The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Labor was published in the Senate section on pages S4190-S4195 on April 25, 1996.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. BINGAMAN:
S. 1702. A bill to require institutions of higher education to provide voter registration information and opportunities to students registering for class, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
the student voter registration act of 1996
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that I believe will effectively increase voter registration among college and university students and will positively change the voting patterns of this Nation.
Mr. President, currently there are over 15 million college students across this country who are eligible to vote. This highly concentrated group of individuals, when allowed increased access to voter registration, can be a very powerful and influential political voice. The legislation I am introducing today provides colleges and universities the mechanisms and the opportunities to increase voter registration among college students so that they can be an active and visible political force within our country.
College and university students are one of the most highly mobile constituent groups in this country and our voter registration systems have not been entirely effective in empowering our Nation's college students to register and to vote. It is estimated that college students in America move on an average of twice a year. To continue to vote, college students must re-register to vote or change their address every year. No other constituent group in America faces such a significant barrier. My legislation will empower college and university students to overcome this barrier.
Mr. President, this bill, which may be cited as the Student Voter Registration Act of 1996, will amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. It will require all colleges and universities that receive Federal funds, have 2-year or 4-year programs of instructions and confer associate, baccalaureate or graduate degrees, to provide voter registration opportunities and forms, including absentee ballots, to students at the time of class registration. Although the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 has made significant advances in the voter registration arena, this legislation will reach out and assist an additional constituency group.
According to a recent study prepared by the Harwood Group for the Kettering Foundation, students feel alienated from the current political process and pessimistic about the prospects for change. This same study challenged America's students ``to be more aware of the power and possibility that lie(s) in their own innate capacity for common action.'' The legislation allows students to overcome the political barriers currently placed before them by a system that has not fully recognized their needs and their power.
If you look at youth participation compared to all eligible voters in Presidential elections from 1972 to 1992, you can see the red column shows that 64 percent of eligible voters voted in the 1992 election, and 43 percent of those in the age group 18 to 24, went to the polls in 1992 to express their political views.
When you look at the same comparison of eligible voters to this age group 18 to 24 in midterm elections, from 1974 to 1994, the disparity is even greater. Among all eligible voters the percentage is 45 percent. Among this age group it is 20 percent. We need to take action to deal with that.
The legislation I am introducing today would amend the law to provide that voter registration opportunities exist in much larger numbers for this age group.
I think it is important legislation for us to enact and to do so, hopefully, before we get too much further into this election year.
As these charts behind me show, for the past 24 years, 18 to 24-year-
olds have had a significantly lower voter participation rate as compared to all eligible voters. For example, in the 1992 Presidential election, of young people in the 18 to 24-year-old age category eligible to vote, only 53 percent had registered to vote and only 43 percent of eligible young people actually voted. During the last midterm election, 40 percent of young people age 18 to 24 were registered to vote and only half of them voted. That is less than 20 percent Mr. President. These numbers are staggering when compared to the numbers of all eligible voters who turned out to vote. In 1994's midterm election, 45 percent of eligible voters went to the polls to express their political views. In the last Presidential election over 60 percent of eligible voters went to the polls to vote. Mr. President, in 1992, youth participation reached its highest level--43 percent--
since 1972, the first year that 18 to 24-year-olds were eligible to vote. We need to continue this upward trend. The bill I am bringing to the Senate floor is a solid mechanism for this.
Mr. President, this is not a partisan issue. I do not stand here in the Senate today in an effort to increase registration for my party, but instead I hope this legislation will increase registration and political involvement among students regardless of party affiliation.
Mr. President, anyone who believes that this is a partisan issue needs to just look at this final chart that I have here. It is clear that when you look at this age group, in this case 18- to 29-year-olds, the numbers, in terms of party affiliation for Democrats versus Republicans is almost identical.
Again, this is not a partisan issue. This is not a way to get more Democrats registered at the expense of the Republicans, or vice versa. It is a way to get more young Americans registered and to get them participating in our political system. What is important is that students have every opportunity to register--not what party they align themselves with and not how they chose to vote. This bill gives college and university students the opportunity to register and provides accessibility to registration forms.
As the American people look ahead to the 1996 election, it is important that we began to establish the foundation for an effective dialogue regarding the electoral process. For many college students this may be the first general election they participate in and it is critical that they do participate. It is also critical, that we here in Congress accept the challenge of energizing America's college students and presenting them the opportunity to be an influential part of the development and the continuation of this great democracy.
