[House Hearing, 107 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
BUSH ADMINISTRATION BUDGET PROPOSALS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES
of the
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 11, 2001
__________
Serial No. 107-36
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
74-523 WASHINGTON : 2001
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
BILL THOMAS, California, Chairman
PHILIP M. CRANE, Illinois CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York
E. CLAY SHAW, Jr., Florida FORTNEY PETE STARK, California
NANCY L. JOHNSON, Connecticut ROBERT T. MATSUI, California
AMO HOUGHTON, New York WILLIAM J. COYNE, Pennsylvania
WALLY HERGER, California SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan
JIM McCRERY, Louisiana BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
DAVE CAMP, Michigan JIM McDERMOTT, Washington
JIM RAMSTAD, Minnesota GERALD D. KLECZKA, Wisconsin
JIM NUSSLE, Iowa JOHN LEWIS, Georgia
SAM JOHNSON, Texas RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts
JENNIFER DUNN, Washington MICHAEL R. McNULTY, New York
MAC COLLINS, Georgia WILLIAM J. JEFFERSON, Louisiana
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee
PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania XAVIER BECERRA, California
WES WATKINS, Oklahoma KAREN L. THURMAN, Florida
J. D. HAYWORTH, Arizona LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
JERRY WELLER, Illinois EARL POMEROY, North Dakota
KENNY C. HULSHOF, Missouri
SCOTT McINNIS, Colorado
RON LEWIS, Kentucky
MARK FOLEY, Florida
KEVIN BRADY, Texas
PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin
Allison Giles, Chief of Staff
Janice Mays, Minority Chief Counsel
______
Subcommittee on Human Resources
WALLY HERGER, California, Chairman
NANCY L. JOHNSON, Connecticut BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
WES WATKINS, Oklahoma FORTNEY PETE STARK, California
SCOTT McINNIS, Colorado SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan
JIM McCRERY, Louisiana JIM McDERMOTT, Washington
DAVE CAMP, Michigan LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania
RON LEWIS, Kentucky
Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public
hearing records of the Committee on Ways and Means are also published
in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the official
version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare both
printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process of
converting between various electronic formats may introduce
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the
current publication process and should diminish as the process is
further refined.
C O N T E N T S
__________
Page
Advisories announcing the hearing................................ 2
WITNESSES
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Dennis P. Williams,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Management and Budget........... 8
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Jeskewitz, Hon. Suzanne, State Representative, Wisconsin State
Assembly, statement............................................ 20
Wilson, James Q., Malibu, CA, statement.......................... 20
BUSH ADMINISTRATION BUDGET PROPOSALS
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 2001
House of Representatives,
Committee on Ways and Means,
Subcommittee on Human Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:30 a.m., in
room B-318 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Wally Herger
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
[The advisory and revised advisory announcing the hearing
follow:]
ADVISORY FROM THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES
CONTACT: (202) 225-1025
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 3, 2001
HR-8
Herger Announces Hearing on Bush Administration Budget Proposals
Congressman Wally Herger (R-CA), Chairman, Subcommittee on Human
Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means, today announced that the
Subcommittee will hold a hearing on initiatives contained in President
Bush's fiscal year 2002 Budget. The hearing will take place on
Wednesday, July 11, 2001, in room B-318 of the Rayburn House Office
Building, beginning at 2:00 p.m.
In view of the limited time available to hear witnesses, oral
testimony at this hearing will be from invited witnesses only. The
invited witness will be a representative of the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Management and Budget, U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS). However, any individual or organization not
scheduled for an oral appearance may submit a written statement for
consideration by the Committee and for inclusion in the printed record
of the hearing.
BACKGROUND:
HHS's fiscal year 2002 budget contains several proposals under the
jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on Human Resources. They include an
expansion of the Promoting Safe and Stable Families program to provide
additional funds and target services to the children of prisoners; a
program to promote Responsible Fatherhood; a Compassion Capital Fund to
provide technical assistance and support to non-profit or faith-based
organizations seeking collaboration with social service agencies; an
expansion of the Chafee Independent Living Program; an increase in
Child Care Entitlement Funds; and a fund to support Maternity Group
homes.
In announcing the hearing, Chairman Herger stated: ``We look
forward to hearing about the many initiatives set forth in the
President's 2002 Budget and how we can work together to put these ideas
into action.''
FOCUS OF THE HEARING:
This hearing will focus on human resources proposals contained in
the President's fiscal year 2002 budget proposal.
DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS:
Any person or organization wishing to submit a written statement
for the printed record of the hearing should submit six (6) single-
spaced copies of their statement, along with an IBM compatible 3.5-inch
diskette in WordPerfect or MS Word format, with their name, address,
and hearing date noted on a label, by the close of business, Wednesday,
July 25, 2001, to Allison Giles, Chief of Staff, Committee on Ways and
Means, U.S. House of Representatives, 1102 Longworth House Office
Building, Washington, D.C. 20515. If those filing written statements
wish to have their statements distributed to the press and interested
public at the hearing, they may deliver 200 additional copies for this
purpose to the Subcommittee on Human Resources office, room B-317
Rayburn House Office Building, by close of business the day before the
hearing.
FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS:
Each statement presented for printing to the Committee by a
witness, any written statement or exhibit submitted for the printed
record or any written comments in response to a request for written
comments must conform to the guidelines listed below. Any statement or
exhibit not in compliance with these guidelines will not be printed,
but will be maintained in the Committee files for review and use by the
Committee.
1. All statements and any accompanying exhibits for printing must
be submitted on an IBM compatible 3.5-inch diskette WordPerfect or MS
Word format, typed in single space and may not exceed a total of 10
pages including attachments. Witnesses are advised that the Committee
will rely on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing
record.
2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material will not
be accepted for printing. Instead, exhibit material should be
referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material not meeting
these specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for
review and use by the Committee.
3. A witness appearing at a public hearing, or submitting a
statement for the record of a public hearing, or submitting written
comments in response to a published request for comments by the
Committee, must include on his statement or submission a list of all
clients, persons, or organizations on whose behalf the witness appears.
4. A supplemental sheet must accompany each statement listing the
name, company, address, telephone and fax numbers where the witness or
the designated representative may be reached. This supplemental sheet
will not be included in the printed record.
The above restrictions and limitations apply only to material being
submitted for printing. Statements and exhibits or supplementary
material submitted solely for distribution to the Members, the press,
and the public during the course of a public hearing may be submitted
in other forms.
Note: All Committee advisories and news releases are available on
the World Wide Web at `HTTP://WWW.HOUSE.GOV/WAYS__MEANS/'.
The Committee seeks to make its facilities accessible to persons
with disabilities. If you are in need of special accommodations, please
call 202-225-1721 or 202-226-3411 TTD/TTY in advance of the event (four
business days notice is requested). Questions with regard to special
accommodation needs in general (including availability of Committee
materials in alternative formats) may be directed to the Committee as
noted above.
