E-MAIL PETE
Fremont Office:
39300 Civic Center Dr. Suite 220 Fremont,
CA 94538 510-494-1388 Fax: 510-494-5852 Office Hours 9:00-5:00
Pacific time (no
appointment neccessary)
Washington, DC:
239 Cannon HOB Washington,
DC 20515 202-225-5065 Fax: 202-226-3805 Office Hours
8:30am-6:00pm Eastern Time |
Accomplishments in the 107th Congress
This
page will be updated at the end of each Congressional session to reflect
current legislative accomplishments.
You can also find the
Accomplishments for the 106th,
105th,
or 104th
Congress.
Jump Ahead to:
Health Issues | Social
Security | Education
| Environment
| Children
& Families | Women's
Issues | Energy
| Transportation
| Foreign
Affairs | Consumer
Protection | Labor &
Trade | Judiciary
| Tax
| Science
| Constituent
Services | Local
Issues |
Health
As the ranking Democratic Member of the Ways and Means Subcommittee
on Health, Stark continued his efforts to improve Medicare and to fight
attempts that would reduce the government’s commitment to providing
universal coverage for our nation’s senior citizens and disabled
population. He also worked to expand access to health insurance for the
uninsured and to provide quality health care for everyone. His position
on the Health Subcommittee allows him to specialize in these health
issues which are of key importance to American families.
MEDICARE REFORM
Early in the 107th Congress, Stark
introduced a blueprint for comprehensive, long-term Medicare reform. His
proposal, if enacted, would modernize Medicare without raising premiums
on seniors or forcing Medicare beneficiaries out of the traditional
fee-for-service Medicare program and into HMOs. The proposal (HR 803)
builds on Clinton Administration efforts to modernize Medicare. It would
add a prescription drug benefit to the program as well. He introduced
this bill to make clear that the Bush-preferred approach for Medicare
reform – called Premium Support – is not the only viable option for
Medicare reform.
Back
to Top
Leading
the Fight for a Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit
Stark re-ignited the debate on the need
for a Rx benefit in Medicare by his introduction of a Medicare
Prescription Drug benefit bill in the fall of 1998 (HR 4753). The bill
was revised and reintroduced with Senator Kennedy as HR 1495. This bill became the basis for
the Democratic Medicare Prescription Drug bill later in the year. It was support for this bill
that forced the Republican House leaders into debating a prescription
drug benefit in the full House.
On July 14, 1999, Stark's amendment in
Ways and Means to offer a tax credit of 50% for Medicare beneficiaries
on the cost of drugs up to $2000 in 2003, rising to $5000 by 2009 was
defeated on a party line vote, but helped force Republicans to begin to
develop their own plan.
Stark requested a GAO study (received
Sept. 21, 1999) showing how extensively HMOs are reducing their optional
Rx benefits for Medicare enrollees, thus making the case that an Rx
benefit should be added to the core Medicare package so that all
beneficiaries are covered, all the time.
In order to bring Medicare prescription
drug legislation to the House floor, Rep. Stark took the lead in filing
a discharge petition on H.R. 1495, to 'discharge' the Ways and Means
Committee from bottling the bill up, and thus allow a full vote in the
House of Representatives.
Rep. Stark worked with Members of
Congress, senior advocacy and labor groups, the Administration and
others to consider and draft Democratic alternatives for Medicare
prescription drug coverage -- ultimately leading to introduction of H.R.
4770, the Medicare Guaranteed and Defined Rx Benefit and Health Provider
Relief Act of 2000, with 115 cosponsors.
HR 4770, endorsed by the President, the
Vice President and major senior groups, provided a drug benefit in
Medicare that would have offered voluntary insurance to all seniors and
disabled, and provided catastrophic, out-of-pocket protection.
This bill was offered by Mr. Stark as the
Democratic 'motion to recommit'“i.e., the substitute motion to the
Republican private medigap drug plan. The bill fit in the allowed budget
of $40 billion over 5 years, and $295 billion over ten years' “providing
twice as much relief and protection as the Republican bill. It failed by
a vote of 204 to 222.
While the 106th Congress adjourned without
passing legislation creating a Medicare prescription drug benefit, it is
sure to be a major issue in the new session of Congress.
Back
to Top
Fighting Excessive Drug Prices
Letter from the Medicare Administrator to
Rep. Stark, May 31, 2000:
"Thank you for the leadership role you
have been taking in addressing the need to ensure that both Medicare and
Medicaid pay appropriately for prescription drugs"
In March, 1998, Rep. Stark and Marion
Berry (D., Ark) filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission
against Mylan Laboratories and three others, charging anti-competitive
behavior that was driving up some generic drug costs by 4093 percent! On
July 13, 2000, the FTC imposed a $137 million fine on Mylan. Since the
Congressmen's complaint, prices of the drugs have come down. Stark
believes that the FTC's settlement should be reviewed to ensure even
further lowering of drug costs.
Study of Rx Prices in 13th
District: Rep. Stark requested and
received two studies by the minority staff of the House Government
Reform Committee. The first study reveals the amount seniors with no
prescription drug coverage (i.e., those paying cash for prescription
drugs) pay for their medications in the 13th District compared to the
prices paid by large U.S. insurers. A separate Government Reform study
prepared for Rep. Stark compares the prices paid by seniors with no drug
coverage to what consumers pay in Canada and Mexico. On average, the
studies found that 13th District seniors without drug insurance pay
about twice as much. By passing Rep. Stark's Medicare prescription drug
benefit, this unfair pricing system would be eliminated.
Stark released a Joint Economic Committee
report on Feb. 9, 2000 on Rx inflation, which is running at 15.4%
annually compared to general health inflation of 5.6%.
Stopping Rx Average Wholesale Price
abuse: See Stark's initiatives
under fighting Medicare fraud, which if enacted -- will result in
billions in savings over the next few years.
Pharmaceutical Advertising: Since a major source of the increase in drug
costs has been the explosion in advertising expenses, Rep. Stark
introduced the Fair Balance Prescription Drug Advertisement Act of 2000
(H.R. 4686) to deny tax deductions for unbalanced prescription drug
advertising that places more emphasis on product benefits than risks or
fails to meet FDA advertising standards. This issue is likely to receive
a great deal of attention in the 107th Congress.
Taxpayer-funded R&D: One way to help the public deal with the
high cost of drugs is to ensure that the public's investment in drug
development is returned, either in lower prices or by the public
receiving a share of the profits. Eleven of the 14 drugs identified as
the most medically significant over the last 25 years were developed
with taxpayer dollars, yet drug companies continue to use the 'R&D
argument' as their excuse to charge Americans the highest prices in the
world. As a result, Rep. Stark collaborated with Rep. Capuano (D-MA) to
introduce the Public Investment Recovery Act of 2000 (H.R. 4705). This
bill calculates the proportion of taxpayer-financed R&D that led to
the production and sale of a product and uses a portion of these profits
to finance a Medicare drug benefit and support further
R&D.
Pharmaceutical Gifts vs.
R&D: Because drug companies
spend more than $11 billion per year on marketing and promoting their
products directly to physicians -- i.e., an estimated total of $8,000 to
$13,000 per physician -- Rep. Stark introduced the Save Money for
Prescription Drug Research Act of 2000 (H.R. 4089). This bill denies tax
deductions for certain gifts and benefits (other than drug samples)
provided to physicians by pharmaceutical manufacturers. The intent of
the bill is to either lower the cost of drugs caused by this lobbying,
or to encourage the companies to spend more on R&D and less on
marketing. Rep. Stark also submitted for the Congressional Record many
examples of unsolicited drug company "freebies" that a Florida physician
received in just one week -- freebies that graphically demonstrate how
much money drug manufacturers waste in promoting products, rather than
increasing R&D or lowering drug prices.
Pharmaceutical Taxation and
Pricing: According to a December
17, 1999, Library of Congress report requested by Stark, the U.S. drug
industry reaps tax benefits that lowered their effective tax rates by
nearly 40% relative to other major U.S. industries, yet U.S. drug
companies charge the highest prices in the world. In response, Rep.
Stark introduced the Prescription Price Equity Act (H.R. 3665) -- a bill
to ensure that drug companies charging more for products in the U.S.
than they charge in other industrialized nations would forfeit their
eligibility for certain U.S. tax subsidies. Stark's amendment to deny
tax breaks for the export of US-made drugs at lower prices to developed
nations was defeated in the Ways and Means Committee on July 27, 2000.
(Stark also wrote the Treasury Department on May 2, 2000 urging the
Administration not include Rx export subsidies in their tax
proposals.)
Back
to Top
Improving
Medicare
The Medicare Regulatory and Contracting
Reform Act: Stark co-authored bipartisan legislation (HR 3391) with
Health Subcommittee Chairperson Nancy Johnson (R-CT) that unanimously
passed the House. The legislation would simplify and reform the
regulatory and contracting processes in Medicare. This legislation would
reduce administrative burdens on providers and improve regulatory
processes, while continuing to protect taxpayer dollars from being
inappropriately spent under Medicare. In contrast, earlier versions of
this legislation that were strongly supported by the American Medical
Association and other provider organizations would have opened the
Medicare doors to rampant waste, fraud, and abuse. Through Stark’s
efforts, the bill was refined to address provider concerns without
allowing the abuses of the earlier proposal.
Stark also included
important beneficiary protections in the final legislation. It would
establish a beneficiary ombudsman program for Medicare to provide a
voice for beneficiaries within the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS), the government agency that runs Medicare, and enable the
agency to better anticipate and respond to beneficiary needs.
The
legislation also establishes a single, national, toll-free telephone
number – 1-800-MEDICARE – for beneficiaries to call with their
questions. The single telephone number will replace the pages of
telephone numbers that beneficiaries now must sort through in the
Medicare Handbook to find the correct number to call with their
particular concern.
The bill authorizes a new demonstration
program that will place Medicare staff in Social Security field offices
to answer beneficiary questions and provide assistance with Medicare
issues. Since seniors are used to going to Social Security offices for
help with their retirement benefits, it makes sense to provide Medicare
assistance at the same place.
By requiring the use of safe needle
technology in public hospitals, the bill also completes Stark’s efforts
to assure that health care workers are protected from needlestick
injuries. This provision builds on Stark’s efforts, along with Rep. Phil
English (R-PA) and others, which resulted in passage of legislation that
protects health care workers in most settings from needlestick injuries
in 2000. Unfortunately, that bill had a loophole that prohibited public
hospitals from being included in the requirement to use safe needle
technology. This provision corrects that loophole. This important
provision in the bill will save lives.
The bill also delays for
one year the requirement in current law that begins in 2002 to “lock”
Medicare beneficiaries into their Medicare+Choice plan (Medicare HMO)
for a year. Stark doesn’t believe anyone should be forced to remain in a
Medicare HMO that doesn’t meet their needs. Stark also introduced
legislation (See HR 3267) to permanently remove any lock-in requirement.
Although this bill only delays the lock-in effective date by one year,
it is a good start.
Finally, this bill takes long-overdue steps
to fundamentally reform Medicare’s contracting system. Stark has worked
on this reform for years, which would allow Medicare to negotiate better
contract terms, while maintaining quality services and fulfilling
performance goals. This provision of the bill in particular is strongly
supported by the Centers on Medicare and Medicaid Services.
While
this bill unanimously passed the House late in 2001, the Senate has not
yet acted on similar legislation. Stark will continue to work closely
with Rep. Johnson and others to see that these Medicare improvements get
enacted into law in 2002.
