and the same as 
last year. The Administration's proposal would have required 
changes in the underlying authorizing statute and the Committee 
was unable to reach agreement with the authorizing committee on 
the propriety of making this change in an appropriations bill. 
The Committee urges, that in this time of declining resources, 
the Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities review 
the allocation formula for this program and concentrate more 
funding on the most disadvantaged districts.
    Local school districts develop and implement their own 
programs to meet the needs of their students. About 14,000 
local school districts participate in the program, which served 
an estimated 6.2 to 6.5 million pupils in 1995.
    Financial assistance flows to school districts by formula, 
based primarily on a State's number of school-aged children 
from low-income families and its average per pupil expenditure 
for public elementary and secondary education. Within 
districts, local school officials target funds on school 
attendance areas with the greatest number or percentage of 
children from poor families.
     Funds under this account will also be used to pay the 
Federal share of State administrative costs for title I 
programs. The maximum State administration grant is equal to 1 
percent of title I local educational agency plus State agency 
grants to the State, or $400,000, whichever is greater. These 
funds are included in the grants to local educational agencies 
account, rather than being a separate line item. The Committee 
remains concerned that after spending $66.6 billion since 1980, 
the Department of Education indicates that a national 
assessment of the title I program found that:
    Pre- and post-tests administered to the same group of 
students (through the Prospectus study) show little progress 
among title I students. Comparison of similar cohorts by grade 
and poverty show that program participation does not reduce 
test score gaps for the disadvantaged students. Indeed, title I 
student scores (in all poverty cohorts) declined between the 
third and fourth grades.
    The Committee is also concerned that in this time of 
reduced funding, funds for the program are still poorly 
targeted with school districts in some of the wealthiest areas 
in America still receiving funding. The Committee 
recommendations include language to speed up the distribution 
of funding on the basis of Local Education Agency rather than 
County poverty data.
    The Committee is concerned that in title I, as in education 
generally, there is adequate information in student achievement 
to allow parents, students, educators and Congress to measure 
achievement. The Committee expects that sufficient assessments, 
meeting all recognized technical and professional standards, 
will be carried out in the new school year and thereafter to 
assure full information on student achievement. These 
assessments must assure that parents receive individual student 
data and that disaggregated data on student performance is 
available.

Capital expenses for private school students

    Capital expenses grants are authorized to pay some of the 
additional costs of providing title I services to children who 
attend nonpublic schools. As a result of a decision of the U.S. 
Supreme Court in 1985, in the case of Aguilar v. Felton, public 
school teachers or other employees can not be sent to sectarian 
nonpublic schools for the purpose of providing title I 
services. The capital expenses grants are allocated to States 
in proportion to the number of nonpublic school pupils they 
serve. Purposes for which these funds may be used include 
rental of classroom space in neutral sites (i.e., locations 
other than private or public schools), rental of mobile vans 
used for title I instruction, or transportation of nonpublic 
pupils to public schools or neutral sites. The bill includes an 
appropriation of $20,000,000 for this purpose, the same as the 
budget request and $21,434,000 below the 1995 appropriation.

Even Start

    Even Start provides demonstration grants for model programs 
of joint education of disadvantaged children, aged 1-7 years, 
who live in title I target school attendance areas, plus their 
parents who are eligible to be served under the Adult Education 
Act. These parents are not in school, are above the State's 
compulsory school attendance age limit, and have not earned a 
high school diploma (or equivalent). At appropriations levels 
above $50,000,000, Even Start funds are allocated to the 
States, generally in proportion to title I basic grants. The 
bill includes $102,024,000 for this program, $102,024,000 above 
the budget request and the same as the 1995 appropriation. 
Funding for this program is based on the decision of the 
Economic and Educational Opportunities Committee to reject the 
President's proposal to consolidate this program into a larger 
block grant and retain this program in its separate categorical 
status.

State agency programs: migrant

    The bill includes $305,475,000 for the migrant education 
program, $4,525,000 below the budget request and the same as 
the 1995 appropriation. This program supports grants to State 
agencies for the support of special educational and related 
services to children of migratory agricultural workers and 
fishermen. The purpose of this program is to provide 
supplementary academic education, remedial or compensatory 
instruction, English for limited English proficient students, 
testing, plus guidance and counseling.

State agency programs: neglected and delinquent

    For the State agency program for neglected and delinquent 
children, the bill includes $32,000,000; this is $8,000,000 
less than the budget request and $7,311,000 below the 1995 
appropriation. This program provides services to participants 
in institutions for juvenile delinquents, adult correctional 
institutions, or institutions for the neglected.

State program improvement grants

    Title I requires State educational agencies to assist local 
educational agencies in the development of program improvement 
plans. These plans are developed for schools that fail to 
produce increases in the aggregate level of achievement among 
participating pupils. The bill includes no funding for this 
program, $35,146,000 less than the budget request and 
$27,560,000 below the 1995 appropriation. There are substantial 
administrative set-asides in title I and other State and local 
funding sources that can support activities funded under this 
authority. In a time of fiscal stringency, the Committee feels 
that these multiple administrative funding streams cannot be 
sustained.

Demonstrations of Innovative Practices

    The Committee bill provides no funding for a program of 
title I demonstration grants for innovative practices. This is 
$25,146,000 below the budget request and the same as the 1995 
appropriation. Under this program, the Secretary of Education 
makes discretionary grants to test, demonstrate, develop, and 
evaluate innovative techniques for the education of 
disadvantaged children. The approach taken in not funding this 
account is consistent with the concerns expressed in the 
Committee's report of last year indicating ``. . . [M]uch more 
can be done to consolidate and focus Departmental research 
activities. . . . In fact, the Committee notes that more 
research funds remain outside of OERI in the budget request 
than within OERI.'' The Committee believes that any activities 
funded under this account which have broader impact should be 
funded by the Secretary from funds made available in the Office 
of Education Research and Improvement.

Evaluation

    The Committee provides no funding for evaluation, 
$11,000,000 less than the budget request and $3,664,000 less 
than the 1995 appropriation. Title I evaluation supports large 
scale national evaluations that examine how title I is 
contributing to improved student performance at the State, 
local education agency, and school levels; short term studies 
that document promising models; and other activities to help 
States and local education agencies implement requirements in 
the title I statute. The Committee decision to provide no 
funding for this activity is based on its concern surrounding 
having the managers of the programs supervise its evaluation. 
The Committee expects the Department to utilize its broader 
evaluation authorities to continue the evaluation of the title 
I program.

Migrant education: high school equivalency program and college 
        assistance migrant program

    The bill includes no funding for two demonstration migrant 
education programs; the migrant high school equivalency program 
(HEP) and the college assistance migrant program (CAMP). This 
funding level is the same as the request and $10,292,000 below 
the FY `95 level. According to the Administration, these two 
demonstration programs have long since accomplished their goals 
of demonstrating techniques to assist disadvantaged youth in 
completing high school equivalency and effectively competing 
for placement in and completing college. Several less expensive 
programs are available to continue these activities.

                               impact aid

    The bill includes $645,000,000 for Impact Aid programs, an 
increase of $26,000,000 over the budget request and $83,000,000 
below the 1995 appropriation. This appropriation account 
supports grants to school districts affected by federal 
activities and is authorized under title VIII of the Elementary 
and Secondary Education Act. During the current school year, 
payments are being made to approximately 2700 school districts 
on behalf of approximately 1.8 million eligible children.

Basic support payments

    The bill includes $550,000,000 for basic support payments. 
This amount is the same as the budget request and $81,707,000 
less than the 1995 appropriation. These payments compensate 
school districts for lost tax revenue and are made on behalf of 
``federally connected'' children, such as children of members 
of the uniformed services who live on federal property.

Payments for children with disabilities

    The bill provides $40,000,000 in payments for children with 
disabilities. This amount is the same as the budget request and 
the 1995 appropriation. These payments compensate school 
districts for increased costs of servicing ``federally 
connected'' children with disabilities.

Payments for heavily impacted districts

    The bill includes $50,000,000 for payments for heavily 
impacted districts. This amount is $30,000,000 above the budget 
request and $10,000,000 above the 1995 appropriation. These 
payments help heavily impacted districts to bring their per-
pupil spending to levels comparable to other school districts 
in their States.

Facilities maintenance

    The bill does not provide funding for facilities 
maintenance. These funds are for maintaining certain school 
facilities owned by the Department of Education.

Payments for increases in military dependents

    The bill does not provide funding for increases in military 
dependents. This amount is the same as the budget request and 
$2,000,000 than the 1995 appropriation. These funds provide a 
one-time payment to school districts experiencing large 
increases of ``federally connected'' children as a result of 
military realignment and draw-down overseas.

Construction

    The bill includes $5,000,000 for construction. This amount 
is the same as the budget request and $5,000,000 more than the 
1995 appropriation. These funds provide payments to eligible 
school districts for building and renovating school facilities.

Payments for Federal property

    The bill provides no funds for payments for federal 
property. This amount is the same as the budget request and 
$16,293,000 less than the 1995 appropriation. These funds 
compensate eligible school districts for lost tax revenue as 
the result of the federal acquisition of real property since 
1938.

                      school improvement programs

    The bill includes $842,000,000 for school improvement 
programs. This amount is $712,331,000 below the 
Administration's 1996 budget request and $486,037,000 below the 
1995 appropriation. This appropriation account includes the 
following programs: Eisenhower professional development state 
grants (part b, title II of ESEA); innovative education program 
strategies state grants (title VI, ESEA); safe and drug-free 
schools and communities (title IV of ESEA); education 
infrastructure (title XII, ESEA); inexpensive book distribution 
(part E, title X, ESEA); arts in education (part D, title X, 
ESEA); law-related education (section 10602, ESEA); Christa 
McAuliffe fellowships (part C, subpart 2, title V, HEA); magnet 
schools assistance (part A, title V of ESEA); education 
programs for homeless children and youth under the Stewart B. 
McKinney Homeless Assistance Act; women's educational equity 
programs (part B, title V of ESEA); training and advisory 
services under title IV-A of the Civil Rights Act; dropout 
prevention demonstration programs (part C, title V of ESEA); 
Ellender fellowships (part G, title X, ESEA); Education for 
Native Hawaiians (part B, title IX, ESEA); foreign languages 
assistance (part B, title VII of ESEA); training in early 
childhood education and violence counseling (part F, title V, 
HEA); charter schools (part C, title X, ESEA) and comprehensive 
regional assistance centers (part A, title XIII, ESEA).

Consolidated funding for professional development and program 
        innovation

    The Committee recommends a consolidated funding for 
professional development and program innovation of 
$500,000,000. This level is $98,548,000 below last year's level 
and $235,000,000 below the President's request. This 
consolidated funding is proposed in anticipation of the passage 
of an Education Reform Block Grant, currently under 
consideration by the Economic and Educational Opportunities 
Committee.

Professional development and program innovation: Eisenhower 
        professional development State grants

    The Committee recommends no funding for State grants under 
the Eisenhower professional development State grants, 
$735,000,000 below the budget request and $251,298,000 below 
the 1995 level. These funds are used to address teacher 
training needs in all of the core academic subject areas. This 
program provides funds to States by formula for use by State 
and local educational agencies, and State higher education 
agencies for sustained, intensive professional development 
opportunities. Funding for this activity is assumed in the 
consolidated funding recommended above.

Professional development and program innovation: innovative education 
        program strategies State grants

    The bill includes no funding for innovate education program 
strategies State grants. This is the same as the budget request 
and $347,250,000 below the 1995 amount. The program makes 
grants to state and local educational agencies for activities 
intended to help meet the National Education Goals and assist 
in the reform of elementary and secondary education. Local 
educational agencies can use program funds for acquiring 
educational materials, supporting educational reform projects 
and magnet schools, and reducing illiteracy among children and 
adults. Funding for this activity is assumed in the 
consolidated funding recommended above.

Safe and drug-free schools and communities: State grants

    The Committee bill includes $200,000,000 for the State 
grants program of the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and 
Communities. This is $265,000,000 below the budget request and 
$240,981,000 less than the amount provided for 1995. The 
program supports comprehensive, integrated approaches to drug 
and violence prevention. Local educational agencies must use 
their funds to implement a drug and violence prevention program 
for students and employees. The Committee believes that State 
and local activities should be carried out under other 
authorities such as the Substance Abuse Block Grant, the 
Preventive Health Block Grant and the Social Services Block 
Grant with a total funding recommended by the Committee of $4.2 
billion. The Committee is also concerned that the broad, 
unfocused distribution of the funds--98% of all districts 
receive funds--dissipates the effectiveness of this program. 
After spending over $3 billion since 1987, statistics indicate 
that the fear of marijuana use is declining among young people 
and substance abuse is increasing.

Safe and drug-free schools and communities: national programs

    For the national programs under the Safe and Drug-Free 
Schools and Communities Act, the bill provides no funding, 
which is $35,000,000 below the budget request and $25,000,000 
less than the 1995 amount. Under this program, the Secretary of 
Education administers a variety of activities to prevent the 
illegal use of drugs and violence among, and promote safety and 
discipline for, students at all educational levels, preschool 
through postsecondary. The Committee remains concerned by the 
multiplicity of small, program oriented research, demonstration 
and evaluation programs which increase the likelihood for 
duplication and self-serving evaluations. The Committee 
believes that any activities funded under this account which 
have broader impact, or high priority should be funded by the 
Secretary from funds made available in the Office of Education 
Research.

Education infrastructure

    The bill provides for no funding for the education 
infrastructure program. This is $35,000,000 below the budget 
request and the same as the 1995 amount. The purpose of this 
program is to assist local educational agencies to repair, 
renovate, or rebuild school facilities. The Administration 
indicated in its original submission that expanding the 
authority of the College Construction Loan Assurance 
Association would ``. . . provide the most cost-effective 
construction assistance to the largest number of LEA's.''

Inexpensive book distribution (Reading Is Fundamental)

    The bill provides $9,000,000 for the inexpensive book 
distribution program. This is $1,300,000 below both the budget 
request and the 1995 appropriation. The purpose of this program 
is to buy inexpensive books, offer them through local community 
programs to children from low-income families, and motivate 
children to read. Federal funds provide for up to 75 percent of 
the costs of the books. This program annually provides an 
estimated 7.6 million books to 2.4 million children nationwide.

Arts in education

    The bill provides $9,000,000 for the arts in education 
program. This is $1,000,000 less than the budget request and 
$1,500,000 less than the 1995 appropriation. The purpose of 
this program is to support arts programs in elementary and 
secondary education and to conduct demonstration programs for 
the involvement of handicapped persons in the arts.

Law-related education

    The bill provides no funding for the law-related education 
program. This is the same as the budget request and $4,500,000 
less than the 1995 amount. The purpose of this program is to 
provide students with information and skills concerning the 
law, the legal process and system, and the fundamental values 
on which these are based. Funds support model classroom 
programs and techniques relevant to law-related education. 
Competitive grants are awarded to State agencies and local 
educational agencies or other public or private agencies, 
organizations, or institutions. This program, in existence 
since the early 1980's has developed programs, trained teachers 
and supported the institutionalized programs. According to the 
Administration, these programs should now be able to continue 
without further federal assistance.

Christa McAuliffe fellowships

    The Committee recommends no funding for the Christa 
McAuliffe fellowships. This is the same as the budget request 
and $1,946,000 less than the 1995 amount. This program provides 
1-year fellowships to experienced, outstanding elementary and 
secondary school teachers. The fellowships may be used for 
sabbaticals; consultation with other schools and school 
systems; and development of innovative programs, partnerships 
between schools and businesses, technology programs, and model 
staff development programs.

Magnet schools assistance

    The bill includes $95,000,000 for the magnet schools 
assistance program, $16,519,000 below both the budget request 
and the 1995 level. The magnet schools assistance program 
awards competitive grants to local educational agencies for use 
in establishing or operating magnet schools that are part of a 
desegregation plan approved by a court or by the Department of 
Education's Office for Civil Rights. A magnet school is defined 
by the statute as ``a school or education center that offers a 
special curriculum capable of attracting substantial numbers of 
students of different racial backgrounds.'' A funding priority 
is given to local educational agencies that have not 
participated during the most recent funding cycle. For 1995, 55 
districts were supported in the first year of a 2-year funding 
cycle.

Education for homeless children and youth

    For the education of homeless children and youth program, 
authorized by section 722 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
Assistance Act, the Committee recommends $23,000,000. This is 
$7,000,000 less than the budget request and $5,811,000 less 
than the 1995 appropriation. Grants are allocated to States in 
proportion to the total that each State receives under the 
title 1 program. For local grants, at least 50 percent must be 
used for direct services to homeless children and youth, 
including tutoring or remedial or other educational services.

Women's educational equity

    The bill contains no funding for the women's educational 
equity program, $4,000,000 below the budget request and 
$3,967,000 below the 1995 amount. This program promotes 
educational equity for women and girls through the support of 
national, State, and other projects. Equality is encouraged 
through the development and dissemination of model educational 
programs and materials, as well as through guidance and 
counseling activities, preservice and inservice training for 
educators, and courses for underemployed and unemployed women. 
This very small program, in existence since 1974, supports only 
32 grants at approximately $100,000 per year. This program has 
adopted no indicators of success after 20 years of existence 
and, given its size, can have little impact.

Training and advisory services

    The bill includes no funding for training and advisory 
services authorized by title IV-A of the Civil Rights Act. This 
is $14,000,000 below the budget request and $21,412,000 below 
the 1995 amount. Title IV-A authorizes technical assistance and 
training services for local educational agencies to address 
problems associated with desegregation on the basis of race, 
sex, or national origin. Competitive awards are made to civil 
rights units within State educational agencies and to regional 
desegregation assistance centers.

Dropout prevention demonstrations

    The bill provides no funding for dropout prevention 
demonstrations; this is the same as the budget request and 
$12,000,000 below the 1995 level. This program provides 
discretionary grants to local educational agencies, community-
based organizations, and educational partnerships. These grants 
are for projects designed to reduce the number of children who 
do not complete their elementary and secondary education. Such 
programs may include identification, prevention, outreach, or 
reentry projects for dropouts and potential dropouts, as well 
as activities to coordinate community resources, evaluate 
programs, and conduct related studies. According to the 
Administration, these demonstration programs have identified 
strategies that can be used to combat the dropout problem. 
``Continuation of this program--which under reauthorization, 
has evolved into a program of direct, noncompetitive assistance 
to incumbent grantees, rather than a demonstration program--is 
no longer justified,'' according to the Administration.

Ellender Fellowships/Close Up

    The bill includes no funding for the Ellender fellowship 
program, the same as the budget proposal and $3,000,000 less 
than the 1995 amount. The program supports the Close Up 
Foundation of Washington, D.C., to carry out its program to 
increase the understanding of the Federal Government by 
providing fellowships to disadvantaged secondary school 
students, secondary school teachers, economically disadvantaged 
older Americans, and recent immigrants. Fellowship recipients 
receive practical experience in the activities of the 
legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the Federal 
Government. Evaluations of the program indicate that there are 
several other programs carrying out similar programs without 
federal assistance and that the incumbent grantee should be 
able to continue activities without continuing federal support.

Education for Native Hawaiians

    The bill includes no funding for education for native 
Hawaiians, $9,000,000 below the budget request and $9,000,000 
less than the 1995 amount. A number of programs limited to 
Native Hawaiians are supported with these funds, including a 
model curriculum project, family-based education centers, 
postsecondary education fellowships, gifted and talented 
education projects, and special education projects for disabled 
pupils. The Administration, in its original request, indicated 
that ``Native Hawaiians, to the extent that they meet 
eligibility criteria that are applied to all citizens, are 
already eligible for Department of Education funded services. . 
. .''

Foreign language assistance

    The bill provides no funding for the foreign language 
assistance program, $10,912,000 less than both the budget 
request and the 1995 amount. This program provides formula 
grants to State educational agencies. States use funds to 
support model programs in local educational agencies for the 
improvement or expansion of foreign language instruction for 
students. Programs must be designed at the local level and 
represent a variety of alternative and innovative instructional 
methods. Foreign languages are limited to those that have been 
deemed critical by the Secretary; these currently include 
Chinese, Japanese, and Russian.

Training in early childhood education and violence counseling

    The bill includes no funding for training in early 
childhood education and violence counseling, $9,600,000 below 
the budget request. This program was not funded in 1995. This 
program, first authorized by the Higher Education Amendments of 
1992, supports the training of individuals for careers in early 
childhood development and for careers in counseling young 
children affected by violence and the adults who work with 
them. Funds are awarded to higher education institutions.

Charter schools

    The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for support of charter 
schools, $14,000,000 below the budget request and the same as 
the 1995 amount. Charter schools are developed and administered 
by individuals or groups of individuals which may include 
teachers, administrators, and parents. These groups enter into 
charters for operation of their schools which must be granted 
exemptions from State and local rules that limit flexibility in 
school operation and management. Under this program, grants are 
made to State educational agencies in States that have charter 
school laws; the State educational agencies will in turn make 
subgrants to authorized public chartering agencies in 
partnerships with developers of charter schools. Grants are 
limited to 3 years, with no more than 18 months devoted to 
local planning.

Technical assistance for improving ESEA programs: comprehensive 
        regional assistance centers

    The Committee recommends no funding for comprehensive 
regional assistance centers, $55,000,000 below the budget 
request and $29,641,000 below the 1995 amount. The program 
supports the consolidation of 7 former technical assistance 
programs that funded 48 technical assistance centers into a 
program of 15 comprehensive regional technical assistance 
centers for improving ESEA programs.

                    violent crime reduction program

    The bill includes no funding for the violent crime 
reduction program authorized by section D, title III of the 
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 and 
funded by the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund. This is 
$31,000,000 below the budget request and the same as the 1995 
amount. This program supports competitive grants to local 
educational agencies and community based organizations to 
improve the academic and social development of at-risk students 
living in high-poverty and high-crime areas.

                   BILINGUAL AND IMMIGRANT EDUCATION

    The bill includes $103,000,000 for bilingual and immigrant 
education programs. This amount is $197,000,000 below the 
Administration's 1996 budget request and $103,700,000 less than 
the 1995 appropriation. This account supports bilingual 
education programs authorized by section A, title VII of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the immigrant 
education program authorized by section C, title VII of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Bilingual education: instructional services

    The bill provides $53,000,000 for instructional services, 
$102,690,000 below the budget request and $64,190,000 below the 
1995 amount. This program provides assistance through 
competitive grants to schools districts to help ensure that the 
limited English proficient students learn English.

Bilingual education: support services

    The bill includes no funding for support services, 
$15,330,000 below the budget request and $14,330,000 below the 
1995 appropriation. These funds provide discretionary grants to 
States to support data collection and reporting on the 
population of limited English proficient persons and the 
educational services available to them, planning, development, 
review and evaluation of bilingual education programs, and 
provision of technical assistance and student assessment 
activities. These funds also provide for the operation of a 
national clearinghouse on bilingual education and studies and 
evaluations designed to provide information for policy-makers 
and program administrators.

Bilingual education: professional development

    The bill includes no funding for the bilingual education 
professional development program. This is $28,980,000 below the 
budget request and $25,180,000 below the 1995 appropriation. 
This program is intended to increase the number of trained 
bilingual education teachers and to strengthen the skills of 
current teachers providing instruction for limited english 
proficient children.

Immigrant education

    The bill includes $50,000,000 for immigrant education, 
$50,000,000 below the budget request and the same as the 1995 
level. The program provides grants to States with school 
districts that enroll substantial numbers of immigrant 
children. Awards are used to help cover the cost of providing 
supplemental educational services to these students.

                           SPECIAL EDUCATION

    The bill includes $3,092,491,000 for programs for children 
with disabilities. This funding level is $249,635,000 below the 
Administration's 1996 budget request and $160,355,000 below the 
1995 appropriation. In Special Education, as in many other 
programs, the Committee sought to fund the core activity, in 
this case, grants to states, at or above last year's levels. 
Smaller, duplicative and expensive categorical programs whose 
missions could be accomplished by states, using state and 
federal resources, were not funded.

IDEA grants for special education

    The bill provides no funding for the proposed State grants 
for special education, which is $2,772,460,000 under the budget 
request and the same as the 1995 amount. The proposed grants to 
States would assist States in educating children with 
disabilities and providing early intervention services to 
infants and toddlers with disabilities.

IDEA grants to States

    The bill provides $2,323,837,000 for grants to States, 
which is $2,323,837,000 above the budget request and $922,000 
above the 1995 level.

Preschool grants

    The bill provides $360,409,000 for preschool grants, 
$360,409,000 above the budget request and $144,000 above the 
1995 level.

Grants for infants and families

    The bill provides $315,754,000 for grants for infants and 
families, $315,754,000 above the budget request and $122,000 
above the 1995 level.

Program support and improvement

    The bill provides no funding for the President's proposed 
program support and improvement, $254,034,000 below the budget 
request and the same as the 1995 amount. The proposal by the 
President includes support for the following activities: 
research and demonstrations, technical assistance and systems 
change, professional development, parent training, and 
technology development and support.

Deaf-blindness

    The bill includes $12,832,000 for deaf-blindness programs, 
which is $12,832,000 above the budget request and the same as 
the 1995 appropriation. Deaf-blind project funds are used to 
support regional centers serving deaf-blind infants, toddlers, 
children and youth, and for technical assistance grants and 
model demonstration projects for the education of deaf-blind 
infants, toddlers, children and youth.

Serious emotional disturbance

    The bill includes $4,147,000 for projects for children and 
youth with serious emotional disturbance, which is $4,147,000 
above the budget request and the same as the 1995 
appropriation. The program includes research projects and local 
school demonstration projects to improve and provide special 
education and related services to children and youth with 
serious emotional disturbance.

Severe disabilities

    The bill provides $10,030,000 for severe disabilities 
programs, which is $10,030,000 above the budget request and the 
same as the 1995 appropriation. The grants under this program 
support research, personnel training, and dissemination 
projects to meet the needs of the severely disabled.

Early childhood education

    The bill provides no funding for early childhood education 
programs, which is the same as the budget request and 
$25,167,000 below the 1995 appropriation. Grants support 
research, dissemination, demonstration, and other projects to 
improve the early education of children with disabilities. The 
Committee expects that services to infants and young children 
can be supported by the broader special education and 
developmental disability authorities funded in the bill and 
through the research, demonstration and technical assistance 
activities funded by programs administered by the Office of 
Education Research and Improvement.

Secondary and transitional services

    The bill provides $23,966,000 for secondary and 
transitional service projects, which is $23,966,000 above the 
budget request and equal to the 1995 appropriation. This 
program provides assistance to strengthen and coordinate 
services for the transition of youth with disabilities from 
secondary school to postsecondary education, employment, and 
adult life and services, and to improve secondary special 
education.

Postsecondary education

    The bill provides $8,839,000 for postsecondary education 
programs, which is $8,839,000 above the budget request and the 
same as the 1995 appropriation. This program supports four 
postsecondary institutions that provide model comprehensive 
support services to serve deaf students as well as awards for 
demonstration projects in postsecondary education for students 
with disabilities other than deafness.

Innovation and development

    The bill provides no funding for innovation and development 
projects, which is the same as the budget request and 
$20,635,000 below the 1995 appropriation. This program funds 
research and demonstration projects, student-conducted research 
in institutions of higher education, model projects to improve 
educational opportunities for children with disabilities, 
Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) information centers, and 
ombudsman model demonstration projects. There are a broad range 
of research funding sources in the Office of Educational 
Research and Improvement and, at a more basic level, in the 
National Institutes of Health. Other demonstration activities 
can be funded under broader authorities in the Department of 
Education, in the Developmental Disabilities programs of the 
Department of Health and Human Services. Given these other 
sources and the funding of State grants at above last year's 
level, the Committee cannot justify the continued funding of 
this essentially research and demonstration activity.

Media and captioning services

    The bill provides $19,142,000 for media and captioning 
services, which is $19,142,000 above the budget request and the 
same as the 1995 appropriation. This program supports the 
captioning of films, videos, and television programs for the 
deaf, recordings for the blind, and cultural experiences for 
the deaf and hard of hearing. The Committee is concerned that 
Recordings for the Blind continue its activities which helps 
assure the availability of high quality materials for this 
segment of the disabled population. It is of particular concern 
that the delay in the most recent funding cycle for Recordings 
for the Blind has resulted in a funding gap that undermines its 
ability to maintain continuous services. The Committee requests 
that the Secretary review the funding for Recordings for the 
Blind and determine whether funding can be provided to 
reimburse it for activities during the funding hiatus.

Technology applications

    The bill includes no funding for technology applications, 
which is the same as the budget request and $10,862,000 below 
the 1995 appropriation. This program provides assistance to 
advance the use of new technology, media, and materials in the 
education of students with disabilities and in the provision of 
early intervention services. The program also supports projects 
that increase access to devices and services providing 
technical assistance. The Committee has funded Educational 
Technology accounts in the Office of Educational Research and 
Improvement at above last years level and expects high priority 
activities funded under this account to be funded by this or 
other authorities.

Special studies

    The bill provides no funding for special studies, which is 
the same as the budget request and $4,160,000 below the 1995 
appropriation. This program supports data collection, 
evaluations, and special studies to assess progress in the 
implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education 
Act, examines special topics in early intervention and special 
education, and provides information on State and local program 
management. The approach taken in funding this account is 
consistent with the concerns expressed in the Committee's 
report of last year indicating ``. . .  [M]uch more can be done 
to consolidate and focus Departmental research activities . . . 
. In fact, the Committee notes that more research funds remain 
outside of OERI in the budget request than within OERI.'' The 
Committee believes that any high priority activities funded 
under this account can be funded by the Secretary from funds 
made available in the Office of Education Research and 
Improvement.

Personnel development

    The bill includes no funding for personnel development, 
which is the same as the budget request and $91,339,000 below 
the 1995 appropriation. This program provides higher education 
grants for training personnel for careers in special education, 
related services, and early intervention; special preservice 
and inservice training grants for instructing both regular 
education and special education personnel; and grants to aid 
States in meeting their personnel needs as identified in their 
comprehensive plans for personnel development. The program also 
supports personnel training grants to Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities and other minority colleges and 
universities to increase the number of minority special 
education personnel. The Committee believes that high priority 
programs funded under this program can be supported by broader 
authorities including funding for historically black 
institutions, funding for specific institutions, or the broader 
training and education reform proposals under consideration by 
the Economic and Educational Opportunities Committee.

Parent training

    This bill provides $13,535,000 for parent training programs 
authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities Education 
Act, Part D, Section 631(c) which is the same as the FY 1995 
appropriation and $13,535,000 above the request. This program 
support parent training and information centers to aid parents 
of children with disabilities.