I commend this legislation to my colleagues, and I will file it with the clerk today and ask that it be appropriately referred.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1702
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Student Voter Registration Act of 1996''.
SEC. 2. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this Act is--
(1) to increase voter registration accessibility to students; and
(2) to increase voter participation among college and university students.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENT OF NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION ACT OF 1993.
Section 7(a) of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993
(42 U.S.C. 1973gg-5(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'';
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) each institution of higher education (as defined in section 1201(a)) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141(a)) in that State that--
``(i) receives Federal funds; and
``(ii) provides a 2-year or 4-year program of instruction for which the institution awards an associate, baccalaureate, or graduate degree.''; and
(2) in paragraph (6)(A), by inserting ``or, in the case of an institution of higher education, with each registration of a student for enrollment in a course of study,'' after
``assistance,''.
SEC. 4. IMPLEMENTATION.
Institutions of higher education shall implement the requirements of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993
(42 U.S.C. 1973gg et seq.) as amended by this Act--
(1) in the case of an institution with enrollment of not less than 10,000 students on the date of enactment of this Act, by 1997;
(2) in the case of an institution with enrollment of not less than 5,000 and not more than 9,999 students on the date of enactment of this Act, by January 1, 1998;
(3) in the case of an institution with enrollment of not less than 2,000 and not more than 4,999 students on the date of enactment of this Act, by January 1, 1999; and
(4) in the case of an institution with enrollment of less than 2,000 students on the date of enactment of this Act, by January 1, 2000.
______
By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself, Mr. Johnston, Mr. Bennett, and Mr.
Kempthorne):
S. 1703. A bill to amend the act establishing the National Park Foundation; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
the national park foundation act amendment act of 1996
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today and along with my colleagues, Senators Johnston, Bennett, and Kempthorne to introduce a bill which, when enacted, will generate as much as $100 million annually from the private sector in support of our national parks.
This legislation contains a number of amendments to the National Park Foundation Act, which I am pleased to say will revitalize and expand the scope of operations of the Foundation.
An act of Congress created the National Park Foundation in 1967 as the official nonprofit partner of the National Park Service. The Foundation provides a vehicle for donors who want to contribute to national parks with the assurance that gifts will be carefully managed and used wholly and exclusively for the purpose specified by the donor.
The Foundation provides a simple and direct way for individuals, corporations, and private foundations to help conserve and preserve the natural, cultural, and historical value of the national parks for the enjoyment of future generations.
Mr. President, there are a number of organizations who claim to support our national parks, and to some extent they do. Unfortunately, there is little evidence that the parks ever receive any monetary or tangible benefits from these organizations.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have three pages of the National Park Foundation's annual report printed in the Record which will show some of the benefits the Foundation provides.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
Financial Report
The National Park Foundation continued to generate solid financial results in fiscal year 1995, which ended June 30, 1995.
Total revenue from all sources increased for the fifth consecutive year, rising from $6.7 million in 1994 to $9.9 million in 1995. The major revenue item, contributions to the Foundation, increased from $5.9 million to $6.3 million. These contributions from individuals, corporations, foundations, and through marketing programs and the Combined Federal Campaign, play an important role in supporting the Foundation's mission this year and in the future.
Unrestricted revenue is used to support the Foundation's discretionary grantmaking to the National Parks and to support operations. Restricted revenue is used to benefit specific parks or projects. The donor's designation is honored through the years.
Total grants made by the Foundation to the National Parks increased 13 percent, from $2.3 million in 1994 to $2.6 million in 1995. Grants made from unrestricted funds totalled
$1 million and grants made from restricted funds totalled
$1.6 million. The Foundation has made grants totalling $10.4 million during the past five years.
The Foundation's total expenditures for 1995 were $4.3 million. Grants to the National Parks and program related expenditures accounted for 83 percent of that spending.
The balance sheet remains in healthy condition. Assets are
$27.1 million at June 30, 1995, compared to $20.7 million a year ago.
Total fund balances increased 29 percent, from $19.9 million to $25.6 million. These fund balances, which will benefit the National Parks in future years, have grown from
$9.6 million to the current $25.6 million during the past five years.
The management of restricted funds and programs is a major activity of the Foundation. Restricted fund balances increased from $8.3 million in 1994 to $12.5 million in 1995.