Improving Care for People with
Chronic Health Conditions: Stark continued his efforts to make
Medicare more responsive to beneficiaries’ health needs by introducing
HR 3188, the Medicare Chronic Care Improvement Act. Individuals with
chronic illnesses represent the highest-cost, fastest-growing sector in
health care. Approximately 80% of seniors have at least one chronic
condition and two-thirds have at least two chronic conditions. The
numbers are even higher among women, 90% of whom have one or more
chronic illnesses. Yet, Medicare continues to focus on acute
illnesses.
The Medicare Chronic Care Improvement Act would
improve Medicare benefits, financing, and oversight for people with
chronic conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease, arthritis, depression
and Parkinson’s disease. Patient benefit packages would be updated to
include increased access to preventive and wellness services. Medicare
would compensate providers for time they spend coordinating complex
patient needs and teaching patients and their family caregivers how to
better manage their conditions. Medicare payment systems would also be
updated to better account for the additional costs of caring for
patients with chronic conditions.
The Medicare Outpatient
Copayment Reduction Act: For most Medicare services, beneficiaries
are required to pay 20% of the allowed payment amount while Medicare
pays 80%. However, due to an error in the original Medicare outpatient
benefit payment formula, the beneficiaries copayment rate for outpatient
services has been significantly higher, at times as high as
90%.
Stark partially corrected this inequity in other legislation
that was enacted, reducing the copayment rate for outpatient services to
40% by 2006.
This additional Stark bill (HR 3284) would continue
the reduction so that by 2010 Medicare beneficiaries would pay just 20%
cost-sharing for outpatient services. It’s a long overdue beneficiary
improvement!
Delay in Medicare Payment Updates for Outpatient
Hospital Services: Because of programming problems, CMS informed
Congress that it would not be able to implement the outpatient
department payment rates scheduled to go into effect January 2002. CMS
would have had to hold payments to hospitals and pay later, causing much
disruption. Stark had joined all Chairmen and Ranking Members of the
House Committees on Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce and the Senate
Finance Committee to request that HHS delay the implementation of the
2002 rates. On Dec. 31, 2001, CMS published notice in the Federal
Register announcing the delay.
Stark joined with other Democrats
in requesting that the reductions in beneficiary cost-sharing for
outpatient services scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2002, and
not be delayed along with the payment updates. As a result, CMS
announced that they would implement cost-sharing reductions for
beneficiaries on schedule.
The Medicare Mental Health
Modernization Act: In April 2001, Stark and Senator Paul Wellstone
(D-MN) introduced legislation (HR 1522) to expand Medicare’s outpatient
and inpatient mental heath benefit.
The current benefit structure
discriminates against people seeking treatment for mental health and
substance abuse conditions. Medicare currently requires a 50% copayment
for mental health services instead of the 20% copayment required for
most other Part B medical services. Unlike all other inpatient services,
there is also a 190-day lifetime cap on psychiatric hospital services.
The Stark-Wellstone bill would eliminate the lifetime limit and reduce
the co-pay to the 20% level enjoyed for other Part B medical
services.
These discriminatory practices are compounded by a
mental health benefit package that is generally outdated and inadequate.
Over the past decade there have been tremendous advances in mental
health diagnosis and treatment. At the same time, Medicare’s mental
health benefit package has remained virtually unchanged since the
Medicare was enacted in 1965. To reflect the improved treatment options
available for mentally illness, the Medicare Mental Health Modernization
Act would allow beneficiaries to access a broad range of community-based
residential and outpatient services.
Only 50% of seniors who need
mental health services actually receive the services they need, in part
because of the shortages in mental health professionals. The Medicare
Mental Health Modernization Act would expand the provider base by
allowing social workers, mental health counselors as well as marriage
and family therapists to bill Medicare directly for mental health
services.
The Medicare Mental Health Modernization Act has 64
cosponsors in the House of Representatives and 8 cosponsors in the
Senate.
Medicare Critical Need GME Protection Act: Stark
introduced HR 1928 to provide the HHS Secretary with flexibility to
adjust Medicare reimbursement for graduate medical education if solid
evidence is presented that a shortage, or immediately pending shortage,
is apparent for a particular specialty or subspecialty. Stark supports
the Medicare policy that reduces payments for specialty training, but
recognizes that there are instances when the Secretary might need
flexibility to address shortages of particular types of doctors. This
bill provides such flexibility to the Secretary of
HHS.
Medicare Coverage for Adult Day Care Services: Stark
joined with Rep. Jerry Kleczka (D-WI) to introduce legislation (HR 3585)
that would allow Medicare home health services to be provided to
eligible beneficiaries at adult day care centers. This legislation would
improve quality of care for the patient and provide the ability for the
primary caregiver to be out of the home while the patient was at an
adult day care center.
Medicare Hospital Investment Act (HR
2490): For many years, Stark successfully worked to prevent health
care providers from inappropriately profiting from referrals and
recommended follow-up care. This year, Stark furthered those efforts by
joining with Rep. Jerry Kleczka (D-WI) to introduce legislation closing
a loophole in current federal law to ensure that physicians who have
ownership stakes in boutique hospitals (for example, a cardiac care
hospital) do not find themselves in a conflict of interest between
financial gain and patient referrals.
Disabled Workers
Opportunity Act: In 2001, Congress passed important legislation
called the “Ticket to Work Act,” which extended the length of time that
a disabled Medicare beneficiary could maintain their Medicare coverage
after returning to work to 8.5 years. Stark believes that we should
fully support the efforts of disabled beneficiaries to return to the
workforce. Therefore, he has introduced HR 481, a bill to allow disabled
workers to permanently keep their Medicare coverage.
Medicare
Social Work Equity Act: Rep. Stark continued his efforts to fix a
problem from the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 that results in decreased
access to social worker services in nursing homes. He reintroduced
legislation (HR 2294) to fix the law so that social workers would be
directly reimbursed by Medicare for providing clinical services to
Medicare beneficiaries in nursing homes – as psychologists and
psychiatrists are reimbursed for such treatment.
Back
to Top
MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG
COVERAGE
Congressman Stark had hoped that a
Medicare prescription drug benefit could be enacted in 2001. While the
Democrats and Republicans were far apart about how such a benefit should
be structured, both sides agreed that a benefit was needed. President
Bush had also campaigned for president on a pledge to create a Medicare
drug benefit.
Unfortunately, Congress declared President Bush’s
first proposal, called “Immediate Helping Hand,” a non-starter. This
plan, outside the Medicare system, would have provided block grants to
the states to expand state low-income drug assistance programs for
seniors.
Stark opposed the effort to create a drug benefit apart
from Medicare since seniors need comprehensive health coverage within
the Medicare system. Nor were states eager for these block grants that
would have shifted the obligation to fund and administer a drug benefit
from the federal government to the states. Stark argued that current
state drug programs cover only the low-income seniors but all seniors
could use help with the high cost of drugs. Stark also pointed out that
other state efforts to provide health coverage for children had not been
successful. Six years after the enactment of Children’s Health Insurance
Program, a program the states actually wanted to administer, almost 10
million children are still without health insurance.
In July
2001, the Bush Administration announced a new Medicare initiative that
would provide a Medicare-approved prescription drug discount card to
seniors. Under this plan, Medicare would give certain drug discount
cards a Medicare seal of approval. Medicare would then market these
cards to beneficiaries for a $25 a year fee. Seniors would only be
allowed to own one of these new Medicare-approved cards. And, the Bush
Administration claimed that the cards would provide savings to seniors
of “10-25%” off retail prices they were paying today.
Stark
raised immediate concerns with this proposal. First, Stark stated that
the Administration had no legal authority from Congress to create such a
program nor had the Administration followed appropriate administrative
procedures in developing this initiative. More importantly, the plan was
so loosely structured that there were no guarantee that seniors would
see any real savings with these cards. Stark raised serious concerns
that seniors might pay for these cards and get no savings for this
expenditure.
Stark reached out to state regulators who have
begun to regulate similar discount cards because of concerns that the
cards advertised far greater savings than they actually provided. In a
letter, Kansas Insurance Commissioner Kathleen Sebilius told Stark, “the
most common complaint is that while the literature touts discounts
upwardly of 40-60 percent, the discount is considerably less, often less
than 10 percent.” And she closes her letter with the adage that “what
sounds too good to be true, remains too good to be true.”
All of
these concerns led Stark to join a lawsuit filed by the National
Association of Chain Drug Stores and the Community Pharmacists that
would enjoin the Bush Administration from moving forward with this drug
discount card proposal. Stark filed an amicus brief in the case on
August 7, 2001. In his statement announcing the filing of the brief,
Stark said:
“President Bush’s program is designed to
benefit the private industry, not those people entitled to benefits
under Medicare and for whom Medicare was created. The program has been
thrust on an unsuspecting public without Congressional action and
merely serves to delay a meaningful and substantial prescription drug
program for our senior citizens. That is why I so vehemently oppose
the way this program was developed and why I am joining in this legal
effort to block its
implementation.”
In September 2001, the federal court
agreed with the case brought forth by the drug stores and Stark and
halted implementation of the Bush drug discount card program. Later in
the year, the judge concluded that the Administration could move forward
with a new prescription drug discount card proposal, but he required
that they follow the appropriate Administrative Procedures Act
requirements when announcing the new proposal. In addition, he made
clear that plaintiffs in this case may return to court if they believe
the Administration still has not met legal standards for developing the
proposal. The administration is expected to come forth with yet another
plan early in 2002.
In an effort to gather more information about
the effectiveness of existing drug discount card programs, Rep. Stark
along with other health care leaders in Congress asked the General
Accounting Office to study of the existing programs and determine
whether they provide a meaningful discount to participants. That full
study is due in 2002, but a preliminary analysis of discount card
programs in four different metropolitan areas found that their discounts
were often less than 10% and that similar prices could often be obtained
through on-line pharmacies or through retail drug stores in the
community.
Back
to Top
OTHER PRESCRIPTION DRUG
INITIATIVES
Stark continued to pursue additional
prescription drug initiatives to reduce the prices of prescription drugs
for seniors.
Fair Drug Prices for Seniors: Stark
cosponsored legislation (HR 1400) introduced by Rep. Allen (D-ME) and
cosponsored by 120 colleagues that would require that prescription drug
companies sell drugs to Medicare beneficiaries at a price equivalent to
their average foreign sales price. This bill would end the ability of
the pharmaceutical industry to reap excessive profit from American
seniors for drugs while charging lower prices overseas. While this bill
is not a substitute for a Medicare prescription drug benefit, it would
immediately provide seniors lower prices for their
medications.
Direct To Consumer Advertising: Direct to
consumer advertising of prescription drugs is skyrocketing. In fact,
drug companies’ advertising budgets doubled between 1998 and 2000. This
increase in advertising correlates with the increased prices of
prescription drugs. In addition, doctors report that patients are
difficult to dissuade when they have heard the glowing promise of a new
drug advertised.
Stark introduced the Fair Balance Prescription
Drug Advertising Act (HR 2352) that would deny tax deductions for drug
advertisements that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found were
unbalanced. More specifically, the legislation would require that such
advertisements provide equal time for a radio or TV ad, or equivalent
typeface in a print ad, for the pros and cons of the particular drug. If
enacted, this bill would prohibit these companies from lauding the
benefits of their drugs and then burying the often very serious
side-effects in such tiny print that it is impossible for most people to
read.