* * * NOTICE--CHANGE IN TIME * * *
ADVISORY FROM THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES
CONTACT: (202) 225-1025
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 9, 2001
HR-8-Revised
Change in Time for Subcommittee Hearing on Bush Administration Budget
Proposals
Congressman Wally Herger (R-CA), Chairman of the Ways and Means
Subcommittee on Human Resources, today announced that the Subcommittee
hearing on initiatives contained in President Bush's fiscal year 2002
Budget scheduled for Wednesday, July 11, 2001, at 2:00 p.m., in room B-
318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, will be held instead at 10:30
a.m.
All other details for the hearing remain the same. (See
Subcommittee Advisory No. HR-8 released on July 3, 2001.)
Chairman Herger. Good morning, and welcome to today's
hearing on President Bush's fiscal year 2002 human resources
budget proposals. The President has made a number of proposals
that fall under the jurisdiction of this Subcommittee and which
would be administered by the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS). These include programs that promote
responsible fatherhood, to better protect children at risk of
abuse and neglect, and to mentor children of prisoners, to name
a few.
Today's hearing will help us learn more about the
President's proposals and how we can work with the
administration to better protect children and assist young
families on the path to self-support.
I want to highlight one proposal, mentoring children of
prisoners. In our country today, one and a half million
children have a parent who is incarcerated. Studies show these
children are more likely to be arrested or incarcerated
themselves, to drop out of school, to run with gangs and to
abuse drugs. To his credit, the President has proposed new
funding for programs that link such children with positive
adult role models, while their own parent is in jail. The
programs also help children maintain contact with an imprisoned
parent so that when the parent leaves prison, he or she can
better reconnect with the child.
Given the number of children affected and the likelihood
this sad cycle will repeat itself if nothing is done, I hope we
can all agree to support the President's proposal. The
President issued a budget blueprint, sketching out this and his
other proposals in February, which means this hearing has been
in the planning stages for some time. For several months, we
have been waiting for the Senate to act on a nomination of Dr.
Wade Horn to be Assistant Secretary for the Office of Family
Support at HHS. However, his nomination is one of a number held
up in the Senate, and we must press on with our business.
Fortunately, we have an excellent pinch hitter in Acting
Assistant Secretary for Management and Budget, Dennis Williams.
Mr. Williams has worked on these issues at HHS since 1984. We
are pleased he can share with us his lengthy experience and
perspective. We welcome him to the Subcommittee and look
forward to his testimony.
Without objection, each Member will have the opportunity to
submit a written statement and have it included in the record
at this point.
Mr. Cardin, would you like to make an opening statement?
[The opening statement of Chairman Herger follows:]
Opening Statement of the Hon. Wally Herger, M.C., California, and
Chairman, Subcommittee on Human Resources
Good afternoon and welcome to today's hearing on President Bush's
fiscal year 2002 human resources budget proposals.
The President has made a number of proposals that fall under the
jurisdiction of this Subcommittee, and which would be administered by
the Department of Health and Human Services. These include programs to
promote responsible fatherhood, to better protect children at risk of
abuse and neglect, and to mentor children of prisoners, to name a few.
Today's hearing will help us learn more about the President's proposals
and how we can work with the Administration to better protect children
and assist young families on the path to self-support.
I want to highlight one proposal--mentoring children of prisoners.
In our country today, one and a half million children have a parent who
is incarcerated. Studies show these children are more likely to be
arrested or incarcerated themselves, to drop out of school, to run with
gangs, and to abuse drugs. To his credit, the President has proposed
new funding for private programs that link such children with positive
adult role models while their own parent is in jail. The programs also
help children maintain contact with an imprisoned parent, so that when
the parent leaves prison, he or she can better reconnect with the
child. Given the number of children affected and the likelihood this
sad cycle will repeat itself if nothing is done, I hope we can all
agree to support the President's proposal.
The President issued a budget blueprint sketching out this and his
other proposals in February, which means this hearing has been in the
planning stages for some time. For several months, we have been waiting
for the Senate to act on the nomination of Dr. Wade Horn to be
Assistant Secretary for the Office of Family Support at HHS. However,
his nomination is one of a number held up in the Senate, and we must
press on with our business.
Fortunately, we have an excellent pinch-hitter in the Acting
Assistant Secretary for Management and Budget, Dennis Williams. Mr.
Williams has worked on these issues at HHS since 1984. We are pleased
he can share with us his lengthy experience and perspective. We welcome
him to the Subcommittee and look forward to his testimony.
Mr. Cardin. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I very much
appreciate you calling this hearing so that we can have a
record on the Bush administration's budget on areas that are
within the jurisdiction of this Committee, and I want to
welcome Dennis Williams to our Committee and we look forward to
having the full range of cabinet-level officials before our
Committee to look at these initiatives.
Mr. Chairman, I might say they think there is some good
news in the President's initiatives. I think there are some
areas that we need to improve upon, and there are some matters
of concern. So let me just touch upon a few very briefly.
First on the Safe and Stable Families Program, we are very
pleased that the Bush administration has put more resources
into that program, and we would like to see that moved as
quickly as we possibly can. Those funds are used to help
children at risk, and I think there is strong support for
moving forward in that area. Mr. Chairman, we would hope that
we could improve upon this recommendation by adding one of the
major causes, substance abuse, into those funding areas that
are eligible for this program.
Secondly, Mr. Chairman, on the Independent Living Program,
I am very pleased that the administration has put more
resources into that program. It is more consistent with the
work of this Subcommittee in our efforts to help children who
age out of foster care, and it is a welcome addition to see
more resources put into that program.
Third, let me mention the Responsible Fatherhood Initiative
that the administration has put forward. That looks very
similar to the legislation that was authored by Congresswoman
Johnson and myself and enjoyed very strong bipartisan support
in the House, and I would hope that we could move forward in
that area.
Now, Mr. Chairman, let me just mention a couple areas that
we have concern and where we think that we need to make
improvements. First, we were disappointed that the
administration has not put forward a recommendation on the
Child Support Distribution System. There has been tremendous
interest among the child support enforcement local officials
that we reform that system to make it easier for them to
administer the program and to allow States to pay us through
more child support to the families. That would help in the
Fatherhood Initiative, and Mrs. Johnson and I again have worked
in that area last Congress and there is strong bipartisan
support to move that initiative.
In the area of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF), we are concerned that the administration has not come
forward with extending the supplemental grant program that
affects a large number of States. It does not affect the State
of Maryland that I have the honor of representing, but it is an
area that we should move forward and we are disappointed that
the administration has not come forward with any initiative in
that area.
And let me just mention another area that has not gotten
much attention here on the Hill and maybe it has been
withdrawn, but the administration's budget also includes the
ability of States to offset local tax breaks to faith-based
institutions through the use of TANF funds, and that is one
that I would hope would not move forward in this Congress.