The Permanent Fund balance, which acts as the Foundation's endowment for resources so designated by the Board, increased from $10.4 million to $11.9 million. The increase resulted mainly from market appreciation in investments of $1.4 million. The increase in the Permanent Fund balance provides the Foundation with the resources to meet the current and future needs of the National Parks.
The Foundation has successfully managed all funds received. Total market value appreciation on invested funds was $2.4 million in 1995.
The National Park Foundation is extremely grateful to the many individual, philanthropic and corporate supporters who have given generously of themselves to strengthen our efforts.
NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION
[Financial summary for the fiscal years ended June 30, 1995 and 1994]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unrestricted Donor Statements of activity -------------------------------- Restricted 1995 Total All 1994 Total All
General Fund Permanent Fund Funds Funds Funds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support and revenue:
Contributions and gifts.... $1,633,963 .............. $4,452,651 $6,086,614 $5,926,776
Contributed goods and services.................. 23,458 .............. 171,804 195,262 ...............
Investment income.......... 594,248 .............. 465,714 1,059,962 854,605
Publication sales.......... 145,273 .............. 13,021 158,294 215,999
Management and other income 16,629 .............. .............. 16,629 532,921
Realized and unrealized gains (losses) or investments............... 106,040 $1,396,977 874,285 2,377,302 (791,412)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total support and revenue 2,519,611 1,396,977 5,977,475 9,894,063 6,738,889
================================================================================
Expenses:
Program grants--
Outreach and education projects.................. 598,557 .............. 559,164 1,157,721 1,351,930
Interpretive projects...... 156,375 .............. 571,566 727,941 733,765
Resource conservation projects.................. 200,600 .............. 300,520 501,120 ...............
Volunteer projects......... 5,000 .............. .............. 5,000 82,540
NPS staff projects......... 53,117 .............. 86,479 139,596 109,839
Other projects............. .............. .............. 62,184 62,184 29,766
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total program grants..... 1,013,649 .............. 1,579,913 2,593,562 2,307,840
================================================================================
Program support............ 601,411 .............. 256,899 858,310 663,135
Cost of publications sold.. 92,012 .............. .............. 92,012 178,503
Yosemite management........ .............. .............. .............. .............. 6,413
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total program expenses... 1,707,072 .............. 1,836,812 3,543,884 3,155,891
================================================================================
General and administrative..... 564,802 .............. .............. 564,802 319,599 Fundraising.................... 151,503 .............. .............. 151,503 136,857
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total expenses........... 2,423,377 .............. 1,836,812 4,260,189 3,612,347
================================================================================
Support and revenue in excess of expenses................... 96,234 1,396,977 4,140,663 5,633,874 3,126,542 Fund Transfers................. (138,189) 100,000 38,189 .............. ...............
Net change in fund balances.... (41,955) 1,496,977 4,178,852 5,633,874 3,126,542 Fund balances, beginning of year.......................... 1,253,990 10,410,068 8,271,029 19,935,087 16,808,545 Fund balances, end of year..... 1,212,035 11,907,045 12,449,881 25,568,961 19,935,087
BALANCE SHEET SUMMARY
Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents.... 253,024 .............. 157,340 410,364 487,513
Marketable securities, at market...................... 923,925 11,869,268 12,210,183 25,003,376 19,246,431
Total assets................. 2,697,729 11,907,045 12,483,118 27,087,892 20,741,868 Liabilities.................... 1,485,694 .............. 33,237 1,518,931 806,781 Fund Balances.................. 1,212,035 11,907,045 12,449,881 25,568,961 19,935,087
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The information shown herein has been summarized by the National Park Foundation from its Fiscal Year 1995
audited statements. To obtain a copy of the Foundation's complete audited financial statements, write to:
National Park Foundation, 1101 17th Street, NW, Suite 1102, Washington, DC 20036-4704.
NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION
[Schedule of donor restricted funds for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1995]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contributions
Donor Restricted Funds Balance June and other Fund Transfers Investment Net Investment Expenditures Balance June
30, 1994 Income Income Gain (Losses) 30, 1995
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endowment Funds:
Albright Wirth Employee Development Fund................................. $2,028,140 $10,000 .............. $91,459 $260,979 $94,341 $2,296,237
Francis B. Crownshield................ 3,634 .............. .............. 185 434 80 4,173
Charles C. Glover..................... 8,934 .............. .............. 456 1,065 197 10,258
Lyndon Baines Johnson Memorial Grove Fund................................. 1,374,049 .............. .............. 68,295 170,736 25,135 1,587,945
Kahlil Gibran-Memorial Endowment Fund. 3,987 .............. .............. 229 535 99 4,652
Marguerite M. Root Parkland Purchase Fund................................. 88,477 .............. .............. 4,513 10,551 1,946 101,595
Theodore Roosevelt Association, Principal............................ 985,783 .............. $(26,661) 47,261 122,110 19,478 1,109,015
Saint-Gaudens Memorial, Principal..... 193,533 .............. (4,938) 9,312 24,019 4,215 217,711
Luis Sanjurjo Memorial Fund........... 271,155 .............. .............. 13,429 32,401 5,922 311,063
Yosemite National Park Centennial Medal Fund........................... 33,149 740 .............. 1,889 4,418 812 39,384
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Endowment Funds............... 4,990,841 10,740 (31,599) 237,028 627,248 152,225 5,682,033
=============================================================================================================
Other Funds:
American Scenic and Historic Preservation Society Fund............ 128,648 .............. .............. 6,027 13,791 15,975 132,491
Art Acquisition....................... 1,191 3,617 .............. 13 56 5,297 (420)
Boston Properties Fund................ 49,597 .............. .............. 2,574 6,019 1,110 57,080
C&O Canal Fund........................ .............. 2,522 .............. 83 319 26 2,898
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Fund........ 70 .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 70
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Tidal Lock.. 385,110 .............. .............. 17,777 39,088 108,108 333,867
Civil War Sites Fund.................. 100,147 1,000 .............. 5,707 12,983 2,270 117,567
George Rogers Clark Park Film Project Fund................................. .............. 6,000 .............. .............. .............. 3,655 2,345
Edison National Historic Site Development Fund..................... .............. 440 .............. 22 54 7 509
Ellis Island Fund..................... 22,457 .............. .............. 1,145 2,678 494 25,786
EPA/NPS Urban Integrated Pest Mgt. Fund................................. .............. 9,608 .............. 207 656 73 10,398
Everglades National Park Freshwater Wetlands Mitigation Trust Fund....... 283,487 844,742 .............. 28,130 25,223 11,014 1,170,568
French Memorial at Yorktown Fund...... 7,324 .............. .............. 422 989 249 8,486
German-American Friendship Garden Fund 47,264 .............. .............. 2,454 5,738 1,058 54,398
Gettysburg Cemetery Annex Fund........ 24,799 .............. .............. 1,421 3,322 613 28,929
Gettysburg Monument Preservation Fund. 30,431 .............. .............. 1,552 3,629 669 34,943
Gettysburg Museum of the Civil War.... 2,326 .............. .............. 118 277 51 2,670
Richard V. Giamberdine Memorial Fund.. .............. 905 .............. 12 57 2 972
General Grant National Monument Fund.. 541 .............. .............. 30 71 13 629
Historic American Building Survey Fund 3,639 .............. .............. 160 374 69 4,104
Labor National Historic Landmark Theme Study Fund........................... 4,351 .............. .............. 62 78 2,808 1,683
Lowell National Historical Park Fund.. 4,579 .............. .............. 184 436 1,085 4,114
Maryland State Monument at Gettysburg Fund................................. .............. 10,000 .............. 404 1,272 119 11,557
Andrew Mellon Foundation.............. 19,774 .............. .............. 1,008 2,358 435 22,705
Minute Man National Historical Park Fund................................. .............. 27,314 .............. 1,407 2,863 5,531 26,053
National Capital Region Handicapped Access Fund.......................... 130,059 .............. .............. 6,633 15,510 2,861 149,341
National Historic Landmark Fund....... 9,419 .............. .............. 485 1,135 209 10,830
National Park Enhancement Fund........ 237,217 .............. .............. 12,007 28,072 6,911 270,385
NPF/Robert Glenn Ketchum Publication Fund................................. 2,836 .............. .............. 27 62 12 2,913
National Park Service Advisory Board Fund................................. 3,558 .............. .............. 181 424 78 4,085
National Park Service Video Fund...... 25,800 694 .............. 1,328 3,120 793 30,149
National Register of Historic Places Fund................................. .............. 2,130 .............. 26 145 4 2,297
Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial Fund................................. 793,744 2,176,387 .............. 114,464 38,375 135,728 2,987,242