Physician Gifts vs. Research and Development:
Pharmaceutical companies spend more than $11 billion a year on marketing
and promoting their products to physicians. They take physicians on
trips, feed them fine meals, provide them tickets to sporting events,
and do almost whatever they can think of to encourage them to prescribe
their drug over those of their competitors.
Stark introduced the
Save Money for Prescription Drug Research Act (HR 2641), in order to
limit these expenditures and encourage the channeling of those dollars
into medical research. The bill denies tax deductions to the drug
companies for certain gifts and benefits (other than drug samples)
provided to physicians by pharmaceutical manufacturers.
Medicare Payment for Covered Prescription Drugs: Medicare
does cover a limited number of prescription drugs through the Part B
benefit. These are drugs that are provided by a physician usually in
their office and are most often drugs related to cancer treatment and
chemotherapy. Stark has worked for years to refine the way Medicare pays
for these drugs because the current payment methodology, called average
wholesale price (AWP), results in drastic overpayment by Medicare for
these medications. In addition to his concern that Medicare is
overspending, there is evidence that indicates that doctors may make
prescribing decisions based on their profit margins on the drugs rather
than on what drug may be best suited for the patient.
This year,
the GAO released a new report proving that the AWP system has resulted
in vast overpayments. The report found that AWP is 13% to 23% greater,
on average, than the actual costs charged to physicians. In some cases,
the spread between AWP and actual costs is as much as 86%. And,
according to the Inspector General, the AWP abuses cost Medicare some
$1.9 billion annually.
This year the Justice Department also
began to move forward with prosecuting drug companies for abuses of the
AWP system. One such case resulted in a settlement with TAP
Pharmaceuticals of $875 million in fines – the largest criminal fine
ever in health care fraud prosecution.
Stark has introduced
legislation to halt this AWP abuse in past Congresses and, based on the
findings of this new GAO analysis, he is developing additional
legislation to introduce early in 2002.
Back
to Top
THE MEDICARE+CHOICE
PROGRAM
The Medicare+Choice (M+C) program was
created as part of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Since its enactment,
Stark has supported numerous consumer protection provisions to the
Medicare+Choice program.
These plans are required to cover all
of Medicare’s benefits and have traditionally offered extra benefits to
beneficiaries to entice them to join their plan. The most important of
these extra benefits is a prescription drug benefit, but they have also
offered benefits such as: reduced cost sharing, eyeglass coverage,
hearing aides, and physical exams to name a few. They are able to offer
these extra benefits because Medicare has historically overpaid these
plans for the beneficiaries that they cover. Beneficiaries who join
these Medicare + Choice plans give up their ability to go to the
provider of their choice and are limited to the network of providers in
that plan and the procedures that plan requires for their use.
The M+C program created a new payment methodology for Medicare
HMOs and other private plans that chose to participate in Medicare. But
each year since its enactment, there has been an exodus of plans from
the program causing instability and confusion for seniors who had been
in those plans. In both 1999 and 2000, Congress increased payments to
M+C plans in order to try to stem their exodus from the program. Plans
continue to argue that their payments must be increased yet again if
they are to remain in Medicare.
In 2001, Stark commissioned a GAO
study which found that while M+C payments increased by more than $1
billion in 2001, few plans increased benefits, entered or re-entered
areas, or expanded into additional service areas. In fact, 83% of plans
didn’t use the new money on benefits at all, instead using it to
“stabilize networks,” which translates into paying more to
providers.
This year, while many M+C plans left the program, we
began to see a new phenomenon. Plans remaining in the program are
adjusting their benefits and cost-sharing structures in ways clearly
designed to encourage people with certain conditions to leave their plan
and to shift more costs to patients in general.
In Stark’s
Alameda County, CA district, plans are charging new hospital deductibles
of up to $400, new cost-sharing of $25 or more for dialysis treatment.
(Plans previously charged nothing for this treatment which patients must
have three times per week.) One plan reduced their drug benefit from
$1600 to $1000 a year. Another plan changed their drug benefit so that
it only covers generic medications.
In the Milwaukee, WI district
of Jerry Kleczka (D-SI), one plan instituted a new $295 copayment for
each day of hospitalization!
The Medicare+Choice program was
designed for beneficiaries to get additional benefits in exchange for a
limited choice of providers. The benefit packages described above show
that in some instances a Medicare beneficiary can now be worse off in a
M+C plan than in traditional Medicare – even without a Medigap
policy.
In response to these drastic changes in benefits and
cost-sharing, Stark introduced the Medicare+Choice Consumer Protection
Act (HR 3267). This bill would protect beneficiaries in M+C plans in the
following three ways:
- Eliminating the so-called “lock-in”
that begins in 2002 that will prohibit a Medicare beneficiary from
leaving an M+C plan at any time of their choosing.
- Providing guaranteed issue Medigap
protections to beneficiaries whose M+C plans reduce benefits, increase
cost-sharing, or eliminate the patient’s doctor or hospital from the
plan. Such guaranteed issue protections exist for beneficiaries if
their plans pull out of Medicare. But, if they change enough that they
no longer meet the patient’s needs, that patient must be protected to
return to Medicare and purchase a protected Medigap policy as well.
- Prohibiting M+C plans from charging
higher cost-sharing for a particular service than Medicare FFS charges
for the same item. This would end the ability of M+C plans to use
cost-sharing as a way to push sicker and costlier patients out of
their plans.
While not solving solve all the
Medicare+Choice problems, the bill would protect beneficiaries from many
abuses occurring today. It is endorsed by numerous consumer advocacy
organizations.
Back
to Top
EXPANDING COVERAGE FOR THE
UNINSURED
Stark continued his efforts to expand
health insurance to the more than 39 million people who lack coverage in
our country. The economic recession that began in March 2001 along with
the terrorist attacks of September 11 led to increases in the number of
people who lost their health insurance due to job loss. Particular
Congressional attention was focussed on these people and that will
continue to prove true in 2002.
MediKids: On May 3, Stark
introduced the MediKids Health Insurance Act of 2001 (HR 1733). Sen.
Rockefeller introduced a companion bill in the Senate. The bill would
ensure that every child born in our country would be enrolled in a
Medicare-type program, called MediKids, unless they had coverage
elsewhere. The benefits would be tailored to meet the needs of children
and would include prescription drugs. The bill is endorsed by
organizations advocating protections for children, including The
American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Defense
Fund.
Upon introduction of the bill, Marion Wright Edelman of the
Children’s Defense Fund said, “Your legislation reminds Congress, the
Bush Administration, and the nation of the importance of insuring every
uninsured child. Rhetoric about how we value children will ring hollow
until we back it up with substance. Your legislation is the kind of
substance essential to making our pledges to children ring
true.”
Stark believes that covering all children through MediKids
can serve as a building block toward universal coverage for everyone in
our country.
COBRA Coverage Extension and Affordability
Act: On May 24, Stark joined with Rep. Moakley (D-MA) to introduce a
bill (HR 2005) that would extend COBRA health insurance continuation
coverage from its general limit of 18 months under current law to five
years. Recognizing that older workers who leave the workforce often face
impossible obstacles to getting affordable coverage in the individual
marketplace, the bill would also allow people age 55 and over to
maintain their COBRA coverage until they become eligible for Medicare.
Finally, the bill would provide for a 50% refundable tax credit toward
the cost of COBRA coverage to help offset the high cost for enrollees
who must pay 102% of the premium. (COBRA costs average $588 a month for
a family coverage.)
The ability of a worker to remain in their
previous employers’ plan was especially important to Rep. Moakley who
knew the value of continuity of care because he was suffering from
cancer. Mr. Moakley died shortly after this legislation was introduced,
but Stark continues to advocate the COBRA extension.
Medicare
Early Access and Tax Credit Act: Stark was the original proponent of
letting uninsured older adults “buy into” Medicare in a revenue neutral
way. Former President Clinton adopted this proposal and urged Congress
to enact it during his presidency. Stark introduced the latest version
of this legislation (HR 1255) on March 27, 2001. The bill provides new
insurance options for certain people age 55 through 64 or through a
special COBRA continuation program for workers age 55 through 64 whose
employers’ renege on their promise to provide retiree health coverage.
This version also provides a 50% tax credit to help people with the
expense of buying-in.
Health Coverage for Displaced
Workers: The terrorist attacks of September 11 and the recognition
that our country was in a recession led to a debate over how best to
address the health care needs of displaced workers and their
families.
Stark, along with other Democrats, advocated a 75%
COBRA subsidy for displaced workers and block grants to the states to
provide temporary Medicaid assistance to those who had lost their jobs
and health insurance, but were ineligible for COBRA. The proposal also
provided a temporary increase in the Medicaid matching rate to the
states in order to help offset the states’ growing budgetary concerns
due to the economic downturn.
The Republicans floated a proposal
that would provide a 60% refundable tax credit for people who had lost
their jobs due to the economic downturn. Their tax credit could be used
to buy COBRA continuation coverage or could be used to purchase
insurance in the individual marketplace. Their proposal also included
two block grant programs to the states to further expand
coverage.
Stark argued that the 60% subsidy was not enough to
make coverage affordable, given that the standard family policy today
costs $588 a month and a typical unemployment paycheck is only $900 a
month. Furthermore, the individual market is so unfair that anyone with
preexisting conditions would be priced right out of it even with the
subsidies. Stark pointed out that the Republican block grant proposals
didn’t have enough money in them and didn’t even require that those
funds be used to expand health coverage.
Back
to Top
PATIENTS' BILL OF
RIGHTS
Stark continued to work for the enactment
of a national Patients’ Bill of Rights. He may have been the first
member of Congress to introduce a package of managed care protections
for consumers in the 104th Congress. In the 106th Congress, the House
passed a strong Patients’ Bill of Rights while the Senate passed a far
weaker version. Stark served on the conference committee to iron out the
differences between those two bills, but the conference committee failed
to complete action before the Congress adjourned.
The situation
changed in the 107th Congress when the Senate returned to Democratic
control. Stark again cosponsored the Patients’ Bill of Rights and the
Senate actually passed a strong Patients’ Bill of Rights in July 2001.
The House then followed by passing a very weak version of the
legislation in August.
The major remaining battle in the
Patients’ Bill of Rights is the issue of liability. Will health plans be
held liable for the harm they cause? The House-passed bill had severe
restrictions on that liability which Stark fears will make the law
meaningless if enacted.
Though 2001 ended without resolution of
these differences, Stark will push for enactment of a strong Patients’
Bill of Rights in 2002.
Back
to Top
ADDITIONAL HEALTH
INITIATIVES
Quality of Care for People in Assisted
Living Facilities: Stark reintroduced his resolution (HJ Res 13)
calling for a White House Conference to study quality of care in
assisted living facilities and to make recommendations on this issue.
Stark wants to ensure that seniors are safe and secure in whatever
long-term care home they choose. Under current law, there is no uniform
regulation of assisted living facilities, leading to severe concerns
about quality of care for residents. Stark was alerted to this problem
by a constituent whose mother died in one of these facilities due to
lack of proper care.
Stark provided written testimony to the
Senate Aging Committee at a hearing to investigate problems with quality
of care in assisted living facilities. He also wrote to President Bush
urging him to convene a special White House Conference to provide
national focus on this important issue.
