DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006--Continued
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, today the Senate accepted two modified amendments that I authored.
Amendment 2230, as modified, will reduce the amount appropriated for travel, conference programs and related expenses at the Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, by $15 million. Currently $68 million is available for these activities.
The $15 million saved by this revised amendment would ensure sufficient funding for travel and conference expenses that may be necessary while recognizing that the current amount spent on these activities by HHS is excessive and can be reduced.
In 2005 alone, HHS spent $68.5 million on conferences. This is a 50 percent increase in conference spending during a 5-year period. At a time when our Nation is fighting a global war against terrorism, recovering from the most expensive natural disaster in our history, and facing an ever growing debt that now surpasses $8 trillion, we must be more frugal with the taxpayers' dollars we have been entrusted and prioritize how they are spent.
This amendment ensures that a greater amount of Federal health dollars will actually be spent on health care, which should be the goal of HHS.
In the context of the $2.5 trillion Federal budget, $15 million may not seem like much until you put it into a real world perspective.
According to the American Institute of Preventative Medicine, the average doctor visit costs $55. The $15 million saved by this amendment could be made available to pay for nearly 273,000 doctors visits in the next year.
The 2004 Census Bureau report on Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance in the United States shows that 45 million Americans are without health insurance.
The annual premium that a health insurer charges an employer for a health plan covering a family of four averaged $9,950 in 2004. For single coverage is $3,695 annual average premium.
The $15 million saved by this amendment could provide 1,500 American families of four or 4,060 single Americans with health insurance for a year.
HHS spends significantly more on conferences than any other Federal department. In fact, the total spent on conferences by HHS in 2005 is comparable to the amount spent by the Energy Department, Education Department, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Labor Department and Transportation Department combined.
In 2002, HHS spent $3.6 million on a single conference, the International AIDS Conference, held in Barcelona, Spain, to which 236 HHS employees traveled to attend. Then-Secretary Tommy Thompson was among the HHS employees who traveled across the globe for this conference and was scheduled to speak. Yet he was prevented from doing so by activists that turned what was intended to be a scientific gathering into a political statement.
Members of Congress rightfully were outraged that the Secretary was treated so rudely at a conference that cost the U.S. taxpayer millions of dollars.
In a May, 2003, letter to members of Congress, Secretary Thompson reassured that HHS ``will work to further reduce our costs associated with that event, while continuing to assure essential scientific personnel can attend this meeting.'' He went on to note that ``the Department is currently revising the HHS travel manual, which will formalize international and domestic travel policies to ensure frugal use of taxpayer money. My staff is taking unprecedented steps to ensure American taxpayers will no longer be asked to foot the bill for wasteful HHS spending, including in the area of travel. ..... Every trip proposal is ..... evaluated on an individual basis by a member of my staff to guarantee that taxpayer money is not wasted.''
Despite this pledge, HHS has continued to spend more and more on conferences and to send hundreds of employees to participate in the same conferences.
In 2004, HHS sent 100 or more employees to at least 59 conferences, including 1,036 to a conference in Orlando, Florida.
Just this past August, HHS was listed as a primary sponsor of the 2005 conference of the Harm Reduction Project, an organization that supports tacit legalization of drugs. Among the sessions at this federally supported conference was ``We Don't Need a `War' on Methamphetamine'' and the discussion groups include ``Tweaking Tips for Party Boys.'' ``Tweaking'' is the most dangerous stage of meth abuse. A tweaker is a meth addict who probably has not slept in days, or weeks, and is irritable and paranoid.
HHS officials later denied ``sponsoring'' the conference, although the Department provided taxpayer dollars for it and sent six employees to participate.
As a practicing physician, I believe that Federal funds expended to support this conference would have been far better spent providing treatment to those suffering from addiction.
This is just one example of taxpayer dollars that have been misspent on conferences.