Clearinghouses

    The bill includes no funding for clearinghouses, which is 
the same as the budget request and $2,162,000 below the 1995 
appropriation. This program funds three clearinghouses on: 
children with disabilities, postsecondary education for 
individuals with disabilities, and careers in special 
education. These clearinghouses disseminate information and 
provide technical assistance to parents, professionals and 
other interested parties; provide information on postsecondary 
programs and services for children with disabilities; and 
encourage students and professionals to seek and obtain careers 
and employment in special education and related fields. The 
Committee believes that these dissemination activities can be 
carried out by the Office of Education Research and 
Improvement.

Regional resource centers

    The bill provides no funding for regional resource centers, 
which is the same as the budget request and $7,218,000 below 
the 1995 appropriation. This program funds six centers that 
provide technical assistance to State governments and, through 
them, to localities to improve administration of Federal 
programs for students with disabilities and disseminate 
information on and encourage the replication of exemplary 
programs and practices. A national coordinating technical 
assistance center is also authorized. The Committee believes 
that these technical assistance activities, to the degree there 
is continued demand, can be carried out by the Office of 
Education Research and Improvement.

            REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

    The bill includes $2,455,760,000 for rehabilitation 
services and disability research. This amount is $1,177,000 
less than the Administration's 1996 budget request and 
$62,408,000 above the 1995 appropriation. The programs in this 
account are authorized by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the 
Helen Keller National Center Act, and the Technology-Related 
Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988.
    The Rehabilitation Act and the Helen Keller Center programs 
were reauthorized in 1992 (P.L. 102-569). The Technology-
Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act was 
authorized in 1994 (P.L. 103-218). The bill includes an 
increase in funds over the 1995 level for the title I 
vocational rehabilitation (VR) State grant program, for 
supported employment State grants, for centers for independent 
living, for client assistance State grants, and for the Helen 
Keller Center program. The bill also includes funding for 
technical assistance activities, which were not funded in 1995. 
The bill includes the merging of the special demonstration and 
supported employment programs with an overall decrease in funds 
from the 1995 level. This includes the same level of funds as 
appropriated in 1995 for all other programs. Funding for 
Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research are considered 
mandatory accounts under the Budget Enforcement Act.
    The Committee is concerned by the extent of unemployment 
among people with disabilities and urges the Department to 
provide support for employment and training assistance at the 
1996 Paralympic Games for people with disabilities. Job 
training could be made available to unemployed workers with 
disabilities in conjunction with the planning and program 
management for this event.
    The Committee is impressed by the contributions of the 
regional head injury centers in improving services for victims 
of traumatic brain injury (TBI). The Committee recommends that 
the Rehabilitation Services Administration, in conjunction with 
other Departments funding research and treatment activities 
associated with TBI, investigate ways to disseminate the 
experience of these centers through existing dissemination and 
technical assistance mechanisms.

Vocational rehabilitation grants to States

    For vocational rehabilitation State grants, the bill 
includes $2,118,834,000, $64,689,000 above the 1995 amount and 
the same as the budget request. This program supports basic 
vocational rehabilitation services through assistance to the 
States. Grants are made to States through an allocation formula 
based on population and per capita income. States in turn 
support a wide range of services designed to help persons with 
physical and mental disabilities prepare for and engage in 
gainful employment to the extent of their capabilities. 
Emphasis is placed on providing vocational rehabilitation (VR) 
services to persons with the most severe disabilities. In 1995, 
an estimated 1.36 million persons will be served, 76 percent of 
whom have severe disabilities. Of this number, an estimated 
211,000 will be rehabilitated. (Persons are defined to be 
rehabilitated if, after receiving VR services, they maintain a 
suitable rehabilitation objective, usually employment, for at 
least 60 days.)

Technical assistance to States

    The bill includes $1,000,000 for technical assistance to 
States, the same as the budget request. No funds were provided 
in 1995. This program assists State agencies improve operations 
of the VR program and the provision of services to persons with 
disabilities.

Client assistance

    The bill includes $10,119,000 for the client assistance 
program, $295,000 above the 1995 amount and the same as the 
budget request. A client assistance program is required in each 
State as a condition of receipt of a basic State grant. This 
program helps persons with disabilities overcome problems with 
the service delivery system and improve their understanding of 
services available to them under the Rehabilitation Act. Funds 
are distributed to States according to population; each State 
receives a minimum of $100,000. In 1995, an estimated 52,000 
persons will receive information and referral through the 
program and 11,000 cases will receive further assistance.

Training

     For training personnel to provide rehabilitation services 
to persons with disabilities, the bill includes $39,629,000, 
the same as both the 1995 level and the budget request. The 
program supports long-term and short-term training, in-service 
personnel training, and training of interpreters for deaf 
persons. Projects in a broad array of disciplines are funded to 
ensure that skilled personnel are available to serve the 
vocational needs of persons with disabilities. In 1995, the 
program supports about 335 grants.

Special demonstration programs

    The bill combines the special demonstration program with 
the supported employment demonstration program and includes 
$23,942,000 for the consolidated program, $6,616,000 below the 
1995 level for the two programs, and the same as the budget 
request. These programs authorize discretionary awards on a 
competitive basis to public and private organizations to 
support demonstrations, direct services, and related activities 
for persons with severe disabilities. In 1995, these programs 
support 113 projects.

Migratory workers

    For programs serving migratory workers, the bill provides 
$1,421,000, the same as both the 1995 amount and the budget 
request. This program makes comprehensive vocational 
rehabilitation services available to migrant or seasonal 
farmworkers with vocational disabilities. Projects emphasize 
outreach activities, specialized bilingual rehabilitation 
counseling, and coordination of vocational rehabilitation 
services with services from other sources. Funds are awarded 
through discretionary grants to State and local vocational 
rehabilitation agencies and to nonprofit organizations working 
in collaboration with the State vocational rehabilitation 
agency. This program supports 10 projects in 1995.

Recreational programs

    For recreational programs, the bill provides $2,596,000, 
the same as both the 1995 amount and the budget request. This 
program provides individuals with recreation and related 
activities to aid in their employment, mobility, independence, 
socialization, and community integration. Discretionary grants 
are made on a competitive basis to States, public agencies, and 
nonprofit private organizations, including institutions of 
higher education. In 1995 this program supports 38 projects.

Protection and advocacy of individual rights

     For protection and advocacy for persons with severe 
disabilities, the bill provides $7,456,000, the same as the 
1995 amount and the budget request. Grants are awarded to 
entities that have the authority to pursue legal, 
administrative, and other appropriate remedies needed to 
protect and advocate the rights of persons with severe 
disabilities. These entities must be independent of State 
vocational rehabilitation agencies. In 1995, the program 
supports 56 grants.

Projects with industry

    For projects with industry, the bill provides $22,071,000, 
the same as the 1995 amount and the budget request. This 
program is the primary Federal vehicle for promoting greater 
participation of business and industry in the rehabilitation 
process. The program provides training and experience in 
realistic work settings to persons with disabilities to prepare 
them for employment in the competitive labor market. Awards are 
made to a variety of agencies and organizations, including 
business and industrial corporations, rehabilitation 
facilities, labor organizations, trade associations, and 
foundations. This program supports 122 projects in 1995.

Supported employment State grants

     For supported employment State grants, the bill includes 
$38,152,000, which is $1,616,000 above the 1995 amount, and the 
same as the budget request. These grants assist States in 
developing collaborative programs with public agencies and 
nonprofit agencies for training and post-employment services 
leading to supported employment. In supported employment 
programs, persons with severe disabilities are given special 
supervision and assistance to enable them to perform a job. 
Funds are distributed on the basis of population, except no 
State can receive less than $300,000. In 1995, an estimated 
34,000 clients will be served and of that number, about 9,500 
will be rehabilitated.

Independent living: State grants

     For State grants for independent living, the bill includes 
$21,859,000, the same as the 1995 amount and the budget 
request. This program supports formula grants to the States to 
assist in the provision of services designed to meet the 
current and future needs of persons whose disabilities are so 
severe that they do not presently have the potential for 
employment, but who may benefit from services to enable them to 
live and function independently. Awards are made to States on 
the basis of population. In 1995, the program supports 79 
grants to general vocational rehabilitation agencies and 
vocational rehabilitation agencies for persons who are blind.

Independent Living: centers

     For centers for independent living, the bill provides 
$41,749,000, which is $1,216,000 above the 1995 amount, and the 
same as the budget request. This program supports a network of 
consumer-controlled, nonresidential, community-based private 
nonprofit centers that provide a wide range of services to help 
persons with severe disabilities live more independently in 
family and community settings. Centers provide information and 
referral services, independent living skills training, peer 
counseling, and individual and systems advocacy. Discretionary 
grants are made to State vocational rehabilitation agencies or 
other public agencies or private nonprofit organizations. In 
1995, the program supports 225 centers.

Independent living: services for older blind persons

     For independent living services for older blind 
individuals, the bill provides $8,952,000, the same as the 1995 
amount and the budget request. This program supports services 
for persons 55 years old or over whose severe visual impairment 
makes gainful employment extremely difficult to obtain, but for 
whom independent living goals are feasible. Discretionary 
grants are awarded competitively to designated State agencies. 
In 1995, the program supports 45 grantees.

Evaluation

    The bill includes $1,587,000 for program evaluation, the 
same as the 1995 amount and the budget request. These funds are 
used to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of individual 
programs authorized under the Rehabilitation Act. Contracts are 
awarded on an annual basis for studies to be conducted by 
persons not immediately involved in the administration of the 
programs authorized by the Act. In 1995, two evaluation studies 
are funded.

Helen Keller National Center

     For the Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youth 
and Adults, the bill includes $7,144,000, which is $208,000 
above the 1995 amount and the same as the budget request. These 
funds are used for the operation of the national center for 
intensive services for deaf-blind individuals and their 
families at Sands Point, New York and a network of 10 regional 
offices for referral and counseling. In addition to support for 
the national and regional staff, the Helen Keller Center 
provides seed money to State and private nonprofit affiliate 
agencies to assist them initiate programs for deaf-blind 
persons. In 1995, the program expects to serve 70 persons at 
the New York center, 2,000 persons through its regional 
representatives, and 3,400 persons through the affiliate 
agencies. The average cost of providing services at the New 
York Center in 1993 was approximately $72,200 per person.

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

    The bill includes $70,000,000 for the National Institute on 
Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), the same as the 
1995 amount and the budget request. NIDRR supports research, 
demonstration and training activities that are designed to 
maximize the employment and integration into society of 
individuals with disabilities of all ages.

Assistive technology

     For assistive technology activities, the bill provides 
$39,249,000, the same as the 1995 amount, and $1,177,000 below 
the budget request. Technology assistance activities are 
authorized under the Technology-Related Assistance for 
Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988, which was 
reauthorized in 1994. This program provides discretionary 
grants to the States to assist them in developing statewide 
programs to facilitate the provision of devices for, and 
services to, persons with disabilities. In 1995, this program 
supports 57 State grants.

                 Special Institutions for the Disabled

                 AMERICAN PRINTING HOUSE FOR THE BLIND

    The bill provides $4,000,000 for the American Printing 
House for the Blind, which is $2,680,000 below both the budget 
request and the 1995 level. The purpose of this appropriation 
is to subsidize the production of educational materials for 
legally blind persons enrolled in programs below the college 
level. The Printing House manufactures and maintains an 
extensive inventory of special materials that are distributed 
free of charge to schools and States based on the number of 
blind students in each State. The Printing House also conducts 
research and field activities to inform educators about the 
availability of materials and how to use them.
    The Committee believes that the Printing House provides a 
valuable service to local educational agencies which are 
required by federal law to provide free and appropriate 
education to all students with disabilities including those 
with sight impairment. However, the bill provides over $2.3 
billion for flexible grants to states for the education of 
individuals with disabilities. This formula grant funding may 
be used to purchase appropriate materials for educating 
visually impaired individuals including materials produced by 
the Printing House. The Committee believes that the flexible 
state grants are a more appropriate method of assisting states 
to meet the needs of all students with disabilities. Through 
the existing system of Printing House credits to states made 
available by this appropriation, all states are familiar with 
and regularly use Printing House products and services. To the 
extent that states believe Printing House materials and 
services represent the best option available to them in the 
market place and are a sufficiently high priority to merit the 
allocation of limited public resources, states will continue to 
purchase them.

               NATIONAL TECHNICAL INSTITUTE FOR THE DEAF

    The bill provides $39,737,000 for the National Technical 
Institute for the Deaf (NTID), a reduction of $3,454,000 below 
the 1995 appropriation and $3,304,000 below the request. The 
recommendation adopts the President's proposal to provide a 
consolidated appropriation for NTID but does not adopt the 
request to earmark funding for the endowment. The Committee 
believes this recommendation will provide NTID needed 
flexibility in allocating limited funding among various 
activities including operations, construction and endowment.
    The Committee notes that this recommendation was one of the 
most difficult decisions it faced and wishes to commend NTID 
for the many actions it has already taken to downsize its 
workforce, control costs, increase efficiency, and develop non-
Federal sources of support.

                          GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY

    The bill includes $72,028,000 for Gallaudet University, a 
decrease of $8,002,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the 
budget request. The recommendation adopts the President's 
proposal to provide a consolidated appropriation for the 
University rather than maintaining separate line items for 
university, pre-college, endowment and construction programs. 
The recommendation does not adopt the request to earmark 
funding for the endowment program. The Committee believes this 
consolidated funding will provide the University needed 
flexibility in allocating limited federal funding among various 
activities including university-level programs, elementary and 
secondary programs, endowment and construction.
    Gallaudet is a private, non-profit educational institution 
federally-chartered in 1864 providing elementary, secondary, 
college preparatory, undergraduate, and continuing education 
for deaf persons. In addition, the school offers graduate 
programs in fields related to deafness for deaf and hearing 
students, conducts various deafness research, and provides 
public service programs for deaf persons.

                     VOCATIONAL AND ADULT EDUCATION

    The bill includes $1,057,919,000 for vocational and adult 
education programs. This amount is $324,649,000 below the 1995 
appropriation and $610,656,000 below the 1996 budget request. 
This appropriation account includes vocational education 
programs authorized by the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and 
Applied Technology Education Act and adult education programs 
authorized by the Adult Education Act, the Stewart B. McKinney 
Homeless Assistance Act, and title VI of the National Literacy 
Act of 1991.

Vocational education state grants

    This bill includes no funds for State grants consolidation 
as proposed by the President, $1,141,088,000 below the budget 
request. No funds were provided in 1995. State grants would 
support the School-To-Work Opportunities Act and the Department 
of Labor's youth program development of developing 
infrastructure for statewide school-to-work transition systems 
for in-school and out-of-school youth. The funding formula is 
based on two age cohorts (15-19 and 20-24). While the Committee 
provides no funding for this particular consolidation approach, 
it supports the overall consolidation of these multiple, 
duplicative programs.

Vocational education basic grants

    This bill includes $700,000,000 for basic grants to States 
under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology 
Education Act, which is $272,750,000 below the 1995 amount. The 
Administration requested no funds for this program. Basic 
grants support programs that are of sufficient size, scope, and 
quality to be effective; that integrate academic and vocational 
education; and that provide equitable participation in these 
programs for special populations such as the disadvantaged and 
the disabled. Basic grants are allotted to States according to 
a formula based on State population with an adjustment based on 
State per capita income.

Community-based organizations

    For community-based organizations the bill includes no 
funds. This is the same as both the budget request and the 
amount provided in 1995. Grants are allocated to the States 
under the same formula used for basic grants. Grants fund 
collaboration among community-based organizations, public 
agencies, and businesses to provide vocational education 
services to disadvantaged youth. These services may include 
outreach programs, transitional services, prevocational 
preparation, career intern programs, special programs for the 
disadvantaged, model programs for school dropouts, and guidance 
and counseling. The President requested a rescission of all 
fiscal year 1995 funds for this program and P.L. 104-00 
rescinded $9,479,000.

Consumer and homemaking education

    For consumer and homemaking education the bill includes no 
funds, which is the same as the budget request. No funds were 
provided in 1995. This program provides formula grants to the 
States for instruction in the areas of food and nutrition, 
consumer education, family living and parenthood education, 
child development and guidance, housing, home management, and 
clothing and textiles. The President requested a rescission of 
all funds in this program for fiscal year 1995 and P.L. 104-00 
rescinded $34,409,000.

Tech-prep education

    For tech-prep education, $100,000,000 is provided, 
$8,000,000 below the 1995 amount. The Administration requested 
no funds for this program. At this level of funding, grants are 
allocated to the States under the same formula used for basic 
grants. In turn, States make grants to consortia of secondary 
and postsecondary institutions to link the last 2 years of high 
school vocational education with 2 years of additional 
vocational education after high school. Funds are used to 
develop tech-prep programs, acquire equipment for such 
programs, and obtain technical assistance from other successful 
tech-prep programs. Funding of $290,000,000 has been provided 
in this and the School-to-Work accounts in anticipation of the 
consolidation of these and other youth and adult training 
programs as reported by the Economic and Educational 
Opportunities Committee in HR 1617.

Tribally controlled postsecondary vocational institutions

    The bill includes $2,919,000 for grants for tribally 
controlled postsecondary vocational institutions, the same as 
the 1995 amount. The Administration requested no funds for this 
program. This program provides grants for the operation and 
improvement of training programs to ensure continuation and 
expansion of vocational training opportunities for Indian 
youth.

State councils on vocational education

    For State councils on vocational education no funds are 
provided, which is $8,848,000 below the 1995 amount. The 
Administration requested no funds for this program. Grants are 
allocated to the States under a modification of the formula 
used for basic grants. States must establish and maintain these 
councils in order to receive any Federal funds for vocational 
education. The councils assist in the development and 
evaluation of State vocational education plans, policies, and 
programs. States can assign the duties of the vocational 
education council to the voluntary State human resources 
investment council (HRIC) established under title VII of the 
Job Training Partnership Act and allocate State council funds 
to the HRIC. The decision not to fund this program is 
consistent with the Committee's overall policy of not funding 
bureaucratic planning and advocacy activities within state and 
local governments. The States may use their basic State grants 
to fund these councils.

National programs, research

    For national research programs, the Committee recommends 
$1,000,000, which is $5,851,000 below the 1995 amount. The 
Administration requested no funds for this program. This 
authority supports the conduct and dissemination of research in 
vocational education, and includes support for the National 
Center for Research in Vocational Education, six regional 
curriculum coordination centers, and other discretionary 
research. The Committee recognizes the value of the broad 
dissemination of quality curriculum and instructional materials 
at the state and local levels and encourages the Department to 
continue the functions of the National Network for Curriculum 
Coordination with the funds provided. The Committee intends to 
work with the Department to see that this service is 
maintained.

National programs, demonstration

    For national demonstration programs, no funds are provided, 
the same as the 1995 amount and the budget request. The 
Secretary makes competitive grants under this program, with 
priority given to the development of instructional 
telecommunications materials and demonstration centers for 
dislocated workers. Other types of projects include cooperative 
demonstration projects for corrections education and school-to-
work transition programs, and projects to establish specific 
occupational competencies in industries and trades. The 
Committee believes that high priority programs funded under 
this authority can be funded under authorities administered by 
the Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee

    For National Occupational Information Coordinating 
Committee, no funds are provided, $4,250,000 below the same 
1995 amount. The Administration requested no funds for this 
program. The National Occupational Information Coordinating 
Committee (NOICC) is authorized by the Carl D. Perkins 
Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act, Title IV, Part 
C, Section 422. The NOICC has been funded jointly with the 
Department of Labor since fiscal year 1978. NOICC funds are 
used for State Occupational Information Coordinating Committees 
(SOICCS) and for the development and delivery of information 
systems that assess current and future labor market conditions 
to communicate and coordinate activities, and provide 
administration to assist students, educators, and vocational 
education program planners. This funding decision is consistent 
with the Committee's decision to eliminate funding for 
duplicative, expensive and unnecessary advisory committees.

State activities for adult education

    For State activities authorized by the Adult Education Act, 
the Committee recommends $250,000,000, which is $2,345,000 
below the 1995 amount, and $229,487,000 below the budget 
request. These funds are used by States for programs to enable 
all adults to acquire basic literacy skills, to enable those 
who so desire to complete a secondary education, and to make 
available to adults the means to become more employable, 
productive, and responsible citizens. Grants are allotted to 
the States according to a formula whereby each receives 
$250,000 with remaining funds distributed in proportion to the 
number of persons age 16 years and older who have not completed 
a high school education. States are specifically required to 
give preference to funding programs and projects that recruit 
and serve educationally disadvantaged adults (persons 
demonstrating basic skills at or below those of students at the 
fifth grade level).

National Institute for Literacy

    For the National Institute for Literacy, the bill provides 
no funds, which is $4,869,000 below the 1995 amount. The 
Administration requested no funds for this program. The 
Institute supports research and development projects, tracks 
progress made toward national literacy goals, supports research 
fellowships, disseminates information through a national 
clearinghouse, and coordinates literacy information data from 
national and State sources. The Committee believes that high 
priority activities funded under this authority can be funded 
under broader authorities administered by the Office of 
Educational Research and Improvement.

National programs for adult education

    For national programs authorized by the Adult Education 
Act, no funds are provided, $11,000,000 less than the budget 
request and $8,769,000 less than the 1995 amount. These 
programs include evaluation, technical assistance, analyses, 
and studies of Federal and State adult education programs, as 
well as the development of new technologies in adult education 
and literacy instructional programs. These activities should 
generate new information on the nature and extent of illiteracy 
and the most effective techniques for reaching the population 
of illiterate adults. The Committee believes that high priority 
activities funded under this authority can be funded under 
broader authorities administered by the Office of Educational 
Research and Improvement.

State literacy resource centers

    For State literacy resource centers, the bill provides no 
funds, the same as the budget request and the 1995 amount. 
Authorized under the Adult Education Act, this program 
allocates funds to States or groups of States in proportion to 
their awards under the adult education State grant program. 
Funds are used to establish and maintain a network of State or 
regional centers to stimulate the coordination of services and 
enhance the capacity of State and local organizations to 
provide literacy services. P.L. 104-00 rescinded $7,787,000 
eliminating all funding for the program in fiscal 1995.

Workplace literacy partnerships

    For workplace literacy partnerships, no funds are provided, 
the same as the budget request, and $12,736,000 below the 1995 
amount. The workplace program provides discretionary 
demonstration grants for workplace-related training, including 
adult secondary education; literacy training for adults with 
limited English proficiency; updating basic skills to meet 
changing needs in the workplace; improving the competency of 
adult workers' literacy skills; and educational counseling, 
transportation, and child care. The authority to fund training 
and support activities such as those funded under workplace 
literacy partnerships also exists, and similar services are 
provided, under joint training programs authorized by the Job 
Training Partnership Act. These activities, to the degree that 
they are public responsibilities, can be funded under the state 
grant program.
    The Committee believes that there are several worthwhile 
workplace literacy programs, such as those identified in last 
year's Congressional reports on the FY 95 appropriations bills 
and encourages the Department of Education to give careful 
consideration to the directives outlined in those reports.
    The Committee also believes that the upgrading of employee 
workplace skills is more properly a function of their 
employers.

Literacy training for homeless adults

    For literacy training for homeless adults, authorized under 
section 702 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, 
the bill provides no funds, the same as the budget request and 
the 1995 amount. Under this program, the Secretary makes 
discretionary grants to the States for programs of literacy 
training and basic skills remediation for homeless persons. 
Programs must develop cooperative arrangements with other 
service agencies to provide an integrated package of services 
to support the most urgent needs of homeless adults. The 
Committee believes that high priority activities funded under 
this authority can be funded by states under their broader 
state grant programs.

Literacy programs for prisoners

    For literacy programs for prisoners, authorized under title 
VI of the National Literacy Act, the bill provides $4,000,000, 
$1,100,000 below the 1995 amount. The Administration requested 
no funds for this program. The purpose of this program is to 
assist persons incarcerated in prison, jail, or detention 
centers with functional literacy and life skills training 
programs. Discretionary grants are authorized to be awarded to 
eligible State and local correctional agencies and correctional 
education agencies, with priority given to programs with the 
potential for innovation, effectiveness, and replication. This 
program supports 19 awards annually.

                      student financial assistance

    The bill provides $6,916,915,000 for student financial 
assistance programs. In combination with $805,000,000 in Pell 
Grants carry-over funding which was provided in previous 
appropriations, the bill makes available $7,721,915,000 for 
student financial assistance, an increase of $103,945,000 over 
the resources available in the 1995 appropriation. The budget 
requests $7,651,415,000 for 1996.
    The Committee considers student financial assistance to be 
among the highest priorities within its jurisdiction and has 
provided substantial resources to support these programs. 
Despite a reduction in funding of 13% bill-wide below the 
amount provided in the regular 1995 appropriations bill, the 
recommendation includes a $100 increase in the maximum Pell 
Grant and level funding for Supplemental Education Opportunity 
Grants and the Work Study program.

Pell Grants

    The bill provides $5,697,000,000 for the Pell Grant 
program, an amount sufficient, when coupled with carry-over 
funding and additional program changes in the bill, to raise 
the maximum Pell Grant to $2,440, the highest level in the 
program's history and an increase of $100 over the maximum 
grant for 1995. The budget request included $6,217,125,000 for 
Pell Grants based on earlier estimates which indicated a lower 
carry-over amount than is currently estimated to be available. 
While funding has been reduced by 13% bill-wide from the 
amounts provided in the regular 1995 appropriations bill in 
order to comply with the budget law, the Committee considers 
this means-tested voucher program to be among the highest 
priorities under its jurisdiction and has made difficult 
reductions elsewhere in the bill in order to raise the maximum 
grant. The President proposed to divide the Pell Grant program 
between degree- and non-degree-seeking students, with non-
degree students receiving ``Skills Grants'' from the Department 
of Labor.
    The bill adopts a legislative change to the Pell Grant law 
in order to better target limited resources to those students 
with the greatest needs and to increase the maximum grant to a 
level that will provide low-income students with real and more 
meaningful choices among institutions of higher education. The 
bill eliminates the transition ``bump'' under which students 
who qualified for Pell Grants in the range of $200 to $400 
prior to 1992 now receive the new minimum Pell award of $400. 
In addition, the bill eliminates assistance to those students 
who currently qualify for grants of less than $600. The 
Committee believes that funding for these small grants which 
support individuals with relatively less need should be better 
targeted to those students with relatively greater financial 
need. These changes in the basic law permit the increase in the 
maximum grant to $2,440, thereby providing increased assistance 
to the estimated 3,550,000 Pell Grant recipients with greatest 
financial need. The Congress has provided adequate loan capital 
and guarantees to ensure that the estimated 250,000 students 
adversely impacted by these legislative changes will have ready 
access to additional loans of $400-$600 necessary to supplement 
their education expenses.

Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOGs)

    The bill provides $583,407,000 for supplemental educational 
opportunity grants, the same as the budget request and the 1995 
appropriation. The Committee considers these grants to be among 
the highest priorities under its jurisdiction. The SEOG program 
provides grants through postsecondary institutions to assist 
qualified students who demonstrate exceptional financial need 
to meet the cost of education. Institutions have broad 
flexibility within the eligibility criteria for awarding these 
grants with the exception that priority be given to Pell Grant 
recipients.

Work-study

    The bill provides $616,508,000 for the federal work-study 
program, the same as the 1995 appropriation and the 
Administration request. The Committee considers this program to 
be among the highest priorities under its jurisdiction. This 
program supports part-time employment for students to help meet 
the cost of education. Institutions receive funding according 
to a statutory formula and may allocate it for job location and 
job development centers. The bill includes $1,500,000 to carry 
out the provisions of section 448(f) of the Higher Education 
act which includes a separate authorization of appropriations 
for ``work colleges.''

Perkins loans capital contributions

    The bill does not provide funding for the Perkins loans 
capital contributions, consistent with the Administrations 1995 
budget request which stated Federal Family Education Loans and 
Federal Direct Student Loans, together with new Perkins Loans 
funded from $6 billion in existing institutional revolving 
funds, will provide adequate sources of capital for new student 
borrowing. The Committee is not aware of any changes in student 
loan policy or in the financial marketplace which would alter 
that view or the resulting policy and therefore does not 
approve the 1996 request for $158,000,000 for the Perkins loans 
capital contributions, the same amount appropriated in 1995.
    The Perkins loan program provides low-interest loans to 
students through individual institutional revolving funds at 
2,700 participating schools. Institutions are required to match 
one-third of the federal capital contribution. The program 
duplicates both the Federal Family Education Loan Program 
(FFEL) and the Federal Direct Student Loan Program (FDSL). The 
Committee does not believe the federal government should 
continue to administer three duplicative loan programs.
    The Committee wishes to emphasize that termination of the 
capital contributions will not result in termination of the 
program. Participating institutions will continue to receive 
federal payments for loan cancellations and may continue to 
initiate new grants with the $6 billion in existing 
institutional revolving funds.

Perkins loans cancellations

    The bill provides $20,000,000 for federal Perkins loans 
cancellations, an increase of $2,000,000 over the 1995 
appropriation and the same as the budget request. Perkins loans 
may be canceled when the borrower pursues a career in one of 12 
statutory designated professions including corrections 
officers, medical technicians, and Peace Corps and VISTA 
volunteers.

State student incentive grants

    The bill does not provide funding for the State Student 
Incentive Grants program, consistent with the 1995 budget 
proposal to terminate this program based on the recommendations 
of the National Performance Review which indicated that the 
program had accomplished its purpose. The 1996 budget proposes 
to phase out SSIGs over two years. The recommended funding 
level is $63,375,000 below the 1995 appropriated level and 
$31,375,000 below the 1996 request.
    The SSIG program was established in 1972 to encourage and 
expand State scholarship assistance to postsecondary students 
with substantial financial need. At that time, only 26 states 
provided such need-based grants. Today, all 50 States and the 
District of Columbia provide such assistance. In addition, 46 
states over-match the SSIG requirement, 42 states award need-
based aid in addition to SSIG, 33 states award non-need-based 
aid, 23 states support part-time students, and 21 states assist 
graduate as well as undergraduate students. SSIG now accounts 
for only 2.5% of grants awarded by states.
    The Committee concurs with the findings of the National 
Performance Review which indicated that 24 years of federal 
support has been more than sufficient to encourage states to 
develop their own student financial assistance programs. State 
grant programs have been aware for some time of Congressional 
and Administration proposals to phase out or terminate funding. 
Each of these programs should be well prepared for the 
reduction in funding which represents only 2.5% of all grant 
funding awarded by states. The Committee believes that at a 
time when federal programs under its jurisdiction are being 
reduced by 14% on average as compared to the regular 1995 bill 
to comply with the budget law, it is reasonable to require 
State grant assistance programs to contribute a percentage 
reduction of one-sixth that magnitude to the overall downsizing 
effort.