Protecting Quality of
Care for Nursing: Stark introduced bipartisan legislation (HR 3238)
with Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-OH) to protect quality patient care and
stem the growing shortage of nurses in our country. The legislation
would strictly limit the use of mandatory overtime for nurses and is
endorsed by every major organization representing nurses.
Upon
introduction of the bill, Mary Foley, President of the American Nurses
Association said, “ANA believes that your initiative to ban the use of
mandatory overtime through Medicare provider agreements in appropriate
because the abusive use of overtime contributes to poor patient care and
therefore is a matter of public health safety.”
Contact Lens
Prescription Release Act: If you get an eyeglass prescription from
an opthomologist or optometrist, you can take that prescription and get
your eyeglasses from the provider of your choice. The FTC required such
practice in the 1970s as it became apparent that eye doctors were
profiting over charging high prices for eyeglasses that they prescribed
for their patients.
Today, consumers face the same problem with
contact lenses. The FTC has taken no action to require that contact lens
prescriptions be made available to patients so that they can purchase
from the provider of their choice. Stark has introduced a bill (HR 2663)
that would require the release of these prescriptions. Purchase of
lenses would require a valid prescription less than two years old to
prevent concerns about quality of care.
Gift of Life Medal of
Honor: Because of the shortage of available organs in this country,
Stark introduced the Gift of Life Medal of Honor (HR 708) to provide a
Congressional medal of honor for organ donors and their families. This
legislation would honor the individual organ donors and their loved
ones, and heighten awareness of the current organ shortage so that organ
donations might increase.
Mental Health Parity: Stark
worked closely with Senate colleagues and proponents in the House to
advance mental health parity for everyone with private health insurance.
The Senate included a strong mental health parity provision in their
version of the Labor HHS Appropriations bill in 2001. Their provision
required private health insurance to cover mental health services in the
same manner they cover physical health care. The proposal did not apply
to small companies. Employers were not required to cover any mental
health coverage, but if mental health benefits were covered at all, they
had to be covered equally.
Stark’s helped unite 224 members of
the House in signing a letter to the Labor, HHS appropriators supporting
inclusion of the Senate provision in the final bill. However, the
Republican leadership in the House vehemently opposed the provision and
it did not make it into the final bill. The opposition to this bill
reveals the underlying prejudice toward the millions of individuals who
suffer the painful consequences of mental illness.
Stark’s fight
for mental health parity will continue in 2002.
Bringing
Health Care into the Information Age: In 1996, Congress passed
legislation to enable health plans and health care providers to exchange
information electronically. The Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act (HIPAA) established a common electronic language for
health care administrative functions such as submission of claims and
enrollment in a health plan. These electronic standards are scheduled to
go into effect October 2002. HHS estimates these administrative
efficiencies will save nearly $30 billion over ten years – savings that
can be redirected toward improving health care quality and access to
services.
Many health plans and providers, however, said they
could not be ready by the October 2002 deadline. They argued that they
needed more time to ensure a smooth transition to the new electronic
environment. Other members of the health care system, hospitals in
particular, said that they will be ready in time and are eager to reap
the return on investments they have made in new technology and revised
processes.
Stark was instrumental in crafting a meaningful
compromise to address these concerns, the Administrative Simplification
Compliance Act (HR 3323). This bill gives health plans and health care
providers an extra year to implement the HIPAA electronic standards,
provided they can outline how they will achieve compliance within that
timeframe. They must describe their budget and work plans and they must
allow at least six months for testing the new standards. These
requirements will help assure that the plans and providers can not come
back next year and argue for another delay because they are still not
ready.
Congress overwhelmingly passed this legislation and it was
signed into law.
Social Security
Stark advocated for
full funding of the Social Security trust funds and for preserving the
Social Security’s retirement and disability safety net that has
functioned so well for generations. Stark has consistently fought
against Republican attempts to undermine the Social Security safety net
through privatization of the program.
Social Security
Reform
Stark voted for H Con
Res 282, Keeping the Social Security Promise Initiative, which passed
the House. This resolution put most Democratic and Republican Members of
Congress on record as opposing Social Security benefit cuts when
reforming the program. Since all proposed privatization plans would
reduce guaranteed Social Security benefits, Republicans, if they stand
behind their vote on the resolution, would not support these
privatization proposals.
Obstacles that Women Have
in Achieving Retirement Security
Stark cosponsored H.
Res. 128, a resolution that recognizes the unique problems that Social
Security reform proposals could have for women. This resolution
acknowledges that women’s traditionally lower wages and time out of the
workforce as family caregivers create obstacles to ensuring retirement
security, and survivor and disability coverage. The resolution stresses
the essential role that Social Security plays in guaranteeing
inflation-protected financial stability for older women and it expresses
the sense of the House of Representatives that the Congress and the
President should take these factors into account when considering
proposals to reform the Social Security system. The House has not acted
on this resolution.
Pension Offset and Windfall
Elimination Provisions
Stark cosponsored HR
2638, which would repeal the Social Security government pension offset
and windfall elimination provisions. These provisions now reduce the
Social Security benefits of spouses, widows or widowers if they also
receive a government pension or did not work enough years in a Social
Security covered job. Congress has not acted on this legislation.
Consumer Price Index for
Elderly Consumers
Stark cosponsored
H.R. 2035, the Consumer Price Index for Elderly Consumers Act. If
enacted, this bill would direct the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the
Department of Labor to prepare and publish a monthly Consumer Price
Index for Elderly Consumers (CPI) that indicates changes over time in
expenditures for consumption which are typical for individuals aged 62
years or older. Once enacted, the new CPI could be used to increase
Social Security and Medicare benefits. Congress has not acted on this
resolution.
Job Training for
Disadvantaged Seniors
Stark wrote to the
members of the House Labor, HHS and Education Appropriations
Subcommittee requesting a $40 million increase in funding for the Senior
Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP). This program provides job
training to disadvantaged, low-income older Americans. The
appropriations committee responded with a more modest $5.1 million
increase in the funding for FY
‘02.
Back
to Top
Education
Stark supported
increases in federal support for education to reduce class size,
modernize schools, and fund commitments to increase subsidies for
education of children with disabilities. He also voted to hold schools
accountable to use these funds to achieve measurable improvements in
their systems.
Education Funding and
Accountability
Stark voted for HR 1,
the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which passed the Senate and the
House and was signed into law. This law calls for an additional $5.5
billion in resources in Fiscal Year 2002 for elementary and secondary
education. It maintains our nation's commitment to education programs
for disadvantaged students, after-school programs and school safety
programs. The law creates a strong school accountability system by
providing new funds for states to develop statewide educational
standards and standardized tests. This law also provides almost $2
billion in new resources for teacher training, recruitment and class
size reduction. Controversial school vouchers and block grant proposals
were not included in the final bill.
Back
to Top
After School Education
Enhancement
Stark cosponsored the
After School Education Enhancement Act (HR 419), which would extend to
five years the amount of time that schools could get grants from the
21st Century Community Learning Centers Program. Congress has not acted
on this legislation.
Back
to Top
Staff Recruitment and
Training
Stark cosponsored HR
466, which would direct the Secretary of Education to make grants to
local educational agencies for the recruitment, training, and hiring of
100,000 individuals to serve as school-based resource staff. Congress
has not acted on this legislation.
Back
to Top
Grants for Gifted and
Talented Programs
Stark cosponsored the
Gifted and Talented Students Education Act of 2001 (HR 490). The bill
would authorize the Secretary of Education to make grants to states for
use by public schools to develop or expand gifted and talented education
programs through professional development programs, technical
assistance, innovative approaches and emerging technologies, including
distance learning. Congress has not acted on this legislation.
Back
to Top
Additional Funding for Pell
Grants
Stark cosponsored the
Pell Grant Full Funding Act (HR 589). The legislation would require that
if FY ‘02 and FY ’03 appropriations are insufficient to fully satisfy
all Pell Grant entitlements, then a supplemental payment for college
expenses would be made based on student financial needs. Congress has
not acted on this legislation.
Back
to Top
Additional Funding for
Education of Children with Disabilities
Stark cosponsored the
Mandatory IDEA Full Funding Act of 2001 (HR 737). If enacted, this bill
would authorize funding to reach the federal government's goal of
providing, by 2006, 40% of the national average per pupil expenditure
for education of all children with disabilities. Past Congresses had
committed to fund the program at 40% of the national average per pupil
expenditure (APPE) for education of all children with disabilities but
had failed to fund that commitment. The 2002 appropriations bill
increased the funding by $1.2 billion ($8.7 billion for FY 2002), which
is 15.5% of the APPE.
Stark also wrote a letter with other
Members of Congress to Chairman Boehner and Ranking Democrat George
Miller of the Education Workforce Committee to support full funding for
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Back
to Top
Increase Safety in
Communities and Drug-Free Schools
Stark cosponsored HR
970, which would amend the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities
Act of 1994 to provide comprehensive technical assistance and implement
prevention programs that meet a high scientific standard of program
effectiveness in our schools. Congress has not acted on this
legislation.
Back
to Top
Grants to Hire Teachers and
Reduce Class Size
Stark cosponsored HR
1036, which would establish grants to help States and local educational
agencies recruit, train, and hire 100,000 additional teachers over a
seven-year period. These new teachers could help reduce class sizes
nationally in grades one through three and improve teaching in the early
grades so that all students could learn to read well by the end of the
third grade. Congress has not acted on this legislation.
Back
to Top
Public School
Modernization
Stark cosponsored the
America's Better Classroom Act of 2001 (HR 1076). If enacted, this bill
would provide $25 billion in interest-free funds to state and local
governments to finance public school construction and modernization
projects. This legislation is essential to meet the growing need for
school construction caused by the growth in school enrollment and
decaying infrastructure. Congress has not acted on this legislation.
Back
to Top
Shifting Additional
Education Resources to California
Stark and other
California Members of Congress wrote to Chairman Ralph Regula of the
House Labor, HHS and Education Appropriations Subcommittee requesting
that his committee change the education funding formula, so that
California gets its fair share of funding. Currently, the Education for
the Disadvantaged (Title I) funding formula underfunds California
schools since current law does not allow states to get less funding than
historic levels even if they have fewer school children in their
schools. In a high population growth state such as California, this
formula results in California children getting disproportionately less
funding than children in states that have low population growth. No such
change has occurred as of this time.
Back
to Top
Stark continued his
efforts in 2002 to protect and preserve our environment for future
generations. He opposed offshore drilling, and supported clean up
efforts for brownfields, conservation and expansion of protected
wilderness areas. He worked to assure that safe drinking water standards
were not scuttled by the Bush administration.
Back
to Top
Off-Shore
Drilling
Stark cosponsored HR
1066, a bill to protect America’s coastlines from the adverse effects of
offshore oil and gas development. Congress has not yet acted on this
bill.
Back
to Top
Cleaning up
Brownfields
Stark cosponsored HR
2064, a bill to increase private investment in cleaning up contaminated
brownfields properties and redeveloping such properties to make them
safe for the environment. Although the House failed to act on this bill,
the Congress did pass a similar bill, HR 2869, with Stark’s support.
Back
to Top
Wilderness
Protection
Stark is a strong
supporter of preserving open space and cosponsored several bills to
protect natural lands from being developed. He cosponsored HR 770, the
Morris K. Udall Wilderness Act of 2001, which would designate specified
lands in Alaska as wilderness. He also cosponsored HR 1613, a bill to
designate more than nine million acres of land in Western Utah as
permanent wilderness.