Theodore Roosevelt Association Income. 83,899 .............. 26,661 4,571 1,502 2,438 114,195
Saint-Gaudens Memorial, income........ 54,499 .............. 4,938 2,800 732 2,112 60,857
Salt River Bay National Historical Park Museum Fund..................... 1,163 .............. .............. 60 141 26 1,338
LJ and MC Skaggs Foundation........... 1,942 .............. .............. 99 232 43 2,230
Theodore Smith Memorial Fund.......... 191,645 .............. .............. 9,717 22,721 4,191 219,892
Tourism and Park Conference Fund...... 24,520 .............. .............. 1,172 2,720 1,876 26,536
Wirth Lecture Fund.................... 55,042 .............. .............. 2,807 6,564 1,210 63,203
Yellowstone Recovery Fund............. 25,250 155,000 .............. 1,263 2,954 155,545 28,922
Zion National Park Visitor Fund....... 2,487 .............. .............. 127 297 55 2,856
Other projects........................ 521,373 1,386,377 38,189 .............. .............. 1,209,764 736,175
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Other Funds................... 3,280,188 4,626,736 69,788 228,686 247,037 1,684,587 6,767,848
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................ 8,271,029 4,637,476 38,189 465,714 874,285 1,836,812 12,449,881
=============================================================================================================
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, with the notable exception of the National Park Foundation, I am aware of no national conservation organizations whose actual cost of conducting business is less than 10 percent of their entire operating program.
In other words, Mr. President, donations made to the National Park Service through the Foundation are actually used to enhance the operation of programs conducted by the National Park Service. The Foundation is governed by a board of distinguished civic and business leaders committed to helping the national parks. By law, the Secretary of the Interior, Bruce Babbitt, serves as the chairman of the board, and the Director of the Park Service, Roger Kennedy, serves as the secretary of the board.
The Foundation is a partnership between the public and private sectors. It provides direct support for park units through a competitive program that grants venture capital to seed creative efforts to conserve park resources.
With the help of private partners, the National Park Foundation has made grants of over $10 million to support projects in our national parks in the last 5 years. I know of no other organization, Mr. President, which claims to support our National Park System that has a record that even comes close to this achievement.
The National Park Foundation does not engage in activities normally associated with lobbying, and as a result it does not enjoy the notoriety or the vast fundraising programs that benefit other environmentally motivated organizations or environmental causes. Unfortunately, not many people even know about the existence of the National Park Foundation.
Mr. President, administrative requests and congressional appropriations are simply not keeping pace with increased visitations and other demands placed on the National Park System. With the current demands on Congress to balance the budget and eliminate the Federal deficit, it would be more and more difficult for Congress to authorize sufficient funding for our national parks. As a result, there is a great need for additional support to protect, conserve and enhance our national parks.
Mr. President, the National Park Foundation is well positioned to take on this important task.
This bill contains amendments which will authorize the National Park Foundation to: First, engage in business relationships with appropriate private partners to raise revenue for the National Park System similar to the authority Congress has already granted the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and the National Forest Foundation. Second, it would operate similarly to the U.S. Olympic Committee, where once a sponsor has been approved by the United States Olympic Committee, moneys are being generated from the private sector partners for the benefit of the Olympics.
This bill, when enacted, will allow the Foundation to optimize and capture for our national parks the economic value of selective, appropriate sponsorships of national parks similar to, as I have said, the authority Congress has granted to the United States Olympic Committee.
As commercial advertisers have long demonstrated, the national parks have great commercial value. Each year advertising, publishing, commercial broadcasts, moviemaking, merchandising and other commercial activity worth hundreds of millions of dollars is made on the intellectual property and other assets of the parks with virtually no return to the Park Service.
A change is needed to enable the Park Service, through the National Park Foundation, to capture some of that potential income through licensing and other marketing agreements.
Mr. President, my bill provides safeguards which will negate any untoward, inappropriate commercialization of our parks; however, it will allow new revenue-generation opportunities outside the parks in partnership with private enterprise.
It is private enterprise that will ultimately provide additional funding in the billions of dollars for resource management and infrastructure repair required for park facilities throughout our Nation.