State Postsecondary Review Entities (SPRE)

    The bill does not provide funding for the State 
Postsecondary Review Entities (SPREs) consistent with H.R. 1944 
which rescinds all 1995 funding for the program. The budget 
includes $25,000,000 for the program in 1996, a $5,000,000 
increase over the original 1995 appropriation. This program 
reimburses States for activities that supplement existing 
institutional licensing and review functions conducted by 
States as part of the process of establishing the eligibility 
of postsecondary institutions to participate in federal student 
aid programs. The Committee believes that the program is not 
well focused on the institutional sectors most in need of 
oversight. Termination of this program does not affect 
Departmental review and certification activities or independent 
accreditation requirements.

                 federal family education loan program

    The bill includes $30,066,000 for the Department of 
Education's administration of the Federal Family Education 
Loans, the same as the budget request and $32,125,000 below the 
1995 level. This discretionary administrative funding is 
provided in the Federal Family Education Loans appropriation 
account rather than under the Department's Salaries and 
Expenses account pursuant to a requirement of the Federal 
Credit Reform Act of 1990. These funds support Federal 
administrative activities, including processing payments and 
claims, reducing loan default costs, and program monitoring. 
Federal Family Education Loans are financed with private 
capital and reinsured by the Federal Government against 
borrower default, death, disability and bankruptcy. Federal 
costs include payments for such insurance claims as well as 
support for borrower interest benefits. Federal Family 
Education Loan programs have supported over $150 billion in 
loans to student and parent borrowers since their inception. In 
1993, $16.5 billion in Federal Family Education loans were 
disbursed to 5.3 million borrowers.
    This account includes discretionary Federal administrative 
costs only. Additional amounts for new Federal Family Education 
loan subsidies and mandatory administrative expenses for 1996 
are provided under permanent authority as authorized by the 
1992 Amendments to the Higher Education Act.
    The loan subsidy and administrative costs for the new 
Federal Direct Student Loan program, authorized by the Omnibus 
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, are also provided under 
permanent authority and do not require appropriation action.
    The bill includes provisions limiting funding available for 
administrative expenses of the Federal Direct Student Loan 
program under section 458 of the Higher Education Act of 
$320,000,000 in 1996, of which $160,000,000 is provided for the 
payment of administrative cost allowances to guaranty agencies. 
The bill also requires the Department of submit a plan for the 
payment of such costs within 30 days of enactment of the bill. 
The Secretary is prohibited from borrowing against future 
appropriations for the Direct Loan program and may not use 
available funds to for marketing, advertising or promoting the 
Direct Loan program or for the payment of administrative fees 
to institutions of higher education. Finally, the bill 
prohibits the use of funding, except by the Advisory Committee 
on Student Financial Assistance, to evaluate the Direct Loan 
program and prohibits increases in on-board staffing at the 
Department.

                            higher education

     The bill provides $757,700,000 for higher education 
programs, a decrease of $161,670,000 from the comparable 1995 
appropriation and $63,072,000 below the request. This 
appropriations account supports a variety of postsecondary 
programs, other than student financial assistance. The 
Committee generally concurs with the Department's decision to 
focus limited federal resources on providing access to 
postsecondary education for those who could otherwise not 
afford it. The Committee has therefore adopted many of the 
Administration recommendations to terminate small, non-need-
based categorical programs within the higher education account 
in order to continue to provide funding for the major student 
financial assistance programs necessary to preserve access to 
education for those who cannot independently afford it.

Strengthening institutions

    The bill provides $32,590,000 for the regular strengthening 
institutions program, a reduction of $47,410,000 below the 1995 
comparable appropriation and $7,410,000 below the 
Administration request. This amount fully funds continuing 
multi-year awards for non-public institutions of higher 
education. No new 5-year grants will be awarded.
    This program provides general operating subsidies for 
institutions with low average educational and general 
expenditures per student and significant percentages of low-
income students. The Committee generally concurs with the 
Administration proposal to phase out the program over two years 
on the basis that limited federal funding will more effectively 
support the general improvement of institutions by increasing 
the investment in federal student aid. These revenues are 
unrestricted and may be used for the same general purposes as 
the strengthening institutions program. In addition, three-
fourths of all funding under this program is awarded to public 
institutions for whose program development and management the 
sponsoring state or local governments are primarily 
responsible. The Committee agrees that federal funds should not 
be appropriated to supplant state and local funds for 
educational operating expenditures. Therefore, the bill 
provides funding to continue the highest priority existing 
multi-year grants through 1996 with the intention that the 
program be terminated in 1997 in accord with the President's 
request. In addition, the bill overrides a provision of law 
which authorizes funding for Hispanic serving institutions only 
in years in which the appropriations for the strengthening 
institutions program is at least $80 million.

Hispanic serving institutions

    The bill provides $10,800,000 for the Hispanic serving 
institutions program, a decrease of $1,200,000 below the 1995 
appropriation and the request. The Committee believes that 
Hispanic serving institutions (HSIs) represent a high priority 
within the strengthening institutions program and has therefore 
continued funding for this program at the 1995 level despite a 
substantial reduction in the regular strengthening institutions 
program. Nevertheless, the Committee intends to terminate this 
program in 1997 consistent with the President's budget request 
and for the same reasons indicated above.
    The HSI program provides operating subsidies to schools 
which serve at least 25% Hispanic students of whom at least 
half are low-income, first-generation students and at least a 
quarter of whom are either low-income or first-generation 
students.

Strengthening historically black colleges and universities

    The bill provides $108,990,000 for strengthening the 
historically black colleges and universities program, the same 
as the 1995 appropriation and the budget request. The Committee 
believes that HBCUs represent a high priority within the 
strengthening institutions program and has therefore continued 
funding for this program at the 1995 level despite a 
substantial reduction in the regular strengthening institutions 
program.
    The strengthening HBCU program provides operating subsidies 
to accredited, legally authorized HBCUs established prior to 
1964 whose principal mission is the education of black 
Americans. Funds may be used to support both programs and 
management and are distributed through a formula grant based on 
the enrollment of Pell Grant recipients, number of graduates, 
and the number of graduates entering graduate or professional 
schools in which blacks are underrepresented. The minimum grant 
is $500,000.

Strengthening historically black graduate institutions

    The bill provides $19,606,000 for the strengthening 
historically black graduate institutions program, the same as 
the 1995 appropriation and the budget request. The Committee 
believes that historically black graduate institutions 
represent a high priority within the strengthening institutions 
program and has therefore continued funding for this program at 
the 1995 appropriation level despite a substantial reduction in 
the regular strengthening institutions program.
    This program provides 5-year grants to the following 16 
postgraduate institutions which are specified in section 
326(e)(1) of the Higher Education Act: Morehouse School of 
Medicine, Meharry Medical School, Charles R. Drew Postgraduate 
Medical School, Clark-Atlanta University, Tuskegee University 
School of Veterinary Medicine, Xavier University School of 
Pharmacy, Southern University School of Law, Texas Southern 
University School of Law and School of Pharmacy, Florida A&M; 
University School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, North Carolina 
Central University School of Law, Morgan State University 
qualified graduate program, Hampton University qualified 
graduate program, Alabama A&M; qualified graduate program, North 
Carolina A&T; State University qualified graduate program, 
University of Maryland Eastern Shore qualified graduate 
program, and Jackson State qualified graduate program. No 
grants may be made to the last 11 institutions until the first 
5 institutions have received at least $12 million. Grants are 
limited to $500,000 unless the institution agrees to match the 
entire grant with the exception of a minimum $3 million set-
aside for the Morehouse School of Medicine. Awards may be used 
for building endowments as well as the same purposes for which 
the strengthening HBCU grants may be used.

Endowment challenge grants

     The bill does not provide funding for the endowment 
challenge grants program, a decrease of $8,060,000 below the 
1995 appropriation. The Administration proposes to terminate 
the regular endowment challenge grant program and to change the 
underlying law to permit funding the HBCU set-aside at the 1995 
level without funding the underlying program.
     Endowment challenge grants are awarded to institutions 
eligible for other strengthening institutions programs on a 
matching basis of one institutional dollar for every two 
federal dollars. Grants may not exceed $500,000 until total 
appropriations for endowment grants exceed $15,000,000. The 
Committee believes that these grants are too small to generate 
any substantial impact on the endowments of participating 
schools or to meaningfully support the goal of self-sufficiency 
and concurs with the Administration request to terminate the 
regular program subject to the Reinventing Government 
recommendations. For the same reasons, the bill does not 
provide funding for the HBCU endowment set-aside. Rather, the 
bill provides for the HBCU strengthening institutions programs. 
The Committee notes that such program funding may supplant 
other institutional resources which may be dedicated to 
endowment building when such activities represent a 
sufficiently high priority to merit the allocation of limited 
resources.

Evaluation

     Consistent with the request, the bill does not provide 
funding to continue the evaluation of the strengthening 
institutions programs. The recommendation represents a decrease 
of $1,000,000 below the 1995 appropriation.
     While the Committee generally believes that all federal 
programs must be evaluated for effectiveness, it does not 
support the allocation of resources to evaluate programs which 
it has recommended be phased out or terminated.

Fund for the improvement of postsecondary education

    The bill provides $15,000,000 for the fund for the 
improvement of postsecondary education (FIPSE), a decrease of 
$2,543,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the budget request. 
The Committee believes that projects funded through FIPSE can 
contribute substantially to the restructuring of the 
postsecondary education industry with particular emphasis on 
cost-containment. The Committee notes that the growth in the 
cost of attending colleges and universities has dramatically 
exceeded general inflation and believes educational 
institutions must actively and aggressively restructure their 
operations to better meet the needs of their consumers which 
include, to a significant degree, the federal government.
     FIPSE awards grants and contracts to a variety of 
postsecondary institutions and other organizations to improve 
the quality and delivery of postsecondary education.

Native Hawaiian and Alaska Native culture and arts development

     The bill does not provide funding for the Native Hawaiian 
and Alaska Native culture and arts study and instruction 
development program. The budget request recommends terminating 
this new program in 1996. H.R. 1944 reduces 1995 funding for 
the program from $1,000,000 to $500,000 and terminates all 
activities in 1996.
     The program provides for the study and instruction in 
Native Hawaiian or Alaska Native art and culture, functions 
which the Committee believes are the responsibilities of the 
respective States and which should not be extended to the 
federal government during times of fiscal constraint. In 
addition, organizations may already receive funds for the 
purposes of this program under the National Endowment for the 
Arts or the National Endowment for Humanities.

Eisenhower leadership program

     The bill does not provide funding for the Eisenhower 
leadership program consistent with the budget which requested 
termination of the program in 1995, a decrease of $4,000,000 
from the 1995 appropriated level and $1,080,000 below the 
amount provided in H.R. 1944. The National Performance Review 
indicated that this program is poorly focused, does not perform 
a federal responsibility, and duplicates activities already 
included in many postsecondary curricula. The program provides 
funding to schools to stimulate development of leadership 
skills among college students and to recruit and educate 
students for leadership roles in a variety of fields. The 
Committee concurs in the findings of the National Performance 
Review and does not believe that limited federal resources 
ought to be expended during periods of fiscal constraint for 
non-federal responsibilities. In addition, the Committee 
generally concurs with the Administration recommendation to 
target limited federal resources to students who could 
otherwise not afford access to postsecondary education.

Minority teacher recruitment

     The bill provides $2,212,000 for the minority teacher 
recruitment program, a decrease of $246,000 below the 1995 
appropriation and $788,000 below the budget request. The 
Committee notes that this recommendation represents a reduction 
of 10% below the 1995 appropriation in contrast to the 14% 
reduction bill-wide as compared to the regular 1995 bill 
necessary to comply with the budget law.
     The Committee has continued funding for this program 
because it believes the recruitment of minority teachers to 
support a racially balanced teaching population is a high 
priority for the country. However, the Committee has several 
concerns about the impact, effectiveness and targeting of the 
program that must be addressed in the near future if funding is 
to be continued for the program beyond 1996. First, the program 
supports only 13 small awards in 1995, far less than the 
Committee believes necessary to meaningfully impact the 
nationwide availability of minority teachers in the work force. 
The Assistant Secretary is requested to be prepared to testify 
regarding the effectiveness of such a small program in meeting 
this national need. The Committee is also concerned that the 
program does not maintain performance data to determine whether 
teacher placement grantees have successfully placed minority 
graduates in teaching positions or whether partnership grantees 
have successfully recruited, trained and placed minority 
students who would otherwise not have entered the teaching 
profession. Finally, the committee is concerned that awards to 
individuals may be a more effective recruitment tool than 
awards to institutions which are already engaged in recruiting 
and training minority students for the teaching profession.
    The minority teacher recruitment program awards two types 
of grants. Partnership grants support institutions of higher 
education in developing partnerships which local educational 
agencies and community based organizations to recruit and train 
minorities for teaching careers. Teacher placement grants 
support departments of education in developing and implementing 
programs to prepare students to become elementary and secondary 
school teachers and to place them in jobs with schools that 
have substantial minority populations.

Minority science improvement

    The bill provides $5,255,000 for the minority science 
improvement program, a decrease of $584,000 below the 1995 
appropriation and the budget request. The budget also requests 
bill language to override two provisions in the underlying law 
to eliminate the set-asides for grants to non-predominately 
minority institutions of higher education and for grants to 
organizations ``for a broad range of activities designed to 
eliminate or reduce specific barriers to the entry of 
minorities into science and technology.'' The Committee concurs 
with the request to focus program funds on institutions which 
serve primarily minority students, and the bill contains the 
necessary changes in the law.
    The Committee considers the recruitment and training of 
minorities in the fields of science, engineering and 
mathematics to be high priorities for the country. However, the 
Committee has several concerns about the effectiveness and 
targeting of the program that must be addressed in the near 
future if funding is to be continued for the program beyond 
1996. The Committee is specifically concerned about the 
inability of the Department to assess the effectiveness of the 
program. In addition, the program appears to generally 
duplicate the purposes of the graduate assistance in areas of 
national need (GAANN) program, and the Committee directs the 
Assistant Secretary to be prepared to testify during the 1997 
budget hearings regarding any duplication of activities or 
services between the two programs. Finally, the Committee is 
concerned that awards to individuals may be a more effective 
mechanism for increasing minority representation in the fields 
of math, science and engineering than awards to institutions 
which are already engaged in recruiting and training minority 
students in these fields.
    The minority science improvement program awards grants to 
improve mathematics, science, and engineering programs at 
institutions serving primarily minority students and to 
increase the number of minority students who pursue advanced 
degrees and careers in those fields.

Community service projects

    Consistent with the budget request, the bill does not 
provide funding for the community service projects program. The 
Congress provided $1,423,000 for the program in 1995.
    This program provides grants and contracts to institutions 
of higher education, public agencies and non-profit 
organizations to encourage students to participate in community 
services projects, to conduct research on the effect of 
community service organizations, to assist student 
organizations to collaborate with community service 
organizations and to strengthen linkages between youth corps 
and institutions of higher education.
    The Committee concurs with the request to terminate this 
program on the basis that program does not represent a federal 
education responsibility, it is far too small to provide 
meaningful impact on any national problem let alone the myriad 
problems addressed by these projects, most universities already 
encourage or require students to engage in community service, 
and program activities duplicate the purposes of many other 
federal programs including VISTA, Americorps, bilingual 
education programs, several federal literacy programs, and many 
federal programs which assist the homeless, among many others. 
While many community service projects provide important and 
valuable services on a very limited basis, they should more 
appropriately be coordinated and administered in conjunction 
with the federal programs that have primary responsibility for 
these activities.

International education and foreign languages studies

            Domestic Programs
    The bill provides $52,283,000 for the domestic activities 
of the international education and foreign languages studies 
programs, the same as the 1995 appropriation and the budget 
request. Consistent with the budget request and previous 
appropriations Acts, no funds are provided for the intensive 
summer language institutes or the foreign periodicals program.
    The program assists graduate and undergraduate foreign 
language and area studies programs and students at institutions 
of postsecondary education, research in foreign language and 
international education, language resource centers, and 
business and international education programs. In general, the 
Secretary has discretion to allocate funding among the these 
various activities.
    The Committee has provided funding for this program because 
it believes that foreign language and international education 
are high priorities for the country. Nevertheless, it has 
serious concerns about the program which must be addressed 
prior to consideration of the 1997 appropriation. First, the 
Committee notes that foreign language and international studies 
were designated by the Secretary as areas of national need 
under the GAANN program in 1991, 1992, and 1994, but were 
dropped from the list of designated priorities in 1995. In 
addition, five of the seven funded programs provide less than 
$10,000,000 in grants to a limited number of grantees, and the 
Committee is concerned that these small categorical programs 
may be unable to substantially impact the supply of students 
educated in these areas. Finally, the Committee believes that 
awards to individuals rather than institutions may be a more 
effective means of improving the supply of students competent 
in foreign languages and international subject matter.
            Overseas programs
    The bill provides $4,000,000 for the overseas programs in 
international education and foreign language studies, a 
reduction of $1,790,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the 
budget request.
    The Committee has continued funding for the overseas 
programs because it considers international education and 
foreign language studies to be a high priority for the country. 
Nevertheless, the Committee has several concerns about the 
overseas programs which should be addressed by the Department 
prior to consideration of the 1997 appropriation. First, the 
Secretary has not identified foreign language studies and 
international education as areas of national need under the 
GAANN program. Nor has the Department indicated that group 
projects, faculty research or doctoral dissertation research 
are national priorities and federal responsibilities which 
merit the allocation of limited federal funds. Finally, the 
Committee requests that the Assistant Secretary be prepared to 
testify as to the impact of these relatively small categorical 
programs on national needs.
            Institute for International Public Policy
    The bill does not provide funding for the Institute for 
International Public Policy, a decrease of $1,000,000 below the 
1995 appropriation and the budget request. This program 
provides a grant to the United Negro College Fund to operate 
the Institute.
    While the Committee supports the goal of increasing the 
representation of minorities in the Foreign Service, it does 
not believe that funding should be diverted from other 
important education programs to providing funding for an 
Institute which does not directly support the national 
education goals. The bill provides $140,596,000 in unrestricted 
operating subsidies to HBCUs and HSIs under the strengthening 
institutions programs which may be used for the purposes of 
supporting the Institute for International Public Policy if the 
recipient institutions deem it to be a sufficiently high 
priority to merit the allocation of limited federal resources.

Cooperative education

    Consistent with the budget request, the bill does not 
provide funding for the cooperative education program. Congress 
provided $6,927,000 for phase out costs for the program in 
1995.
    The cooperative education program provides grants to 
institutions of higher education to initiate and operate campus 
programs to provide students with work experience related to 
their academic course work. Student earnings help meet the cost 
of education.
    The Committee concurs with the budget request to terminate 
the program for several reasons. As indicated by the National 
Performance Review, the program has achieved its purpose as 
over 900 schools now operate cooperative education programs. 
Nor does this program fulfill a federal responsibility. Because 
many institutions offer cooperative education programs which 
attract students both for the work experience and earnings 
which help defray educational expenses, all institutions have a 
self-interest in providing such programs in order to compete 
for students during a period of declining enrollments. In 
addition, cooperative education programs help defray operating 
expenses for sponsoring institutions because student earnings 
increase net revenues available to those institutions from 
external sources.

Law school clinical experience

    The bill includes no funding for the law school clinical 
experience program which is the same as the budget request and 
$14,920,000 below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds 
$1,698,000 from the program to permit continuation of existing 
multi-year grants but to prohibit the award of new grants in 
1995. The President's budget also proposed a rescission of all 
1995 appropriated funds for the program.
    In 1995, the program will provide grants to 130 of the 176 
accredited law schools nationwide to maintain programs which 
provide students with actual or simulated clinical experience.
    The Committee concurs with the administration proposal and 
the recommendations of the National Performance Review which 
concluded that the program does not perform a federal 
responsibility and, regardless, has already achieved its 
purpose. Law schools have strong self-interest in maintaining 
such programs. The American Bar Association, which is the 
national accrediting agency for law schools, recommends that 
all schools provide students clinical experience in order to 
obtain accreditation. In addition, because clinical experience 
is generally considered a critical component of legal education 
and because virtually all schools operate clinical experience 
programs, schools have an economic incentive to provide such 
opportunities in order to attract students. For these reasons, 
the Committee believes that this program clearly is not 
performing a federal responsibility and should not be funded 
during this period of fiscal constraint.

Urban community service

    The bill provides no funding for the urban community 
service program, the same as the budget request and $13,000,000 
below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds $3,000,000 
from this program.
    The Department makes five-year urban community service 
grants to universities for projects which address urban 
problems and needs such as job training, poverty, health care, 
substandard schools, problems of the elderly, problems of 
families and children, environmental concerns, economic 
development, crime prevention, and urban infrastructure.
    The Committee concurs with the Reinventing Government 
proposal which concluded that urban community services are not 
an appropriate responsibility of the Department of Education. 
Clearly, projects funded under the urban community service 
program either do not serve federal responsibilities or 
duplicate the purposes of other federal programs including many 
administered by agencies funded in this bill. Finally, the 
program lacks both focus and the comprehensive approach 
necessary to effectively impact national problems on a broad 
scale.

Student financial aid database and information line

    The bill includes no funding for the student financial aid 
database and information line, the same as the budget request 
and $496,000 less than was appropriated in 1995. H.R. 1944 
contains a rescission of the entire 1995 appropriation.
    This program authorizes a contract to maintain a 
computerized database of all public and private financial 
assistance programs to be accessible to schools and libraries 
through either modems or toll-free telephone lines.
    The Committee notes that private sector publishers provide 
a great deal of information on colleges and financial 
assistance. In addition, most high school counseling offices 
already make available to students comprehensive information 
regarding student financial assistance. The Committee believes 
that this program does not represent a federal responsibility 
and is a low priority during this period of fiscal constraint.

Interest subsidy grants

    The bill provides $16,712,000 for interest subsidy grants 
authorized under section 702 of the Higher Education Act, the 
same amount requested in the budget and $800,000 below the 1995 
appropriation.
    This program provides loan subsidies to higher education 
organizations for facilities acquisition, construction and 
renovation loans taken prior to 1974. All loans will terminate 
by the year 2013. The authority to initiate new loan subsidy 
commitments was repealed in the 1992 amendments to the Higher 
Education Act. Interest subsidies provide institutions the 
difference between the interest they pay on commercially-
obtained loans and 3% of the loan balance. The program is 
currently making interest subsidy payments on 355 loans 
including 103 loans to state-run colleges and universities.
    The bill provides funding sufficient to meet the federal 
government's commitments on the 351 loans expected to be in 
repayment status in 1996. However, the Committee is concerned 
about the continuing use of substantial federal resources to 
finance the prior acquisition and construction of higher 
education facilities--activities which the Committee considers 
to be the responsibilities of the respective institutions, not 
the federal government. The Committee intends to consider 
phasing out or terminating interest subsidy grants beginning in 
the 1997 appropriations cycle.

TRIO

    The bill provides $463,000,000 for the six TRIO programs, 
the same as the 1995 appropriation and the budget request.
    The Committee recommends this substantial investment in 
TRIO because it believes that the recruitment and retention of 
an economically and racially balanced postsecondary student 
population is a high priority for the country. The Committee 
notes that funding for TRIO increased by 91% in the five years 
1990-1995.
    The TRIO programs provide a variety of outreach and support 
services to encourage low-income, potential first-generation 
college students to enter and complete college. The Committee 
notes that a 1981 study commissioned by the Department of 
Education indicated that students who received the full range 
of Student Support Services were more than twice as likely to 
complete the first year of college as eligible students who did 
not receive such services. A similar study indicated that 
Upward Bound participants were four times as likely to have 
earned a college degree within four years of high school 
graduation as eligible students who did not participate in the 
program.
    The Committee wishes to emphasize however, that as with all 
programs under its jurisdiction, future funding for TRIO will 
be conditioned on the results of current outcomes evaluations. 
Accordingly, the bill provides $1,500,000 to fully fund the 
ongoing evaluation of the TRIO programs.

Early intervention scholarships and partnerships

    The bill includes no funding for the early intervention 
scholarships and partnerships program, the same as the budget 
request and $3,108,000 below the 1995 appropriation. The budget 
request also recommends terminating all 1995 funding. This new 
program supports grants to 8 states to provide support services 
to students at risk of dropping out of school. States must also 
guarantee some level of tuition assistance for participating 
students who meet State-specified academic goals.
    The Committee concurs with the budget request which states 
``in view of the significant level of resources available to 
postsecondary students, the Administration does not recommend 
funding for small, categorical programs such as [this] 
program.'' The early intervention scholarships and partnerships 
duplicate the purposes of state student financial assistance 
programs, the TRIO program, and federal student financial 
assistance programs. The Committee notes that the federal 
government will provide over $30 billion in student financial 
assistance to students pursuing postsecondary education. Much 
of this assistance is guaranteed to students in the form of 
loan program entitlements.

Bethune-Cookman College fine arts center

    The bill does not provide funding for the Bethune-Cookman 
College memorial fine arts center, the same as the budget 
request and $4,000,000 less than the 1995 appropriation.
    This program provides earmarked funding to Bethune-Cookman 
College to complete phase II of an extensive campus 
construction project. Phase I of the project--construction of a 
three-story building including classrooms, library, multi-media 
center and exhibit hall--was completed with $6,200,000 in 
federal funding. Congress has already provided $4,000,000 for 
phase II of the project which includes construction of a 
performing arts center and a hospitality management training 
facility.
    In general, the Committee does not believe that federal 
funding ought to be designated for specific institutions non-
competitively. In addition, capital projects are the 
responsibility of individual educational institutions, not the 
federal government.
    The Committee notes that the bill does provide 
administrative funding of $166,000 for the HBCU capital 
financing program to operate an otherwise self-financing 
initiative to make available $357,000,000 in bond financing to 
HBCUs, including Bethune-Cookman, for capital projects.

Byrd honors scholarships

    The bill includes no funding for the Byrd honors 
scholarships program, $38,117,000 less than the budget request 
and $29,117,000 less than the 1995 appropriation. The Committee 
concurs with the general philosophy reflected in the budget 
request of focusing limited federal higher education resources 
on providing access to education for those who would not 
otherwise be able to afford it. While the Committee generally 
supports efforts to reward academic merit, federal funding 
should more appropriately be targeted on providing access 
rather than providing scholarships to meritorious students who 
already have the economic means to obtain postsecondary 
education. The Committee concurs with the budget request to 
terminate other merit-based programs including the Douglas 
teacher scholarships, national science scholars, Javits 
fellowships and the National Academy of Science/Space/
Technology on the basis that they duplicate other student 
financial assistance programs. The Committee finds the budget 
request to increase funding for the Byrd scholarships 
inconsistent with the recommendations regarding other merit-
based programs.
    The Byrd scholarship program provides formula grants to 
states to award four-year $1,500 scholarships to students who 
demonstrate academic excellence in high school. The program was 
initiated as a one-year scholarship program and was later 
expanded to a four-year program. Funding for the program 
tripled in size during the two previous years and the budget 
request represents a further 31% increase in 1996. This 
proposed growth is clearly inconsistent with the 15% downsizing 
in the bill in 1996 necessary to comply with the budget law and 
contribute to achieving a balanced federal budget by 2002. The 
federal government will make available over $30 billion in 
student financial assistance through other programs in 1996.

National science scholars

    The bill includes no funding for the national science 
scholars program, the same as the budget request and $4,424,000 
below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 includes a rescission 
of $1,121,000 in 1995 funding in order to permit existing 
scholarships to be funded to completion and to prohibit the 
award of new scholarships.
    The program awards four year scholarships of up to $5,000 
per year to high school students who demonstrate excellence in 
mathematics, engineering, or the physical, life or computer 
sciences. The Committee concurs with the budget request which 
indicates that the program is costly to administer and 
duplicates other federal mathematics, science, and student 
financial assistance programs. The Reinventing Government 
report recommended termination of the program which is not 
currently authorized in law. The federal government will 
provide over $30 billion in student financial assistance which 
is available to students pursuing postsecondary education in 
engineering, mathematics, and the sciences.

National Academy of Science, Space and Technology

    The bill includes no funding for the National Academy of 
Science, Space and Technology, the same as the budget request 
and $2,000,000 less than the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 
rescinds all 1995 funding for the program consistent with the 
budget request. The authorization for the program was repealed 
by the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994.
    The program creates an advisory board to select or develop 
a single test to be used as the sole criteria for determining 
program eligibility. The top scoring high school student from 
each congressional district will receive a scholarship of up to 
$5,000 and 4 years to pursue studies in science, mathematics or 
engineering. Students receiving scholarships must complete 4 
years of employment with the federal government or a U.S. 
corporation engaged in a scientific or engineering research 
endeavor. Scholars who do not complete the service requirement 
must repay the total amount of awards received with interest.
    The Committee concurs with the National Performance Review 
which indicated this small categorical program is difficult and 
costly to administer and duplicates other federal science, 
mathematics, and student financial assistance programs. The 
service requirement is especially difficult to monitor and 
enforce. The federal government will provide over $30 billion 
in student financial assistance in 1996 which is available to 
students pursuing educations in science, mathematics or 
engineering.

Douglas teacher scholarships

    The bill includes no funding for the Douglas teacher 
scholarships program, the same as the budget request and 
$14,599,000 below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds 
$14,300,000 of the 1995 appropriation in order to terminate the 
program.
    The program provides formula grants to states to provide 
scholarships of up to $5,000 and four years to students who 
intend to pursue teaching careers and have demonstrated 
academic excellence. In selecting scholars, states must give 
priority to individuals who intend to teach students with 
disabilities, limited English proficient students, or preschool 
children, or who intend to teach in inner city, rural or 
geographically isolated schools or in areas with teacher 
shortages. States must also attempt to attract women or 
minorities who are interested in teaching mathematics or 
science. Recipients must agree to teach 2 years for each year 
of assistance received. Those who fail to meet the service 
requirement must repay the amount of assistance received 
according to the percentage of the requirement not fulfilled.
    The Committee concurs with the Reinventing Government 
recommendations which indicated the program duplicates the 
Eisenhower Professional Development program and federal student 
financial assistance programs. In addition, the program is 
costly and difficult to administer, and the service requirement 
is difficult to monitor and enforce. The federal government 
will provide over $30 billion in student financial assistance 
in 1996 which is available to students pursuing education 
leading to careers in teaching.