Back
to Top
Arsenic
Stark was infuriated
by the Bush Administration’s initial decision to end a Clinton
Administration regulation that would reduce the level of arsenic in
drinking water. Rep. Stark cosponsored HR 1413, the Get Arsenic Out of
Drinking Water Act, and wrote a letter to the President asking him to
reconsider his decision. After pressure from Stark and other Members of
Congress, the Bush Administration reversed their decision and allowed
the Clinton arsenic regulations to stand.
Back
to Top
Land and Water
Conservation
Stark cosponsored HR
701, the Conservation and Reinvestment Act. This bill provides full
funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (WCF) and provides new
funds for wildlife conservation, historic preservation and urban parks
and recreation. This bill was reviewed by a House committee but has not
yet been considered by the full House.
Back
to Top
Global
Warming
Stark is very
concerned about the harmful consequences of global warming and is a
strong supporter of bills to help address this pending environmental
crisis. He is a cosponsor of HR 1256, a bill to require factories with
large emissions of gasses and harmful toxins to meet efficiency and
clean air standards. The House has not acted on this bill.
Back
to Top
Forest
Protection
Stark cosponsored HR
1494, the National Forest Protection Act. This bill would reduce the
deficit, cut corporate welfare, protect communities from wildfires, and
protect and restore America’s natural heritage by eliminating
ecologically destructive commercial logging program on federal lands.
The bill also would restore native biodiversity in our federal public
forests and facilitate the economic recovery and diversification of
communities affected by the federal logging program.
Back
to Top
Sudden Oak
Death
Stark signed onto
November 16, 2000 letter asking for $2.1 million to study causes of
sudden oak death. On January 19, 2001 Secretary of the Interior, Dan
Glickman’s office gave notice that the request was granted. (See also
UNIQUE ISSUES for the 13th CD.)
Children and
Families
As a Member of the
Ways and Means Human Resources Subcommittee, Stark strenuously advocated
on behalf of children to create policies and practices to nurture them
and shield them from the effects of poverty and abuse. He promoted
programs to improve the quality of child care and to recognize the
importance of caregivers in our society. Stark will play a large role in
2002 in the reauthorization of the Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families (TANF) program.
Back
to Top
Reauthorization of the
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program
(WELFARE)
A specific Stark goal
is to amend the TANF Act to ensure that reducing child poverty is an
explicit goal of the program. Right now, that is not the case. Stark
believes that the 1996 Act seeks to reduce welfare rolls without concern
for whether those families ascend out of poverty or not.
To this end, Stark
introduced the Child Poverty Reduction Act (HR 2166). This legislation
would make the reduction of poverty an explicit goal of TANF and would
also provide a $150 million annual high performance bonus grant to
states that reduce child poverty. A companion bill (S 1027) was
introduced by Senators Schumer and Wellstone. Congress has not acted on
this bill. However, two larger Democratic TANF reauthorization bills (HR
3113 and HR 3625) have incorporated the language of the Child Poverty
Reduction Act. Stark is a cosponsor of both of those bills.
Stark commissioned
the General Accounting Office with Representatives Ben Cardin, Sander
Levin and Robert Matsui to carry out a study to examine the effects of
the 1996 Welfare Reform has had on low-income disabled individuals. The
study was completed in November 2001.
The study found
that:
- Forty-four percent
of TANF recipients reported having physical and mental impairments, a
proportion three times as high as among adults in the non-TANF
population. Twenty percent of TANF recipients with impairments also
reported working full or part-time in 1999, compared with 44% of TANF
recipients not reporting impairments.
- Almost all of the
county TANF agencies say they screen TANF recipients for mental and
physical impairments and three-fourths screen for learning
disabilities. However, most of this screening relies entirely on
self-disclosure.
- One third of
responding counties reported that on average 43% of their recipients
with impairments were receiving services to move them toward
employment.
Stark used the
findings to support the need for the additional reforms included in the
House Ways and Means Comprehensive Democratic TANF Rauthorization bill,
H.R. 3625, the Next Step in Reforming Welfare Act. If enacted, these
reforms would:
- Require states to
assess the employability of a recipient by considering whether they
have physical and mental impairments, proficiency in English, child
care needs, and whether the recipient is a victim of domestic
violence.
- Require states to
give TANF recipients an opportunity to meet with their caseworkers
before they are sanctioned and to mandate that caseworkers must
adequately screen for physical, or mental impairments, domestic
violence, or limited proficiency in English as a factor for
non-compliance.
- Establish a new
employment advance fund that provides a $150 million over 5 years for
states to help TANF recipients who suffer from barriers to work and to
improve the wages of the poor. Forty percent of this funding would go
to TANF recipients who suffer from barriers to work.
- Allow
rehabilitative services to be counted as a work activity for up to 6
months. These services include substance abuse treatment, domestic
violence counseling, and physical rehabilitation and mental health
services.
- Require states to
report if the head of a welfare household suffers from a significant
physical or mental impairment.
As part of his work
to help TANF recipients that confront barriers to enter the workforce,
Stark cosponsored H.R.3113, TANF Reauthorization Act of 2001 to amend
the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program (TANF). This bill
would extend the TANF program through FY ‘08 and modify it to include
more education and skill development, which is needed to get out of
poverty. The bill incorporates safeguards in the sanctions process
including the protection of children from sanctions imposed by states.
If enacted, the bill would give proper credit for compliance with
program requirements like training and education, and for care-giving or
addressing work/life barriers such as domestic or sexual violence,
mental illness, substance abuse, or disability. Additionally, the bill
would remove the 20% cap on the number of families who can be excused
from the 5-year life time limit due to hardships. Congress has not acted
on this legislation.
Back
to Top
Stark Bill to Improve the
Quality of Child Protection Services
Stark introduced the
Child Protection Services Improvement Act (HR 1371). This bill would
provide $500 million over five years for grants to State child welfare
systems to improve quality of child welfare workforces and to authorize
the forgiveness of loans made to certain students who become child
welfare workers. Congress has not yet acted on this legislation.
To build empirical
evidence for HR 1371, Stark, along with Representative James Greenwood,
commissioned the General Accounting Office to examine problems in the
child welfare workforce and how problems affects the safety and
well-being of children served in the child welfare workforce. That
report is due in 2002.
Back
to Top
Memorial to Remember
Children Lost to Violence
Stark cosponsored H
Con Res 98, a resolution establishing a National Children's Memorial
Flag Day. This resolution, first proposed by Gail Steele, Vice President
of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, encourages national, state,
and local agencies and private organizations to fly the Children's
Memorial Flag to remember children lost to violence and to raise public
awareness about the continuing problem of violence against children.
Stark worked with the House Republicans to change the resolution
language so that they would support the resolution. This new resolution,
H Con Res 110, passed the House and was forwarded to the Senate.
Back
to Top
Development and
Appreciation of Child Care Workers
Stark cosponsored H
Con Res 115, a resolution which supports the goals and ideas of National
Child Care Worthy Wage Day (May 1, 2001) and urges public officials and
the public to honor early childhood care and education staff and
programs in their communities, and to work together to resolve the early
childhood care and education staff compensation crisis. Congress has not
acted on this resolution.
Stark also
cosponsored the Focus On Committed and Underpaid Staff for Children's
Sake Act (HR 1650). This bill would establish the grants for child care
provider retention and development and for child care provider
scholarships. Congress has not acted on this legislation.
Back
to
Top
Coordination of Child
Welfare and Substance Abuse Efforts
Stark cosponsored
H.R. 265, the Child Protection/Alcohol and Drug Partnership Act of 2001
(HR 1909). This bill, if enacted, would create a grant program to
promote joint activities among Federal, State, and local public child
welfare and alcohol and drug abuse prevention and treatment agencies.
These joint activities would increase the capacity of both the child
welfare system and the substance abuse prevention and treatment system
to help families improve child safety and enhance family stability, and
also to promote recovery from substance abuse problems. Congress has not
acted on this legislation
Back
to
Top
Affordable Quality Child
Care
Stark cosponsored the
Right Start Act of 2001. If enacted, this legislation would increase the
availability and affordability of quality child care and early learning
services by increasing funding to the Child Care Development Block Grant
(CCDBG), the Head Start program and the Early Learning Opportunities
Act. The legislation also would amend the Family and Medical Leave Act
of 1993 to extend coverage to employees at worksites where the employer
employs at least 25 (currently 50) employees at the worksite and within
75 miles of that worksite. Congress has not acted on this legislation.
Stark also
cosponsored the Child Care Quality Incentive Act of 2001. Because there
is such a need for quality child care, this legislation would provide
grants to improve the quality of child care.
Back
to
Top
Investment in Child Health,
Welfare and Education
Stark cosponsored HR
1990, the Leave No Child Behind Act of 2001, a comprehensive approach to
improving care for children in our country. It would make a massive
investment to help the development and growth of our nation’s children.
If enacted, this bill would provide health insurance for all children,
paid parental and medical leave for parents, improve social services to
children, and increase funding and improve services for early childhood,
elementary and secondary education programs. Congress has not acted on
this legislation.
Back
to
Top
Unemployment
Insurance
Seeing the harsh
impact of the recession on many families, Stark pushed to increase
unemployment compensation. He cosponsored H.R. 3020, the Temporary
Unemployment Compensation Act of 2001, which would temporarily extend
the length of time a worker can receive benefits from 26 weeks to 39
weeks; temporarily enhance the benefit by 15% from $250 to $287; and
create new, temporary benefits for others who do not qualify now.
Back
to
Top
Modernization of
Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
Stark cosponsored the
SSI Modernization Act of 2001 (HR 739). This legislation would make
adjustments to liberalize the program eligibility and income
determination requirements for Supplemental Security Income recipients
so that they would not be penalized by modest income increases, the
receipt of a scholarship or other sporadic income. Congress has not
acted on this legislation.
Back
to
Top
Investigation of Custody
Practices for Children with Mental Illness
Stark commissioned
the General Accounting Office with Representative Patrick Kennedy to
carry out a study to examine the reasons why child welfare agencies and
juvenile justice agencies require parents to relinquish custody of their
emotional, behavioral and mentally ill children so that their children
can receive public mental health services. The study should be completed
in 2002.
Back
to
Top
Improving Child
Nutrition
Stark, along with the
Congressional Progressive Coalition, wrote Chairman Larry Combest of the
House Agriculture Committee to ask for improvements in the Food Stamp
Program. In response, the House Farm Bill provided $3.6 billion over 10
years to improve the Food Stamp program.
Back
to
Top
Women's
Issues
Stark consistently
voted to preserve a women’s right to choose and to support overseas
family planning programs.
Back
to Top
FEHBP Contraceptive Coverage
President Bush’s FY02
budget request recommended elimination of FEHBP contraceptive coverage.
Although Congressman Stark wrote to Chairman Istook urging him to retain
contraceptive coverage for federal employees in the Treasury-Postal
appropriations bill, the original House bill did not continue FEHB
contraceptive coverage. Rep. Lowey then offered an amendment to continue
FEHBP coverage, which passed, paving the way for the final bill to
continue FEHBP contraceptive coverage in 2002.