And then lastly, let me mention the faith-based initiatives
that our full Committee will be taking up later today. There
has been a lot of discussion about the faith-based initiatives,
but today we are going to be talking about budget initiatives,
and one area that I think all the faith-based groups that
currently enjoy significant resources from the Federal
government to help in their mission would agree, and that is we
should be putting more money, not less, into those programs in
which faith-based institutions today are able to access Federal
funds. Title XX is a good example of that, and yet that program
is still under funded and the administration has not come
forward with initiatives in that area.
And then I would lastly mention the CCDBG Program and the
fact that the administration has come forward with some new
money in that area in the Child Care and Development Block
Grant Program, but they come forward with some new initiatives
to take some money out of that program which we think is
counterproductive, so that we would hope that if we want to
work out a bipartisan agreement on the faith-based initiatives,
that we would talk about putting more money into the pot so
that the community can address these problems more adequately
rather than just putting more spoons in the bowl that is
already inadequate as far as the resources that are available.
We look forward to hearing Mr. Williams, and we look
forward to working with you on these initiatives.
[The opening statement of Mr. Cardin follows:]
Opening Statement of the Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin, M.C., Maryland
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be here today to consider those
portions of the President's budget that are within the jurisdiction of
this subcommittee. As I look at the Administration's budget, I see some
things I like, some things that concern me, and some things that are
missing.
Let me start by commending President Bush for proposing to increase
resources for the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program, which
provides funding to prevent child abuse, to restore families, and to
promote adoption when appropriate. I believe this panel should act
quickly to pass this increase in funding. We have heard considerable
testimony that our child welfare system lacks adequate resources for
preventive care--and this proposal takes an important first step in
addressing that problem.
During our deliberations on child welfare issues, I hope we also
will consider providing additional resources to combat the leading
cause of child abuse and neglect--namely, substance abuse by parents.
Furthermore, I support quick enactment of the Administration's plan to
add funding to the Independent Living Program to provide educational
and training assistance to children aging out of the foster care
system. This proposal dovetails nicely with legislation enacted last
session by this subcommittee to help former foster children achieve
self-sufficiency.
I also am pleased that the Administration has a proposal to promote
responsible fatherhood, but I was very disappointed that the
President's budget failed to highlight the need to improve the
distribution of child support.
Last year, this Committee and the entire House overwhelmingly
supported a bill sponsored by Mrs. Johnson to ensure more child support
actually goes to families. Because such reforms are central to any
effort to enhance the relationship between absent fathers and their
children, I cannot support moving a fatherhood proposal without these
vitally important child support improvements.
On the issue of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program
or TANF, two decisions made by the Administration give me pause about
the role it will play in reauthorizing that important program next
year. First, theBush budget fails to extend the TANF supplemental
grants, which help many of our poorer States and which expire this
year. And second, the budget would allow States to spend Federal TANF
funds to offset the cost of tax breaks for charitable donations.
Fortunately, the Congressional Budget Resolution includes an
extension of the TANF supplemental grants, and the Administration's
proposal on using TANF funds to offset tax breaks has not been included
in any of the faith-based proposals now being considered by Congress.
Finally, let me make a general point about resources. The President
has on many occasions touted his faith-based initiative as a way to
help more charities serve needy families. But he fails to acknowledge
that many religious charities already receive government aid to help
the poor.
One of the most effective ways to help these faith-based providers
do even more is to increase funding for public programs which provide
them with resources.
For example, religious charities have been outspoken in their
support for restoring funding to the Social Services Block Grant (Title
XX), which has been cut from $2.8 billion a year in 1995 to $1.7
billion today. And yet President Bush's budget continues to under-fund
this program.
The Child Care and Development Block Grant is another example of a
program that faith-based organizations depend on to serve needy
families. The President's budget would provide $400 million in
discretionary funding for a new after-school program within this block
grant, but half of that money is taken out of the current activities
funded by the CCDBG. We must do better if we are serious about helping
``the armies of compassion'' ensure that ``no child is left behind.''
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing Mr. Williams' presentation
of the Administration's budget, while recognizing that as a career
employee in the position of Acting Assistant Secretary for Management
and Budget at HHS, he may be constrained in his ability to articulate
the Administration's policies beyond what is already stated in the
budget.
Chairman Herger. Thank you, Mr. Cardin. Before we move on
to our testimony this morning, I want to remind our witness to
limit his oral statements to 5 minutes. However, without
objection, all the written testimony will be made a part of the
permanent record. Now we will turn to our witness, Mr. Dennis
Williams, Acting Assistant Secretary for Management and Budget
at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Mr.
Williams.
STATEMENT OF DENNIS P. WILLIAMS, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES
Mr. Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the
Committee. I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss
the President's fiscal year 2002 budget request for the
administration for Children and Families. ACF is the
Department's leading agency responsible for serving our
Nation's most vulnerable populations, including preschool age
children, adolescents, and families and children in crisis. The
fiscal year 2002 budget for the administration for Children and
Families is $44.4 billion. The request represents an increase
of 2.9 percent above the fiscal year 2001 enacted level and is
comprised of $31.8 billion in funding for entitlement programs,
including the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program,
Child Support Enforcement, Foster Care and Adoption Assistance
and the Child Care Entitlement, and $12.6 billion for funding
discretionary programs, such as Head Start.
The agency's fiscal year 2002 budget reflects the
administration's commitment to improving the lives of our
Nation's most vulnerable children and families by maintaining
critical investments and targeting new initiatives to help them
thrive and prosper. The budget also increases support for
charitable organizations that can make such a difference in
people's lives. I would like to spend my time today discussing
these new initiatives.
First, ACF's budget seeks to strengthen families by
recognizing the critical role that fathers play in the lives of
their families. A new $64 million program is proposed to
provide competitive grants to religious and community
organizations to help parents support their children
financially and improve parenting skills and to promote
marriage. We commend the Subcommittee for its leadership on
this issue and look forward to working with you in this area of
mutual commitment.
In addition, ACF's budget seeks funding under the Social
Security Act's section 1110 demonstration authority for a
Compassion Capital Fund. The fund would provide startup capital
and operating funds totaling $89 million in 2002 to support
qualified charitable organizations that wish to expand or
emulate model social programs and to promote research on best
practices among charitable organizations.
Further, to encourage States to create State tax credits
for contributions to designated charities, this budget proposes
to allow States to use Federal Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families funds to offset revenue losses from such
contributions.
In the area of child care, the fiscal year 2002 request
proposes to increase discretionary funds available for the
Child Care and Development Block Grant by $200 million for a
total fiscal year 2002 level of $2.2 billion.
The President's budget includes a $400 million set-aside to
provide parents with certificates to obtain after-school child
care with a high quality education focus for eligible children
up to 19 years of age. This would help low-income working
parents pay for the cost of care to children especially
vulnerable to crime and at-risk behavior when left unsupervised
after school.
Additionally, the 2002 budget includes a $150 million
increase in pre-appropriated entitlement funds. In total, this
translates to a $350 million increase in child care funding,
which will provide after-school care for up to 500,000
additional children.