Olympic scholarships

    The bill includes no funding for the Olympic scholarships 
program, the same as the budget request and $1,000,000 less 
than the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds all 1995 
funding for the program consistent with the budget request.
    The program provides grants to the United States Olympic 
Education Center and the United States Olympic Training Center 
to enable them to provide grants to athletes in training under 
the same conditions as other federal grant programs.
    The Committee concurs with the recommendations of the 
Reinventing Government initiative which indicate that this 
program clearly duplicates other federal student assistance 
programs. The Committee notes that student athletes at the 
Olympic Training and Education Centers are eligible for the 
more than $30 billion in federal student financial assistance 
which is provided by the government in 1996.

Teacher corps

    The bill includes no funding for the teacher corps program, 
the same as the budget request and $1,875,000 below the 1995 
appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds all 1995 funding for the 
program consistent with the President's request.
    The program provides discretionary grants to states to 
establish teacher corps scholarships. States must identify the 
10% of their schools with the highest poverty and lowest 
student achievement for designation as teacher corps schools. 
States may then award scholarships of up to $5,000 for three 
years to graduating high school students pursuing teacher 
education who agree to serve at least three years in teacher 
corps schools upon college graduation. Students who fail to 
fulfill the service requirement must repay the amount of 
assistance. The program will make grants to 5 states in 1995.
    The Committee concurs with the budget request which 
indicates the teacher corps program is overly complex and 
difficult to administer. The application process is burdensome 
to the States, and the repayment provisions require constant 
monitoring that consumes inordinate administrative resources. 
In addition, the program duplicates the Eisenhower professional 
development state grants and federal student financial 
assistance programs.

Harris graduate fellowships

    The bill includes no funding for the Harris graduate 
fellowships program, the same as the budget request and 
$20,244,000 below the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds 
$10,100,000 of the 1995 funding to effectively terminate the 
program.
    The program provides grants to institutions of higher 
education to fund fellowships for minorities and women who are 
underrepresented in masters, professional, and doctoral 
education programs in areas of study designated by the 
Secretary as national priorities. By law, half of program 
funding must support masters level and professional study, and 
the remaining half must be designated for doctoral study.
    The Committee concurs with the findings of the Reinventing 
Government initiative and the budget request which indicate 
that the Harris graduate fellowships duplicates the graduate 
assistance in areas of national need (GAANN) program and 
federal student financial assistance programs.

Javits fellowships

    The bill includes no funding for the Javits fellowships 
program, the same as the budget request and $7,787,000 below 
the 1995 appropriation. H.R. 1944 rescinds $942,000 to continue 
existing fellowships but prohibit the award of new fellowships 
in 1995.
    The Javits fellowships program provides fellowships of up 
to $14,400 to students of superior ability pursuing doctoral 
study in the arts, humanities, and social sciences. The 
decision to terminate this program was one of the most 
difficult faced by the Committee. Unlike most higher education 
programs, Javits fellowships are awarded directly to students 
rather than to institutions. The Committee strongly supports 
the goals of the program in awarding fellowships to superior 
students in the designated fields. Nevertheless, the fellowship 
recipients are not selected on the basis of need, funding is 
not targeted to underrepresented populations, and fellowships 
do not support study in designated areas of national need. 
Therefore, the Committee has taken the difficult decision to 
terminate this program with the understanding that the 
authorizing committees of jurisdiction intend to consider 
legislation which would address these concerns in restructuring 
the delivery of federal higher education assistance.

Graduate assistance in areas of national need

    The bill provides $27,252,000 for the graduate assistance 
in areas of national need (GAANN) program, the same as the 
budget request and the 1995 appropriation. The program awards 
grants to institutions of higher education to provide 
fellowships of up to five years and $14,400 to economically 
disadvantaged students, with emphasis on those from 
traditionally underrepresented backgrounds, who have 
demonstrated academic excellence, and who are pursuing graduate 
education in designated areas of national need. In 1995, the 
Secretary designated chemistry, engineering, mathematics, 
physics, biology and computer and information sciences as the 
areas of national need.
    The Committee believes that this program represents a high 
priority for the country by virtue of its emphasis on student 
financial need, underrepresented groups, academic excellence, 
and study in areas of national need. Nevertheless, the 
Committee believes that funding should more appropriately be 
awarded directly to students rather than institutions of higher 
education.

Faculty development fellowships

    The bill includes no funding for the faculty development 
fellowships program, $3,732,000 less than the 1995 
appropriation and the budget request. H.R. 1944 rescinds 
$3,520,000 of the 1995 appropriation to terminate the program.
    The faculty development fellowships program provides 
approximately 450 fellowships to minority undergraduate 
students seeking faculty positions and minority faculty seeking 
doctorates. The Committee notes that the program duplicates 
federal student financial assistance programs which will 
provide over $30 billion in assistance in 1996 and which are 
available to individuals previously supported through the 
faculty development fellowships program.

School, college, and university partnerships

    The bill includes no funding for the school, college, and 
university partnerships program, a decrease of $3,893,000 below 
the 1995 appropriation and the budget request. The program 
provides funds to institutions of higher education which have 
entered agreements with secondary schools, businesses, labor 
organization or other public or private agencies to improve the 
academic skills of students and enhance their employment 
prospects following graduation. The program awards grants up to 
$1,000,000 and five years.
    The Committee notes that this program duplicates the 
purposes of the Tech-Prep, School-to-Work and other federal 
education and job training programs. In addition, the program 
awards funds to consortia to perform local and private 
responsibilities. In support of continued funding, the budget 
request states, ``institutions of higher education and American 
businesses have a vested interest in ensuring that American 
secondary schools produce students who are well prepared to 
enter higher education or the workplace.'' For this very 
reason, the Committee believes the program does not serve a 
federal responsibility and should not be funded with limited 
federal resources. Driven by this very self interest and 
responsibility, many schools and businesses are already working 
together to better perform their responsibility of providing 
students with the basic skills necessary to function in the 
work place. In addition, only 11 school, college and university 
partnerships were awarded in 1995, far to few to generate 
significant or coordinated nationwide progress toward program 
goals.

Legal training for the disadvantaged (CLEO)

    The bill includes no funding for the legal training for the 
disadvantaged program, the same as the budget request and the 
Reinventing Government recommendations and $2,964,000 below the 
1995 appropriation. This program makes biennial non-competitive 
(earmarked) grants to the Council on Legal Education 
Opportunity (CLEO) to prepare economically-disadvantaged 
students or those with insufficient academic credentials for 
admission to law school.
    The Committee concurs with the budget request on the basis 
that this program does not perform a federal responsibility and 
should more appropriately be funded with private resources 
which already represent 40% of the CLEO budget.

                           HOWARD UNIVERSITY

    The bill includes $170,366,000 for Howard University, 
$34,297,000 below the 1995 funding level and $25,597,000 below 
the 1996 request. Howard University is located in the District 
of Columbia and has 17 schools and colleges. Direct 
appropriations for Howard University are authorized by 20 
U.S.C. 123, originally passed in 1867.

Academic program

    The bill includes $140,877,000 for the academic program at 
Howard University, $15,653,000 below the 1995 appropriation and 
$17,453,000 below the 1996 budget request. Howard University 
provides undergraduate liberal arts, graduate and professional 
instruction. Masters degrees are offered in over 85 fields and 
Doctor of Philosophy degrees in 24 fields. Howard currently 
enrolls 12,000 students including 8,700 undergraduates and 
3,300 graduate students.

Endowment grant

    The bill does not include funding for the endowment 
matching grant program at Howard University, which is 
$9,030,000 below the 1995 appropriation and $3,530,000 below 
the request.

Research

    The bill does not include funding for research at Howard 
University, a reduction of $4,614,000 below both the 1995 
amount and the budget request.

Howard University Hospital

    The bill includes $29,489,000 for the Howard University 
Hospital, the same level as both the 1995 amount and the budget 
request. The hospital serves as a major acute and ambulatory 
care center for the inner city of the District of Columbia. It 
provides both inpatient and outpatient services and serves as a 
facility for training physicians, nurses, and other 
professional and technical health care personnel. The direct 
Federal appropriation partly finances these activities.

Construction

    The bill does not include funding for construction, which 
is $5,000,000 below the 1995 level. No funds were requested in 
the budget for this purpose.

         COLLEGE HOUSING AND ACADEMIC FACILITIES LOANS PROGRAM

Federal administration

    The bill includes $700,000 for the Federal administration 
of the college housing and academic facilities loan program, 
$58,000 below the 1995 appropriation and $327,000 below the 
budget request. Under the terms of the Federal Credit Reform 
Act of 1990, these funds reimburse the Department for salaries 
and expenses that are directly related to the administration of 
the loan program. These costs are incurred for the continuation 
of the existing loan program, whether or not new borrowing 
authority is provided during the current fiscal year.
    The bill does not include authority for the Department to 
make new loans during 1996.

HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY CAPITAL AND FINANCING PROGRAM

Federal administration

    The bill includes $166,000 for the administration of the 
historically black college and university capital financing 
program authorized under part B of title VII of the Higher 
Education Act. This amount is $181,000 below the 1995 
appropriation and the same as the budget request. This program 
is intended to make capital available for repair and renovation 
of facilities at historically black colleges and universities. 
In exceptional circumstances, capital provided under the 
program can be used for construction or acquisition of 
facilities.

Bond subsidies

    Under this program, a private, for-profit ``designated 
bonding authority'' issues construction bonds to raise capital 
for loans to historically black colleges and universities for 
construction projects. The Department of Education provides 
insurance for these bonds, guaranteeing full payment of 
principal and interest to bond holders. Federally insured bonds 
and unpaid interest are limited by statute to $357 million. The 
letter of credit limitation establishes the total amount of 
bonds which can be issued by the designated bonding authority. 
The credit limitation must be explicitly stated in an 
appropriation act, according to the authorizing legislation.

            EDUCATION RESEARCH, STATISTICS, AND IMPROVEMENT

    The bill includes $255,107,000 for education research, 
statistics, and improvement programs. This amount is 
$177,957,000 less than the 1996 budget request, and $68,860,000 
below the 1995 level. This account supports education research 
authorized under the Educational Research, Development, 
Dissemination, and Improvement Act of 1994, title IX of P.L. 
103-227; the National Center for Education Statistics and the 
National Assessment of Educational Progress authorized by the 
National Education Statistics Act of 1994, title VI of P.L. 
103-382; and a variety of other discretionary programs for 
educational improvement. Throughout the bill, the Committee has 
provided no funding for a broad array of research, 
demonstration and technical assistance activities supported by 
individual line item appropriations. In doing so, the Committee 
has also indicated that funding for high priority activities 
could be funded by the Office of Educational Research and 
Improvement. Funding for the core research activity is provided 
with a substantial increase. The Committee expects OERI to 
review, and reduce or eliminate funding of low priority or 
ineffective activities, and to fund higher priority research, 
demonstration, dissemination and technical assistance 
activities currently funded elsewhere in the bill.
    In last year's report, the Committee indicated that:

          . . . [M]uch more can be done to consolidate and 
        focus Departmental research activities. . . . In fact, 
        the Committee notes that more research funds remain 
        outside of OERI in the budget request than within OERI.

    The Committee remains concerned that the fragmentation of 
research, demonstration and evaluation authorities continues to 
plague the Department and that there seems little coordination 
among these different authorities.
    The Committee instructs the Department to, within 30 days 
of the passage of this bill in the House of Representatives, to 
provide the Committee with a listing of all research, 
demonstration, dissemination and evaluation authorities and the 
funding levels for each authority. The Committee further 
instructs the Secretary to designate a senior official of the 
Department to coordinate all Departmental research, 
demonstration, dissemination and evaluation activities.
    The Committee also instructs the Department to develop and 
submit a comprehensive research, demonstration, dissemination 
and evaluation plan that indicates Departmental programmatic 
goals to be achieved through these activities and how each 
separate program or activity supports these overall goals.
    The Committee is pleased that Office of Education Research 
and Improvement is considering supporting outcomes-based 
research to quantify the degree to which involvement in one-to-
one mentoring programs contributes to the academic performance 
of children placed at-risk. The Committee encourages OERI to 
place a high priority on this research and demonstration 
initiative within the funds provided.
    The Committee encourages the Office of Education Research 
and Improvement to expand the existing programs through which 
local community-based cultural organizations collaborate 
formally with local schools to provide music education and to 
infuse music into science and math curricula.

Research

    The Committee recommends $106,447,000 for educational 
research, an increase of $20,247,000 over the 1995 amount, and 
$8,847,000 above the budget request. The Office of Educational 
Research and Improvement conducts research and development 
activities, which are newly authorized and restructured under 
the Educational Research, Development, Dissemination, and 
Improvement Act of 1994, title IX of P.L. 103-227. The 1994 Act 
establishes a National Educational Research Policy and 
Priorities Board within the Office of Educational Research and 
Improvement, and authorizes five new national research 
institutes for the following subject areas: (1) student 
achievement, curriculum, and assessment; (2) education of at-
risk students; (3) educational governance, finance, policy-
making, and management; (4) early childhood development and 
education; and (5) postsecondary education, libraries, and 
lifelong learning. The Assistant Secretary is authorized to 
support activities to increase the participation of minority 
researchers and institutions as well as research and 
development centers, in order to support the objectives of the 
national research institutes. A new national education 
dissemination system is established to coordinate various 
dissemination activities, including an electronic network 
linking various offices and activities at the Department of 
Education; maintain the 16 Educational Resources Information 
Center Clearinghouses (ERIC); identify successful educational 
programs and disseminate information about them; provide 
contracts for the operation of regional educational 
laboratories to conduct research and development, provide 
technical assistance, promote education reform, and assist 
rural education; including learning grant institutions and 
district education agents; support a teacher research 
dissemination demonstration program; and operate the National 
Library of Education. The bill includes funding for the 
regional educational laboratories program including rural 
activities. These labs, whose work is defined for them by their 
governing boards, determine the educational needs of their 
respective regions and help meet those needs through applied 
research and technical assistance. The bill specifically 
prohibits the use of federal funds to support the Goals 2000 
Community Partnership Program, consistent with the Committee's 
intent to end this program.
    The Committee applauds the important work to improve 
education being conducted by the National Board for 
Professional Teaching Standards, and urges the Department of 
Education to continue this work out of the funds provided to 
OERI.

Statistics

    The Committee recommends $48,153,000 for the activities of 
the National Center for Education Statistics, exclusive of the 
National Assessment of Educational Progress. This amount is the 
same as the 1995 amount, and $8,847,000 below the budget 
request. Statistics activities are authorized under the 
National Education Statistics Act of 1994, title VI of P.L. 
103-382. The Center collects, analyzes, and reports statistics 
on all levels of education in the United States. Activities are 
carried out directly and through grants and contracts. Major 
publications include ``The Condition of Education'' and 
``Digest of Education Statistics.'' Other products include 
projections of enrollments, teacher supply and demand, and 
educational expenditures. Technical assistance to State and 
local education agencies and postsecondary institutions is 
provided.

Assessment

    The Committee recommends $32,757,000 for the National 
Assessment of Educational Progress, the same as the 1995 
amount, and $5,243,000 below the budget request. The Assessment 
is authorized under section 411 of the National Education 
Statistics Act of 1994, and is the only nationally 
representative survey of educational ability and achievement of 
American students. The primary goal of the Assessment is to 
determine and report the status and trends of the knowledge and 
skills of students, subject by subject. Subject areas assessed 
in the past have included reading, writing, mathematics, 
science, and social studies, as well as citizenship, 
literature, art, and music. The Assessment is operated by 
contractors through competitive awards made by the National 
Center for Education Statistics; a National Assessment 
Governing Board formulates the policy guidelines for the 
program. Of the funds provided, $3,000,000 is available for the 
Governing Board.
     The Committee provided the maximum funding level possible 
for the National Assessment of Educational Progress given its 
constrained funding ceiling. Under this program, states are 
able to obtain international benchmarks in math and science. 
The Committee urges the Department to utilize additional funds 
that may be available to assure that all states have access to 
these benchmarks.

Fund for improvement of education

    The Committee recommends $36,750,000 for the fund for 
improvement of education, the same as the budget request and 
the 1995 level. The fund has a broad focus on activities 
related to the national education goals and systemic education 
reform, as well as activities that identify and disseminate 
innovative educational approaches.

Civics education

     The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for civics education, 
$1,463,000 below the budget request and $1,463,000 below the 
1995 level. Under civics education, a sole source award is made 
to the Center for Civic Education for its ``We the People'' 
program.

Eisenhower professional development national activities

    The bill includes no funds for Eisenhower professional 
development national activities, $35,000,000 below the budget 
request and $21,356,000 below the 1995 level. The purpose of 
this program is to support activities of a national 
significance related to professional development in core 
subject areas. The Committee believes that high priority 
activities funded under this authority can be funded under 
broader authorities within OERI.

Javits gifted and talented students education

    The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the Jacob K. Javits 
Gifted and Talented Students Education Act, $6,521,000 below 
the budget request and $1,921,000 below the 1995 amount. This 
program provides assistance to State and local education 
agencies, higher education institutions, and other agencies for 
research, demonstration, training, and other activities to 
identify and meet the educational needs of gifted and talented 
students. The Committee believes that high priority activities 
funded under this authority can be funded under broader 
authorities within OERI.

National writing project

    For the national writing project, authorized under title II 
of the Education Council Act of 1991, the bill includes no 
funds, the same as the budget request and $3,212,000 below the 
1995 amount. A single grant is awarded directly to the National 
Writing Project, a nonprofit educational organization 
affiliated with the University of California at Berkeley. 
Activities include training programs and classroom research 
related to effective writing programs. This demonstration 
project has been funded since 1976 and, according to the 
Administration, ``. . . [H]as . . . amply demonstrated . . . a 
strategy for improving the teaching of writing. It should now 
be supported at the initiative of State and local educational 
agencies. . . .''

National Diffusion Network

     The Committee recommends no funds for the National 
Diffusion Network, $14,480,000 below the budget request and 
$11,470,000 below the 1995 amount. The National Diffusion 
Network validates effective and promising programs and 
practices for distribution to schools. Funds are distributed to 
state facilitators for state programs and national programs. 
The Committee believes that high priority activities funded 
under this authority can be funded under broader authorities 
within OERI.

Technology for education

    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for Education 
Technology: technology for education, $58,000,000 below the 
budget request and $2,500,000 above the 1995 amount. The 
purpose of this program is to support technology applications 
in elementary and secondary schools, professional development 
in educational technology, and technology-related services in 
nationally significant activities.
    The Committee believes that assessments of projects shall 
include comparisons with students from other countries and 
participation from businesses, corporations, related agencies, 
and universities and colleges.

Star schools

    The bill includes no funds for the star schools program, 
$30,000,000 below the budget request, and $25,000,000 below the 
1995 amount. This program supports the development of statewide 
or multi-State telecommunications partnerships. Among their 
activities, these partnerships have sought to increase the 
availability of courses in mathematics, science, and foreign 
languages; serve educationally disadvantaged students; and 
train teachers in the use of telecommunications equipment. The 
budget request indicates that this program is to demonstrate 
the potential of technology to create learning opportunities. 
The Committee, consistent with its policy throughout the bill, 
feels that these activities should be funded through broader 
demonstration authorities.

Ready to learn television

     The Committee recommends no funds for ready to learn 
television, $7,000,000 below the budget request, and $7,000,000 
below the 1995 level. Program objectives are to develop and 
distribute educational and instructional video programming for 
preschool and elementary school children and their parents. The 
Committee, consistent with its policy throughout the bill, 
feels that these activities should be funded through broader 
demonstration authorities.

Telecommunications Demonstration Project for Mathematics

     The Committee recommends no funds for Telecommunications 
Demonstration Project for Mathematics, $2,250,000 below the 
budget request, and $1,125,000 below the 1995 level. Program 
objectives are to support a national demonstration project 
based on telecommunication and secondary level with regard to 
new State Standards in mathematics. The Committee believes that 
high priority activities funded under this authority can be 
funded under broader authorities of the Office of Educational 
Research and Improvement.

                               LIBRARIES

    The bill includes $101,227,000 for programs of assistance 
to libraries. This amount is $42,934,000 below the 1995 
appropriation and $5,700,000 below the Administration's 1996 
budget request. The programs in this account are authorized by 
the Library Services and Construction Act and title II of the 
Higher Education Act.

Public library services

    The Committee provides $83,227,000 for public library 
services, $5,908,000 below the budget request and the same as 
the 1995 level. These activities are authorized under title I 
of the Library Services and Construction Act. Formula grants 
are made to the States based on population, after each State 
receives an initial grant of $200,000, with a reservation of 
1.5 percent of the funds reserved for services to Indians, and 
0.5 percent for native Hawaiians. States spend their grants to 
extend and improve public library services in areas that are 
without services or in which services are inadequate, and to 
make library services more accessible to previously underserved 
population groups, such as the elderly or those living in 
institutions. Title I grants may also be used to enhance 
library technology, or to provide innovative services--
including library services to child care facilities, 
intergenerational library programs in which older adults assist 
school-age children, local library literacy centers, and drug 
abuse prevention programs. These are matching grants, with the 
State share varying in relation to personal income per capita. 
Specified portions of appropriations above $60,000,000 will be 
devoted to major urban resource libraries.

Public library construction

    The bill provides no funds for public library construction, 
$17,792,000 below the 1995 amount and the Administration 
request. These activities assist public library construction 
programs, especially those that increase access to the 
disabled, increase energy efficiency, or accommodate new forms 
of library technology.

Interlibrary cooperation

    The Committee provides $18,000,000 for interlibrary 
cooperation, $5,700,000 below the 1995 amount and the 
Administration requested no funds for this program. These 
activities support cooperative projects among all types of 
libraries to pool their resources efficiently, including 
computerized bibliographic data bases, centralized technical 
services, and application of new technologies to library 
services.

Library literacy programs

    The bill includes no funds for library literacy programs, 
$8,026,000 below the 1995 level; the Administration requested 
no funds for this program. These activities have the purpose of 
promoting literacy training in the Nation's public libraries to 
combat illiteracy among adults, and complement the adult basic 
education services supported under the Adult Education Act. 
Activities funded under this narrow authority are also 
supportable under the broader adult basic education authorities 
of the Adult Education Act and should be funded there.

Library education and training

    The Committee provides no funds for library education and 
training, $4,916,000 below the 1995 amount; the Administration 
requested no funds for this program. Discretionary grants are 
provided to institutions of higher education and library 
professional organizations for training or retraining of 
librarians. The Committee believes that high priority 
activities funded under this authority can be funded under 
broader authorities of the Office of Educational Research and 
Improvement.

Research and demonstrations

    The bill provides no funds for library research and 
demonstrations, $6,500,000 below the 1995 amount; the 
Administration requested no funds for this program. This 
program provides discretionary grants and contracts to support 
projects to improve libraries and information technologies, and 
to disseminate the results of these projects. The Committee 
believes that high priority activities funded under this 
authority can be funded under broader authorities of the Office 
of Educational Research and Improvement.

                        DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT

     The bill includes $409,424,000 for departmental management 
(salaries and expenses) at the Department of Education. This 
amount is the $35,359,000 below the 1995 appropriation and 
$78,270,000 less than the Administration's 1996 budget request. 
These activities are authorized by the Department of Education 
Organization Act, P.L. 96-88, and include costs associated with 
the management and operations of the Department as well as 
separate costs associated with the Office for Civil Rights and 
the Office of the Inspector General.
    The Committee is concerned that the Departments of Labor, 
Health and Human Services, Education and other agencies, such 
as the Social Security Administration, have no 
institutionalized forum for ongoing interdepartmental 
collaboration. the absence leads to fragmentation and 
duplication of efforts. The Committee is pleased to note that 
the Working Group on Comprehensive Early Childhood Family 
Centers has begun its work and looks forward to receiving its 
report no later than October 6th. The Committee urges the 
Departments to institutionalize interdisciplinary collaboration 
at all levels and to coordinate future initiatives and 
community based planning procedures, regulations and to act to 
remove the barriers they present to coordinated services at the 
local level.

Program administration

    The bill includes $327,319,000 for program administration, 
an amount $28,702,000 below the 1995 appropriation and a 
decrease of $43,525,000 from the 1996 budget request. These 
funds support the staff and other costs of administering 
programs and activities at the Department. Items include 
personnel compensation and health, retirement and other 
benefits as well as travel, rent, telephones, utilities, 
postage fees, data processing, printing, equipment, supplies, 
technology training, consultants and other contractual 
services. The Committee has reduced the base funding for this 
account by 7.5% below the 1995 level. In addition, executive 
direction activities have been reduced by a further 7.5% for a 
total reduction of 15%. This includes the Offices of the 
Secretary and Deputy Secretary and such other offices as 
Planning and Evaluation, Legislation and Congressional Affairs, 
Public Affairs, and Intergovernmental and Interagency Affairs. 
It is the intent of the Committee that no funds provided in 
this or any other appropriation may be used to fund the 
following committees or councils:
          Historically Black Colleges/Universities Capital 
        Financing Board
          National Board of the Fund for the Improvement of 
        Postsecondary Education
          Javits Fellows Program Fellowship Board
          National Academy of Science, Space, and Technology 
        Board
          President's Advisory Commission on Education 
        Excellence for Hispanic Americans
          President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black 
        Colleges and Universities.

Headquarters renovation

    The bill provides no funding for Headquarters Renovation. 
The Administration requested $20,000,000 for this program; no 
funds were provided in 1995.

Office for Civil Rights

    The bill includes $53,951,000 for the salaries and expenses 
of the Office for Civil Rights, an amount $4,374,000 below the 
1995 appropriation and $8,833,000 below the budget request. 
This Office is responsible for enforcing laws that prohibit 
discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, 
sex, handicap, and age in all programs and institutions that 
receive funds from the Department. These laws extend to 50 
State educational agencies, 16,000 local educational agencies, 
3,500 institutions of higher education, as well as to 
proprietary schools, State rehabilitation agencies, libraries, 
and other institutions receiving Federal funds. These 
institutions and agencies generated over 5,000 discrimination 
complaints in 1993, according to the Office for Civil Rights. 
In addressing these complaints, the Office's duties include 
monitoring and performing compliance reviews, investigating 
allegations, offering advice on corrective and remedial 
actions, and providing technical assistance to help recipients 
achieve voluntary compliance.

Office of the Inspector General

    The bill includes $28,154,000 for the Office of the 
Inspector General, an amount $2,283,000 below the 1995 
appropriation and $5,912,000 less than the 1996 budget request. 
This Office has authority to inquire into all program and 
administrative activities of the Department, as well as into 
related activities of grant and contract recipients. It 
conducts audits and investigations to determine compliance with 
applicable laws and regulations, to check alleged fraud and 
abuse, efficiency of operations, and effectiveness of results.

                       TITLE IV--RELATED AGENCIES

                      Armed Forces Retirement Home

    The bill includes authority to expend $58,186,000 from the 
Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund for operations and 
construction activities at the United States Soldiers' and 
Airmen's Home and the United States Naval Home, which is 
$1,131,000 below the 1995 level and $934,000 below the 
President's request.
    The Committee commends the Armed Forces Retirement Home 
Board for undertaking a strategic study/economic analysis which 
will provide data on which to base long term strategic 
planning. The study will provide estimates of optimal size of 
each operating location of the Armed Forces Retirement Home; 
identify the most cost effective location (or combination) for 
economic performance; and identify the most cost effective use 
of AFRH facilities including renovation, new construction, and 
partial or complete closure.
    The Committee intends to make future appropriations 
consistent with the recommendations of the study and, as such, 
directs the Armed Forces Retirement Home to develop its FY 1997 
budget request in accordance with the outcomes of the strategic 
study/economic analysis.

Operation and maintenance

    The bill provides $45,090,000 for the operations and 
maintenance of the Soldiers' and Airmen's Home, which is a 
decrease of $276,000 below the 1995 appropriation and the same 
level as the President's request. The bill also provides 
$11,045,000 for the operations and maintenance of the United 
States Naval Home, which is the same level as the 1995 
appropriation and $934,000 below the President's request.

Capital outlay

    The bill provides $1,483,000 for capital projects at the 
Soldiers' and Airmen's Home, which is $1,017,000 below the 1995 
level and the same as the President's request. The bill also 
provides $568,000 for capital projects at the United States 
Naval Home, which is $162,000 above the 1995 amount and the 
same level as the President's request.

             Corporation for National and Community Service

                  domestic volunteer service programs

    The bill provides $168,974,000 for the Domestic Volunteer 
Service Programs which are part of the Corporation for National 
and Community Service. The recommended amount is a decrease of 
$45,650,000 below the comparable 1995 level and $93,926,000 
below the request. Funding for the Americorps program, which is 
also administered by the Corporation for National and Community 
Service, is provided in the VA/HUD and Independent Agencies 
appropriations bill.

VISTA

    The bill provides $25,603,000 for the Volunteers in Service 
to America (VISTA) program, a decrease of $17,073,000 below the 
comparable 1995 level and $28,197,000 below the request. The 
VISTA program supports participants who recruit volunteers and 
organize community volunteer activities but who do not provide 
direct volunteer services.
    The bill does not include separate funding for the VISTA 
Literacy Corps, a decrease of $5,024,000 below the 1995 funding 
level and $6,200,000 below the request. The Committee notes 
that this program duplicates the purposes of several other 
literacy programs funded elsewhere in this bill. Activities 
previously performed under this program may be conducted under 
the regular VISTA program if deemed sufficiently high priority 
to merit the allocation of limited federal resources.

National Senior Volunteer Corps

    The bill provides a total of $114,548,000 for the National 
Senior Volunteer Corps, which is $21,216,000 below the 1995 
level and $53,852,000 below the request.
    The bill provides $57,640,000 for the Foster Grandparents 
Program, which is $10,172,000 below the 1995 appropriation and 
$21,170,000 below the request. This program provides volunteer 
service opportunities for low-income people aged 60 and over.
    The bill includes $26,557,000 for the Senior Companion 
Program, a decrease of $4,687,000 below the 1995 appropriation 
and $16,533,000 below the request. The program provides project 
grants to private, non-profit organizations and State and local 
public agencies to offer volunteer service opportunities to 
low-income individuals aged 60 and over. These volunteers 
assist older adults with physical, mental or emotional 
impairments which put them at risk for institutionalization.
    The bill provides $30,351,000 for the Retired Senior 
Volunteer Program, a decrease of $5,357,000 below the 1995 
level and $14,149,000 below the request. This program provides 
part-time volunteer service opportunities for low-income 
individuals aged 60 and over to recruit volunteers and organize 
volunteer activities relating to a variety of social needs.
    The bill does not provide separate funding for senior 
demonstration programs, a decrease of $1,000,000 below the 1995 
level and $2,000,000 below the request. The Committee does not 
believe that these demonstrations represent a sufficiently high 
priority to merit the allocation of limited federal funding 
during this period of fiscal constraint.