Back
to Top
Unborn Victims Of Violence Act (UVVA)
Stark opposed this
bill (HR 503) that would create new federal crimes for bodily injury or
death of an “unborn child” in utero. UVVA is a deceptive attempt to
erode Roe vs. Wade by legislatively defining when life begins. In April
2001, the House passed the bill by 252-172. The Senate has not taken up
this bill. As an alternative, Congressman Stark supported Rep. Lofgren’s
Substitute, which strengthens punishments for crimes against pregnant
women without weakening a woman’s right to choose. The Lofgren
Substitute failed to pass the House.
Back
to Top
The Global Gag Rule
Stark supported
efforts by Reps. Lowey and Lee, and Senator Boxer to overturn the Global
Gag Rule reimposed by President Bush but their efforts were unsuccessful
in the FY ‘02 Foreign Operations conference agreement. The Global Gag
Rule prohibits the US Agency for International Development from granting
family-planning funds to any foreign non-governmental organization
unless it agrees not to use its own private, non-US funds for abortion
services, advocacy, counseling or referrals to a legal abortion
provider.
Back
to Top
United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
and United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
Stark wrote to
President Bush urging him to continue the commitment to USAID and UNFPA
in FY ‘02 by funding USAID family planning programs and the US
contribution to UNFPA at levels of $524 million and $35 million
respectively. Unfortunately, the Conference report for FY ‘02 Foreign
Operations appropriations included $446.5 million in funding for USAID
population assistance program, no more than the amount requested in the
President’s budget. And although the conference report funded UNFPA at
$34 million, President Bush froze all UNFPA money.
Back
to Top
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Protection for Domestic Violence
Stark was an original
cosponsor of the Domestic Violence Victim Protection Act (HR 3595),
which seeks to reduce violence in domestic relations. The House has
failed to act on this and all other domestic violence bills listed
below.
Back
to Top
Legal Assistance for Victims of Dating
Violence
Stark also
cosponsored legislation (HR 3193) that would expand the Violence Against
Women Act of 2000 (VAWA) to include legal assistance for victims of
dating violence.
Back
to Top
Women Immigrants’ Safe Harbor Act (WISH)
Stark cosponsored the
WISH Act (HR2258), which would provide a safe harbor for legal
immigrants, and their children who are victims of domestic violence. If
enacted, this bill would allow immigrant women and their children to get
health insurance, food, and other assistance until they are out of
harm’s way.
Back
to Top
Condemning Acts of Domestic Violence Committed Against
Women’s Health Care Providers
Stark cosponsored a
concurrent resolution (H Con Res 285) condemning the 500 anthrax threats
sent to reproductive health centers since October 14, 2001. The
resolution also urges the Bush Administration, local law enforcement,
and other government related agencies to make their best efforts to
bring all those who commit acts of domestic terrorism to justice.
Back
to Top
Violence Against Women Office
Stark wrote to
Attorney General Ashcroft urging him to appoint a director to the
Violence Against Women Office (VAWO) within the Department of Justice,
also bringing his attention to the Violence Against Women Office Act,
which would make the VAWO office permanent at DOJ.
Back
to Top
National Domestic Violence Hotline
Stark wrote to
Chairman Regula and Ranking Member Obey of the House Committee on
Appropriations asking them to support additional funding of $652,500 for
the National Domestic Violence Hotline. Created under the Violence
Against Women Act of 1994, the Hotline provides callers nationwide with
crisis intervention.
Back
to Top
Family Planning in Medicaid
Stark wrote to Health
and Human Services Secretary Thompson encouraging him to reconsider his
decision to deny requests by states to expand family planning services
in the Medicaid program.
Stark cosponsored the
Family Planning State Empowerment Act of 2001 (HR 2777), which would
allow states to extend family planning services through Medicaid without
applying for a federal waiver. California would lose over $100 million
annually in federal matching funds if the waiver were not extended in
2004.
Back
to Top
United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination Against Women
Stark cosponsored a
resolution (H Res 18) urging the Senate to ratify the United Nations
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against
Women (CEDAW).
Stark also wrote to
Secretary Powell urging him to recognize the broad support CEDAW has
across the United States when advising President Bush policy as it
applies to the treaty.
Back
to Top
Support for Afghan Women’s Rights and their Efforts to
Rebuild Afghanistan
Stark wrote to
President Bush urging him to make every effort to include the women of
Afghanistan in the processes of reconstruction and redevelopment efforts
in their country.
Stark cosponsored the
Access for Afghan Women Act, which encourages the United States
Department of State and the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID) to ensure that Afghan women’s political, economic
and social rights are recognized when the US gives aid to Afghanistan.
Stark cosponsored a
resolution that calls on the Bush Administration to ensure that the
post-Taliban government will protect the human and civil rights of
Afghan women and to provide that women are included in any Afghan
government. The resolution also commends the work of organizations led
by Afghan women who continue to provide education, health and relief
services during the crisis.
Back
to Top
Sheltering Women from Gender-Related Violence and
Persecution
Stark cosponsored
legislation (HR 544) that would require the Attorney General to
promulgate regulations relating to gender-related persecution, including
female genital mutilation, for use in determining an alien’s eligibility
to receive asylum or withholding of deportation.
Back
to Top
Fairness for Women in the
Workplace
Stark wrote to Secretary Chao opposing the
Department of Labor’s plan to eliminate funding for regional Women’s
offices. The Administration reversed its decision and is keeping
regional offices open as a result of protests from women’s organizations
and Members of the Congress.
Back
to Top
Capitol Art Exhibits Display American Women’s
Contributions
Stark cosponsored a resolution ( H Res
106) that expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that the
artwork in the Capitol, the Capitol Visitors Center, and the House
office buildings should represent the contributions of women to American
society.
Back
to Top
Energy
California Energy Crisis
Stark joined his
California colleagues in cosponsoring a bill to establish cost-based
rates (the cost of generation plus a reasonable profit) for wholesale
electricity sales in the western United States. In addition, the bill
calls for retroactive refunds for charges above cost-based rates. These
refunds will be issued to California consumers who have incurred
exorbitant debt due to the unjust charges. Stark will work with his
colleagues to see this legislation enacted.
Stark urged
President Bush to support Governor Davis’ request on wholesale rates,
investigate the allegations of overcharges, and act to prevent a
dysfunctional electricity market from damaging California
residents.
Stark, along with other western states Members of
Congress, also wrote to Secretary Abraham stating that the FERC price
mitigation was of limited use for California and not even offered to
other western states. The letter supported real cost-of-service based
rates in the West imposed by administrative action or through
legislation. The letter called upon FERC to uphold the law and restore
just and reasonable rates. Finally, the drafters of the letter asked
that the Secretary consult with them prior to the Energy Task Force’s
final recommendation. The Secretary never did consult with the members
expressing concerns about energy policy.
Stark cosponsored the
Energy Price and Economic Stability Act of 2001, which instructs the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to implement short-term
cost-of-service based energy rates. This legislation would sunset on
March 1, 2003. If enacted, this bill would exempt new generation
facilities from the rate limits in order to encourage new energy
generation. If FERC ignores the will of Congress as expressed by this
resolution, then states would have the right to appeal to federal
courts.
The GOP leadership refused to allow a floor consideration
of this bill so Stark signed a discharge petition to force a floor vote.
To date, there are not enough signatures on this petition to require a
discharge.
Back
to Top
Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE)—Clean Air and Clean
Water
Stark joined his
California colleagues in a letter to the Administrator of EPA requesting
a waiver from the 2 percent MTBE oxygenate requirement in gasoline. EPA
denied the request stating that California failed to show sufficient
cause to receive a waiver. The EPA’s decision benefits the ethanol
producers who will be able to help California meet the requirement by
providing refiners with the corn-based fuel. However, ethanol is
expected to drive up the cost of gasoline in California.
Stark,
along with the entire California delegation, introduced HR 2270, a bill
to amend the Clear Air Act to allow California to phase out the use of
MBTE as a gasoline additive. In the current formulation, MTBE is
contaminating drinking water across the State. A phase-out of MTBE would
permit California to achieve federally mandated clean air standards
without raising gas prices and without contaminating our drinking water.
Back
to Top
LIHEAP Funding
Stark cosponsored a
resolution (H Res 300) expressing the sense of the House of
Representatives that President Bush should release emergency funding
under the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) due to the
recession and the spike in unemployment. The resolution language was
included in the Fiscal Year ‘02 Labor, Health and Human Services
Appropriations conference report and enacted into law. (See also
CONSUMER PROTECTION.)
Back
to Top
Transportation and Airline Security
New San Francisco-Shanghai Route
Established
Stark wrote to
Secretary of Transportation supporting United Airlines’ competitive
request to operate daily non-stop service from San Francisco to Shanghai
providing a direct route for commerce and tourism. United was granted
the route and service began on April 1, 2001. This new route offers
tremendous economic benefits to consumers, businesses and communities in
California.
Back
to Top
Airport Noise Mitigation
Stark is an original
cosponsor of the Quiet Communities Act of 2001 (HR 1116). The bill would
re-establish the Office of Noise Abatement and Control (ONAC) at the
Environmental Protection Agency. The ONAC was critical to effectively
mitigating aircraft noise because the EPA consistently advocated
stricter methodologies of noise measurement and the implementation of
noise abatement programs nationwide.
Back
to Top
Airline Bailout
Stark opposed HR
2926, the airline bailout bill. The bill gave $5 billion to the airline
industry to cover the immediate incremental losses from the shutdown of
U.S. airspace on September 11, 2001 although the Joint Economic
Committee estimated that, at most, the industry had lost $1 billion due
to the shutdown. The bill also gave an additional $10 billion in loan
guarantees for the industry. The airline industry workers didn’t fare
nearly as well. While limited severance packages were included for those
airline executives making over $300,000 to $600,000, nothing was
included in the package for the regular airline workers. Congress passed
this bill and it was signed by the President on 9/22/01.
Back
to Top
Air Line Security
Stark supported to S
1447, the Conference Report on Aviation & Transportation Security
Act, which was signed by the President. This Act makes the federal
government directly responsible for all passenger and baggage screening,
requiring that all screeners be federal employees. However, the Act
allows airports to return to private contractors for screening three
years after enactment.
The Act requires that all baggage
screeners be US citizens, which Stark opposed. Stark advised the bill
conferees that it would be less discriminatory to require baggage
screeners to be legal permanent residents since legal permanent
residents are allowed to join our armed forces and are employed in
various occupations across the US, including in our airports and
airlines. Conditioning employment on US citizenship effectively makes
legal permanent residents a suspect class even though they contribute to
the fabric of our nation on a daily basis.
Back
to Top
Foreign
Affairs & Peace
Stark supported international peace
efforts that would enhance freedom and justice abroad. He pushed for
economic justice, religious freedom and worker rights, and promoted
public health and hunger relief initiatives abroad.
Diamonds
Stark was an original cosponsor
of HR 918 and HR 2722, bills to restrict the sale of certain “conflict
diamonds.” Conflict diamonds are diamonds used by African rebels and
dictators to finance military activities that subvert international
efforts to promote peace and stability. The bills would impose import
restrictions and enforcement provisions on conflict diamonds and provide
requirements on legal trade diamonds in order to distinguish conflict
diamonds from non-conflict diamonds. The United Nations Security Council
has prohibited states from importing diamonds from and exporting weapons
to certain countries affected by diamond-related conflicts. Parts of
these bills, including the prohibition of funding from the Export-Import
Bank for trade in conflict diamonds, were included in the Foreign
Operations appropriations bill PL 107-115. (See also TRADE.)