In addition, ACF's budget seeks to help our most vulnerable
and at-risk children live safe and productive lives in
conjunction with reauthorization of the Promoting Safe and
Stable Families Program, which is scheduled to expire on
September 30th, 2001.
We are proposing a $200 million increase for the Promoting
Safe and Stable Families Program, which supports State and
tribal child welfare agencies in carrying out family
preservation, family support, family reunification and adoption
promotion and assistance services.
Within this framework, we are also proposing to create a
new discretionary initiative that will provide $67 million
within the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program to assist
children of prisoners. On an average day, as Mr. Herger has
pointed out, America is home to 1.5 million children of
prisoners who suffer disproportionate rates of many severe
social problems, including substance abuse, gang involvement,
early childbearing and delinquency. This additional new funding
would go to States to provide a range of activities, including
family rebuilding programs that serve low-income children of
prisoners and probationers.
Finally, we are also seeking a $60 million increase in
funding for the Independent Living Program within the Foster
Care and Adoption Assistance Entitlement. This funding is
intended to provide vouchers worth up to $5,000 for education
and training to help young people who age out of foster care
develop skills to lead independent and productive lives.
Currently 16,000 youth age out of the foster care system
annually and often do not have the resources to pay for higher
education and vocational training that can be critical to
increasing their opportunity to secure workand become
contributing members of adult society.
As outlined in my written testimony, ACF's fiscal year 2002
budget includes several additional funding priorities,
including $33 million for maternity group homes to provide safe
and nurturing environments for teenage mothers and their
children who cannot live with their own families because of
abuse, neglect or other extenuating circumstances.
Along with the priorities I have just highlighted, the
fiscal year 2002 budget for ACF supports crucial areas of need
for our Nation's children and families. We look forward to
working with you to ensure these needs are addressed. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman. I will be happy to answer any questions you
or the Committee may have at this time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Williams follows:]
Statement of Dennis P. Williams, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Management and Budget, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am pleased to
appear before you today to discuss the President's FY 2002 budget
request for the Administration for Children and Families (ACF). I am
Dennis Williams, the Acting Assistant Secretary for Management and
Budget in the Department of Health and Human Services. The
Administration for Children and Families is the Department's lead
agency responsible for serving our Nation's most vulnerable
populations, including preschool age children, adolescents, and
families and children in crisis. The agency's FY 2002 budget reflects
the Administration's commitment to improving the lives of these
children and families by maintaining critical investments and targeting
new initiatives to help them thrive and prosper as well as increasing
support for the charitable organizations that can make such a
difference in people's lives.
I would like to begin my testimony today by providing an overview
of ACF's overall FY 2002 budget and then focus on areas that I know are
of particular interest to this subcommittee.
Overview
The FY 2002 budget for the Administration for Children and Families
is $44.4 billion. This request represents an increase of 2.9 percent
above the FY 2001 enacted level and reflects the President's commitment
to a balanced fiscal framework while at the same time increasing
support for America's children and families.
Two thirds or $31.8 billion of the ACF budget request is for
entitlement programs including the Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families (TANF) program, Child Support Enforcement, Foster Care and
Adoption Assistance, and the Child Care Entitlement. The remaining
$12.6 billion of this request represents the discretionary portion of
ACF's budget and funds programs such as the Low Income Home Energy
Assistance Program (LIHEAP), the Child Care and Development Block
Grant, Head Start, Community Services Block Grant and Refugee and
Entrant Assistance.
I would like to turn now to a few key programmatic initiatives in
ACF's FY 2002 request that we look forward to working with you on such
as responsible fatherhood, support for charitable organizations, child
care, Safe and Stable Families and independent living.
Promoting Responsible Fatherhood
ACF's budget seeks to strengthen families by recognizing the
critical role that fathers play in the lives of their families. A new
$64 million program would be authorized to strengthen the role of
fathers in families and marriage. This initiative shares many of the
same goals as the legislation this subcommittee has supported over the
last several years. The President's proposal would provide competitive
grants to faith-based and community organizations to help low-income
non-custodial parents (mainly fathers) support their children
financially and improve parenting skills and to promote marriage. We
commend the subcommittee for your leadership in focusing attention on
responsible fatherhood and look forward to working with you in this
area of mutual commitment.
Support for Charitable Organizations
In addition to reaching out to the expertise of faith--and
community-based organizations in our child care, fatherhood and
mentoring initiatives, ACF's budget seeks funding under the Social
Security Act's section 1110 demonstration authority for a compassion
capital fund. The fund would provide start-up capital and operating
funds totaling $89 million in 2002 to support qualified charitable
organizations that wish to expand or emulate model social programs.
This funding would build on the efforts of charitable organizations by
supporting the creation of public/private partnerships in addressing
the needs of low-income families. In addition, these funds would be
used to promote research on best practices among charitable
organizations.
Further, to encourage States to create State tax credits for
contributions to designated charities, this budget proposes to allow
States to use Federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families funds to
offset revenue losses, from such contributions.
Child Care
The FY 2002 request proposes to increase the discretionary funds
available for the Child Care and Development Block Grant by $200
million for a total FY 2002 level of $2.2 billion. The President's
budget includes a $400 million set-aside to provide parents with
certificates to obtain after-school child care with a high quality
education focus for eligible children up to 19 years of age. This would
help low-income working parents pay for the cost of care to children
especially vulnerable to crime and at-risk behavior when left
unsupervised after school. Additionally, the 2002 budget includes a
$150 million increase in pre-appropriated entitlement funds which are
subject to the rules of the Child Care and Development Block Grant. In
total, this translates to a $350 million increase in child care funding
and will provide after school care investment for up to 500,000
additional children.
Promoting Safe and Stable Families
In addition, ACF's budget takes steps to help our most vulnerable
and at-risk children live safe and productive lives in conjunction with
reauthorization of the Promoting Safe and Stable Families program,
scheduled to expire on September 30, 2001. First, we are proposing a
$200 million increase for the Promoting Safe and Stable Families
program, which supports State and Tribal child welfare agencies in
carrying out family preservation, family support, family reunification,
and adoption promotion and assistance services. These additional funds
will be used to help serve the best interests of children by either
keeping them with their biological families when it is safe and
appropriate, or by expediting adoptive placement when it is not.
Second, we are proposing to create a new discretionary initiative that
will provide $67 million within the Promoting Safe and Stable Families
program to assist children of prisoners. America is home to 1.5 million
children of prisoners on an average day who suffer disproportionate
rates of many severe social problems including substance abuse, gang
involvement, early child-bearing, and delinquency. This additional new
funding would go to States to provide a range of activities, including
family rebuilding programs that serve low-income children of prisoners
and probationers.
Independent Living
We are also seeking a $60 million increase in funding for the
Independent Living Program within the Foster Care and Adoption
Assistance entitlement. This funding is intended to provide vouchers
worth up to $5,000 for education and training to help young people who
age out of foster care to develop skills to lead independent and
productive lives. Currently, 16,000 youth age out of the foster care
system annually and often do not have the resources to pay for higher
education and vocational training that can be critical to increasing
their opportunity to secure work and become contributing members of
adult society.