Program administration

    The bill provides $28,823,000 for program administration, a 
7.5% reduction consistent with the bill wide policy regarding 
administrative functions. This recommendation represents a 
decrease of $2,337,000 below the 1995 level and $5,677,000 
below the request.

                  Corporation for Public Broadcasting

    The bill provides $240,000,000 for the Corporation for 
Public Broadcasting (CPB) for fiscal year 1998, a decrease of 
$20,000,000 below the comparable 1997 funding level and 
$56,400,000 below the President's request. This level of 
funding will continue the process of graduating the CPB from 
annual federal appropriations with the goal of achieving 
independence from the federal government. The Committee will 
continue to work with other congressional committees of 
jurisdiction to facilitate this transition in a manner which 
preserves a vital public broadcasting industry.
    The bill includes a provision requiring that payments to 
CPB from the Treasury be made on an ``as needed'' basis rather 
than the current practice of providing the entire appropriation 
directly to CPB at the beginning of the fiscal year. The bill 
includes a further provision overriding the requirement in the 
law to fund an independent production organization.
    The Committee urges the CPB in allocating reduced funding 
to consider the impact of that reduced allocation on rural 
radio and TV stations, particularly those which are sole 
service providers, have minimal donor bases, and serve areas 
with limited cable alternatives.

               Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service

    The bill includes $31,896,000 for the Federal Mediation and 
Conciliation Service, $552,000 above the 1995 appropriation and 
$1,394,000 below the budget request.
    The Service attempts to prevent and minimize labor-
management disputes having a significant impact on interstate 
commerce or national defense, except in the railroad and 
airline industries. The agency conducts dispute mediation, 
preventive mediation, and arbitration, and convenes boards of 
inquiry appointed by the President in emergency disputes. In 
addition, the Service offers alternative dispute resolution 
services and training to other Federal agencies to reduce 
litigation costs and speed federal administrative proceedings.
    The 1996 appropriation includes $632,000 to begin 
implementation of the Service's Strategic Information Plan. 
According to the Plan, investments in improved information 
management will result in large savings in resources (staffing 
and funding) in the future. During the hearing on the 1996 
budget request, it was estimated that personnel savings of 
$2,400,000 per year will occur. The Committee directs the 
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to prepare a report 
prior to November 17, 1995 which outlines anticipated savings 
in personnel and funding, including when such savings are 
expected to occur.

            Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

    The bill includes $6,467,000 for the Commission, which is 
$267,000 above the 1995 appropriation and the same level as the 
budget request.
    The Commission is responsible for reviewing the enforcement 
activities of the Secretary of Labor under the Federal Mine 
Safety and Health Act and for protecting miners against 
unlawful discrimination. The Commission's administrative law 
judges hear and decide cases initiated by the Secretary of 
Labor, mine operators, or miners. The five-member Commission 
hears appeals from administrative law judge decisions, rules on 
petitions for discretionary review, and may direct, of its own 
initiative, review of cases that may present unusual questions 
of law.
    Consistent with the request made during the hearing on the 
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission's budget, the 
Commission is directed to report to the Committee prior to the 
1997 budget hearing on its plans to increase productivity in 
case disposition and appellate review and reduce personnel. 
This report, which the Committee recommends should take the 
form of a strategic plan, should include specific objectives 
and time frames for accomplishing them.

        National Commission on Libraries and Information Science

    The bill includes $450,000 for the Commission, which is 
$451,000 below the 1995 appropriation and $512,000 below the 
budget request.
    The Commission is charged with advising the President and 
Congress on national policy in the library and information 
field, developing overall plans for meeting national library 
and information needs, and coordinating activities at the 
Federal, State and local levels.
    Beginning with the 1996 appropriation, the Committee 
intends a two-year phase-out of Federal support for the 
Commission. In times of fiscal constraint, the Committee feels 
that activities of the Commission, which focus on developing 
policies, not providing services, are not a sufficiently high 
priority to merit the allocation of severely constrained 
resources. The Committee notes that in 1995 the Commission 
received $475,000 from the Departments of Education and State, 
which was a 50 percent increase over appropriated funding. The 
Committee encourages the Commission to continue to engage in 
such activities to supplement, and eventually replace, the 
Federal appropriation.

                     National Council on Disability

    The bill includes $1,397,000 for the Council, which is 
$396,000 below the 1995 level and $433,000 below the budget 
request.
    The Council is charged with making recommendations to the 
President, the Congress, the Rehabilitation Services 
Administration, and the National Institute on Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research on public policy issues of concern to 
individuals with disabilities. The Council focuses on 
eliminating barriers that prevent persons with disabilities 
from actively participating in community and family life. The 
Council also monitors implementation of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act.
    Due to the fiscal constraints that will continue to shape 
the budgetary environment, the Committee encourages the Council 
to negotiate memoranda of understanding with various agencies 
to supplement the declining Federal appropriation.

                     National Education Goals Panel

    The bill does not provide new account-level funding for the 
National Education Goals Panel, a decrease of $2,785,000 below 
the request. The Committee believes that during periods of 
fiscal constraint, limited federal funds should be allocated 
for direct services.

          National Education Standards and Improvement Council

    The bill does not provide new account-level funding for the 
National Education Standards and Improvement Council, a 
decrease of $3,000,000 below the request. The Committee 
believes that during periods of fiscal constraint, limited 
federal funds should be allocated for direct services.

                     National Labor Relations Board

    The bill provides $123,233,000 for the National Labor 
Relations Board, a decrease of $52,814,000 below the 1995 
funding level and $57,901,000 below the request.
    The agency receives, investigates, and prosecutes unfair 
labor practice charges filed by businesses, labor unions, and 
individuals. It also schedules and conducts representation 
elections. The five-member Board considers cases in which 
administrative law judge decisions are appealed.
    The bill includes a legislative provision to limit the 
discretion of the Board to investigate and prosecute charges 
under Section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act based on 
employer actions with regard to employees or agents of labor 
organizations, pending a decision on this matter by the Supreme 
Court. The bill also includes provisions limiting the 
circumstances in which the Board may pursue injunctive relief 
pursuant to section 10(j) of the Act including requirement of a 
four-fifths vote of the Board and requirement to provide named 
parties to an injunction the opportunity to review and respond 
to the General Counsel's memorandum of recommendations and to 
present oral evidence.

                        National Mediation Board

    The bill provides $8,000,000 for the National Mediation 
Board, a reduction of $519,000 below the 1995 amount and 
$993,000 below the request. The National Mediation Board 
mediates disputes over wages, hours, and working conditions 
that arise between employees and those railroad and airline 
carriers subject to the Railway Labor Act. The Board also 
resolves representation disputes involving labor organizations 
that wish to represent railroad or airline employees.

            Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

    The bill provides $8,200,000 for the Occupational Safety 
and Health Review Commission, an increase of $605,000 over the 
1995 appropriation and $73,000 over the request. The Commission 
adjudicates contested citations issued by the Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) against employers for 
violations of safety and health standards. The Commission's 
administrative law judges settle and decide cases at the 
initial level of review. The agency's three appointed 
Commissioners also review cases, issue rulings on complicated 
issues, and may direct review of any decision by an 
administrative law judge.
    The Committee commends the Commission for development of 
its strategic plan and implementation of cost cutting 
initiatives. The recommended funding is sufficient to fully 
automate the Commission in 1996 to continue productivity 
improvements so that increasing work loads may be handled by 
fewer employees.

                  Physician Payment Review Commission

    The bill includes authority to transfer $2,923,000 from the 
Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund to support 
the activities of the Physician Payment Review Commission, 
which is $1,253,000 below the amount available in 1995, and 
$1,177,000 below the budget request.
    The Commission serves as an independent agency to advise 
Congress and the Secretary of Health and Human Services on 
matters relating to Medicare physician reimbursement and health 
system reform. The Commission is required by law to report to 
Congress each year on adjusting Medicare physician payment 
rates, setting standards for expenditure growth, and monitoring 
access under Medicare. In addition, the Commission considers 
policies related to improving access under the Medicaid program 
and for underserved populations, controlling costs of 
employment-based health plans, physician training and 
licensure, medical malpractice reform, and ensuring quality 
care.
    The Committee has decreased funding for the Physician 
Payment Review Commission in anticipation of the merger of this 
Commission with the Prospective Payment Assessment Commission. 
Once merged, the Commissions will have an aggregate funding 
level of $6,190,000, a decrease of approximately 30 percent 
below the aggregate 1995 funding level. The Committee believes 
that this amount is sufficient to fund the essential activities 
of both Commissions subsequent to their merger.

               Prospective Payment Assessment Commission

    The bill includes authority to transfer $3,267,000 from the 
Medicare trust funds to support the activities of the 
Prospective Payment Assessment Commission. The amount 
recommended by the Committee is $1,400,000 below the 1995 level 
and $1,389,000 below the budget request.
    The Prospective Payment Assessment Commission advises the 
Congress and the Secretary of Health and Human Services on 
maintaining and updating Medicare payment policies for 
hospitals and other facility services. The Commission is also 
responsible for analysis of Medicaid hospital payments and 
issues related to health care reform. The Commission issues 
several reports required by Congress, including recommendations 
on the annual update of Medicare hospital payments and a 
general report on the impact of the Medicare program on the 
American health care system.
    The Committee has decreased funding for the Prospective 
Payment Assessment Commission in anticipation of the merger of 
this Commission with the Physician Payment Review Commission. 
The aggregate appropriations for both Commissions is 
$6,190,000, a decrease of approximately 30 percent below the 
aggregate 1995 funding level. The Committee believes that this 
amount is sufficient to fund the essential activities of both 
Commissions subsequent to their merger.

                       Railroad Retirement Board

                         dual benefits account

    The bill provides $239,000,000 for dual benefits, which is 
$15,000,000 less than the comparable 1995 amount and the same 
as the budget request. These funds are used to pay dual 
benefits to those retirees receiving both railroad retirement 
and social security benefits. The Committee has included bill 
language to permit a portion of these funds to be derived from 
income tax receipts on dual benefits, as authorized by law. It 
is estimated that approximately $17,000,000 may be derived in 
this manner, which is $2,000,000 less than the 1995 amount.

           federal payment to the railroad retirement account

    The bill includes $300,000 for interest earned on 
unnegotiated checks, the same as the 1995 amount and the budget 
request.

                      limitation on administration

    The bill includes $90,912,000 for administrative expenses 
of the Board which is the same as the 1995 amount and 
$1,788,000 below the request.
    The Board administers comprehensive retirement-survivor and 
unemployment-sickness insurance benefit programs for the 
nation's railroad workers and their families. This account 
limits the amount of funds in the railroad retirement and 
railroad unemployment insurance trust funds which may be used 
by the Board for administrative expenses.
    The Committee notes that Board workloads are declining as 
fewer applications are received for retirement, spousal, 
disability and unemployment and sickness benefit applications. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Board to aggressively 
re-examine and consolidate its regional office structure to 
most efficiently process these declining workloads.
    The bill provides for a consolidated limitation on 
administration in contrast to previous appropriations bill 
which provided separate appropriations from the trust funds and 
from general revenues.

                  special management improvement fund

    The bill provides $659,000 for the special management 
improvement fund, the same as the request and $981,000 less 
than the 1995 appropriation. This account provides additional 
trust funds to augment the normal administrative expenses to 
improve various activities such as claims processing, debt 
collection, fraud control, tax accounting, trust fund 
integrity, and information systems. The 1996 appropriation will 
provide the fifth and last year of funding for this initiative. 
The Committee commends the Board for meeting, and in some cases 
exceeding, the fourth year performance criteria established to 
measure the success of this initiative.

             limitation on the office of inspector general

    The bill includes $5,100,000 for the Inspector General, a 
decrease of $1,582,000 below the 1995 appropriation and 
$1,600,000 below the request. This account provides funding for 
the Inspector General to conduct and supervise audits and 
investigations of programs and operations of the Board. The 
funds are derived from the railroad retirement and railroad 
unemployment insurance trust funds.
    The Committee is concerned that the IG indicated during the 
hearing process that its highest priority is the investigation 
and prosecution of Medicare fraud. The Committee believes that 
the IG's principal concern ought to be safeguarding the 
railroad trust funds rather than the Medicare trust funds. 
Accordingly, the Committee reiterates its directive that the IG 
focus greater resources on management improvements at the Board 
as well as ensuring the integrity of the railroad unemployment 
and retirement trust funds.

                     Social Security Administration

                payments to social security trust funds

    The bill provides $22,641,000 for mandatory payments 
necessary to compensate the Social Security system for cash 
benefits paid out but for which no payroll tax is received. 
This is the same amount requested in the budget and a decrease 
of $2,453,000 from the amount provided in 1995. These funds 
reimburse the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and 
Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Funds for special payments to 
certain uninsured persons, costs incurred administering pension 
reform activities and interest lost on the value of benefit 
checks issued but not negotiated. This appropriation restores 
the trust funds to the position they would have been had they 
not borne these costs properly charged to the general funds.
    The amount provided includes $4,541,000 for the cost of 
special payments to a declining population of uninsured persons 
who were at least 72 years old in 1968 and attained retirement 
age before they could accumulate sufficient wage credits to 
qualify for benefits under the normal retirement formulas. This 
account also includes $1,100,000 for reimbursements to the 
trust funds for administrative costs incurred in providing 
private pension plan information to individuals and $17,000,000 
to reimburse the trust funds for the value of the interest for 
benefit checks issued but not negotiated.

                   additional administrative expenses

    The bill provides $10,000,000 for a new mandatory account 
for additional administrative expenses, the same as the budget 
request. Section 19141 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 
established the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit program 
which Social Security must administer. The law combined two 
existing United Mine Workers of America pension plans into a 
single fund and required that certain coal mine operators pay 
health benefit premiums for the new combined plan. Social 
Security assigned retired coal miners covered by the combined 
plan to coal operators and must now provide requested earnings 
records to mine operators and process appeals of assignments. 
The funding is available until expended.

               special benefits for disabled coal miners

     The bill provides $485,396,000 for special benefits for 
disabled coal miners in 1996, the same as the budget request 
and $42,478,000 less than in 1995. This amount does not include 
$180,000,000 in advance funding for the first quarter of 1996 
provided in the 1995 bill or $170,000,000 provided in this bill 
for the first quarter of 1997.
    This appropriation provides cash benefits to miners who are 
disabled because of black lung disease, and to widows and 
children of miners. The Social Security Administration was 
responsible for taking, processing, and paying claims for 
miners benefits filed from December 30, 1969 through June 30, 
1973. Since that time it has continued to take claims, but 
forwards most to the Department of Labor for adjudication and 
payment. The Social Security Administration will continue to 
pay benefits and maintain the beneficiary roll for the lifetime 
of all persons who filed during its jurisdiction. During 1996, 
the SSA expects to provide benefits to 138,000 miners, widows, 
and dependents who will receive average monthly benefits of 
$427.40.

                  supplemental security income program

    The bill provides $18,753,834,000 for the Supplemental 
Security Income program, not including $7,060,000,000 in 
advance funding provided in the 1995 bill. The recommendation 
is a decrease of $2,472,786,000 below the comparable 
appropriation for 1995 and $50,159,000 below the request.
    These funds are used to pay Federal cash benefits to 
approximately 6,457,000 aged, blind, and disabled persons with 
little or no income. The maximum monthly Federal benefit 
payable in 1996 is expected to be $472 for an individual and 
$709 for an eligible couple. In addition to federal benefits, 
the Social Security Administration administers a program of 
supplementary State benefits for those States which choose to 
participate. The funds are also used to reimburse the trust 
funds for the administrative costs of the program.
    The SSI appropriation includes $176,400,000 for beneficiary 
services, an increase of $33,000,000 over the 1995 level and 
the same as the request. This amount includes $142,000,000, an 
increase of $33,000,000 over the 1995 level and the same as the 
request, to support the referral and monitoring of certain 
disabled SSI recipients who are drug addicts or alcoholics and 
$34,000,000 to reimburse State vocational rehabilitation 
services agencies for successful rehabilitation of SSI 
recipients. Legislation enacted in August of 1994 and effective 
in February 1995 places a 36 month limit on SSI benefit 
payments to disabled individuals for whom drug addition or 
alcoholism is a contributing factor to the determination of 
disability. This new law requires suspension of benefits for 
non-compliance with treatment. Currently, 49 states and the 
District of Columbia monitor SSI beneficiary treatment 
compliance. The large increase in funding for drug addict and 
alcoholic monitoring will permit SSA to ensure that all such 
SSI recipients are undergoing necessary treatment or are 
terminated from the benefit program.
    The bill also contains $6,700,000 for research and 
demonstration activities conducted under section 1110 of the 
Social Security Act, a decrease of $21,000,000 below the 1995 
level and the same as the budget request.
    The Committee is concerned by the extent of unemployment 
among people with disabilities and believes that a 
demonstration quantifying the relationship between 
participation in disability sport and economic independence is 
an appropriate use of funds.
    The bill includes the traditional indefinite appropriation 
requested by the Administration to finance unanticipated 
shortfalls in the program during the last three months of the 
fiscal year, as well as the $9,260,000,000 advance 
appropriation requested for the first quarter of 1997.

                 limitation on administrative expenses

    The bill provides a total limitation on administrative 
expenses of the Social Security Administration of 
$5,910,268,000 to be funded from the Social Security trust 
funds, an increase of $356,931,000 over the comparable amount 
for 1995 and $299,134,000 below the request.
    The recommended amount is sufficient to enable the Agency 
to fully meet defined performance targets for the improvement 
of service in 14 specific areas as submitted to the Committee 
during the budget hearings. This large increase in funding will 
support continuing initiatives to streamline the disability 
determination process and fully automate agency administrative 
functions. These activities should directly contribute to a 
reduction of 1,058 FTEs, a 9% reduction in the ratio of 
supervisory staff to field staff, and a two-thirds reduction in 
overtime workyears.

Disability initiative

    The bill provides $407,000,000 for the disability 
initiative to streamline the disability processes and improve 
service for disabled individuals applying for and receiving 
disability payments under SSI and OASDI. This amount is an 
increase of $87,000,000 over the comparable 1995 amount and 
$127,000,000 less than the request. The recommended funding 
level will fully enable the agency to meet its performance 
goals relating to reducing pending claims and hearings, 
expediting claim and hearing processing, increasing the number 
of claims and hearings processed, improving fraud and abuse 
activities, improving administrative efficiency and reducing 
agency employment. The Committee wishes to emphasize that 
future funding for the disability initiative is contingent on 
satisfactory attainment of the performance goals submitted 
during the budget hearing process.

Automation initiative

    The bill provides $228,000,000 for the third year of the 5-
year automation initiative, an increase of $139,717,000 over 
the comparable 1995 amount and $129,000,000 below the request. 
The Committee has provided this large increase in funding in 
response to specific performance goals submitted to it by SSA 
during the budget hearings. The recommended amount will fully 
enable the agency to meet its first year goals relating to 
administrative information processing, level of office 
automation, percentage of supervisory staff, agency employment 
levels and workload processing. The Committee wishes to 
emphasize that future funding for the automation initiative is 
contingent on satisfactory attainment of the performance goals 
submitted during the budget hearings.

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

    The Committee directs the Social Security Administration to 
provide a summary of its current Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) 
surveillance projects to the Chronic Fatigue Interagency 
Coordinating Committee within 90 days of enactment of this 
bill. The Committee is concerned that the SSA has not 
established a CFS Advisory Committee to review current medical 
standards and investigate the training and information resource 
needs of regional SSA office as recommended in the report 
accompanying the 1995 bill. The Committee strongly recommends 
that the agency establish such a committee in 1996. The SSA is 
further encouraged to include medically accurate, up-to-date 
information on CFS in the Listing of Impairments and POMS 
manuals.

                      Office of Inspector General

    The bill includes $4,816,000 for the new Office of the 
Inspector General, the same as the comparable amount allocated 
for these activities in 1995 and $2,148,000 below the budget 
request. The bill also provides a limitation on trust fund 
transfers for the IG of $21,076,000, an increase of $5,000,000 
over the comparable amount allocated for these activities in 
1995 and $823,000 above the request. This new Office of 
Inspector General was created pursuant to P.L. 103-296.

                    United States Institute of Peace

    The bill provides $6,500,000 for the United States 
Institute of Peace, a decrease of $5,000,000 below the 1995 
appropriation and the request. The Institute was created in 
1984 to provide education and training, basic and applied 
research, and information services to promote conflict 
resolution. This recommendation represents one of the most 
difficult decisions taken by the Committee in this bill, and 
the Institute is encouraged to target limited funding to those 
activities having the greatest impact on the practice of 
diplomacy and conflict resolution.

                           General Provision

    Section 509.--The Committee has added a provision that 
clarifies that each State is and remains free not to fund 
abortions to the extent that the State in its sole discretion 
deems appropriate, except where the life of the mother would be 
endangered if the fetus were carried to term. This additional 
provision is not intended to effectuate any change in Federal 
law or policy from that enacted in the Committee's fiscal year 
1994 and 1995 appropriations Acts, but is designed instead to 
correct erroneous administrative and judicial understandings of 
those prior Acts and to provide clarification for fiscal year 
1996 and thereafter.

              House of Representatives Report Requirements

    The following items are included in accordance with various 
requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives:

                     inflationary impact statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4), rule XI of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee estimates that enactment of this 
bill would have no overall inflationary impact on prices and 
costs in the operation of the national economy.

                   comparison with budget resolution

    Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, requires that the report accompanying a bill providing 
new budget authority contain a statement detailing how the 
authority compares with the report submitted under section 602 
of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent 
resolution on the budget for the fiscal year. This information 
follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          602(b) allocation             This bill       
                     ---------------------------------------------------
                         Budget                    Budget               
                       authority     Outlays     authority     Outlays  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary:                                                          
    General Purposes       61.150       68,080       60,830       68,080
    Violent Crime                                                       
     Trust Fund.....           41           37           40           24
Mandatory...........      201,538      202,046      210,002      210,211
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bill provides no new spending authority as described in 
section 401(c)(2) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as amended.
    In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, the following information was provided to the 
Committee by the Congressional Budget Office:

                         five-year projections

    In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, the following table contains five-year projections 
associated with the budget authority provided in the 
accompanying bill:
                                                (In millions of dollars)
Budget authority in the bill............................         224,469
Outlays:
    1996................................................         177,494
    1997................................................          39,253
    1998................................................           6,618
    1999................................................           1,037
    2000................................................              67

          Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments

    In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(D) of Public Law 93-
344, the Congressional Budget Office has provided the following 
estimates of new budget authority and outlays provided by the 
accompanying bill for financial assistance to state and local 
governments:
                                                (In millions of dollars)
Budget authority........................................         104,260
Fiscal year 1996 outlays................................          82,993

                           transfer of funds

    Pursuant to clause 1(b), rule X of the House of 
Representatives, the following table is submitted describing 
the transfers of funds provided in the accompanying bill.
    The table shows, by Department and agency, the 
appropriations affected by such transfers.

             APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Account to which                    Account from which               
transfer is to be made     Amount    transfer is to be made     Amount  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Labor:                                                    
 Employment Standards                                                   
 Administration                                                         
    U.S. Postal                                                         
     Service:                                                           
        Special               (\1\)  Postal Service........        (\1\)
         Benefits.                                                      
    Salaries and         26,045,000  Black lung disability    26,045,000
     expenses.                        trust fund.                       
Departmental                                                            
 management:                                                            
    Salaries and         19,621,000  Black lung disability    19,621,000
     expenses.                        trust fund.                       
    Office of               287,000  Black lung disability       287,000
     Inspector General.               trust fund.                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Indefinite.                                                         

                              rescissions

    Pursuant to clause 1(b), rule X of the House of 
Representatives, the following table is submitted describing 
the rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill.

                  Rescissions Recommended in the bill

Department and Activity:
    Department of Health and Human Services: Low-income 
      home energy assistance............................  $1,000,000,000

            Compliance With Rule XIII, Cl. 3 (Ramseyer Rule)

    In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change 
is proposed is shown in roman):

          SECTION 444 OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROVISIONS ACT

      protection of the rights and privacy of parents and students

    Sec. 444. (a) * * *
    (b)(1) No funds shall be made available under any 
applicable program to any educational agency or institution 
which has a policy or practice of permitting the release of 
education records (or personally identifiable information 
contained therein other than directory information, as defined 
in paragraph (5) of subsection (a)) of students without the 
written consent of their parents to any individual, agency, or 
organization, other than to the following--
          (A) * * *
           * * * * * * *
          [(E) State and local officials or authorities to whom 
        such information is specifically allowed to be reported 
        or disclosed pursuant to State statute adopted--
                  [(i) before November 19, 1974, if the allowed 
                reporting or disclosure concerns the juvenile 
                justice system and such system's ability to 
                effectively serve the student whose records are 
                released, or
                  [(ii) after November 19, 1974, if--
                          [(I) the allowed reporting or 
                        disclosure concerns the juvenile 
                        justice system and such system's 
                        ability to effectively serve, prior to 
                        adjudication, the student whose records 
                        are released; and
                          [(II) the officials and authorities 
                        to whom such information is disclosed 
                        certify in writing to the educational 
                        agency or institution that the 
                        information will not be disclosed to 
                        any other party except as provided 
                        under State law without the prior 
                        written consent of the parent of the 
                        student.]
          (E) State and local officials or authorities to whom 
        such information is specifically--
                  (i) required to be reported or disclosed 
                pursuant to State statute adopted before 
                November 19, 1974;
                  (ii) allowed to be reported or disclosed 
                pursuant to State statue adopted before 
                November 19, 1974, if the allowed reporting or 
                disclosure concerns the juvenile justice system 
                and such system's ability to effectively serve 
                the student whose records are released; or
                  (iii) allowed to be reported or disclosed 
                pursuant to State statute adopted after 
                November 19, 1974, if--
                          (I) the allowed reporting or 
                        disclosure concerns the juvenile 
                        justice system and such system's 
                        ability to effectively serve, prior to 
                        adjudication, the student whose records 
                        are released; and
                          (II) the officials and authorities to 
                        whom such information is disclosed 
                        certify in writing to the educational 
                        agency or institution that the 
                        information will not be disclosed to 
                        any other party except as provided 
                        under State law without the prior 
                        written consent of the parent of the 
                        student;
           * * * * * * *

            Section 427 of the Job Training Partnership Act

                           job corps centers

    Sec. 427. * * *
      [(c) No funds appropriated to the Department of Labor for 
any fiscal year may be used to carry out any contract with a 
nongovernmental entity to administer or manage a Civilian 
Conservation Center of the Job Corps.]

                            Public Law 85-67

                          working capital fund

    There is established a working capital fund, to be 
available without fiscal year limitation, for expenses 
necessary for the maintenance and operation of (1) a central 
reproduction service; (2) a central visual exhibit service; (3) 
a central supply service for supplies and equipment for which 
adequate stocks may be maintained to meet in whole or in part 
the requirements of the Department; (4) a central tabulating 
service; (5) telephone, mail and messenger services; (6) a 
central accounting and payroll service; and (7) a central 
laborers' service: Provided, That any stocks of supplies and 
equipment on hand or on order shall be used to capitalize such 
fund: Provided further, That such fund shall be reimbursed in 
advance from funds available to bureaus, offices, and agencies 
for which such centralized services are performed at rates 
which will return in full all expenses of operation, including 
reserves for accrued annual leave and depreciation of 
equipment.
    The Working Capital Fund of the Department of Labor shall 
be available on and after March 5, 1970, for expenses necessary 
for personnel functions in regional administrative offices.
    For expenses necessary during the fiscal year ending 
September 30 1994, and each fiscal year thereafter, for the 
maintenance and operation of a comprehensive program of 
centralized services which the Secretary of Labor may prescribe 
and deem appropriate and advantageous to provide on a 
reimbursable basis under the provisions of the Economy Act 
(subject to prior notice to OMB) in the national office and 
field: Provided, That such fund shall be reimbursed in advance 
from funds available to agencies, bureaus, and offices for 
which such centralized services are performed at rates which 
will return in full cost of operations including services 
obtained through cooperative administrative services units 
under the Economy Act, including reserves for accrued annual 
leave, worker's compensation, depreciation of capitalized 
equipment, and amortization of ADP software and systems (either 
acquired or donated): Provided further, That funds received for 
services rendered to any entity or person for use of 
Departmental facilities, including associated utilities and 
security services, shall be credited to and merged with this 
fund. Provided further, That within the Working Capital Fund, 
there is established an Investment in Reinvention Fund (IRF), 
which shall be available to invest in projects of the 
Department designed to produce measurable improvements in 
agency efficiency and significant taxpayer savings. 
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of 
Labor may retain up to $3,900,000 of the unobligated balances 
in the Department's annual Salaries and Expenses accounts as of 
September 30, 1995, and transfer those amounts to the IRF to 
provide the initial capital for the IRF to remain available 
until expended, to make loans to agencies of the Department for 
projects designed to enhance productivity and generate cost 
savings. Such loans shall be repaid to the IRF no later than 
September 30 of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in 
which the project is completed. Such repayments shall be 
deposited in the IRF, to be available without further 
appropriation action.