Back
to Top
Debt Relief for
Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC)
Stark wrote a
letter to Treasury Secretary O’Neill in support of debt relief for
heavily indebted poor countries, and encouraging reforms to the HIPC
initiative. Secretary O’Neill responded positively to these
recommendations, supported them in G-7 summit, and reforms were adopted
at conclusion of Summit. Congress provided an additional $244 million in
further bilateral debt relief in Foreign Operations Appropriations FY
‘02 bill, PL 107-115.
Back
to Top
International
Tuberculosis Programs
Stark signed letter to
appropriators in support of funding for programs combating tuberculosis.
Members of the appropriating committees agreed and appropriated $75
million for efforts to treat and combat the spread of tuberculosis.
Back
to Top
Hunger
Prevention
Stark cosponsored H. Con. Res.102 , a
resolution expressing the Sense of Congress that the US should support
efforts to reduce hunger and poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa. This
resolution passed the House 400-9 and now moves to the Senate for
consideration.
Back
to Top
Afghanistan
Stark cosponsored a
resolution condemning an initiative by the Taliban to register and force
Hindus to wear badges indicating their background. This resolution
passed the House 420-0.
Back
to Top
Burma/Myanmar
Stark cosponsored a
resolution commending Daw Aung San Suu Kyi for winning the Nobel Peace
Prize for her efforts to protect human rights in Burma. This resolution
passed the House 420-0.
Back
to Top
Colombia
Stark wrote to President Pastrana urging him to protect labor
leaders from assassination and harassment. Pastrana replied indicating
that he will continue to try to improve protections for Social and Labor
Union leaders. (See also LABOR.)
Back
to Top
East
Timor
Stark wrote to Secretary of State Colin Powell
urging him to pressure the Indonesian Government to allow East Timorese
refugees held captive in West Timor to return to their homes. The State
Department replied indicating that they would continue to pressure the
Indonesian Government to facilitate the return of the refugees.
Back
to Top
El
Salvador
Stark cosponsored H. Con Res. 41, expressing
sympathy for the victims of the earthquakes that destroyed much of the
country in January of 2001. This resolution passed the House 405-1 and
was referred to the Senate.
India
Stark also cosponsored H. Con.
Res. 15, expressing sympathy for the victims of the earthquakes that
struck India in January of 2001. This resolution passed the House by
406-1 and is awaiting action by the Senate.
Back
to Top
Israel/Palestine
Stark cosponsored H.
Res. 99, urging Iran and Syria to allow Red Cross workers to visit three
kidnapped Israeli soldiers being held by Hezbullah in Lebanon. This
resolution passed the House 379-0.
Back
to Top
Iraq
Stark wrote to Secretary
Powell to support lifting the sanctions on economic and humanitarian
goods into Iraq. The State Department reply indicated the
administration’s support of this initiative.
Back
to Top
Lebanon
Stark also wrote to
Secretary Powell urging him push for the withdrawal of Syrian troops in
Lebanon. The State Department response expressed the administration’s
support of long standing US policy of an independent sovereign Lebanon
without foreign occupational forces.
Back
to Top
Mexico
Stark wrote to the local
labor-business board in Puebla, Mexico, urging them to recognize
independent labor unions seeking to represent laborers in the factory.
In August, 2001, the Kukdong Garment company agreed to formulate a new
contract with the employee-supported union.
Back
to Top
Sudan
Stark wrote to President Bush
urging the establishment of a Special Envoy to the Sudan. In September
2001, President Bush appointed Former Senator John Danforth fill this
post.
Back
to Top
Taiwan World Health
Organization Resolution
Stark was an original
cosponsor of a bill (HR 428) to authorize the Secretary of State to
initiate a US plan to endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan at
the annual week-long summit of the World Health Assembly. The bill
became law on May 28, 2001.
Back
to Top
Columbia
Paramilitary organizations
seeking to defend the illicit drug trade in Columbia have threatened and
assassinated labor activists in Columbia. Stark joined other House
Members in a letter to the President of Columbia asking for an
investigation into the deaths of union activists who worked diligently
to bring fair and legal trade practices to a country whose primary
export is now cocaine. (See also TRADE.)
Back
to Top
Consumer
Protection
Credit Cards for College Students
Stark
cosponsored HR 184, a bill to prevent credit card issuers from taking
advantage of full-time, traditional-aged college students and to protect
parents of college student credit card holders. Congress has not acted
on this bill.
Back
to Top
LIHEAP Funding
Stark cosponsored a
resolution (H Res 300) expressing the sense of the House of
Representatives that President Bush should release emergency funding
under the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) due to the
recession and the spike in unemployment. The resolution language was
included in the Fiscal Year ‘02 Labor, Health and Human Services
Appropriations conference report and enacted into law. (See also
ENERGY.)
Back
to Top
Protecting Injured Victims from Unethical Business
Practices
Stark co-authored legislation to impose a
tax penalty on unscrupulous purchasers of structured settlements
payments. This bill was prompted by the practices of companies who prey
on injured victims and pressure them to sell (at a deep discount) their
future damage payments, which they have received as a result of a tort
claim. Doing so often leaves the injured party without sufficient means
to pay their medical costs. The bill created an economic disincentive
for these types of companies to buy settlement payments, but allows
legitimate companies to continue doing business. The bill had bipartisan
support and the support of advocates for the disabled; its provisions
were rolled into HR2884, the Victims of Terrorism Relief Act of 2001 and
enacted into law in 2002. (See also TAX.)
Back
to Top
Labor & Trade
Stark supported safer
working conditions for all workers, a minimum wage increase, and
ergonomic standards to reduce work-related injuries.
Safety Standards for Mexican Trucks
One
of NAFTA’s troubling results is the failure of drivers and trucks
transporting goods from Mexico to meet US safety standards. To address
safety concerns, Stark cosponsored H. Res. 152, requesting that the
President certify to Congress that all trucks and drivers coming from
Mexico will meet U.S. safety and emissions standards. Unfortunately, a
NAFTA dispute tribunal ruled that any prohibitions placed on trucks
coming from Mexico would violate the agreement.
The Department of
Transportation's Inspector General and the General Accounting Office
have documented the unresolved safety issues with trucks coming across
the border from Mexico. Stark supported a successful amendment that
would prohibit processing of applications for Mexican trucks to operate
in the US. The Senate placed an array of inspection and insurance
requirements on Mexican trucks in its Transportation Appropriations
bill, despite veto threats from the President. The two chambers finally
came to an agreement, and the President signed the bill, which will
require Mexican trucks to meet the same safety standards as U.S. trucks
and drivers.
Back
to Top
Andean Trade Preference Act
Stark
opposed the Andean Trade Preference Act because this bill overlooks the
importance of protecting labor rights overseas and sets up unfair trade
circumstances for U.S. textile workers.
The Andean Trade
Expansion bill (HR 3009), if enacted, would give the Andean region
duty-free status on various imports in hope that the region would
replace their drug economy with other sustainable alternatives. Stark
argued that this hope was unfounded in light of the Columbian
government’s failure to address the threats and even assassinations of
labor activists by the paramilitary organizations seeking to defend the
illicit drug trade.
The bill, if enacted, would add textiles and
apparel to the list of imports that will be allowed into our country
duty and quota-free. In addition to the Andean countries (Columbia,
Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru) already included under the current Andean
Trade Preference Act, Caribbean and sub-Saharan African countries will
also be included in this duty and quota-free status for apparel. This
would have a devastating affect on textile and apparel jobs here at
home. The House has passed this bill and it awaits Senate action.
Back
to Top
Fast Track Trade Negotiating Authority
Stark worked with his
colleagues to defeat a bill (HR 3019) that would grant the President
fast track trade negotiating authority. This bill gave even less
protection to labor and environmental issues than the 1988 fast track
bill used to negotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
After the surge of imports and loss of millions of jobs following
NAFTA’s implementation, Stark pushed to hold the President accountable
for negotiating better trade agreements. Unfortunately, in a vote that
couldn’t have been closer (215-214), the bill passed the House and is
awaiting action in the Senate.
Back
to Top
Diamonds
Stark was an original cosponsor
of HR 918 and HR 2722 that would impose import restrictions and
enforcement provisions on “conflict diamonds.” Conflict diamonds are
diamonds being used by African rebels and dictators to finance military
activities, overthrow legitimate governments, and subvert international
efforts to promote peace and stability. The United Nations Security
Council has prohibited states from importing diamonds from, and
exporting weapons to, certain countries affected by diamond-related
conflicts.
Back
to Top
Columbia
Paramilitary organizations
seeking to defend the illicit drug trade in Columbia have threatened and
assassinated labor activists in Columbia. Stark joined other House
Members in a letter to the President of Columbia asking for an
investigation into the deaths of union activists who worked diligently
to bring fair and legal trade practices to a country whose primary
export is now cocaine. (See also FOREIGN AFFAIRS.)
Back
to Top
Ergonomics Debate: Business Prevails over Worker
Safety
Stark opposed the resolution (H Res 79) to
repeal the Occupational Safety & Health Administration's ergonomics
standard. This standard, issued under the Clinton Administration, was
scheduled to take effect in October of 2001. Unfortunately, the
resolution calling for repeal passed Congress and was signed by the
President.
The ergonomic standard had been developed over a
ten-year period with assistance from the businesses that had
successfully prevented ergonomic injuries or reduced their severity in
the workplace. Repetitive injuries are one of the leading causes of
work-related illness. More that 647,000 American workers suffer serious
injuries and illnesses due to musculoskeletal disorders, costing
businesses $15 to $20 billion annually in workers' compensation costs.
Back
to Top
Minimum Wage and Decent Labor
Conditions
Stark was an original cosponsor of HR 665,
a bill to increase the federal minimum wage by $1.50 over 3 years.
Stark also cosponsored H Con Res 177, expressing the sense of
Congress that all workers deserve fair treatment and safe working
conditions, and honoring Dolores Huerta for her commitment to the
improvement of working conditions for children, women and farm worker
families.
Stark was an original cosponsor of the HR 2755, Day
Laborer Fairness and Protection Act. The bill would require day laborer
service agencies to disclose the wage rate offered by the agency and
protects day laborers from being exploited.
Back
to Top
Judiciary
Stark worked to
promote justice by fighting discrimination and advocating gun control
laws to protect our children from the danger of firearms.
Back
to Top
Hate Crimes
Stark is a cosponsor of HR
74, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2001. This bill would assist state
and local governments in investigating and prosecuting hate crimes.
Congress failed to act on this bill.
Back
to Top
Employment Discrimination
Stark is a
cosponsor of HR 2692, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The bill
would outlaw federal employment discrimination based on sexual
orientation. Such protections are already provided based on race,
religion, gender, national origin, age and disability.
Back
to Top
Racial Profiling
Stark is an original
cosponsor of HR 2074, the End Racial Profiling Act of 2001. This bill
would ban racial profiling in all circumstances, such as race, national
origin, or ethnicity. The bill would require all federal, state and
local law enforcement officers to cease any racial profiling procedures.
Although the Congress has not acted on this bill, it has achieved
bipartisan support. Rep. Stark is hopeful that the bill will be
addressed this year.
Back
to Top
Gun Control
Stark is a strong proponent
of gun control laws that protect our children from the danger of
firearms. He has cosponsored several bills to improve our gun laws,
including the Childproof Handgun Act of 2001, the Child Handgun Injury
Prevention Act, and the Antique Firearm Safety Act.