Other Budget Priorities
Before concluding, I would like to take this opportunity to mention
several additional priorities in ACF's budget which fall outside this
committee's jurisdiction. First, the budget includes $33 million for
community-based, adult supervised group homes for teenage mothers and
their children under the Runaway and Homeless Youth Program. The homes
would provide safe, stable, nurturing environments for teenage mothers
and their children who cannot live with their own families because of
abuse, neglect, or other extenuating circumstances.
In addition, the FY 2002 budget request for Head Start would
increase by $125 million to $6.3 billion. This will support all Head
Start programs in maintaining the current level of services while
efforts are undertaken to improve the program's focus on child and
family literacy in order to better prepare children for school.
Finally, the FY 2002 request for Federal Administration is $175
million, an increase of $11 million or 4.9 percent over the FY 2001
enacted level. This level is expected to fund 1,532 full-time
equivalent staff (FTE) and provide 15 new FTE needed to support the
Department's Faith-Based Center established in accordance with the
President's recent Executive Order. Also, ACF envisions committing an
additional $2 million as needed to meet the intensive staffing and
travel requirements generated by the child welfare monitoring reviews.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the President's FY 2002 budget for ACF identifies
crucial areas of need for our Nation's children and families. We look
forward to working with you to ensure these needs are addressed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be happy to answer any questions
you and the Committee may have at this time.
Chairman Herger. Thank you, Mr. Williams, and now we will
turn to questions for Mr. Williams, and I would like to remind
the members that they each have 5 minutes for witness
questioning. I recognize the gentlelady from Connecticut, Mrs.
Johnson, to inquire.
Mrs. Johnson. I thank the chairman and I thank Mr. Williams
for appearing before our Subcommittee today. I want to make
just a couple of comments that I hope you will kind of take
back as my first reactions to where we are and then I will
proceed with the question.
But first of all, I am very pleased to see this new
administration focusing on fatherhood. I would call your
attention to the structure of the bill that Mr. Cardin and I
wrote that involves preferences. There are some problems that
we don't know how to solve, but we need to stimulate and
incentivize the States to solve them. One of the biggest is how
do we help young men who are terribly in debt from nonsupport
payments, from not having paid child support, out from under
that debt? In Hartford, there are at least 400 men who will
never, ever be able to work in the public economy. They will
never be part of Social Security. They will never be a part of
Medicare, and they will never be a stable part of their
families, not because they don't want to and not because they
aren't actually working under the table, but because they have
such large arrearages that they could never, ever pay off
$10,000, $20,000, $30,000.
So we need States to look at this creatively. We do this in
many other areas. We let teachers pay off debt by serving in
low income areas. I mean, there are lots of things we can do,
but we have done none of it and so we don't tell States how to
deal with arrearages. But I can tell you many of the men that
we most want to reach cannot be reached until we also work with
them financially. We didn't. That is why they have these big
debts.
Now that we have a system that identifies paternity at
birth, gets them in the system early, we should avoid these
problems in the future, but we will never solve the problems of
our young families if we aren't more honest about debt and its
influence on our lives.
So I just point that out to you and any work the Department
is doing on those kinds of creative things or knows the States
are doing I think we would be real interested in.
Then secondly, I hope you will look more carefully at and I
hope we will have a chance to look at the Safe and Stable
Families Program from the point of view of the waivers that
have been given to States to better integrate their foster care
and adoption money, because that control over those dollars so
that they aren't driven by placement decisions but rather by
child need decisions is a very important movement, and now
there are a lot of States that have gotten waivers and more
flexible use of that money, and we need to look at that because
as we reauthorize these things, we really have to be more
progressive on future looking.
On the maternity group home thing, I am really concerned
about that, because we have got to do a far better job among
pregnancy prevention among teenagers, and I have a program in
my district that gets not one dollar of abstinence money though
it has a 100 percent success rate now over a number of years,
not one pregnancy, male or female. This isn't just about girls
getting pregnant. This is about young boys impregnating girls.
But because they teach about contraceptives, even though they
teach heavily about abstinence and it is abstinence that is
really serving them, they don't get a dollar of Federal money.
So I think we need to look more realistically.
There was a very big article about this recently that
quotes kids just about the security. They need to know that
they have got that backup and if they make a mistake and--we
don't have the time to go into it here, but we have got to be
more honest with our kids, because we can help them prevent
pregnancy and go on and get the education they need to be a
productive member of society. And I would be very reluctant,
frankly, to put new money into maternity homes when we are
doing so little to prevent pregnancy.
I do also join my other colleagues in their interest in
substance abuse treatment dollars, and that leads me to the one
question of this series of things that we have laid out here. I
do wonder how much we know about women in prison and parents in
prison, parents of children on TANF in prison, and what their
particular needs are, what percentage of parents are there
because of substance abuse, because of so on and so forth, and
what are we doing and how will some of the programs that you
are proposing help in that.
Before I relinquish my time, let me also just say that I am
very pleased with the increase in the child care dollars, but
in my experience we have two few vouchers to support the number
of people coming off welfare, so it is a problem to take
voucher dollars, the after-school dollars, as important as
after-school care is. So I just put those concerns out there,
but I am very interested in the families in prison and
particularly those in TANF.
Mr. Williams. Let me add more fully for the record on some
of the statistics and characteristics of women and children
that I think could give you a fuller response, but we can say
that women in prison and the children of women in prison are
particularly vulnerable in society. These children typically
come from households where the mother was asole provider,
making placements in foster care more likely when the mother is in
prison than if she is not. So this is an area where we have particular
interest and concern.
There are no government programs now that really address
this problem. There are some private programs, such as Big
Brother, Big Sister, but this is an area where the government
and a government program can, we think, have particularly high
payoff. In a more general way, the limited data indicates that
placements in foster care as a result of a parent's
incarceration increased from 2.5 percent of the placements in
1997 to 5.9 percent in 1999, and that represents roughly 30,000
children. So this is a matter of some size and dimension.
I might just comment briefly, if you have a moment, on some
of your other comments. Your comments with respect to
strengthening fatherhood are timely. The administration is now
giving high priority to the drafting of that legislation, and
we will take your concerns and your interests into account.
When we have the legislation we certainly look forward to
working with the Committee to try to produce a bill which
addresses this problem.
[The following was subsequently received:]
In 1999 State and Federal prisons held an estimated 721,500 parents
of minor children. A majority of State (55%) and Federal (63%)
prisoners report having a child under the age of 18. Forty-six percent
of the parents reported living with their children prior to admission.
As a result, there were an estimated 336,300 U.S. households with minor
children affected by the imprisonment of a parent.
While a majority of both fathers (57%) and mothers (54%) in State
prison reported never having a personnel visit with their children
since admission, 40% of fathers and 60% of mothers in State prison
reported weekly contact with their children.