                 Changes in Application of Existing Law

    Pursuant to clause 3, rule XXI of the House of 
Representatives, the following statements are submitted 
describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill 
which may directly or indirectly change the application of 
existing law.
    In some instances the bill includes appropriations for 
certain ongoing programs which are not yet authorized for 1996.
    The bill provides that appropriations shall remain 
available for more than one year for some programs for which 
the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize 
such extended availability.
    In various places in the bill, the Committee has earmarked 
funds within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific 
sections of a law. Whether these actions constitute a change in 
the application of existing law is subject to individual 
interpretation, but the Committee felt that this fact should be 
mentioned.
    On page 5 of the bill is language allowing the Labor 
Department to withhold from State allotments funds available 
for penalty mail under the Wagner-Peyser Act.
    On page 6 is language providing that funds in this Act for 
one-stop career centers may be used for contracts, grants or 
agreements with non-State entities.
    On page 6 is language providing that funds in this Act may 
be used by the States for integrated Employment Service and 
Unemployment Insurance automation efforts.
    On page 9 is language authorizing the Secretary of Labor to 
accept and spend all sums of money ordered to be paid to the 
Secretary, in accordance with the terms of a Consent Judgement 
in U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands.
    On page 9 is language authorizing the Secretary of Labor to 
collect user fees for processing certain applications and 
issuing certain certificates and registrations under the Fair 
Labor Standards Act and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural 
Worker Protection Act.
    On page 10 of the bill is language providing funds may be 
used under the Federal Employees' Compensation Act in which the 
Secretary of Labor may reimburse an employer, who is not the 
employer at the time of injury, for portions of the salary of a 
reemployed, disabled beneficiary.
    On page 10 is language allowing the Secretary of Labor to 
transfer certain administrative funds from the Postal Service 
fund and certain other government corporations and agencies 
related to the administration of the Federal Employees' 
Compensation Act.
    On page 11 of the bill is language allowing the Secretary 
of Labor to require any person filing a claim for benefits 
under the Federal Employees' Compensation Act or the Longshore 
and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act to provide such 
identifying information as the Secretary may require, including 
a Social Security number.
    On page 12 is language establishing a maximum amount 
available for grants to States under the Occupational Safety 
and Health Act, which grants shall be no less than 50 percent 
of the costs of State programs required to be incurred under 
plans approved by the Secretary under section 18(b) of the Act.
    On page 13 is language authorizing the Occupational Safety 
and Health Administration to retain and spend up to $500,000 of 
training institute course tuition fees for training and 
education grants.
    On page 15 is language allowing the Mine Safety and Health 
Administration to purchase and bestow certificates and trophies 
in connection with mine rescue and first-aid work; to accept 
lands, buildings, equipment, and other contributions from 
public and private sources; to prosecute projects in 
cooperation with other agencies, Federal, State, or private; 
and to promote health and safety education and training in the 
mining community through cooperative programs with States, 
industry, and safety associations.
    On page 15 of the bill is language allowing the Secretary 
of Labor to use any funds available to the Department to 
provide for the costs of mine rescue and survival operations in 
the event of major disasters.
    On page 17 is language amending P.L. 85-67 with respect to 
the Department of Labor Working Capital Fund; the language 
establishes a new Reinvention Investment Fund and allows the 
Department to use up to $3,900,000 in unobligated balances to 
capitalize the fund.
    On page 19 is language repealing section 427(c) of the Job 
Training Partnership Act.
    On page 23 is language providing that the Division of 
Federal Occupational Health may utilize personal services 
contracting in certain instances.
    On page 23 is language providing that in addition to fees 
authorized by section 427(b) of the Health Care Quality 
Improvement Act of 1986, fees shall be collected for the full 
disclosure of information under the Act sufficient to recover 
the full costs of operating the National Practitioner Data 
Bank, and shall remain available until expended to carry out 
that Act.
    On page 25 is language permitting the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention to insure official motor vehicles in 
foreign countries.
    On page 25 is language providing that collections from user 
fees may be credited to the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention appropriation.
    On page 25 is language making amounts under section 241 of 
the Public Health Service Act available to carry out the 
National Center for Health Statistics surveys.
    On page 30 is language providing that the National Library 
of Medicine may enter into certain personal services contracts.
    On page 32 of the bill, language is included to permit the 
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research to retain and expend 
amounts received from Freedom of Information Act fees, 
reimbursable and interagency agreements and the sale of data 
tapes.
    On page 33 of the bill is a provision that in the 
administration of title XIX of the Social Security Act, 
payments to a State for any quarter may be made with respect to 
a State plan or plan amendment in effect during any such 
quarter, if submitted in, or prior to, such quarter and 
approved in that or any such subsequent quarter.
    On page 34 is language allowing fees charged in accordance 
with 31 U.S.C. 9701 to be credited to the Health Care Financing 
Administration administrative account.
    On page 36 is language providing that funds appropriated 
pursuant to section 414(a) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act for fiscal year 1994 shall be available for the costs of 
assistance provided and other activities conducted in such year 
and in fiscal years 1995 and 1996.
    On page 42 is language providing that funds may be used by 
the Department of Education to obtain certain data from the 
Census Bureau; and that no funds shall be reserved under 
section 1003(a) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
    On page 43 is language providing that funds for Impact Aid 
shall be allocated in a certain manner.
    On page 44 is language providing that immigrant education 
funds may be allocated by States for competitive grants to 
local school districts and language providing that bilingual 
education funds should only be used to support instructional 
programs which ensure that students master English in a timely 
fashion.
    On page 45 is language providing that the National 
Technical Institute for the Deaf and Gallaudet University may 
use funds for their endowment programs at their discretion.
    On page 46 is language providing that vocational education 
research funds in the bill may be spent without regard to 
section 451 of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied 
Technology Education Act.
    On page 46 is language providing that the maximum Pell 
grant a student may receive in the 1996-97 academic year shall 
be $2,440.
    On page 46 is language providing that notwithstanding 
section 401(g) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, if the 
Secretary determines, prior to publication of the payment 
schedule for award year 1996-1997, that the funds included 
within this appropriation for Peal Grant awards for award year 
1996-1997, and any funds available from the FY 1995 
appropriation for Pell Grant awards, are insufficient to 
satisfy fully all such awards for which students are eligible, 
as calculated under section 401(b) of the Act, the amount paid 
for each such award shall be reduced by either a fixed or 
variable percentage, or by a fixed dollar amount, as determined 
in accordance with a schedule of reductions established by the 
Secretary for this purpose.
    On page 47 is language providing that funds provided herein 
for carrying out title III shall be available without regard to 
section 360(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
    On page 49 of the bill is language specifying that any 
unobligated balances remaining from fixed fees previously paid 
into the college housing loans account pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 
1749d, relating to payment of costs for inspections and site 
visits, shall be available for the operating expenses of that 
account.
    On pages 52-53 is section 305 of the bill which limits 
administrative costs for the direct student loan program to 
$320 million in FY 1996, of which $160 million shall be for 
payment of administrative cost allowances to guaranty agencies. 
It also prohibits the Secretary of Education from using funds 
available for subsequent years during FY 1996.
    On pages 54-55 is section 307 of the bill which amends the 
General Education Provisions Act to make a technical correction 
regarding student records privacy.
    Under General Provisions, title III, is section 308 which 
prohibits the Department of Education from enforcing title IX 
of the Education Amendments of 1972 after December 31, 1995, 
unless the Department has issued updated policy guidance to 
institutions of higher education containing objective 
compliance criteria.
    On pages 56-57 of the bill is a provision waiving section 
396(k)(3)(B)(iii) of the Communications Act of 1934 with 
respect to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and a 
provision requiring that all funds shall be made available to 
the Corporation in accordance with the payment methods required 
under OMB Circular A-110.
    On page 58 of the bill is a provision requiring that 
appropriations to the NLRB shall not be available to organize 
or assist in organizing agricultural laborers or used in 
connection with investigations, hearings, directives, or orders 
concerning bargaining units composed of agricultural laborers 
as referred to in section 2(3) of the Act of July 5, 1935 (29 
U.S.C. 152), and as amended by the Labor-Management Relations 
Act, 1947, as amended, and as defined in section 3(f) of the 
Act of June 25, 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203), and including in said 
definition employees engaged in the maintenance and operation 
of ditches, canals, reservoirs, and waterways when maintained 
or operated on a mutual non-profit basis and at least 95 per 
centum of the water stored or supplied thereby is used for 
farming purposes.
    On pages 59-60 of the bill is a provision prohibiting the 
NLRB from investigating certain unfair labor practice charges 
until the Supreme Court decides whether certain individuals are 
protected under the National Labor Relations Act and three 
provisions limiting the Board's ability to seek section 10(j) 
injunctions.
    On page 64 is language providing that reimbursement for the 
carrying out of sections 9704 and 9706 of the Internal Revenue 
Code of 1986 to the Social Security Trust Fund shall be made, 
with interest, by September 30, 1997.
    On page 65 is language providing that the total amount 
provided for railroad retirement dual benefits shall be 
credited to the Dual Benefits Payments Account in 12 
approximately equal amounts on the first day of each month in 
the fiscal year.
    Sections 106, 107, 201, 202, 206, 207, 209, 301, 302, and 
501, 502, 504, 505, 506, 507 and 510 of the bill are general 
provisions, most of which have been carried in previous 
appropriations acts, which place limitations on the use of 
funds in the bill or authorize certain activities, and which 
might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing the 
application of existing law.
    Under title V, General Provisions, are the following new 
general provisions: (1) section 509 which provides that, 
effective October 1, 1993 and thereafter, States may elect not 
to fund abortions resulting from rape or incest; (2) section 
511 which prevents the use of human embryos in medical 
research; and (3) section 513 which expresses the sense of 
Congress concerning the appropriate minimum length of hospital 
stay for a routine delivery of a child.
    Under title VI, Political Advocacy, is legislation to 
prohibit recipients of federal funds from engaging in political 
advocacy, either with Federal funds or with their own funds 
under certain circumstances.

              Definition of Program, Project and Activity

    During fiscal year 1996 for purposes of the Balanced Budget 
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177), 
as amended, the following information provides the definition 
of the term ``program, project, and activity'' for departments 
and agencies under the jurisdiction of the Labor, Health and 
Human Services, and Education and Related Agencies 
Subcommittee. The term ``program, project, and activity'' shall 
include the most specific level of budget items identified in 
the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and 
Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996, the 
accompanying House and Senate Committee reports, the conference 
report and accompanying joint explanatory statement of the 
managers of the committee of conference.

                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

    Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of 
Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations 
in the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law:

                      TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

            community service employment for older americans

           TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                         public health service

    Health Resources and Services Administration
          Community Health Centers
          Migrant Health Centers
          Health Care for the Homeless
          Public Housing Health Service Grants
                          (Consolidated Funding)
          Health Professions
                  Grants for Communities for Scholarships
                  Nurse Loan Repayment
                  Research on Health Professions Issues
                  Centers of Excellence
                  Health Careers Opportunity Program
                  Exceptional Financial Need Scholarships
                  Faculty Loan Repayment
                  Fin. Asst. for Disadv. HP Students
                  HPSL Recapitalization
                  Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students
                  Family Medicine Training/Departments
                  General Internal Medicine & Pediatrics
                  Physician's Assistants
                  Public Health and Preventive Medicine
                  Health Administration Traineeships/Projects
                  Area Health Education Centers
                  Border Health Training Centers
                  General Dentistry Residencies
                  Allied Health Special Projects
                  Geriatric Education Centers & Training
                  Interdisciplinary Traineeships
                  Podiatric Medicine
                  Advanced Nurse Education
                  Nurse Practitioners/Nurse Midwives
                  Special Projects
                  Nurse Disadvantaged Assistance
                  Professional Nurse Traineeships
                  Nurse Anesthetists
                  Chiropractic Demonstration Grants
          (Consolidated Health Professions Funding)
          Organ Transplantation
          Health Teaching Facilities Interest Subsidy
          Alzheimer's Demonstration Grants
          Acquired Immunity Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)
                  AIDS Dental Services
                  Ryan White Programs
                          Emergency Assistance
                          Comprehensive Care Programs
                          Early Intervention Program
                          Pediatric Demonstration
          Vaccine Inj. Comp.--HRSA Admin. (Trust Fund)
          Bone Marrow Donor Registry Program
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
          Childhood Immunization
    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration
          Consolidated Mental Health & Subst Abuse Demos
          Mental Health Block Grant
          Children's Mental Health
          Protection and Advocacy
          AIDS Demonstrations
          Substance Abuse Block Grant
    Adolescent Family Life
    Health Initiatives--Minority Health
    Agency for Health Care Policy and Research

                administration for children and families

    Child Care & Development Block Grant
    Temporary Child Care/Crisis Nurseries
    Abandoned Infant Assistance
    Native Americans

                        administration on aging

    Grants to the States
          Supportive Services and Centers
          Nutrition
                  Congregate Meals
                  Home Delivered Meals
          Frail Elderly In-Home Services
          Grants to Indians
          Program Administration

                   TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

                           special education

          Preschool Grants
          Grants for Infants and Families
    Special Purpose Funds
          Deaf-Blindness
          Serious Emotional Disturbance
          Severe Disabilities
          Secondary and Transitional Services
          Post-Secondary Education
          Media and Captioning Services
          Parent Training

                       TITLE IV--RELATED AGENCIES

    Corporation for Public Broadcasting

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 1

    Date: July 20, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Obey.
    Description of motion: To strike 11 legislative provisions.
    Results: Rejected 18 to 29.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dixon                           Mr. DeLay
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Dickey
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. Forbes
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Hobson
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Istook
Mr. Mollohan                        Mr. Kingston
Mr. Murtha                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Kolbe
Ms. Pelosi                          Mr. Lewis
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Livingston
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. McDade
Mr. Thornton                        Mr. Miller
Mr. Torres                          Mr. Nethercutt
                                    Mr. Neumann
                                    Mr. Packard
                                    Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wolf

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 2

    Date: July 20, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Livingston.
    Description of motion: To eliminate funding for the title X 
categorical program and transfer this funding to the maternal 
and child health block grant and community and migrant health 
centers.
    Results: Adopted 28 to 25.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Coleman
Mr. Bonilla                         Mr. Dicks
Mr. Bunn                            Mr. Dixon
Mr. Callahan                        Mr. Durbin
Mr. DeLay                           Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Dickey                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Forbes                          Mr. Hefner
Mr. Istook                          Mr. Hobson
Mr. Kingston                        Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Knollenberg                     Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Lightfoot                       Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Livingston                      Mr. Lewis
Mr. McDade                          Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Miller                          Mr. Obey
Mr. Mollohan                        Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Murtha                          Mr. Porter
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Regula
Mr. Nethercutt                      Mr. Riggs
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Sabo
Mr. Packard                         Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Rogers                          Mr. Stokes
Mr. Skeen                           Mr. Thornton
Mr. Taylor                          Mr. Visclosky
Mrs. Vucanovich                     Mr. Wilson
Mr. Walsh                           Mr. Yates
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 3

    Date: July 20, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Hoyer.
    Description of motion: To increase funding to various 
education programs and to cap the Federal matching rate for 
Medicaid at 66 percent.
    Results: Rejected 19 to 30.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. DeLay
Mr. Dixon                           Mr. Dickey
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Forbes
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Hobson
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Istook
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. Kingston
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Kolbe
Ms. Pelosi                          Mr. Lewis
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Livingston
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. McDade
Mr. Thornton                        Mr. Miller
Mr. Visclosky                       Mr. Myers
Mr. Wilson                          Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Neumann
                                    Mr. Packard
                                    Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Riggs
                                    Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 4

    Date: July 20, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Ms. Pelosi.
    Description of motion: To increase funding to various 
worker protection programs and to cap the Federal matching rate 
for Medicaid at 69 percent.
    Results: Rejected 19 to 32.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Dixon                           Mr. Bunn
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Callahan
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. DeLay
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Dickey
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Forbes
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Hobson
Mr. Murtha                          Mr. Istook
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Kingston
Ms. Pelosi                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Livingston
Mr. Torres                          Mr. McDade
Mr. Visclosky                       Mr. Miller
Mr. Wilson                          Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Myers
                                    Mr. Nethercutt
                                    Mr. Neumann
                                    Mr. Packard
                                    Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mr. Thornton
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 5

    Date: July 20, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mrs. Lowey.
    Description of motion: To increase funding for Perkins 
loans and SSIG State scholarships and CAP Federal matching rate 
for Medicaid at 72 percent.
    Results: Rejected 19 to 24.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Bunn
Mr. Chapman                         Mr. DeLay
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Dickey
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. Forbes
Mr. Dixon                           Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Hobson
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. Istook
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Kingston
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. Lewis
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Livingston
Mr. Murtha                          Mr. Miller
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Myers
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Thornton                        Mr. Packard
Mr. Torres                          Mr. Porter
Mr. Visclosky                       Mr. Regula
Mr. Wilson                          Mr. Riggs
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wolf

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 6

    Date: July 20, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Stokes.
    Description of motion: To increase funding for career and 
youth training and CAP Federal matching rate for Medicaid at 65 
percent.
    Results: Rejected 19 to 26.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Chapman                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dixon                           Mr. DeLay
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Dickey
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. Forbes
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Hobson
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. Istook
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Kingston
Mr. Murtha                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Lewis
Ms. Pelosi                          Mr. Livingston
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Miller
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Myers
Mr. Thornton                        Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Torres                          Mr. Packard
Mr. Wilson                          Mr. Porter
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Riggs
                                    Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wolf

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 7

    Date: July 20, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Obey.
    Description of motion: To increase funding for programs 
serving vulnerable populations, mainly energy assistance, and 
cap the Federal matching rate for Medicaid at 65 percent.
    Results: Rejected 17 to 32.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Chapman                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Dixon                           Mr. Bunn
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Callahan
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. DeLay
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Dickey
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Forbes
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Hobson
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Istook
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Kingston
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Torres                          Mr. Lewis
Mr. Visclosky                       Mr. Livingston
Mr. Wilson                          Mr. Miller
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Mollohan
                                    Mr. Myers
                                    Mr. Nethercut
                                    Mr. Neumann
                                    Mr. Packard
                                    Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Riggs
                                    Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mr. Thornton
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall no. 8

    Date: July 20, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Porter.
    Description of motion: Substitute amendment to the Dickey 
amendment to prohibit funding to support the creation of human 
embryos for research purposes.
    Results: Rejected 26 to 26.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. Chapman                         Mr. Bunn
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. DeLay
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Dickey
Mr. Fazio                           Mr. Forbes
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. Hefner
Mr. Frelinghuysen                   Mr. Istook
Mr. Hobson                          Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Kingston
Mr. Kolbe                           Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Lewis                           Mr. Lightfoot
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Livingston
Mr. Miller                          Mr. McDade
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Nethercutt                      Mr. Murtha
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Neumann
Ms. Pelosi                          Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter                          Mr. Rogers
Mr. Regula                          Mr. Skeen
Mr. Riggs                           Mr. Taylor
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Thornton
Mr. Skaggs                          Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Wicker
Mr. Visclosky                       Mr. Wolf
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             rollcall No. 9

    Date: July 20, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Dickey.
    Description of motion: To prohibit funding to create Human 
Embryos for research purposes or for research in which human 
embryos are destroyed or discarded greater than that allowed 
under 45 CFR 46.208(a)(2) and 42 U.S.C. 289g(b).
    Results: Adopted 30 to 23.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Bunn                            Mr. Chapman
Mr. Callahan                        Mr. Coleman
Mr. DeLay                           Mr. Dicks
Mr. Dickey                          Mr. Durbin
Mr. Forbes                          Mr. Fazio
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Istook                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Kingston                        Mr. Hefner
Mr. Knollenberg                     Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Lewis                           Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Lightfoot                       Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Livingston                      Mrs. Lowey
Mr. McDade                          Mr. Miller
Mr. Mollohan                        Mr. Obey
Mr. Murtha                          Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Porter
Mr. Nethercutt                      Mr. Riggs
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Sabo
Mr. Packard                         Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Regula                          Mr. Stokes
Mr. Rogers                          Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Skeen                           Mr. Yates
Mr. Taylor
Mr. Thornton
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall No. 10

    Date: July 21, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Bonilla.
    Description of motion: To prohibit OSHA from developing any 
standard or guideline regarding ergonomic protection or 
reporting related injuries.
    Results: Adopted 28 to 17.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. Bunn                            Mr. Coleman
Mr. DeLay                           Mr. Dicks
Mr. Dickey                          Mr. Durbin
Mr. Forbes                          Mr. Fazio
Mr. Frelinghuysen                   Mr. Hefner
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Istook                          Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Kingston                        Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Knollenberg                     Mr. Obey
Mr. Kolbe                           Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Lewis                           Mr. Sabo
Mr. Lightfoot                       Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Livingston                      Mr. Stokes
Mr. McDade                          Mr. Thornton
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Wilson
Mr. Nethercutt                      Mr. Yates
Mr. Neumann
Mr. Packard
Mr. Porter
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall no. 11

    Date: July 21, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Delay.
    Description of motion: To prohibit funding for any program 
if that program subjects any health care entity to 
discrimination if the entity refuses training or other 
activities on induced abortions.
    Results: Adopted 29 to 25.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Chapman
Mr. Bonilla                         Mr. Coleman
Mr. Bunn                            Mr. Dicks
Mr. Callahan                        Mr. Dixon
Mr. DeLay                           Mr. Durbin
Mr. Dickey                          Mr. Fazio
Mr. Forbes                          Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Istook                          Mr. Hefner
Mr. Kingston                        Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Knollenberg                     Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Lewis                           Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Lightfoot                       Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Livingston                      Mr. Obey
Mr. McDade                          Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Miller                          Mr. Porter
Mr. Mollohan                        Mr. Riggs
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Sabo
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Packard                         Mr. Stokes
Mr. Regula                          Mr. Thornton
Mr. Rogers                          Mr. Torres
Mr. Skeen                           Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Taylor                          Mr. Wilson
Mrs. Vucanovich                     Mr. Yates
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall no. 12

    Date: July 21, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Obey.
    Description of motion: To report the bill.
    Results: Rejected 22 to 32.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Chapman                         Mr. Bunn
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. DeLay
Mr. Dixon                           Mr. Dickey
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Forbes
Mr. Fazio                           Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. Hobson
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Istook
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Kingston
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Mollohan                        Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Lewis
Ms. Pelosi                          Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Livingston
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. McDade
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Miller
Mr. Thornton                        Mr. Myers
Mr. Torres                          Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Visclosky                       Mr. Neumann
Mr. Wilson                          Mr. Packard
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Riggs
                                    Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wolf
                                    Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall no. 13

    Date: July 21, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion By: Mr. Obey.
    Description of motion: Substitute to the Istook amendment 
to add rape or incest to the exceptions for funding of 
abortions.
    Results: Rejected 25 to 26.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Chapman                         Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. Callahan
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. DeLay
Mr. Fazio                           Mr. Dickey
Mr. Foglietta                       Mr. Forbes
Mr. Frelinghuysen                   Mr. Hobson
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Istook
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Kingston
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Kolbe                           Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Lewis                           Mr. Livingston
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. McDade
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Miller
Ms. Pelosi                          Mr. Myers
Mr. Porter                          Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Regula                          Mr. Neumann
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Packard
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Riggs
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Skeen
Mr. Thornton                        Mr. Taylor
Mr. Torres                          Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Visclosky                       Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wilson                          Mr. Wicker
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Wolf
                                    Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall no. 14

    Date: July 21, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion By: Mr. Istook.
    Description of motion: To not require states to have to pay 
for abortions if a State deems that appropriate except when the 
life of the mother would be endangered.
    Results: Rejected 29 to 23.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Chapman
Mr. Bonilla                         Mr. Dicks
Mr. Bunn                            Mr. Dixon
Mr. Callahan                        Mr. Durbin
Mr. DeLay                           Mr. Fazio
Mr. Dickey                          Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Forbes                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Hefner
Mr. Istook                          Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Kingston                        Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Knollenberg                     Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Lewis                           Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Lighfoot                        Mr. Obey
Mr. Livingston                      Ms. Pelosi
Mr. McDade                          Mr. Porter
Mr. Miller                          Mr. Sabo
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Nethercutt                      Mr. Stokes
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Thornton
Mr. Packard                         Mr. Torres
Mr. Regula                          Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Riggs                           Mr. Wilson
Mr. Skeen                           Mr. Yates
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall no. 15

    Date: July 21, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Istook.
    Description of motion: To prohibit funding for higher 
education institutions if such institutions use certain fees to 
support groups who lobby or engage in political campaigns.
    Results: Rejected 17 to 32.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. DeLay                           Mr. Bevill
Mr. Forbes                          Mr. Bunn
Mr. Frelinghuysen                   Mr. Chapman
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Coleman
Mr. Istook                          Mr. Dickey
Mr. Kingston                        Mr. Dixon
Mr. Knollenberg                     Mr. Durbin
Mr. Kolbe                           Mr. Fazio
Mr. Lightfoot                       Mr. Foglietta
Mr. Livingston                      Mr. Hefner
Mr. McDade                          Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Myers                           Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Lewis
Mr. Packard                         Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Riggs                           Mr. Miller
Mr. Taylor                          Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Wicker                          Mr. Obey
                                    Ms. Pelosi
                                    Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Sabo
                                    Mr. Skaggs
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Stokes
                                    Mr. Thornton
                                    Mr. Torres
                                    Mr. Visclosky
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wilson
                                    Mr. Yates
                                    Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall no. 16

    Date: July 24, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Yates.
    Description of motion: To strike the enacting clause.
    Results: Rejected 18 to 29.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Chapman                         Mr. Bunn
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. DeLay
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Dickey
Mr. Fazio                           Mr. Forbes
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Hobson
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Istook
Mr. Murtha                          Mr. Kingston
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Knollenberg
Ms. Pelosi                          Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Lewis
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Livingston
Mr. Thornton                        Mr. McDade
Mr. Wilson                          Mr. Miller
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Neumann
                                    Mr. Packard
                                    Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Riggs
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wolf
                                    Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall no. 17

    Date: July 24, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Sabo.
    Description of Motion: To amend the Istook amendment to 
expand the applicability to include entities receiving contract 
payments or loans or loan guarantees.
    Results: Rejected 18 to 29.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bevill                          Mr. Bonilla
Mr. Chapman                         Mr. Bunn
Mr. Coleman                         Mr. Callahan
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. Delay
Mr. Durbin                          Mr. Dickey
Mr. Fazio                           Mr. Forbes
Mr. Hefner                          Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Hobson
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Istook
Mr. Murtha                          Mr. Kingston
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Pelosi                          Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Lewis
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Lightfoot
Mr. Stokes                          Mr. Livingston
Mr. Thornton                        Mr. McDade
Mr. Wilson                          Mr. Miller
Mr. Yates                           Mr. Neumann
                                    Mr. Packard
                                    Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Riggs
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wolf
                                    Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall no. 18

    Date: July 24, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Istook.
    Description of Motion: To prohibit entities who receive 
grants from using these funds for political advocacy.
    Results: Adopted 28 to 20 Voting Present 1.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. Bunn                            Mr. Chapman
Mr. Callahan                        Mr. Coleman
Mr. Delay                           Mr. Dicks
Mr. Dickey                          Mr. Durbin
Mr. Forbes                          Mr. Fazio
Mr. Frelinghuysen                   Mr. Hefner
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Istook                          Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Kingston                        Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Knollenberg                     Mr. Murtha
Mr. Lewis                           Mr. Pelosi
Mr. Lightfoot                       Mr. Porter
Mr. Livingston                      Mr. Regula
Mr. McDade                          Mr. Sabo
Mr. Miller                          Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Stokes
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Thornton
Mr. Packard                         Mr. Wilson
Mr. Riggs                           Mr. Yates
Mr. Rogers                            
Mr. Skeen                             
Mr. Taylor                            
Mrs. Vucanovich                       
Mr. Walsh                             
Mr. Wicker                            
Mr. Wolf                              
Mr. Young                             

    Present: Mr. Obey.