Back
to Top
Tax
Bush Tax Proposal
Stark opposed the
Economic Growth and Tax Reconciliation Act of 2001 (HR 1836), the Bush’s
tax cut bill because it was fiscally irresponsible and inequitable.
This bill cuts income tax rates, eliminates the estate tax for
one year, increases the amounts that can be deferred in retirement
savings plans, and increases the standard deduction for married
couples.
Congress passed the Bush tax cut, depleting the budget
surpluses, and leaving no leeway to shore up the Social Security and
Medicare programs. No surplus dollars were left for key priorities like
a Medicare prescription drug benefit for seniors and better education
for our children. Finally, the tax cut overwhelmingly benefited the
wealthy with little relief given to the vast majority of working
families. (See also HEALTH and CHILDREN and FAMILY ISSUES.)
Democratic Alternative Tax Proposal
Stark did support
more balanced tax reduction plans as alternatives which would have spent
a fraction of the comprehensive Bush tax proposal, leaving room to pay
down the debt and for other critical spending needs. The substitute
bills also would have spread the tax relief more evenly among all
working families. Unfortunately, the alternatives failed to win a
majority vote in this Congress.
Back
to Top
Pension Changes
Stark opposed HR 10, a
pension reform bill, because he argued that any reform bill should
expand retirement coverage to those who do not have existing benefits.
Half of the American workforce now lack pension coverage. Primarily, the
workers without benefits are low to moderate-income workers and
employees in small businesses. But instead of addressing the needs of
these workers, the bill expanded the amounts that can be saved by
workers who already have pensions. In addition, the bill could actually
provide a disincentive for small business owners to provide any pension
coverage at all. In spite of these concerns, the bill was enacted into
law.
Back
to Top
Protecting Injured Victims from Unethical Business
Practices
Stark co-authored legislation (HR 1514) to
impose a tax penalty on unscrupulous purchasers of structured
settlements payments. This bill was prompted by the practices of
companies who prey on injured victims and pressure them to sell (at a
deep discount) their future damage payments, which they have received as
a result of a tort claim. Doing so often leaves the injured party
without sufficient means to pay their medical costs. The bill created an
economic disincentive for these types of companies to buy settlement
payments, but allows legitimate companies to continue doing business.
The bill had bipartisan support and the support of advocates for the
disabled; its provisions were rolled into HR 2884, the Victims of
Terrorism Relief Act of 2001 and enacted into law in 2002.
Back
to Top
Tax Benefits for Computers Donated to Seniors
Centers
Stark cosponsored a bill (HR 2259) to expand
the enhanced deduction for corporate donations of computer technology to
senior centers and community centers. Congress has not acted on this
bill.
Back
to Top
Clamping Down on Corporate Tax
Shelters
Stark was an original cosponsor the Abusive
Tax Shelter Shutdown Act of 2001 (HR 2520). This bill would close the
loopholes to prevent tax abuses by corporations in order to decrease
their tax liability. Congress has not acted on this bill.
Back
to Top
Economic Stimulus Tax Package
Stark
opposed the House economic stimulus package, HR 3090, because it was an
expensive and ineffective tool to spur economic recovery. This bill
would have provided excessive corporate tax breaks while failing to
provide health care and to fund unemployment benefits for workers who
lost their jobs due to the recession. Although the proponents of the
President’s economic stimulus plan claimed it would create 300,000 more
jobs, the cost for each job created under the Administration’s stimulus
package would have exceeded $300,000. Fortunately, the Senate refused to
pass this bill.
Back
to Top
Science
Terascale Computing
Stark wrote to the
National Science Foundation in support of the Distributed Terascale
Facilities Program. This program would create a computer across several
cities capable of performing TeraFLOP operations with the first computer
of its size in the world. As an illustration, if a computer this size
had existed five years ago, it could have mapped the human genome code
in half the time it took existing computers to complete this
task.
Back
to Top
Casework
CuttingThrough Red
Tape
Stark helped
constituents work through problems they have with the federal
government. During the course of this congressional term, Stark and his
staff resolved approximately 2,000 cases. For some people, this was a
matter of tracking down a missing check from Social Security. For
others, help involved strong advocacy to assist constituents in pursuit
of their claims before the government. Often times, constituent work
allows family members from overseas to be reunited with their kin in
times of illness or joyous family celebrations. But always it is a
privilege to help the people of the 13th congressional with their
federal concerns.
Below are just a few
examples of cases successfully resolved:
Cases
Stark and his staff
helped over 1600 constituents cut through federal red tape in 2001. For
some people, the casework was a matter of tracking down a missing check
from Social Security. For others, Stark’s help involved strong advocacy
to assist constituents who sought specific government services. Often
times, constituent casework allows family members from overseas to be
reunited with their families. Listed below are a few examples of
constituent issues resolved in 2001:
Herb, a disabled mail
carrier & a veteran, asked if the VA shuttle that provides
transportation to Livermore VA & Palo Alto VA could also make a stop
in Fremont to transport veterans to either facility. Stark’s office
worked with the VA on this idea and VA began shuttle service for
veterans from the Fremont Senior Center in February 2002.
Edward
requested assistance in obtaining medals he earned while serving in the
military. As a result of Stark’s inquiry on Edward’s behalf, he received
his military medals.
Betty was covered by Medicare as a result of
her husband’s Medicare coverage. She paid the $150 quarterly premiums
directly to Medicare as required but when her husband died, Medicare
erroneously started billing her $225 per quarter. Although Betty kept
paying $150 each quarter, Medicare erroneously terminated her from
Medicare & consequently from Kaiser. Stark’s office resolved the
billing problems and got her reinstated in Medicare and at
Kaiser.
Beant asked for immigration assistance for her family.
Stark’s office helped to expedite visa interviews for this family
because a delay would have resulted in leaving one child behind in their
native land due to age limits for family immigration to the US.
Xueying’s Permanent Resident Number was inadvertently also
assigned to another person. That other person was in New York and about
to be deported. Because Xueying had the same number, the confusion with
the other person caused problems with her work authorization, her
adjustment of status and her travel document. Stark’s office has
resolved two of these issues and they continue to work on the third
one.
Reynaldo’s wife was eligible for a V visa under new LIFE Act
law, but the INS had no system in place to notify the State Department
of the person’s eligibility. With much persistence, Stark’s staff worked
with both INS and the State Department to assure that they fixed the
glitches in their information exchange processes, ensuring that visas
would be granted to those entitled under the LIFE Act.
Lillian
became a US citizen in 1982. Her daughter was born in 1985 in the
Philippines. At the age of 16, her daughter was not allowed to return
home to US from vacation because she had no proof of US citizenship.
Although this family had applied for a Certificate of Citizenship some
five years earlier, the INS never processed the application. Stark’s
office worked with the INS/San Jose office to expedite the Certificate
of Citizenship processing and interview so that the teen could return
home to the US with her mother.
Jing and his wife had fully paid
their taxes. The IRS erroneously claimed that they owed over $35,000
more in taxes & withheld the couple’s $600 tax rebate. After Stark’s
office intervened, the IRS corrected it’s error and paid the couple
their $600 rebate.
As an executor, Carol tried for almost a year
to settle her father’s estate. Carol’s records showed that the Social
Security Administration (SSA) owed the estate $364 but SSA claimed that
the estate owed the government more money. Stark’s office worked with
SSA until they found and corrected their error.
Lois asked for
Stark’s help getting a headstone corrected for her deceased husband’s
gravesite at national cemetery in San Bruno. Stark’s office worked until
the stone was fixed.
Erwan’s petition to become a permanent
resident was approved in December 2000 by the California Service Center
but the approval was never sent to the National Visa Center or to the
embassy for final processing. Although there had been an eight month
delay before Stark’s office intervened, Stark’s staff got the California
Service Center to retrieve the file and send it to the National Visa
Center within one week.
Evelyn‘s son died. The Social Security
Administration (SSA) mistakenly confused the identity of her husband
with her son, resulting in the wrongful termination of her husband’s
benefits & the improper payment of widow’s benefits to the Evelyn.
Then SSA compounded the problems by reclaiming large amounts from their
bank account causing undue financial hardship & overdrafts. Stark’s
office worked with SSA Program Center to straighten out the records and
resolve the payment differences.
Ernesto petitioned for his son
to come to the US. Although the embassy was ready to give the child a
visa interview, the California Service Center failed to transfer the
file necessary for the interview for 2 1/2 years. After Stark’s office
intervened, the file was promptly transferred from California to Manila
so the child could be reunited with his father in the US.
Back
to Top
Local Issues
FEMA Flood Insurance Bill
Stark
introduced the National Flood Insurance Program Fairness Act of 2000.
This bill, if enacted, would require FEMA to reimburse a resident for
reasonable costs incurred in connection with a surveyor or engineer when
successfully challenging a designation in a flood zone. The bill also
changes the process by which residents affected by changes to flood
insurance rate maps are notified by FEMA. This will allow residents more
time to file appeals and to purchase flood insurance. The need for this
bill became apparent when FEMA changed the flood zones in Alameda County
without a clear and adequate notice of their process to
homeowners.
Sudden Oak
Death
Stark signed a letter on November 16, 2000,
asking for $2.1 million to study causes of sudden oak death. On January
19, 2001 Secretary of the Interior, Dan Glickman’s office gave notice
that the request was granted. (See also ENVIRONMENT.)
Studies on Estudillo Canal and Laguna
Creek
Stark requested $100,000 for feasibility studies
of the Estudillo Canal in San Leandro and Laguna Creek in Fremont in the
Energy and Water Appropriations bill for FY ’02. The request was not
included in the final bill because appropriators did not fund any new
projects.
Supporting the Needs of 13th CD
Children
Stark secured $1.03 million in funding for
Alameda and Santa Clara Counties. The money was included in H.R. 3061,
the Fiscal Year 2002 Labor, HHS, and Education Appropriations bill.
These funds will support the expansion of Alameda County Social Service
Agency’s Alternative Response System and will support Santa Clara
County’s first-in-the-nation effort to provide universal health
insurance for all children in the county.
In particular, the bill
provides $440,000 for the Alameda County Social Services Agency’s
Alternative Response System (ARS). The ARS program provides early
intervention and prevention services to help reduce the number of
children who must enter the foster care system. The new funds will
enable the county to expand the program beyond the two neighborhoods
where it has been successfully piloted.
The bill also includes
$590,000 for Santa Clara County’s Children Health Initiative. The
Children’s Health Initiative is a one of a kind program in the nation
that seeks to provide health insurance to every child in the county. The
program increases children’s access to health care by expanding
enrollment in existing health care programs, such as the State’s
Medicaid and SCHIP programs. The Initiative also created a new County
insurance program known as Healthy Kids.
Support for Davis Street Center
Stark
testified before the House Appropriations VA-HUD Subcommittee to request
$3 million for the Davis Street Community Center, located in San
Leandro. Stark secured $150,000 in H.R. 2620, the Fiscal Year 2000
VA-HUD Appropriations bill. The additional funds requested would help
enable Davis Street to move into a larger facility and enable them to
expand services to the working poor. Davis Street has provided critical
services to the working poor for over 30 years and this funding will
help them to expand that mission.
Meeting
Mass Transit Needs
On behalf of the riders of AC
Transit, Stark requested the authorization and appropriation of $4
million to provide 16 new buses and additional bus service in Fremont
and Newark.
Back
to
Top |