If we do not count the damage to the C&O canal, the current backlog in maintenance and facility repair for our parks is in excess of $4 billion. It is going to take literally hundreds of millions of dollars to reestablish resource management and visitor service programs which have been deferred servicewide.
According to the National Park Service, employee housing faces a backlog of $500 million. Mr. President, it is apparent that we cannot even afford to take care of the caretakers, much less properly address the needs of the National Park System.
Enactment of this legislation will provide an economically cost-
efficient and accountable program by which the Foundation can begin the long quest to address the needs of our National Park System with the assistance of private sector resources.
Mr. President, the concept is exciting. The results will surely contribute to the future financial stability of our Park System as well as the protection of those national treasures we described as our national parks.
I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. Together we can make it possible for the National Park Foundation to play the role originally intended by Congress back in 1967, making a significant contribution to preserving America's national parks through private partnerships between Government, private business, and individuals.
______
By Mr. McCAIN:
S. 1704. A bill to provide for the imposition of administrative fees for medicare overpayment collection, and to require automated prepayment screening of medicare claims, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
the medicare overpayment reduction act of 1996
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing an initiative to address Medicare overpayments--a serious problem which is depriving the trust fund of billions of dollars every year.
I'd like to thank Martha McSteen, president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, and her talented staff, for their invaluable efforts and continued support of this important crusade.
Today, I introduce the Medicare Overpayment Reduction Act. This bill imposes an administrative fee on providers who submit inaccurate Medicare claims and are overpaid by the Health Care Financing Administration. The fee will be equal to 1 percent of the overpaid amount, and is intended to discourage overpayments and to offset the cost of recovering them.
In addition, the bill will require the Health Care Financing Administration to screen claims for accuracy, before payment is made, for certain procedures and services where there is a high rate of mis-
billing.
Hospitals, and other providers under Medicare Part A, are prepaid annually by HCFA for anticipated Medicare expenditures. Currently many hospitals grossly overestimate their Medicare funding needs and use the overpayment to subsidize their non-Medicare operations. This is an abuse and it must stop. The legislation will impose the administrative fee if a hospital overestimates its Medicare needs by more than 30 percent, and does not repay the overage within 30 days.
Doctors, on the other hand under part B, submit claims for services. Sometimes claims are submitted for services that were never provided, or that are incorrectly coded in order to receive greater payments. The fee will discourage this activity and help us recoup the cost of seeking reimbursement.
Moreover, prepayment screening will help eliminate overpayments from occurring in the first place. Prescreening technology is readily available and used extensively in the private sector, and we should use prescreening to improve Medicare payment accuracy.
It should come as no surprise to my colleagues, or to any interested citizen, that the Medicare system is in serious condition. It is estimated that Medicare funds will be exhausted by the year 2002. The Washington Post today reported that the trust fund is in worse shape than previously thought.
We have an obligation to take every step we can to protect the trust funds and ensure their health and viability for this and future generations.
While overpayments are not the only problem with Medicare, they are a significant problem. GAO reports that last year over $4.1 billion was overpaid from the trust funds. Had this bill been in effect last year, I would submit that a healthy portion of these mis-billings and overpayments might not have occurred and even if they had, we would have been able to recoup over $15 million from imposing the administration fee.
While this bill is not a panacea, it is a step in the right direction in the effort to discourage overbilling, and to recoup recovery costs in every instance.
Overpayments are costly, unnecessary and wasteful. They contribute to the Medicare solvency problem and they must be stopped. This bill will help.
Again, I want to thank Martha McSteen, her staff and the membership for their continued support of the effort to help protect and preserve the future of the Medicare program, and for their leadership on this legislation.
______
By Mr. THURMOND:
S. 1705. A bill to eliminate the duties on Tetraamino Biphenyl; to the Committee on Finance.
DUTY ELIMINATION LEGISLATION
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to permanently suspend the duty on the chemical tetra amino biphenyl
[TAB]. This chemical is imported to the United States from Germany. TAB is an essential raw material used in the production of a high performance fiber called ``PBI.''
PBI is a unique heat and chemical resistant fiber that, in some uses, can be a suitable replacement for asbestos. PBI has a wide range of thermal protective applications including flight suits and garments for firefighters, boiler tenders, and refinery workers.