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the result of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the name of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall No. 19

    Date: July 24, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Istook.
    Description of motion: To prohibit the enforcement of title 
IX of the education amendments of 1972 with respect to gender 
equity in intercollegiate athletics unless the Department of 
Education issues updated guidance clarifying demonstration of 
program expansion for the underrepresented sex.
    Result: Adopted 30 to 23.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. Callahan                        Mr. Bunn
Mr. DeLay                           Mr. Chapman
Mr. Dickey                          Mr. Coleman
Mr. Frelinghuysen                   Mr. Dicks
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Dixon
Mr. Istook                          Mr. Durbin
Mr. Kingston                        Mr. Fazio
Mr. Knollenberg                     Mr. Forbes
Mr. Kolbe                           Mr. Hefner
Mr. Lewis                           Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Lightfoot                       Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Livingston                      Mrs. Lowey
Mr. McDade                          Mr. Obey
Mr. Miller                          Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Sabo
Mr. Nethercutt                      Mr. Skaggs
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Stokes
Mr. Packard                         Mr. Thornton
Mr. Porter                          Mr. Torres
Mr. Regula                          Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Riggs                           Mr. Wilson
Mr. Rogers                          Mr. Yates
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes
    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the result of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the name of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:
                            rollcall No. 20
    Date: July 24, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Miller of Florida.
    Description of motion: To eliminate FY 1998 funding for the 
Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
    Results: Reject 14 to 40.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. DeLay                           Mr. Bunn
Mr. Dickey                          Mr. Callahan
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Chapman
Mr. Istook                          Mr. Coleman
Mr. Kingston                        Mr. Dicks
Mr. Knollenberg                     Mr. Dixon
Mr. Kolbe                           Mr. Durbin
Mr. Livingston                      Mr. Fazio
Mr. Miller                          Mr. Forbes
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Hefner
Mr. Packard                         Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Wicker                          Ms. Kaptur
                                    Mr. Lewis
                                    Mr. Lightfoot
                                    Mrs. Lowey
                                    Mr. McDade
                                    Mr. Mollohan
                                    Mr. Nethercutt
                                    Mr. Obey
                                    Ms. Pelosi
                                    Mr. Porter
                                    Mr. Regula
                                    Mr. Riggs
                                    Mr. Rogers
                                    Mr. Sabo
                                    Mr. Skaggs
                                    Mr. Skeen
                                    Mr. Stokes
                                    Mr. Taylor
                                    Mr. Thornton
                                    Mr. Torres
                                    Mr. Visclosky
                                    Mrs. Vucanovich
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wilson
                                    Mr. Wolf
                                    Mr. Yates
                                    Mr. Young

                            Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                            rollcall no. 21

    Date: July 24, 1995.
    Measure: Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations, FY 1996.
    Motion by: Mr. Young of Florida.
    Description of motion: That the bill be reported, and that 
the chairman be authorized to seek a rule on such terms and 
conditions as he may deem appropriate, and pursuant to the 
provisions of clause 1 of rule XX, the chairman be authorized 
to move that the House disagree to the amendments of the Senate 
and agree to the conference requested by the Senate on the 
bill.
    Results: Adopted 32 to 21.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bonilla                         Mr. Bevill
Mr. Bunn                            Mr. Chapman
Mr. Callahan                        Mr. Coleman
Mr. DeLay                           Mr. Dicks
Mr. Dickey                          Mr. Dixon
Mr. Forbes                          Mr. Durbin
Mr. Frelinghuysen                   Mr. Fazio
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Hefner
Mr. Istook                          Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Kingston                        Ms. Kaptur
Mr. Knollenberg                     Mrs. Lowey
Mr. Kolbe                           Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Lewis                           Mr. Obey
Mr. Lightfoot                       Ms. Pelosi
Mr. Livingston                      Mr. Skaggs
Mr. McDade                          Mr. Stokes
Mr. Miller                          Mr. Thornton
Mr. Myers                           Mr. Torres
Mr. Nethercutt                      Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Wilson
Mr. Packard                         Mr. Yates
Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula
Mr. Riggs
Mr. Rogers
Mr. Skeen
Mr. Taylor
Mrs. Vucanovich
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
      
    
    
                  DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVID OBEY

    As members of the Minority party, we face enormous 
substantive differences with the Majority over the direction 
this country should take with respect to many of the critical 
activities contained in this bill. We disagree on what we 
should do in terms of educating our kids, protecting our 
workers, providing the necessary skills to our workforce and 
seeing to it that the weakest and more vulnerable in this 
society don't get left out.
    This bill is qualitatively different from any bill reported 
by this Committee in the post war era. It is the meanest, most 
radical and most extreme attack on women, on children, on 
workers and on the vulnerable which has been procured by the 
Majority since their takeover of the House in January. And this 
is only the first step. Under the budget plan passed by the 
Majority, additional cuts will be required in Labor, Health and 
Human Services, and Education programs in fiscal year 1997 at 
least as large as the combined cuts produced in this bill and 
in the rescission bills which have already become law.
    These cuts far exceed what would be necessary to balance 
the budge. They are necessary because the economic plan being 
implemented by the Majority includes the elimination of the 
alternative minimum tax on large corporations, and a dramatic 
cut in the taxation of profits on stock and real estate sales. 
These cuts are larger than necessary because half the 
discretionary budget, all spending on defense, has been taken 
off the table. Because of these policy decisions by the 
Majority, the bill ends up attacking weak claimants rather than 
weak claims.
    The result is legislation which retreats from Federal 
responsibilities with respect to the country's children, its 
workers, its seniors and the most vulnerable in our society. It 
abandons our economic future by cutting basic investments in 
education and training. It abandons our present by gutting 
programs to protect the health, safety, pensions and bargaining 
rights of our workers. It eliminates basic services and 
opportunities for our elderly. The bill which has traditionally 
been used to empower and nuture a broad segment of the American 
people, has now been used by the Majority as a vehicle to 
impose a radical conservative agenda both fiscally and 
philosophically. While we have attempted during Subcommittee 
and Full Committee consideration to improve the bill, it is our 
view as the bill is being reported that it is not fixable and 
that the House should reject the legislation and insist that 
the Committee readjust its spending allocations and prepare a 
bill which more adequately finances the investments and 
services within the agencies covered by this legislation.
    Discretionary totals in bill.--The bill as reported 
includes $60,870 million for discretionary programs. This is a 
reduction of $6,347 million below the levels currently 
available in 1995 after enactment of HR 1944, the Fiscal Year 
1995 Rescission bill. It is $9,146 million below the comparable 
amounts approved by the 103d Congress for these activities in 
the original Fiscal Year 1995 Appropriations Act, P.L. 103-333. 
The combined effect of this bill together with the enacted 
rescission is a 13 percent reduction from last year's spending 
levels. The totals for each Department are as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          Bill v.      Bill v.  
                                        1995enacted  1995revised  1996Pres.   1996Bill  1995enacted  1995revised
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Labor.................................      11,033        9,431      11,315      8,355      -2,678       -1,076 
    Percent...........................  ...........  ...........  .........  .........       -24.3        -11.4 
HHS...................................      29,411       29,221      31,042     28,212      -1,199       -1,009 
    Percent...........................  ...........  ...........  .........  .........        -4.1         -3.5 
Ed....................................      25,122       24,476      25,803     20,647      -4,475       -3,829 
    Percent...........................  ...........  ...........  .........  .........       -17.8        -15.6 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Critical reductions in bill.--We agree that reductions are 
possible in many sections of this bill. As an example, we have 
supported elimination of significant numbers of small, 
categorical programs in both the Department of Labor and the 
Department of Education. We believe, however, that the bill as 
currently presented goes too far in reducing critical resources 
for American families. Among the reductions which we strongly 
object to are the following:
  --$3,829 million from education including $2.5 billion of 
            funds for local schools.
  --$372 million from eliminating the Goals 2000 program.
  --$1,143 million from title 1 assistance for disadvantaged 
            students.
  --$251 million by terminating the Eisenhower professional 
            development program.
  --$266 million from Safe and Drug-free Schools.
  --$380 million from vocational education including $55 
            million cut in the new school-to-work program.
  --$701 million from student financial assistance including 
            $219 million by terminating Federal contributions 
            to the Perkins loan program and the SSIG 
            scholarship program.
  --$867 million by eliminating the 1996 Summer Jobs program.
  --$1 billion from other training programs at the Dept. of 
            Labor.
  --$180 million from worker protection programs such as OSHA, 
            MSHA, Employment Standards Admin., NIOSH, and the 
            National Labor Relations Board.
  --$1 billion by terminating the Low Income Energy Assistance 
            program.
  --$193 million by terminating the title X Family Planning 
            program.
  --$137 million from Head Start.
  --$55 million from Healthy Start.
  --$392 million from substance abuse and mental health 
            services at the Dept. at HHS.
  --$103 million from homeless programs including $77 million 
            in reductions in programs authorized under the 
            McKinney Act.
  --$55 million from various HHS programs targeted to rural 
            areas.
  --$162 million in programs for older Americans including 
            nutrition, employment and volunteer programs such 
            as RSVP and Foster Grandparents.
    Legislative provisions in bill.--We are particularly 
concerned that numerous legislative provisions have been 
included in this appropriations bill which are under the 
jurisdiction of other Committees of the House. Many of these 
provisions involve highly complicated and controversial topics 
which do not belong in appropriations bills. Because the 
Majority party has evidently decided that many of these 
proposals will not stand up to the detailed review which would 
be provided under the normal procedures of the House, they have 
loaded up this bill with the elitist agenda of their special 
interests at the expense of workers, children and women. Among 
the objectionable provisions are the following:
          Language limiting the authority of the National Labor 
        Relations Board to enforce laws which protect workers' 
        rights to organize and bargain collectively.
          Language restricting the Department of Labor's 
        enforcement authority in the area of occupational 
        safety and health.
          Language prohibiting the Department of Labor from 
        developing new workplace standards for ergonomic 
        (musculoskeletal) injuries such as carpal tunnel 
        syndrome.
          Language restricting the Department of Labor's 
        enforcement of various child labor laws.
          Language blocking the President's executive order 
        regarding striker replacements.
          Language effectively abolishing the Office of the 
        Surgeon General.
          Language significantly restricting the Department of 
        Educations' implementation of the new Direct Lending 
        Program.
          Language limiting the choices for women who have been 
        the victims of rape or incest.
          Language intended to overturn private accreditation 
        standards for the training of obstetricians and 
        gynecologists.
          Language blocking biomedical research regarding human 
        embryos.
          Language restricting the authority of the Department 
        of Education to ensure the civil rights of women in 
        higher education.
          Language restricting the rights of anyone who 
        receives a grant from the Federal Government from 
        engaging in political advocacy with their own funds.
          etc., etc. etc
    We object to the use of this bill for such far reaching 
changes in the basic laws of the United States without 
hearings. We particularly object to provisions which attempt to 
stifle political debate and dissent. These provisions are a 
fundamental assault on the First Amendment rights of every 
American.

                        Areas of Special Concern

                               education

    We believe that the bill's unprecedented $3,829,568,000 
reduction from 1995 in overall discretionary spending for the 
Department of Education represents an unacceptable reversal of 
a decades-long, bipartisan Federal commitment to improving 
educational opportunity for students of all ages. The 
continuing decline of real wages for all but the college-
educated dramatizes the importance of education, and the 
President's budget recognizes this by maintaining our 
investment in education and job training. The Committee bill, 
however, moves in the opposite direction, forcing many States 
and communities to abandon or scale back education reform 
efforts and undermining the ability of many cash-strapped 
communities to meet the educational needs of their most 
disadvantaged students. Make no mistake about the impact of 
these cuts. The will inevitably lead to lower educational 
standards and higher local property taxes.


Title I grants to local educational agencies for disadvantaged students

    The majority bill attacks America's children with a 
massive, billion-dollar reduction in the major vehicle for 
helping elementary and secondary schools improve the academic 
performance of poor and disadvantaged students. The bill would 
appropriate $5,555,000,000 for Title I Grants to Local 
Educational Agencies, a reduction of $1,143,356,000 from the 
$6,698,356,000 appropriated for 1995. Title I enables schools 
to provide extra help for poor, low-achieving children who do 
not typically have access to the same education resources as 
other children, either at home or at school. With the proposed 
cut, schools would be forced to make tough, no-win choices 
about which classrooms and disadvantaged children can do 
without the essential help that Title I provides. Overall, as 
many as 1.1 million low-achieving children (out of more than 
6.4 million children currently being served by the program) 
would be denied services. Such drastic cuts will prove yet 
another obstacle to helping these children escape the cycle of 
poverty. We supported an amendment that would have provided 
substantial additional funds for Title I grants to local 
educational agencies, but the amendment was voted down by the 
Republican Majority.
    Under the Committee bill, States and school districts would 
experience sharp funding cuts, losing 17 percent of their Title 
I funds at a time when many are already having trouble making 
ends meet. For example, school districts in Wisconsin would 
lose $21 million, New York City would lost $67 million, Los 
Angeles County would lose $44 million, Cook County would lose 
$55 million, Philadelphia would lost $14 million, Dade County 
would lose $15 million, and Cuyahoga County would lost $8 
million. Rural and small-town school districts would be equally 
hard hit by the budget cuts. We do not support imposing such 
drastic reductions at a time when most districts already have 
cut to the bone in response to losses in State-level financial 
support.
    Since 1965, the Title I program has improved the basic 
reading and mathematics skills of disadvantaged children in 
school districts across the country, helping to close the 
learning gap between those children and more advantaged 
students. For example, the achievement gap between black and 
white 9-year olds narrowed over the past two decades by 18 
percent in math and 25 percent in reading. To ensure that 
disadvantaged children make even more progress, the recent 
reauthorization restructured the program to incorporate high 
standards and expectations for Title I children, deemphasized 
standardized testing, and discouraged instruction that isolates 
students from the regular classroom. With adequate funding, 
these changes will greatly strengthen the Title I program; at 
the funding level provided in the bill, schools may find it 
impossible to implement the most critical reforms.


Goals 2000: State grants

    Just one year ago a bipartisan majority in Congress passed 
the Goals 2000: Educate America Act with the enthusiastic 
endorsement of such organizations as the U.S. Chamber of 
Commerce, the Business Roundtable, the National Alliance of 
Business, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the 
National Parent Teacher Association. Despite this overwhelming 
support for Goals 2000, the majority bill walks away from this 
critical effort to raise academic standards and all but 
abandons the National Education Goals agreed to 5 years ago by 
the Nation's governors. The bill would terminate funding for 
Goals 2000 State and local improvement grants in 1996, compared 
to a revised 1995 appropriation of $361,870,000 and a 1996 
budget request of $693,500,000.
    Goals 2000 provides flexible, regulation-free grants to 
help States and communities implement their own school 
improvement plans to raise student academic achievement, 
involve parents in schools, bring technology into the 
classroom, upgrade teacher professional development, and create 
partnerships with business and community groups to improve 
schools. The President's budget proposal would provide 
``venture capital'' permitting more than 16,000 schools to 
focus on academic excellence and school improvement for nearly 
9 million students. The majority bill denies funding to these 
schools just as most States and communities have completed 
their planning and begun to implement reforms. We supported 
amendments at both the Subcommittee and Committee levels that 
would have restored funding for Goals 2000 State grants, albeit 
at a lower level, but each time the Republican majority 
rejected this proposal.

Eisenhower teacher training and professional development

    The bill would end funding for the Eisenhower Professional 
Development program, compared with a revised 1995 appropriation 
of $251,298,000 and an administration request of $735,000,000. 
The Eisenhower program is the major Federal vehicle for 
ensuring that the Nation's educators are able to teach children 
to high standards, and for many school districts, the only 
source of funding for any professional development activities 
at the local level. For this reason, we supported an amendment 
to restore funding for this program, but the amendment was 
defeated by the majority. The Eisenhower Professional 
Development program provides financial assistance to State and 
local educational agencies and to institutions of higher 
education to support sustained and intensive high-quality 
educator professional development. Eisenhower funds support 
professional development activities for nearly 900,000 teachers 
in over 15,000 local educational agencies nationwide. Without 
these funds, fewer teachers will be prepared for teaching a 
diverse student population to meet challenging academic 
standards, and fewer schools will be able to make significant 
progress toward the National Education Goals.

Special education

    During the past 20 years America has made tremendous 
strides in educating children with disabilities, many of whom 
were excluded from school altogether before the 1975 enactment 
of Public Law 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped 
Children Act. As a result of Federal law, most children with 
disabilities are attending neighborhood schools and learning 
alongside their non-disabled peers. Part of this success is 
attributable to the investments we have made at the Federal 
level in programs that support the research, training, and 
technical assistance needed to help State and local school 
districts meet the educational needs of 5.6 million children 
with disabilities.
    The bill reduces Federal support for these activities by 
$162,543,000. For example, the bill would terminate the primary 
sources of Federal funding to identify effective practices for 
improving educational results for these children, including 
infants and preschool children. The bill would eliminate all 
funding for personnel development, despite State-identified 
needs for 48,000 personnel trained to work with children with 
disabilities. We believe the Committee-passed bill is short-
sighted. As with the cut in Title I, the majority has taken aim 
at our most disadvantaged students. Eliminating these programs 
is an abdication of Federal responsibility in areas critical to 
effective special education.

Safe and drug-free schools

    The bill cuts Federal support for drug-free schools and 
communities programs by $266 million, or nearly 60 percent, 
sharply reducing drug abuse and violence prevention activities 
currently serving about 39 million students in 97 percent of 
the Nation's school districts. This level of funding would 
cripple our Nation's efforts to keep drugs and violence out of 
our schools and away from our youth. This occurs at a critical 
time when new surveys consistently show an increase in drug use 
by our students as shown in the following chart showing drug 
prevention funding and use:


                          vocational education

    The majority's decision to cut $299,699,000, or 27 percent, 
from the programs authorized by the Carl D. Perkins Vocational 
and Applied Technology Education Act would seriously undermine 
efforts to make America's workers more competitive in the 
global economy. With more jobs requiring a high level of 
technical expertise, our career development systems must 
produce greater numbers of skilled and adaptable workers than 
in the past. Perkins Act programs are crucial to the attainment 
of this goal. Without adequate resources, States and local 
school districts cannot develop high-quality career preparation 
education systems that enable students to make the transition 
from school to productive careers. We must strengthen, not 
weaken, opportunities for youth to obtain the skills they need 
for further education and careers.
    Programs supported with Perkins Act funds serve more than 
11 million students two-thirds at the secondary level and one-
third in post-secondary institutions. The Committee bill would 
eliminate services to 3.1 million students nationally. For 
example, the cuts could deny services to nearly 300,000 
vocational students in California, about 280,000 in Florida, 
277,000 in Texas, 185,000 in Illinois, 156,000 in New York and 
53,000 in Wisconsin. Moreover, all States and local schools 
would be severely hampered in their ability to serve special 
populations. In addition, the elimination of vocational 
education discretionary programs would terminate all on- 
going research projects prior to their completion, resulting in 
almost no return on the Federal investment in this area.
    The bill's substantial reductions in Perkins Act funding 
are magnified by the $55,000,000 (split between Education and 
Labor) or 22 percent cut in the School-to-Work Opportunities 
programs, which provide States, localities, and Indian tribes 
with venture capital for creating systems that will enable all 
students to make a successful transition from school to 
postsecondary education and high-skilled, high-wage careers. 
While the School-to-Work Opportunities Act was never intended 
to be a permanent source of Federal support funding is 
scheduled to decline in 1997 and phase out entirely by 2001 the 
Committee's action would suspend many State and local efforts 
at a critical point in the developmental process, when venture 
capital is still badly needed. When compared to the budget 
request of $400,000,000 (split between Education and Labor), 
the majority bill would reduce grants to 43 States by more than 
half.
    We supported amendments that would have provided additional 
funding for these critical programs, but the amendments were 
rejected by the majority. In view of America's need for more 
highly skilled workers, and the need of American workers for 
the training that will allow them to increase their earning 
power, we cannot support a proposal that would be so damaging 
to our vocational educational system.

                      postsecondary student loans

Direct loans

    We are gravely concerned that restrictive bill language on 
Direct Loan administrative spending in section 305 could 
jeopardize the Department of Education's ability to effectively 
manage the Direct Loan program. The majority action represents 
an effort to derail a successful new loan program, one that 
better serves students and schools at a potential cost savings 
to taxpayers of $12 billion, in order to protect subsidies 
received by banks, guarantee agencies, and secondary markets 
under the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) programs. The 
bill limits administrative costs to $320,000,000 $230,000,000 
below the $550,000,000 that the authorizing legislation 
provides for 1996 and half of the funds are earmarked for 
guaranty agencies. As a result, the bill would provide the 
Department just $160,000,000 not only to continue 
implementation of Direct Loans but also to maintain significant 
administrative support for the FFEL programs. This limitation 
would result in, among other things: (1) reduction in critical 
default collection activities; (2) significant delays in 
student aid application processing and delivery; (3) 
elimination of support for all contract modifications to cover 
unexpected increases in loan volume, and for guaranty agencies 
experiencing financial difficulties; and (4) severe reductions 
in school monitoring, training, and technical assistance.
    The language in section 305 constitutes authorizing 
legislation in an appropriations bill and reflects 
irresponsible Congressional micromanagement of a complex 
program carrying significant risk of damage to taxpayer 
interests. Rather than ``leveling the playing field'' in the 
competition between guaranteed student loans and Direct Loans, 
this language would sabotage Direct Loan program implementation 
and jeopardize student access to college loans.
    In addition, Department spending for Direct Loan public 
information materials is forbidden under this bill language. 
Such a restriction could deny students and schools an 
opportunity to learn about Direct Loan benefits. Meanwhile, the 
guaranteed student loan lenders and intermediaries face no such 
restrictions as they promote guaranteed loans and spread 
misinformation about Direct Loans, using guaranteed loan 
program profits derived from taxpayer subsidies.

Perkins loans

    The majority's decision to eliminate Perkins Loan Federal 
Capital Contributions would deny campus-based, low-interest 
loans to approximately 150,000 postsecondary students. Perkins 
Loans averaged about $1,400, and nearly half of all borrowers 
come from families with total incomes below $20,000. Borrowers 
often find smaller loans more accessible under the Perkins Loan 
program than under the FFEL program, because private lenders 
generally prefer making larger, more profitable loans. We 
supported an amendment to restore funding for Perkins Loans, 
but the Republican Majority voted it down.

                          department of labor

    Total discretionary spending.--The Committee bill cuts the 
Department of Labor's discretionary spending to $8,355 million, 
a reduction of $2,678 million below the original appropriation 
provided for 1995. Reductions in this bill totaling $1,076 
million together with massive rescissions already enacted 
earlier this year for 1995 have the effect of reducing total 
discretionary resources available for the Department by 24% 
below the level which this Committee considered appropriate 
less than one year ago. These trends are shown on the following 
graph:


    We are particularly concerned by reductions in funds for 
various worker protection activities and for training programs 
for both adults and youth.
    Worker protections.--The Committee bill reverses decades of 
progress by this country in creating effective systems to 
protect its workers. These reductions will affect the health, 
safety, pensions, wages, hours, and collective bargaining 
rights of tens of millions of workers. The total reductions in 
these activities is almost $180 million as shown on the 
following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            fiscal year                      Reduction  
                               1995       Committee bill     (percent)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Occupational Safety and                                                 
 Health--OSHA...........           312.5           264.0           -48.5
                                                                 (-15.5)
(OSHA enforcement)......           145.8            98.0           -47.8
                                                                   (-33)
Mine Safety and Health--                                                
 MSHA...................           200.6           185.2           -15.4
                                                                  (-7.7)
Pension Welfare Benefits                                                
 Adm....................            69.3            64.1            -5.2
                                                                  (-7.5)
Employment Standards....           273.0           247.9           -25.1
(Wage and Hour).........           101.1            88.9           -12.2
                                                                 (-12.1)
National Labor Relations                                                
 Board..................           176.0           123.2           -52.8
                                                                   (-30)
National Inst. of                                                       
 Occupational Safety and                                                
 Health--NIOSH..........           132.1            99.2            32.9
                                                                 (-24.9)
    Total...............         1,163.5           983.6          -179.9
                                                                 (-15.5)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We strongly object to these cuts which we believe will have 
the following impact:
    1. Occupational safety and health.--The health and safety 
of millions of workers will be adversely impacted. The 
Department of Labor estimates that these cuts will result in 
50,000 more workplace injuries and deaths each year. Currently 
6000 Americans are injured on the job each day and these 
injuries cost America more than $112 billion annually. Without 
OSHA's efforts we believe that these numbers would be much 
worse. Since the passage of occupational safety and health laws 
25 years ago, the workplace fatality rate has declined by 57%. 
Research shows unequivocally that OSHA inspections result in 
fewer injuries and deaths.
    2. Mine safety.--Fewer mines will be inspected exposing 
more miners to injury. The mining industry which employs some 
360,000 workers, remains one of the most dangerous occupations 
in the world. Since 1989, 30 miners have been killed in mine 
fires and explosions and another 90 have been killed in roof 
cave-ins. During the last 25 years more than 50,000 miners have 
died from black lung disease. Largely because of MSHA's 
efforts, miners today are five times less likely to be killed 
on the job. We should not reduce resources available in this 
critical area.
    3. Pensions.--The reductions proposed in the bill place in 
jeopardy working families pensions. The Department of Labor 
estimates that these cutbacks will result in pension plan 
losses of at least $100 million and that the number of pension 
fraud cases pursued will decline by 20%. This agency is 
responsible for the oversight of 5.2 million pension plans with 
over 3 trillion in assets. We should not put retirees savings 
at risk.
    4. Employment standards.--We believe that reductions in our 
efforts to ensure fairness in the workplace by enforcing laws 
such as those which prescribe child labor protections and wage 
and hour standards are dangerous for American workers. As an 
example the Department of Labor estimates that these reductions 
will mean that $25 million in back wages owed to some 50,000 
workers will not be recovered. The Employment Standards 
Administration make sure that Americans get fair treatment in 
the workplace--that people can take time off to care for a sick 
relative or new child, that employers do not discriminate, that 
minors aren't pressed into dangerous or illegal work, and that 
people who work overtime get paid for it. We believe that 
reductions totaling more than $25 million to this agency are 
inappropriate.
    5. Collective bargaining.--The 30 percent reduction 
recommended in the bill for the National Labor Relations Board 
is a punitive effort to restrict the agency responsible for 
ensuring the rights of workers to organize and bargain 
collectively. This agency was created in 1935 to bring order 
and reduce violence in labor organization disputes. The effort 
to gut this agency has been led by Minority Members of the 
Committee who wish to punish the agency for its handling of 
cases with which they have been involved personally as 
advocates for private companies. The funding reductions 
together with a series of restrictions on the Board's authority 
to enforce the law will seriously undermine this agency and the 
rights of workers.
    6. NIOSH, Occupational safety and health research.--The $20 
million cut in occupational safety and health research will 
significantly undermine studies on critical issues such as the 
toxic effects of industrial substances, hazardous contaminants, 
and protective respirators used by miners and firefighters. The 
Committee's recommendation to end all Federal assistance for 
training of specialists in this field will cripple efforts to 
protect workers in the future.

                         training opportunities

    Training funds in bill.--The employment and training budget 
at the Department of Labor is funded at a level $2.5 billion or 
35% below the amount approved last year for these programs. We 
believe that the $4.6 billion allocated for this purpose is 
entirely inadequate given the need for essential investments to 
train this country's workforce. New technologies, global 
competition, and an increasingly integrated economy require an 
exceptionally well trained workforce. It is clear that job-
related skills training is essential, paying off in terms of 
increased productivity for industry and increased wages for 
workers. Given these facts, we cannot comprehend why the 
Congress should reduce funding in this critical area by more 
than one-third. Such cuts will mean lost opportunities for 
thousands who are striving for a better life or just to escape 
welfare dependency.
    Comparison with CAREERS bill.--We believe that the severe 
cuts recommended in the bill will undermine efforts underway in 
the authorizing Committees to restructure the Nation's 
workplace development programs. We support efforts to 
streamline this country's current collection of multiple 
training programs. The CAREERS bill recently reported by the 
Education and Economic Opportunities Committee consolidates 
more than 90 programs establishing a new system that is market 
driven, provides customer choice and is easily accessible. It 
cannot succeed, however, if funding levels fall dramatically 
below the levels contemplated by the reauthorization. The 
following table shows that the funding levels included in this 
appropriations bill are more than $2.5 billion below the 
comparable training allocations last year and more than $1.5 
billion below the levels authorized in the CAREERS bill as 
reported for adult and youth training.


    Adult training.--The Committee bill reduces funding for 
adult training overall by 21 percent. Funding under title II-A 
is set at $830 million, $225 million below the level for these 
programs in the original 1995 bill. This will mean 84,000 fewer 
adults will receive assistance. The Majority has justified this 
reduction by saying the program doesn't work. The evidence 
available to the Committee, however, shows the exact opposite. 
The National JTPA Impact Evaluation shows that participants 
increase earnings by 10-15% over comparable individuals who are 
not trained; adult women trainees who were former AFDC 
recipients earn $6,000 per year more than control groups and 
earnings gains achieved as a result of training continue 
throughout the lifetime of the individuals who participate.
    Dislocated workers.--The second largest cut in the 
Department of Labor occurs in the title III dislocated worker 
program. The $850 million recommended in the bill is $446 
million or 34% below the 1995 appropriations level. This means 
that 193,000 workers who lose their jobs in 1996 through no 
fault of their own will not receive training. Rapid 
advancements in technology, defense downsizing, corporate 
restructuring and intense global competition result in 
structural changes necessary for economic growth. There is, 
however, a human cost to this growth. The Department of Labor 
estimates that 2.5 million American workers will be permanently 
laid off in 1995 as a result of these forces. An example is the 
recent round of Defense Department base closings announced last 
month. This action alone is expected to affect 100,000 workers 
who will have to switch careers. We believe that continued 
investment in dislocated worker training is essential if 
disruptions in the economy are to be manageable for the workers 
and communities. We know this program works. 70 percent of 
workers served by the program get jobs upon completion of 
training and wages in their new jobs equal 92% of their 
previous wages. The Inspector General has reported that workers 
served by the program ``were reemployed, remained in the 
workforce and regained their earning power''.
    Youth training programs.--The bill reported by the Majority 
makes dramatic and inappropriate reductions in Labor Department 
programs serving youth. The $1,343 million recommended is 54% 
below the levels recommended in the original 1995 bill. We 
believe that it is unwise and unfair for the Federal government 
to abandon the 800,000 youngster who will not be trained if 
this is sustained.
    The following graph displays the severity of the 
unemployment problem for teenagers, particularly minority 
teens, and the compelling case for investing more resources in 
this problem:


    Summer jobs.--The bill as reported completely eliminates 
the Federal summer jobs program which has been Federally 
financed for 30 years. This means that 615,000 youth will not 
be given the opportunity next Summer to participate in the 
workforce, many for the first time in their lives. Many of 
these youngsters live in the inner cities or in rural areas 
where private sector work opportunities are limited. The 
Majority's recommendation is based on statements that the 
program is ineffective. Again, as with adult program criticism, 
this is not supported by analytic evidence. The Inspector 
General's evaluation indicated that ``kids were closely 
supervised, learned new skills they could apply in school, and 
took pride in their employment.'' Other studies showed similar 
positive results. There were no significant problems with 
behavior, attendance or turnover. Kids and employers reported 
that the work was needed and of value to the community. The 
evidence indicates clearly that terminating the Summer jobs 
program is a serious error. This country is in the midst of a 
debate on welfare reform. For many youth, the Summer Jobs 
program is their first opportunity to work and their first step 
in learning the work ethic. We can't talk about moving people 
from welfare to work and eliminate this program. This program 
should be restored.

                         vulnerable populations

    We object strongly to the extent of the reductions 
recommended in the bill for programs which serve the most 
vulnerable and the most needy in our society--the disabled, the 
elderly, children, the homeless, and the poor. It targets weak 
claimants rather than weak claims for the harshest cuts in 
order to free-up resources to 
finance tax cuts for the wealthy. During Subcommittee and Full 
Committee consideration of the bill, we offered amendments to 
try to ameliorate the harshest of these actions. Unfortunately 
they were rejected on party line votes.
    We are especially concerned by reductions in the following 
areas:
    Energy assistance.--The Subcommittee bill eliminates all 
funding for this program which served 6.1 million households in 
1994 of which one third were elderly and 25% were disabled. 80% 
have income below $10,000 per year. This program is about 
people who need help like the 367 deaths reported recently in 
Chicago due to excessive heat. 60% of these people were 
elderly. Governor Edgar released additional LIHEAP funds to try 
to deal with the emergency but for many it was too late. Next 
year if this bill is approved there won't be any funds to 
release for cold or hot weather.
    Other workers.--The Committee bill cuts funding by $46 
million or 11 percent below last year's appropriation. This 
will eliminate minimum wage jobs for 14,000 seniors with 
incomes less than 125% of the poverty level. 70% of 
participants are women. Even without this cut there are waiting 
lists for these part-time jobs in every State.
    Senior volunteers (RSVP & Foster Grandparent).--The 
Subcommittee cuts funding for these two elderly volunteer 
programs by $21 million or 15%. This affects the 23,000 Foster 
Grandparents who cared for more than 80,000 disabled kids, 
12,000 senior companions who kept 36,000 frail elderly in their 
homes and more than 400,000 RSVP volunteers.
    Other seniors programs.--The Committee bill cuts $71 
million out of other senior programs. This includes $4.5 
million for counseling programs to prevent rip-offs in the 
Medigap insurance industry. The bill funds 12 million less 
meals for the elderly at home and in centers. Senior citizen 
centers lose $15 million.
    Special Education.--The discretionary programs for 
educating disabled students have been cut by $160 million. The 
largest reduction comes from eliminating the $91 million of 
Federal assistance to train teachers to work with the disabled. 
13,000 students currently training to be teachers for the 
handicapped would lose their Federal scholarship under the 
Committee bill.
    Healthy Start.--The Committee bill cuts Healthy Start 
grants by more than half, from $105M to $50. This program was 
started by President Bush to provide intensive efforts to lower 
the infant mortality rate in communities whose rates were more 
than double the National average. Many of these communities 
have infant mortality rates which exceed levels in developing 
countries. The program is making steady progress. As an example 
Baltimore has cut its rate from 21.1 deaths per 100,000 to 
14.1. This is still double the national infant death rate but 
the Federal funds have saved lives. The Subcommittee reduction 
will likely result in termination of 14 of the existing 22 
grants. (Aberdeen, Baltimore, Birmingham, Boston, Chicago, 
Cleveland, Detroit, Lake County Indiana, New Orleans, NYC, 
Oakland, Phila., Pittsburgh, Wash. DC, Dallas, Essex County NJ, 
Florida panhandle, Milwaukee, Mississippi Delta, Richmond, 
Savannah).
    Head Start.--Head Start is funded at $535 million below the 
President's request and $137 million below last year. The Head 
Start program is a major investment in the future of our 
country. It provides essential education, health, mental 
health, nutrition, and social services to 750,000 disadvantaged 
preschool age children. Currently less than half of all 
children eligible for the program are able to participate. This 
bill will further exacerbate this problem. At the Subcommittee 
level 45-50,000 children would have to be cut from current 
rolls. Critical quality improvements mandated by Congress would 
not take place. Head Start is a program which both Republican 
and Democratic administrations have supported. It should be 
expanded not cut.