Children of prisoners are less likely than their peers to succeed
in school and more likely to succumb to substance abuse, gangs, early
childbearing and delinquency. Children of incarcerated mothers are
particularly vulnerable; as these children typically come from
households where the mother was the sole provider, making placement in
foster care more likely when the mother is in prison. The data
available indicates that placement in foster care as a result of a
parent's incarceration increased from 2.5% of the placements in 1997 to
5.9% (roughly 30,000 children) in 1999.
Chairman Herger. Thank you. The time has expired of the
gentlelady from Connecticut. Now I recognize our ranking
member, Mr. Cardin, to inquire.
Mr. Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Williams, HHS, of
course, is the agency that is primarily responsible for our
people who are most at risk. As I look at the budget priorities
of the Bush administration, clearly they have come forward now
with an initiative for defense. They have had their tax
initiative. When I look at the increase that you refer to in
your statement of 2.9 percent in this area, the Consumer Price
Index rose 3.6 percent for the 12 months ending this May, and
with two more million people in our country this year, it seems
to me we are not keeping up with inflation. We are not keeping
up with the needs in this area for our most vulnerable, so I
appreciate the fact that you have gone over some of the new
initiatives. I wonder how you square the overall resources that
are going to be available with the needs that are out there.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Cardin, thank you. The President has
produced a budget which has very much focused on trying to
restrain the growth in spending, not eliminate it, but to
restrain it to a level of spending over the long term which is
sustainable. Within that objective, however, the President and
the Secretary have focused their attention on some clear
priorities.
Mr. Cardin. I just interrupt for one moment to say that 2.9
in this area is significantly lower than the overall number of
the other areas in the budget. So it appears to me again, as an
advocate for human resources, which is what this Subcommittee
is concerned about, and HHS, which is your agency's mission, it
seems like this is the area that got shortchanged.
Mr. Williams. We have focused our attention on some clear
priorities. Some of the new programs I have mentioned are new
initiatives. They will amount to $456 million in new spending
in 2002. Some of the areas that Mrs. Johnson mentioned are
areas that we want to address, child care and development. For
child care, we have an increase of $200 million in the
discretionary program. We have a $150 million increase in the
mandatory program. On the discretionary side of this budget,
that is a 10-percent increase. So we have in selected areas,
admittedly selected areas, significant increases in resources
that are of priority to the President and the Secretary.
Mr. Cardin. I appreciate that response. I don't think it
fully answers the question. Let me go on to one area, the
Fatherhood Initiative is one in which there has been strong
bipartisan support, has passed this House several times. Part
of what we do is allow--one of our initiatives with child
support is allow pass-through child support to the families,
which we think also helps bring the father into the family.
Secretary Thompson, when he was Governor of Wisconsin,
initiated that policy for his own State. The administration has
come out with tax relief, and that has been enacted into law,
and yet these families are paying effectively a marginal tax
rate of 100 percent. Is the administration going to offer some
initiative to help States who want to pass through child
supports to the families to bring the families together?
Mr. Williams. It is my understanding, at least in the
context of the strengthening fatherhood proposal, we have not
made specific proposals there, although that legislation is
still being drafted, so it is something we can consider, as
Mrs. Johnson asked us to do. The budget does not envision any
particular change in child support.
Mr. Cardin. I would just ask you to take back that message.
Again, we have bipartisan support here, and it helps the
vulnerable families who have very high marginal rates, 100
percent.
Do you know how much resources currently go to faith-based,
religious-affiliated organizations under the current Federal
programs? Do you have that number?
Mr. Williams. I don't think so, but we could try to provide
that for the record.
[The following was subsequently received:]
On January 29th the President issued two Executive Orders (E.O.s)
creating the White House Office of Faith Based and Community
Initiatives and establishing Executive Department Centers for Faith-
Based and Community Initiatives within the Departments of Education,
Labor, Justice, Health and Human Services and Housing and Urban
Development. One of the initial tasks of the Executive Department
Centers is to conduct department-wide audits to identify all existing
barriers to the participation of faith-based and community
organizations in the delivery of social services by the department.
According to information collected for a section of the report
about the current level of participation by faith-based and community-
based organizations in Federal programs, overall figures were difficult
to determine due to lack of available information. Grantees do not
necessarily report their affiliation in a manner that allows the
departments to identify whether or not they are faith-based. In
addition, many programs provide funding to States by formula
allocation. For these programs, information on the recipients of funds
at a sub-state level is not currently collected and would not be
included as part of a grant record.
To illustrate, while the Department of Health and Human Services
was able to provide information on funding for faith-based
organizations for a number of smaller programs, information on larger
block grant programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) or Community Services Block Grant, which provide funds under the
auspices of charitable choice provisions, was not available. It is our
understanding that the Departments of Education, Labor, Justice, and
Housing and Urban Development are experiencing similar limitations in
their ability to accurately represent resources provided to faith-based
organizations.
Mr. Cardin. Would you? I appreciate it if you would. We
know that the Catholic Charities has estimated almost two-
thirds of their operating income comes from Federal, State and
local governments. The Salvation Army says that they receive
about $300 million a year in government funding. I think it
would be important for us to have that number. If you could
make it available to the Committee, I would appreciate that.
The one area that really concerns me, and you mention it in
your oral statement--I thought maybe you had abandoned it. I
guess that was just wishful thinking--and that is using TANF
funds to reimburse the States for the charitable breaks they
give them on the tax returns. You know, this is not money that
is going necessarily to low-income programs. Charitable
deductions could be anything from our church, to our hospital,
to a university, and you really think we should be taking money
away from low-income programs to fund this initiative? It is
totally inconsistent with everything we have said on TANF
funding.
Mr. Williams. The proposal envisions that the ability to
use TANF money to help to finance a tax credit would be for
those programs which address poverty and other social problems
in the State. So this is not meant to be----
Mr. Cardin. I thought it was for tax cuts.
Mr. Williams. No. This is not meant to be an open-ended tax
credit but, rather, for charitable contributions for those
areas that would address the issues you are talking about.
Mr. Cardin. I am sorry I don't have Mr. Portman on this
panel, because I think Mr. Portman would agree with me, that if
you are going to limit it to the type of 501(c)(3)s that would
qualify for this tax relief, you are just creating additional
complexity and also an impossible burden on enforcement for a
State to develop a separate tax break for certain types of
charitable organizations.
Mr. Williams. But we do that with the objective of
leveraging a lot more money for some of these programs. If we
can provide some tax credits to individuals who are prepared to
put private money--more private money--into these programs than
overall, we should. The objective is to increase the amount of
resources available for these programs.
Mr. Cardin. But States can do that already with their TANF
funds.
Mr. Williams. Yes, but----
Mr. Cardin. Why develop another complexity into the system?
Chairman Herger. I thank the gentleman from Maryland. We
have been notified that there are expected to be two votes on
the floor. We will go and vote and return as soon as possible.
In the meantime, the hearing stands in recess.