Mr. President, in previous Congresses, I introduced similar legislation to apply duty-free treatment to TAB. These bills were ultimately incorporated into the Omnibus Tariff and Trade Act of 1984, the Omnibus Trade Act of 1988, and the Customs and Trade Act of 1990. The current duty suspension for this chemical expired December 31, 1992.
During the Uruguay Round negotiations, the Administration made a commitment to negotiate the elimination of duties on products covered by duty suspension legislation. However, TAB was inadvertently deleted from Tariff Schedule XX during talks on the GATT Agreement. This chemical has been on the duty suspension list for several years. It is a noncontroversial item and should have been included in the final Tariff Schedule XX approved at Marrakesh.
Mr. President, it is my understanding that TAB was on the original Department of Commerce ``Consolidated Duty Suspension List'' of products to be incorporated into the U.S. offer and on subsequent offers until the final document was prepared in March. The February 25th offer, which was the last list made available to the public, included TAB as ``free'' under the proposed HTS 2921.59.14. When the importing company asked why it was deleted, they were told that it was incorporated into either the pharmaceutical or intermediate chemicals for dyes lists.
Recently, importers were surprised to discover that TAB was not covered under any duty suspension and would be assessed a 12.8 percent duty. According to the company, it is not covered under any tariff heading, no industry opposition has been found, and no instructions were issued which would have deleted TAB from the list. I hope the Senate will consider this measure expeditiously.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1705
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF DUTIES ON 3,3'-DIAMINOBENZIDINE
(TETRAAMINO BIPHENYL).
(a) Elimination of Duties.--The President--
(1) shall proclaim duty-free entry for 3,3'-diaminobenzidine (Tetraamino Biphenyl), to be effective with respect to the entry of goods on or after January 1, 1995, and
(2) shall take such actions as are necessary to reflect such tariff treatment in Schedule XX, as defined in section 2(5) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(5).
(b) Liquidation or Reliquidation and Refund of Duty Paid on Entries.--
(1) Liquidation or reliquidation.--Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514) or any other provision of law, and subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Treasury shall liquidate or reliquidate any entry of goods described in subsection (a) that was made on or after January 1, 1995, and before the proclamation is issued under subsection (a), and refund any duty or excess duty that was paid on such entry.
(2) Requests.--Liquidation or reliquidation may be made under paragraph (1) with respect to any entry only if a request therefor is filed with the Customs Service, within 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, that contains sufficient information to enable the Customs Service--
(A) to locate the entry; or
(B) to reconstruct the entry if it cannot be located.
SEC. 2. DEFINITION.
As used in this Act, the term ``entry'' includes a withdrawal from warehouse for consumption.
______
By Mr. CRAIG:
S. 1709. A bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to adjust the maximum hour exemption for agricultural employees, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
the water delivery organization flexibility act of 1996
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I am introducing a bill today, which this body previously approved as an amendment to the first bill amending the Fair Labor Standards Act [FLSA] that the Senate passed in 1989. This bill would solve a problem with the interpretation of a provision of the FLSA, clarifying that the maximum hour exemption for agricultural employees applies to water delivery organizations that supply 75 percent or more of their water for agricultural purposes.
Representative Mike Crapo, of the Second District of Idaho, is today introducing an identical bill in the other body. Our bill would restore an exemption that was always intended by Congress.
Companies that deliver water for agricultural purposes are exempt from the maximum-hour requirements of the FLSA. The Department of Labor has interpreted this to mean that no amount of this water, however minimal, can be used for other purposes. Therefore, if even a small portion of the water delivered winds up being used for road watering, lawn and garden irrigation, livestock consumption, or construction, for example, delivery organizations are assessed severe penalties.
The exemption for overtime pay requirements was placed in the FLSA to protect the economies of rural areas. Irrigation has never been, and can not be, a 40-hour-per-week undertaking. During the summer, water must be managed and delivered continually. Later in the year, following the harvest, the work load is light, consisting mainly of maintenance duties.
Our bill is better for employers, workers, and farmers. Winter compensation and time off traditionally have been the method of compensating for longer summer hours. Without this exemption, irrigators are forced to lay off their employees in the winter. Therefore, our bill would benefit employees, who would continue to earn a year-round income. It also would keep costs level, which would benefit suppliers and consumers.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1709
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938.
Section 13(b)(12) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
(29 U.S.C. 213(b)(12)) is amended by inserting after
``water'' the following: ``, at least 75 percent of which is ultimately delivered''.
____________________