                               Conclusion

    We fear as we review the shape of this bill, that the 
policies of the Majority party which are reflected in it will 
make it harder for ordinary people to hold on to a middle class 
life. They will make it more difficult for the disadvantaged to 
get the education and training which they need to work their 
way into the middle class. It will make millions of workers 
more vulnerable to the whims of employers who wish to avoid the 
the minimum wage, the 40 hour week, the rules of fair labor 
practices, standards for a safe workplace. We are concerned 
that this bill marks a retreat from our efforts to be one 
people with common causes and common interests. It shuts down a 
significant portion of the opportunities that people without 
means have of gaining access to the rewards this country can 
provide and it takes away the protections that help those in 
the middle class stay there.
    Surely this Congress in a bi-partisan way can do better. 
The bill as currently written should be rejected and we should 
start over. In the past the Labor, Health and Human Services, 
and Education bill has been known as the ``people's bill''. 
With hard work it can continue to earn that praise in this 
Congress.
    Impact on individual states.--The Minority believe that it 
is important that all Members understand not only the national 
impact of the reductions which are made by this bill but also 
the direct effect on their States. The attached charts display 
the State specific effect of the bill in selected areas where 
such data is readily available. All amounts have been provided 
by the Federal agencies with jurisdiction over these programs.


  DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. NANCY PELOSI, HON. DAVID OBEY, HON. STENY 
             HOYER, HON. NITA LOWEY, AND HON. LOUIS STOKES

    We, the undersigned, dissent from the provisions of the 
bill regarding AIDS research at the National Institutes of 
Health (NIH). The legislation fails to provide specific funding 
for AIDS research and has not continued the procedure of 
providing a single appropriation through the Office of AIDS 
Research (OAR). Both actions are inconsistent with recent 
reforms taken to strengthen our federal AIDS research program 
and both actions are taken without sufficient justification.
    Our concerns arise out of an appreciation for the history 
of the federal AIDS research program. Because the AIDS epidemic 
emerged in the U.S. after most of the institutes at NIH were 
already established and because HIV manifests itself in so many 
ways and acts against so many parts of the body, AIDS research 
has taken place in all 24 NIH institutes, centers, and 
divisions. As an infectious disease, AIDS naturally fell within 
the purview of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 
Diseases. As a cause of cancer, it was within the mandate of 
the National Cancer Institute. As a cause of lung disease, it 
has been studied by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
Institute, and so on. But there was no AIDS institute and there 
was no natural home for research on this new and complex 
disease.
    Moreover, since the disease arose suddenly and research 
efforts were assembled without a central plan, many 
individuals, groups, and labs began work on the disease because 
of their background in immunology or virology, not because HIV 
affected the organ system or disease that was in the name of 
the institute within which they worked. There was no single 
discipline or subspeciality of research that could turn its 
attention to this new and multi-faceted syndrome.
    The result of this history was the creation of a portfolio 
of AIDS research without an authoritative central reviewing 
process, without a comprehensive plan for the use of resources, 
and without a method for evaluating research performance and 
results. While individual research projects have produced 
significant results and insights, there have been problems in 
the overall structure of the AIDS program, including omission 
of important areas of research, duplication of efforts, and a 
lack of priority-setting for the use of limited funds.
    In retrospect, perhaps everyone can agree that, if the 
Congress had known what everyone now knows, it should have 
created a National Institute on AIDS. The planning and 
coordination that comes with such an institute structure is 
what has been clearly missing until very recently.
    Having not created a National Institute on AIDS in the 
early 80's, the Congress found itself in the early 90's with a 
dilemma: Research was ongoing in every location without 
sufficient planning and coordination, but there was significant 
resistance among scientists to uprooting and reconfiguring 
ongoing projects and collaborations. Moreover, the NIH found 
itself with a portfolio of research funding requests that had 
not been ordered by priority or by research opportunity but 
rather had simply grown within existing institutes, isolated 
one from another.
    With that in mind, the Congress created an ``institute 
without walls'' by significantly strengthening the Office of 
AIDS Research in the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993. After much 
discussion, debate, and compromise, the authorizing committees 
created a mechanism which had the advantages of an institute 
structure without the disadvantages of having to move 
scientists, break up research teams and labs, or recreate 
review committees. The OAR was intended to be--and has 
functioned as--the best of both worlds: consolidation for 
better budgeting and planning, diffusion for better research 
and collaboration.
    The Act charged the OAR Director with developing a 
Comprehensive Plan and Budget for all AIDS research conducted 
by the 24 NIH institutes and directed that the OAR receive and 
distribute all funds appropriated to the NIH for AIDS research 
in accordance with the plan. The annual plan is developed 
through a unique process involving broad representation of the 
scientific community, in collaboration with all individual 
institutes, and linked with the AIDS budget. The rationale for 
a consolidated budget and appropriation rests on fundamental 
management principles that link budgeting with planning.
    The authorizing committees did not arrive at this solution 
alone. Recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences, 
scientific review groups, and AIDS advocates almost all pointed 
in the same direction. While some general biomedical research 
organizations were initially trouble by questions of timing of 
implementation, participation in planning, and predictability 
of funding streams, significant concessions and compromises 
were made during the process and final support for the bill was 
broad and bipartisan.
    All evidence is that the OAR is working well and as 
intended. Administrators agree, including the Director of the 
NIH, who has repeatedly expressed his preference for a single 
appropriation through OAR. Researchers agree, including both 
funded and non-funded scientists. And advocates agree, 
including some of those who have been most critical of the 
government's response to date.
    The OAR is now conducting the first comprehensive 
scientific peer review of the entire NIH AIDS research program. 
The review involves over 100 scientists, including Nobel 
laureates and members of the National Academy of Sciences. It 
will help scientists examine areas of overlap and gaps in the 
AIDS research program, weaknesses of structure, and methods of 
economizing and supporting research. The single appropriation 
provides only mechanism to assure the implementation of the 
recommendations of this review across the institutes.
    The OAR process is only now being fully implemented. All 
tangible evidence is that it is working as intended. Only an 
extraordinary reason should be allowed to interrupt this 
process mid-stream, but the Committee is doing so for no valid 
reason whatsoever.
    The Committee maintains that it is acting in an effort to 
eliminate ``earmarks'' for disease-specific research. We are 
also opposed to disease-specific earmarks, but we consider the 
use of a single appropriation for the Office of AIDS Research 
to be no more an earmark than a single appropriation for the 
National Cancer Institute. The Congress arrived at the 
``institute without walls'' not as an earmark, but out of a 
recognition that for better budgeting and management decisions 
an institute-like structure was needed. For the Committee now, 
in the name of ending earmarks, to eliminate this distinct 
budget would weaken the management for AIDS research, and would 
leave all observers and participants without the simplest 
benchmarks.
    We have the highest respect for the courageous men and 
women working at the NIH and at academic research centers 
around the country who have devoted their lives to vanquishing 
this disease, in spite of the scientific and bureaucratic 
obstacles that stand in their way. We hope that the Congress 
will realize that continuing the procedure of providing a 
single appropriation through the Office of AIDS Research is in 
the best interest of a strong national AIDS research program.
    Because AIDS remains a national and world-wide priority, a 
robust, efficient, and well-managed research program is vital 
if we are to develop treatments, vaccines, and a cure for this 
deadly disease and end the vast burdens the AIDS epidemic 
imposes on our Nation. We pray for the day when the epidemic 
can be said to be over. This bill must help speed that day.

                                   Nita Lowey.
                                   Steny Hoyer.
                                   Nancy Pelosi.
                                   Louis Stokes.
                                   David Obey.

  DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. NITA M. LOWEY, AND HON. SIDNEY YATES, HON. 
LOUIS STOKES, HON. CHARLES WILSON, HON. NORMAN DICKS, HON. MARTIN SABO, 
   HON. JULIAN DIXON, HON. VIC FAZIO, HON. STENY HOYER, HON. RONALD 
 COLEMAN, HON. JIM CHAPMAN, HON. DAVID SKAGGS, HON. NANCY PELOSI, HON. 
                EDWARD VISCLOSKY, AND HON. EDWARD TORRES

    We, the undersigned, dissent from the provisions in the 
bill which prohibit the funding of certain activities related 
to women's reproductive health. These provisions eliminate 
Medicaid coverage for abortion services for victims of rape and 
incest, prohibit accreditation committees from requiring that 
educational curriculum for obstetricians and gynecologists 
contain training in abortion techniques, and ban research on 
early stage human embryos that could lead to advancements in 
the fights against infertility, genetic disease and birth 
defects. Furthermore, the bill eliminates Title X family 
planning services for low income women. These provisions put 
the health and welfare of American women and their families at 
risk.
    First, we are deeply concerned by the provision in the bill 
that only obligates a state to provide Medicaid coverage for 
abortion services in the case of life endangerment of the 
mother. This provision is a drastic change from existing law, 
embodied in the Hyde Amendment, which dictates that states must 
provide Medicaid coverage for abortion services in the cases of 
life endangerment, rape and incest. Although the new provision 
is theoretically about state's rights, its intent is clearly to 
deny abortion services to the most vulnerable in our society--
victims of rape and incest.
    Under current law, states do not have a right to pick and 
choose which procedures they will cover under Medicaid. 
Although a state's participation is voluntary, once a state 
chooses to participate it must comply with all federal 
statutory and regulatory requirements. The issue is not one of 
states' rights, but of the rights of indigent victims of rape 
and incest to decide not to carry the children of the men who 
assaulted them.
    In addition, some have suggested that the Hyde amendment 
left open a question of whether states had to provide abortion 
services to victims of rape and incest. This is simply not the 
case. Since the 1993 statute change, three federal appellate 
courts and federal district courts in 10 states have rejected 
challenges brought by states that did not want to comply with 
the rape and incest language. Also, Supreme Court Justice 
Antonin Scalia, an abortion opponent, refused to stay an order 
to a state to pay for abortion services for victims of rape and 
incest. The reason for his refusal was that the law was clear 
that states were obligated to pay. The new provision in the 
bill does not clarify existing law, it changes it.
    Second, we are also concerned about the provision that 
would bar organizations like the Accreditation Council on 
Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) from dispensing requirements 
for medical schools and training programs that include training 
in abortion techniques. This provision is an unprecedented 
interference by the federal government into the decision making 
processes of a private organization.
    These guidelines ware implemented to insure that doctors 
are qualified to protect the health and save the lives of 
American women. Basic women's health care includes the full 
range of reproductive health services. It is unconscionable 
that this body would interfere with a decision that insures 
that doctors are fully capable of serving all the medical needs 
of our nation's women. The guidelines currently contain a 
conscience clause that allows both individuals and institutions 
to opt not to participate.
    In addition, this provision would circumvent members of the 
medical community who are empowered to make decisions about the 
content of graduate medical education in our nation. In 
essence, this provision replaces the medical expertise of the 
medical experts who sit on the ACGME with the medical expertise 
of the lawyers and business people who sit in Congress. We 
refer our colleagues to a recent letter that the American 
Medical Association sent to Congressman Hoekstra regarding his 
bill to alter the ACMGE's abortion training requirements, which 
said:
          The AMA strongly opposes any precedent which would 
        compromise professional responsibility to develop and 
        uphold educational standards by which these programs 
        are evaluated, should not be subject to federal or 
        state legislative initiatives, and not politicized by 
        governmental regulation.
    We agree that the Congress should not insert itself into 
the determination of the details of an educational curriculum 
in this manner.
    Third, we are concerned about the provision of this bill 
that bans all federal funds for human embryo research. This 
provision goes much further than President Clinton's current 
policy, which only prohibits federal funds for the creation of 
human embryos for research purposes. We feel that the 
President's is the wiser policy, and that the current provision 
will deprive the American people of the medical advancements 
that such research would provide.
    Early stage embryo research involves examining how cells 
develop and divide once sperm and egg meet and form an embryo. 
This research could lead to advancements in the prevention of 
pregnancy loss and infertility, the diagnois and treatment of 
genetic disease, the prevention of birth defects, and the 
prevention and detection of childhood and other cancers.
    The embryos used in the research are donated by couples who 
have undergone medical fertility treatments that involve the 
fertilization of a number of embryos outside of the womb. Once 
fertilized, some embryos are returned to the womb with hopes 
that a pregnancy will result. The remaining embryos are stored 
for later use. When a couple no longer needs or wishes to 
continue storing the embryos, they can donate these ``spares'' 
to research. The spares would otherwise be discarded.
    A recent panel appointed by the National Institutes of 
Health recently issued stringent guidelines for this research. 
Ironically, a ban on all federal funding would segregate this 
research into private laboratories, which are not subject to 
any set scientific or ethical guidelines. The panel concluded 
that carefully guided early-embryo research can benefit 
millions of people and is worthy of federal support.
    Lastly, we are deeply concerned that the Committee voted to 
approve an amendment which eliminates funding for the Title X 
Family Planning program. There are many members who serve on 
this Committee who disagree about the right to choose. However, 
it is extremely frustrating that we could not work together to 
support a program to prevent unwanted pregnancies and 
abortions. Title X does not fund abortions; it is prohibited by 
law from doing so.
    The elimination of Title X family planning funds from the 
bill will compromise the health of millions of American women, 
particularly the working poor who lack either private insurance 
or Medicaid coverage. Last year's appropriation of $193 million 
enabled clinics to provide services to more that 4 million 
clients in over 4,000 cities.
    Title X sets the national framework for the delivery of 
complete family planning services. The program began with wide 
bi-partisan support. Its lead co-sponsors, 25 years ago, were 
President George bush as a Republican Congressman from Texas 
and Rep. James Scheuer, Democrat of New York. It was signed 
into law by President Nixon.
    Title X is cost-effective. Family planning services prevent 
unintended and teenage pregnancies and thus avert the need for 
abortions. However, eliminating Title X affects more than the 
availability of family planning services. Title X clinics 
provide additional health care services to women such as pap 
smears and exams for cervical and breast cancer.
    Earlier this year, the House passed the Personal 
Responsibility Act, which stated that the ``reduction of out-
of-wedlock births is an important government interest.'' It is 
contradictory to aim to decrease out-of-wedlock births but 
eliminate the centerpiece of the nations family planning 
efforts.
    We are deeply concerned about the way in which women's 
reproductive health is jeopardized by this bill. Millions of 
American women and their families will be directly impacted.

                                   Sidney R. Yates.
                                   Norm Dicks.
                                   Esteban E. Torres.
                                   Julian Dixon.
                                   Vic Fazio.
                                   Charles Wilson.
                                   Steny Hoyer.
                                   Jim Chapman.
                                   Nita Lowey.
                                   Peter J. Visclosky.
                                   Martin O. Sabo.
                                   Nancy Pelosi.
                                   David Skaggs.
                                   Ron Coleman.
                                   Louis Stokes.

                 SEPARATE VIEWS OF HON. DAVID E. SKAGGS

    This bill has many serious shortcomings, including severe 
reductions in funding for many programs that are of great 
importance to people throughout our society.
    But this bill should be rejected by the House if for no 
other reason because of its heavy-handed provisions to curtail 
political advocacy, designed to intimidate recipients of 
federal grants, and associates of such recipients, from 
exercising their constitutional right to free expression of 
political views and their right to petition their government.
    While supporters claim these provisions are intended merely 
to keep federal dollars from being used to lobby the federal 
government, in fact they would have much greater reach--using 
the long arm of the federal government to fundamentally 
restructure the ability of universities, research 
organizations, non-profits, and their employees and suppliers, 
to communicate with policy-makers and to participate in the 
political life of America.
    This is a ``Big Brother'' proposal that would bring about 
creation of a national data base of political activity--
covering everything from communications to contributions made 
by individual citizens--managed by the United States 
government. All individuals and organizations falling under the 
reporting terms of the amendment would have to file annually an 
itemized statement of political activity with the Federal 
government. Sound like ``1984''?
    Enactment of these provisions would mean that we would soon 
face a new section in many employment forms and purchase 
orders, necessitated by the accounting regime imposed by the 
amendment, in which the question would be: ``Are you now, or in 
the last five years have you, engaged in lobbying or political 
activity of any kind? If the answer is `yes,' complete schedule 
D, itemizing the type and date of such activity, the amount you 
spent on the activity, and the percentage of your annual income 
devoted to all such political activity expenditures.'' Sound 
like 1953?
    The provisions not only prohibit direct use of federal 
grants funds for political advocacy,\1\ but prohibit any grant 
to an entity which has exceed something called a ``political 
advocacy threshold'' for any of the preceding five years. So, 
the provisions would restrict political expression using even 
the grantee's private resources and even for years in which no 
federal grant was involved.\2\
    \1\ Section 1(a)(1) of amendment as offered in Committee. All 
citations are to sections of the amendment.
    \2\ Section 1(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A guarantee would also be prohibited from doing business of 
any sort with any other person or entity which has spent more 
than 15% of his/its budget on ``political advocacy'' during the 
preceding year, at penalty of having any such expenditure count 
as if it were the grantee's own ``political advocacy.'' \3\ To 
comply with this provision, a grantee would have to require all 
employees and every person with whom the grantee does business 
to disclose their political activities and expenditures. In 
other words, the provisions not only seek to control the 
political activity of the grantee, but all persons with whom 
the grantee does business.
    \3\ Section 1(a)(4) and 1(c)(1)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Incidentally, all calculations of these thresholds are to 
be based on the federal fiscal year.\4\ So, if grantees, or the 
persons with whom a grantee is doing business, happen to have a 
different fiscal year (as most do), they will have to convert 
their books to the federal year to determine compliance.
    \4\ Section 1(a)(2),(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The provisions have another Big Brother feature--the burden 
of proof regarding compliance with these limits on so-called 
``political advocacy.'' This feature is particularly troubling 
because the provisions place limits on activities of a grantee 
of the type that are protected under the First Amendment. While 
it usually falls to the government to prove that someone has 
done something wrong (an approach consistent with the 
presumption of innocence), here the bill provides that the 
burden of proof will be on the grantee to establish that he's 
done everything right! \5\ And, as if that weren't enough, 
under these provisions the grantee must carry that burden of 
proof, not by the usual standard of civil law, a preponderance 
of the evidence, but rather by the far more exacting and 
difficult standard of clear and convincing evidence, a standard 
usually reserved for extraordinary matters such as punitive 
damages.
    \5\ Section 1(b)(1) (C)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This burden of proof is all the more objectionable when 
coupled with a further provision, discussed below, that would 
allow private citizens to sue a grantee and split treble 
damages with the government.\6\
    \6\ Section 1(b)(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To understand the full import of the bill's restrictions, 
we must consider the question, what is ``political advocacy''? 
For all practical purposes, its definition encompasses all 
manner of communication and conduct normally protected by the 
First Amendment: engaging in publicity, making contributions 
(cash or in-kind), campaigning, distributing statements, 
participating in litigation, challenging a government agency 
action, and so on, whenever the objective is getting someone 
elected or defeated, or exerting some influence on government 
policy or decisions at any level--state, local, or federal.\7\ 
There are several exceptions: a grantee can respond to a 
government's written request for technical assistance, or make 
available the results of ``nonpartisan analysis, study, 
research,'' or communicate with its own members (provided that 
any such communication is not designed to encourage the members 
themselves to engage in any political advocacy).\8\
    \7\ Section 1(c)(1), (2)
    \8\ Section 1(c)(1)(B), (C)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The disclosure requirements of this part of the bill are 
likely to have an especially onerous and intimidating effect. A 
grantee that engages in any political advocacy must file with 
its grant-making agency each year a certified statement, 
describing all its political advocacy activities, listing the 
name and ID number of any person with whom it spent any grant 
funds, and estimating the amount spent on advocacy and the 
amount of the grantee's prohibited political advocacy 
threshold. The bill also provides that each grant-making agency 
will then send all these disclosure statements to the Census 
Bureau, where they'll be collated and put out on the Internet.
    Enforcement of the limits on political advocacy will occur 
through GAO or IG audits,\9\ through False Claims Act 
investigations by the grant-making agency, False Claims Act 
civil actions brought by the Attorney General, and, as 
mentioned above, by private lawsuits brought under the so-
called ``private attorney general'' provisions of the False 
Claims Act.\10\ (The lengthy and detailed provisions of the 
False Claims Act are incorporated by reference into this part 
of the bill.)
    \9\ Section 1(b)(1)
    \10\ Section 1(b)(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    That means a grantee could face liability under the False 
Claim Act for a penalty of $10,000, plus up to three times the 
amount of the grant, for submitting a false statement in 
support of a claim--in this context, a grant--if the grantee 
``acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the 
information''.\11\ That might sound reasonable, until one 
recalls the provisions concerning the burden of proof regarding 
compliance--the grantee must show compliance by clear and 
convincing evidence. Absent some clarification, it appears that 
this burden of proof is to be transposed into the False Claims 
Act. So, if this part of the bill were to become law, we would 
be faced with the bizarre prospect that a zealous private 
citizen could sue a grantee for treble damages, alleging that 
the grantee's annual certification of political advocacy was 
false, and thus put the grantee to the task of proving the 
negative, which is tough enough to do under any circumstances, 
let alone under the requirement that the proof be by clear and 
convincing evidence.
    \11\ 31 U.S.C. 3729(b)(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I believe the potentially perverse effects of this part of 
this bill can be no better illustrated than by its application 
to a hypothetical, but typical, set of facts involving an NSF 
research grant. The grantee would likely be a university 
professor, heading a research team of several colleagues, post-
doc fellows, graduate students, and lab assistants. They would 
purchase lab equipment and supplies from several companies.
    Now under the bill's restrictions, the professor could have 
spent no more than 5% of his own income on political activity 
for the previous five years. Heaven only knows how he would be 
supposed to deal with the political expenditures of his 
independently wealthy and activist wife, assuming they file a 
joint return. Meanwhile, he would have to have his entire 
research team and all the lab equipment and supply firms 
complete the questionnaire I mentioned earlier and account for 
their political activity. Again, what if one if them should 
have been so enthusiastic about civic responsibilities that he 
spent over 15% of his income on political advocacy that year? 
Presumably, he's off the team. Or, what if the same facts 
applied to the company that's the only source of an essential 
piece of equipment? There goes the project. And, of course, if 
any of these folks did even a little political advocacy, that 
would have to be disclosed and reported to NSF, which would 
have to report it to the Census Bureau, which would make sure 
that the information about the political activity of the 
professor and his team was as near as the Internet.
    Is there any doubt that academic freedom, and freedom of 
expression more generally, is put at grave risk by all this? 
Would anyone in the House like to try to explain to the 
colleges in his or her district how we could endorse such a 
Rube Goldberg contraption, especially one so patently 
unconstitutional?
    No doubt, there have been some transgressions, some misuse 
of federal grant money to push what some consider a biased 
political agenda. But for many of those, these provisions would 
constitute capital punishment for a misdemeanor. And for all 
the vast majority of federal grant recipients who've tried to 
work in good faith for the national interest, this part of the 
bill would be a slaughter of the innocents.
    I'm embarrassed to have to be associated with such a sorry 
idea as this part of this bill even long enough to argue and 
vote against it. However else this bill may be improved, if 
these provisions are retained the bill should not become law.
                                                   David E. Skaggs.

             DISSENTING VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE LOUIS STOKES

    The callous actions taken by the majority leadership--
making life-threatening funding cuts in critical quality of 
life programs in order to provide a tax cut for the wealthy, 
and to increase defense spending well above the increase 
recommended by the administration--is unconscionable and 
inhumane. To make matters worse, the leadership forces two of 
the 13 appropriations subcommittees, the Labor-HHS-ED and VA-
HUD subcommittees to absorb the bulk of the 602(b) cuts. These 
are the same two subcommittees that were hit with the bulk of 
the rescission cuts. The 602(b) allocation for the FY 1996 
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education 
and Related Agencies Appropriations bill is $9 billion, or 13 
percent below the FY 1995 allocation.
    Throughout the history of the subcommittee, the Labor-HHS-
ED bill has been proudly referred to as the ``people's bill'' 
in recognition of its responsiveness to the needs of the 
American people. In an unprecedented action, the Republican 
leadership has converted the measure into an attack weapon 
designed to launch a calculated and concentrated assault on the 
most vulnerable in our society--children, the elderly, and 
families.
    While some of the cuts can be justified, far too many of 
them will create critical quality of life problems. In its 
current state, the Labor-HHS-ED majority's bill deprives 
families of the programs and services that have allowed them to 
achieve the American dream--including employment training, 
education, and health care services. As a result, their 
standard of living and quality of life is threatened.

                               EDUCATION

    The 16 percent, or $4 billion, cut in education programs 
under the auspices of the Department of Education threatens 
students' academic achievement, safety, teacher development, 
parental involvement, and education technology. Nearly 70 
percent of the cut is taken in elementary and secondary 
education programs. The $1.1 billion cut in Title I 
concentration grants means that more than one million 
educationally disadvantaged students would be deprived of the 
academic assistance they require, especially in reading and 
math. These children would be denied the help they need to 
achieve the same high academic standards as other children. 
With accountability based on improved student learning, the 
Title I program helps parents, teachers, and community leaders 
improve their schools.
    While 94 percent of the Nation's schools, or 39 million 
students, depend on the Safe and Drug-Free Schools program to 
provide the resources they need to help remove guns, drugs and 
violence from the classroom, funding for the program is cut by 
$266 million, or nearly 60 percent below the current funding 
level.
    Funding for Goals 2000 is eliminated. This action 
undermines what was once a bipartisan effort to ensure the 
development of goals, standards, accountability, and 
innovations in education across the nation. Federal efforts 
underway in 47 states and hundreds of communities across the 
country to raise academic standards, to increase students 
performance, and to enhance parental participation in education 
would be terminated. The magnet schools program also suffers a 
devastating reduction, funding is cut $17 million below the 
current funding level.
    With respect to higher education, funding is drastically 
reduced including that the Perkins loans, Howard and Gallaudet 
Universities, and state student incentive grants.
    Critical funding cuts are made in a number of other 
education and related programs as well including scholarship 
and fellowship programs, special education, vocational and 
adult education, teacher development and in libraries.

                     LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT TRAINING

    In overall discretionary programs, the cut for the 
Department of Labor is 24 percent, or $2.7 billion below the FY 
1995 appropriation level. Within the labor account, youth 
employment and training programs are hardest hit. Funding for 
the summer jobs program is eliminated denying jobs to over 
600,000 young people who need and want to work. The youth 
employment training program is gutted. Funding is cut 
approximately 80 percent below the FY 1995 appropriation level 
depriving young people of the training and skills they need to 
successfully compete in the job market.
    Adult employment opportunities also suffer critical funding 
cuts. While CBO data projects that 2.5 million workers will be 
permanently laid-off in 1995, and another 2.4 million in 1996, 
funding for the dislocated workers program is cut 34 percent, 
or $446 million below the FY 1995 appropriations level. This 
means that 194 thousand fewer workers would be helped. Funding 
for the adult employment training program is cut $167 million 
below the rescission level. This means that nearly 80,000 fewer 
adults would be able to receive the job training assistance 
they need.
    Drastic cuts are also made in community service employment 
for older Americans, unemployment insurance, employment 
service, veterans employment and training, and in the school-
to-work initiative. Worker protections are also abandoned with 
critical funding reductions made in the employment standards 
administration, OSHA, Mine Safety, and the National Labor 
Relations Board.

                         HUMAN SERVICES/HEALTH

    The elimination of funding for the low income home energy 
assistance program means that nearly 6 million families will no 
longer have the heating and cooling assistance they need. By 
denying the elderly energy assistance, they will be forced to 
choose between health care and heating, or food and heating, or 
housing and heating. Drastic cuts are also made in a number of 
other programs which are vital to elderly citizens including 
preventive health, pension and medicare counseling, congregate 
meals, and home-delivered meals. With respect to the nutrition 
programs, the majority's action would result in 6.2 million 
fewer congregate meals being served, and 5.6 million fewer 
home-delivered meals.
    The $55 million, or over 50 percent, cut in the healthy 
start program means that up to 14, or over 60 percent, of the 
existing healthy start projects would be terminated. Over one 
million women would be denied the comprehensive prenatal and 
other health care, social and support services they need. The 
Nation's efforts to combat infant mortality at a time when 
progress is just beginning to be made in addressing this 
national health problem would be devastated. With respect to 
Head Start, the $137 million cut means that nearly 50 thousand 
fewer children will be served. Funding for family planning is 
completely eliminated.
    Other drastic cuts include funding for Food and Nutrition 
and other community services, Health Prevention, Services for 
the Homeless, Rural Health Services, Substance Abuse and Mental 
Health Services, the Office of the Surgeon General, and the 
agency for health care policy.
    The absurdities do not stop here. The majority leadership 
has delegated authorizing powers to the appropriations 
committee, as such the bill includes major authorizing 
legislation. Liberties taken range from abolishing the office 
of the U.S. Surgeon General, to restricting women's rights, to 
dedicating the limits of political advocacy, to denying worker 
protections. Such an abuse of power is a blatant insult to the 
American people.
    This is just a cross-section of the GOP targeted assault. 
It is absolutely essential for the American people to be 
mindful that the majority on the committee repeatedly voted 
against measures to even partially restore some of the funding 
cuts that they made in critical quality of life programs that 
the American people utilize to improve their standard of 
living. There is no excuse for the majority's callous and 
blatant disregard for children, the elderly, and families. The 
GOP's actions do not even make good economic sense, and will 
devastate the economy and the lives of millions of hard working 
Americans. On behalf of the American people, the Labor-HHS-ED 
measure must be corrected, and if it is not, it must be 
defeated. This we must do for the sake of our children and the 
Nation.
                                                   Louis Stokes, MC