The bottom line remains that at a time when important health care programs are faced with financial difficulties, we do not have the luxury for excessive spending on conferences. While Congress is trying to control the growth of spending on important health programs like Medicaid and Medicare, we should first impose restraints on nonessential spending at HHS including conferences.
Conferences may provide interesting opportunities for bureaucrats and others to network and exchange information in person, but they do not make people well or provide life saving health care.
Furthermore, in the modern telecommunications era, it is unnecessary to spend time and resources to finance so many conferences. Teleconferences and video conferencing, for example, can save money while allowing the same type of interaction and information sharing at a mere fraction of the cost.
The second amendment, No. 2336 as modified, directs the Secretary of HHS and the Secretary of Education to estimate improper payments as required by the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 and report to Congress on specific actions taken to estimate improper payments within 60 days of this bill being signed into law.
The Improper Payment Information Act was enacted in November 2002 for the purpose of finding and eliminating payments that should not have been made, or were made for incorrect amounts, by government agencies.
This law requires that all agencies, at the very least, perform a risk assessment of all programs and activities to determine whether or not a program is at risk of making ``significant'' improper payments.
``Significant'' as defined by the Office of Management and Budget means at least 2.5 percent of all payments made are improper, and the absolute dollar figure associated with that 2.5 percent or more, totals at least $10 million.
Federal programs and activities deemed to be at ``significant'' risk of making improper payments their respective agencies are required under the Improper Payments Information Act to first, develop a statistically valid estimate of improper payments; and second, develop a corrective action plan for all programs where the improper payment estimate exceeds $10 million annually. This corrective action plan must also contain annual targets for reducing improper payment levels.
At the end of each fiscal year, agencies are to report the results of the Improper Payments Information Act activities in their Performance and Accountability Report PAR; and submit them to Congress. The Improper Payments Information Act exempts no agency from compliance.
Improper payments--which include inadvertent, fraudulent, and irresponsible payments--are costing the taxpayers at the very least, over $45 billion each year. Even worse, this $45 billion represents only 17 of 70 agencies that are currently reporting improper payment information as required under law.
The Medicare program, which is already reporting, makes up nearly half--$21.7 billion--of the government's $45.4 billion reported improper payments for fiscal year 2004.
The magnitude of the Government's improper payment problem is not yet known because some of the largest programs are not reporting, as required by law.
Medicaid, with outlays that exceed $175 billion annually, is one of the programs that is not reporting. The Medicaid program has been required to report improper payments under the Office of Management and Budgets, OMB, A-11 Circular requirements since 2001; and under the Improper Payments Information Act since 2002, yet it still has made no estimate of its improper payments.
In its November 2002 Performance and Accountability Report, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reported that it would be able to report improper payments for the Medicaid program by 2006; however, they have pushed that date back to 2008--six years after the date by which they were to have begun reporting improper payments.
Similarly, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, TANF, program has not even been able to estimate when it will be able to report improper payments for a law that has existed since 2002.
TANF spent over $17 billion in fiscal year 2005 ($18.6 in outlays).
Foster Care spent $6.4 billion in fiscal year 2005.
State Children's Insurance Program spent $5.129 billion in fiscal year 2005.
Child Care Development Fund spent $4.9 billion in fiscal year 2005.
Title I, within the Department of Education, spent $22.916 billion in fiscal year 2005, fiscal year 2005 outlays: $21.18 billion.
This amendment does not debate the merits of any of these programs, it simply demands compliance with transparency and accountability measurements for expenditures already in existing law.
After all, eliminating improper payments ensures more funds actually reach those who are intended to benefit from these programs while protecting the taxpayer. However, we must first understand the magnitude and source of the problem to correct it. We can only do this if all agencies are monitoring and reporting their improper payment information.
Together these amendments make small, yet important steps, towards making federal agencies more fiscally responsible and accountable.
I thank Chairman SPECTER for accepting these amendments and his commitment to fight for inclusion of these provisions in conference with the House of Representatives.