[Recess.]
Chairman Herger. This Committee is reconvened, and, again,
good to see you, Mr. Williams. On the fatherhood legislation
proposed by the administration, this Committee approved
fatherhood legislation last year that also passed the House by
a wide margin. Nancy Johnson and Ben Cardin have reintroduced
that legislation this year, and we recently held a hearing that
included discussion of their bill, H.R. 1471. Could you please
tell us how the President's proposals on fatherhood differ, if
at all, from the approach in the Johnson-Cardin bill?
Mr. Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can't answer that
question with absolute definition, because the administration's
bill is still being drafted, and we hope to have it up here
soon. It is my understanding, though, that the primary and
basic purposes of the fatherhood title in the Cardin-Johnson
bill and the administration's bill are likely to be in many
areas of agreement, and we look forward to working with the
Committee when we actually have the final draft.
Chairman Herger. I thank you, and then Mr. Cardin mentioned
a concern about simply adding more spoons to the same sized
bowl when it comes to the President's faith-based initiative.
Is it true that the President's budget does call for more
funds, I believe some $89 million, in this budget in the area
of a Compassion Capital Fund; and, therefore, it is growing the
bowl?
Mr. Williams. Yes.
Chairman Herger. And would you like to comment?
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir. The budget does propose a
Compassion Capital Fund, which is aimed at providing startup
capital for faith-based institutions to provide services in
their communities. It is $89 million that we would be proposing
in new spending in fiscal year 2002.
Chairman Herger. Thank you. And with that, I yield time to
the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Doggett, to inquire.
Mr. Doggett. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Williams,
as you are aware, 17 States received supplemental grants to
TANF, where they have traditionally received low TANF grants
because they have many people in poverty or expanding
populations. Why is President Bush opposed to this supplemental
TANF program?
Mr. Williams. The President has not said that he is opposed
to the supplemental program.
Mr. Doggett. Well, he excluded it from his budget, didn't
he?
Mr. Williams. The TANF legislation is up for
reauthorization in----
Mr. Doggett. Well, it is not in the President's budget.
Mr. Williams. And----
Mr. Doggett. Is that correct?
Mr. Williams. It was the President's and the Secretary's
intention to deal with this and other issues in the TANF
legislation as they came up for reauthorization.
Mr. Doggett. It is omitted from the President's budget,
isn't it?
Mr. Williams. Yes, because that particular aspect of the
TANF legislation expires this coming year rather than in 2002,
but we expect the President will be addressing the full TANF
reauthorization in the next year's budget.
Mr. Doggett. Well, do you expect that he is going to
support the supplemental TANF program even though he excluded
it from his budget?
Mr. Williams. I can't answer that with definition. The
President's budget is being worked on now, but I would expect
that this would be addressed in that budget.
Mr. Doggett. Why is the President opposed to the Early
Learning Opportunities Fund to fund improvements in child care
quality and seek out innovative programs that might be
replicated across the country?
Mr. Williams. Mr. Doggett, I would say that the President
and the Secretary are not opposed to the fund. The President
did make some choices, however, and chose to spend money in the
Department of Education for an early reading program, and the
President's budget has an increase of $75 million for that
program in the Department of Education and----
Mr. Doggett. Well, my question is related to the Early
Learning Opportunities Fund to upgrade the quality of child
care. These other programs may have merit, too, but the
President thought again so little of this initiative to improve
the quality of child care, not just for poor children but for
all children, that he excluded it from his budget, didn't he?
Mr. Williams. That particular program is not funded, but
there is money and increased resources for programs with
similar purposes.
Mr. Doggett. So in terms of putting dollars into that
program, the President is opposed to the Early Learning
Opportunities Fund?
Mr. Williams. He is not opposed to the fund. He just
doesn't want to provide more resources for similar programs.
Mr. Doggett. Let me ask you, with reference to Mr. Cardin's
inquiry on the Child Care and Development Block Grant, as I
understand, you increase it by $200 million and then take $400
million out of it for a new After School Program?
Mr. Williams. If you look at child care broadly, which
includes both----
Mr. Doggett. I want to look specifically at the Child Care
and Development Block Grant----
Mr. Williams. In the Child Care and Development Block
Grant, there is an increase of $200 million in total.
Mr. Doggett. And then you take $400 million out of it?
Mr. Williams. We are not taking $400 million out of it.
Mr. Doggett. Well, you are putting it into a program that--
--
Mr. Williams. We are earmarking $400 million for an After
School Program.
Mr. Doggett. Right. So it no longer will be available, sir,
for the purposes of the Child Care Development Block Grant
under current law, will it?
Mr. Williams. If you take child care under the Child Care
and Development Block Grant, plus the mandatory program where
there is an increase of $150 million, we will be providing the
same assistance to child care in 2002 as we do in 2001. In
addition, we will serve 500,000 additional children in the
After School Program.
Mr. Doggett. Well, I am delighted you will under your
proposal, but you have cut the Child Care and Development and
Block Grant Program for purposes of what we use it for now,
which in my State can't cover the number of people that want to
receive support on child care who are trying to get off welfare
and into the workforce. You cut it by $200 million dollars,
don't you?
Mr. Williams. We have compensated for that by increasing
the mandatory program by $150 million.
Mr. Doggett. Thank you very much.
Mr. Cardin. Would you yield for one moment? Following Mr.
Doggett's point on the supplemental grants, I don't really
follow your answer. If you don't put it in this year's budget,
that means that those States that have received the
supplemental grants in the past will go a year without TANF
funds, isn't that correct?
Mr. Williams. Yes, if the Congress did not address the
issue, that is correct.
Mr. Cardin. So----
Mr. Williams. But I was asked whether the President
supported the supplemental program, and the answer is we do,
but the President wants to deal with all of these issues in the
TANF reauthorization.
Mr. Cardin. The answer to the question, if we want to do
it, Congress has to act this year, this year, and the budget
has to include it this year, and the administration is not
recommending action this year. Therefore, Mr. Williams, I would
submit that by doing that you are adversely affecting the 17
States that depend upon that. Maryland is not one of those
States. This is Texas and some of the other States that are
involved. But I don't think you can hide behind the banner that
you will take it up next year. Next year we will have a TANF
reauthorization bill, but we should at least have a 1-year
extension if you want to defer it to next year and summit a 1-
year extension of the supplemental grants so that these States
aren't adversely affected.
Mr. Doggett. If the gentleman would yield back, just like
the Early Opportunity Learning Fund to upgrade the quality of
child care, they are for it. They just don't want to pay
anything for it.
Chairman Herger. The time is expired. It is my
understanding--Mr. Williams, if you would comment--that the
budget resolution approved by the House and the Senate provides
for continued funding for the Supplemental Grants Program,
about which we were speaking?
Mr. Williams. Yes, I believe that is right.
Mr. Cardin. Will the gentleman yield?
Chairman Herger. Yes.
Mr. Cardin. You are absolutely correct, but I am trying to
see whether the administration is supporting us on that.
Congress is probably going to act, but the President can veto.
I want to know whether the administration is going to support
the supplemental grants and, if you are, where the money is
coming from. That is, I guess, our question.
Mr. Williams. I can't speak for the President specifically,
but I think the President has endorsed the budget resolution
and my guess is that he will support that particular provision
when it is enacted.
Chairman Herger. Thank you very much, Mr. Doggett, Mr.
Cardin, Members of our Committee, and I want to thank you
again, Mr. Williams, for joining us this morning. I trust that
you would respond to additional questions on these issues for
the record. It has been a very informative hearing, and I
appreciate the time that you have given us today, and with
that, this Committee stands adjourned.
Mr. Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Whereupon, at 11:35 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[Submissions for the record follow:]
Statement of the Hon. Suzanne Jeskewitz, State Representative,
Wisconsin State Assembly
I would like to urge you to maintain the full funding for maternity
group homes that President Bush has allocated in the Health and Human
Services fiscal year 2002 budget.
As a State Representative in Wisconsin, I have been working on
state legislation to allow private organizations to establish and
operate maternity group homes, commonly referred to as Second Chance
Homes, for pregnant and parenting teenage girls. While developing this
legislation, I had the opportunity to visit a Second Chance Home. The
life skills that these mothers learn while living in a Second Chance
Home are invaluable. They learn money management skills,
responsibility, how to be a contributing member of society and most
importantly how to be a good mother. Many of these girls come from
broken homes themselves and are in danger of repeating the cycle of
irresponsible parenting. These homes show them that there are other
options available and teach them how to choose the best path.
The legislation that I am advocating in Wisconsin currently does
not have a funding source. We are counting on the benevolence of
society to help us fund these homes. The support that we have received
already has been very encouraging, but living on the hope of generosity
is a scary prospect. The funding that has been allocated by President
Bush will be a start for the development and operation of Second Chance
Homes all over the country. This will be money that these homes can
depend on. The money will provide stability for the operators of these
homes who in turn provide a safe, stable, secure environment for these
young mothers and their new babies.
Thank you for the opportunity to express my support for President
Bush's proposal for $33 million in the Health and Human Services budget
for maternity group homes.
Statement of Professor James Q. Wilson\1\, Malibu, California
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Wilson is an emeritus professor of management and public policy
at UCLA and now lectures at Pepperdine University. He is the author of
a book, THE MARRIAGE PROBLEM, that discusses out-of-wedlock births in
greater detail. It will be published in January 2002 by HarperCollins.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I strongly endorse President Bush's request for funds to support
Maternity Group Homes. There are many humane reasons for wishing to
help private organizations supply safe and decent shelter to unmarried
teenage mothers. But I want to suggest a practical reason for doing so.
Out-of-wedlock births are, in my judgment, the central social issue
facing this country. Over many decades, our culture (like that of
Australia, Canada, England, and other nations) has lost its capacity to
enforce a marriage obligation on people who create children. Today,
over one-fifth of all white children and over one-half of all black
ones live in a mother-only family. America is unique in one respect: we
lead the world in the proportion of births to unwed teen mothers. In
1997, the proportion of births to unwed mothers under the age of twenty
in large American cities was shown by the National Center for Health
Statistics to be as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
St. Louis 97%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baltimore 96%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
District of Columbia 96%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pittsburgh 96%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Orleans 95%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philadelphia 95%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newark 95%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detroit 95%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cincinnati 94%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland 94%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I could add more cities to this list, but the story would be much
the same. For the nation as a whole in 1997, 78 percent of all births
to teen moms were out of wedlock.
As a result, children growing up without fathers are now a major
source of social instability. Research has revealed these facts about
out-of-wedlock children:
When the Department of Health and Human Services studied 30,000
American households, it found that at every income level save the very
highest single-parent children were more likely to drop out of school,
have emotional problems, and behave badly.
Among white children, those living with unwed mothers were much
more likely to become delinquent, and this remained true even after the
researcher held constant family income.
Among all children, those with an unwed mother were twice as likely
to spend time in jail as were those with two parents even after the
researchers held constant family income.
In predominately African American communities, the rate of violent
crime is more closely correlated with family structure than with race.
To avoid poverty in this country, you need do only three things:
finish high school, marry before having a child, and produce the first
child after the age of twenty. William Galston, formerly an adviser to
President Clinton, has shown that only 8 percent of the families who do
this are poor while 79 percent who fail to do this are poor.
Welfare reform--the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996--has helped reduce the number of women
obtaining welfare and increase the number who are working. But so far
it has not had a large effect on out-of-wedlock births, especially
among teenage girls. Despite its requirement that unmarried teen moms
either live with their parents or, should that be undesirable, in an
appropriate, adult-supervised residence, most states have done little
to produce such residences.
But some states, such as Massachusetts, have done a great deal to
create these residences, using public money and part of the TANF
payment to teen moms to create what is called the Teen Living Program.
Some of them are run by secular organizations, some by church-related
ones. There are comparable programs in Georgia, Nevada, New Mexico,
Rhode Island, and Texas.
The Federal government should insist that all states carry out the
requirements of the 1996 law and offer them matching grants to make it
financially easier to do so.
The goal of this effort, in my view, should not simply be to
improve the lives of teen moms by insuring that they finish high
school, stay away from drugs and alcohol, and avoid predatory boy
friends. Its larger purpose should be to insure that these girls do not
have additional children without first getting married and that their
babies grow up in an environment in which they are not only given
loving care but taught that romance ought to be a prelude to marriage,
not simply an opportunity for sex.
This may be happening now with similar homes that are already in
operation, but we do not know this with any certainty. Therefore, I
suggest that Congress offer funds for such homes only on condition that
these homes be evaluated by independent (that is, non-governmental)
organizations. I would recommend that at least 10 percent of all
federal funds appropriated for this purpose be earmarked for such
evaluation efforts.
Such evaluations will take a long time because we need to learn
from them what happens to the children as they grow up. We should not
be worried about this delay. This nation has taken half a century to
reduce the obligations, and thus to minimize the benefits, of marriage.
It may well take twenty years or more for us to learn how best to undo
the mischief we have created.
In taking these steps, I am mindful of the fact that some unmarried
mothers (and some unmarried fathers) do a fine job of raising their
children. But statistically they are a distinct minority. Today,
violent gangs, drug-dependent adolescents, juvenile detention centers,
and our state prisons are disproportionately made up of fatherless
children.
From time to time, some people try to minimize this problem by
pointing out that the number of such births is declining. But that is
true only because the number of all births is declining. The ratio of
out-of-wedlock births to all births has scarcely declined at all.
This is not a uniquely American problem. It can be found in most
other English-speaking nations and in some European ones as well. Only
slowly have some people living abroad come to appreciate the gravity of
this problem. But America has one advantage: our leaders now view the
problem seriously. This proposal is an opportunity to take a giant leap
forward in bringing under control a profound source of social
instability.