Rosenfeld Susan. Encyclopedia of American Historical Documents

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

(B) any right, benefit, or position of employment other

than any right, benefit, or position to which the employee

would have been entitled had the employee not taken the

leave.

* * *

(5) Construction. Nothing in this subsection shall be

construed to prohibit an employer from requiring an

employee on leave under section 102 to report periodically

to the employer on the status and intention of the

employee to return to work.

(b) Exemption Concerning Certain Highly Compen-

sated Employee—

(1) Denial of restoration. An employer may deny

restoration under subsection

(a) to any eligible employee described in paragraph

(2) if—

(A) such denial is necessary to prevent substantial and

grievous economic injury to the operations of the

employer;

(B) the employer notifies the employee of the intent

of the employer to deny restoration on such basis at the

time the employer determines that such injury would

occur; and

employee elects not to return to employment after receiv-

ing such notice.

(2) Affected employees. An eligible employee

described in paragraph (1) is a salaried eligible employee

who is among the highest paid 10 percent of the employ-

ees employed by the employer within 75 miles of the facil-

ity at which the employee is employed.

(1) Coverage. Except as provided in paragraph (2),

during any period that an eligible employee takes leave

under section 102, the employer shall maintain coverage

under any “group health plan” (as defined in section

5000(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) for the

duration of such leave at the level and under the condi-

tions coverage would have been provided if the employee

had continued in employment continuously for the dura-

tion of such leave.

(2) Failure to return from leave. The employer may

recover the premium that under such group the employer

paid for maintaining coverage for the employee under

such group health plan during any period of unpaid leave

under section 102 if—

(A) the employee fails to return from leave under sec-

tion 102 after the period of leave to which the employee is

entitled has expired; and

(B) the employee fails to return to work for a reason

other than—

(i) the continuation, recurrence, or onset of a serious

health condition that entitles the employee to leave under

subparagraph (C) or (D) of section 102(a)(1); or

(ii) other circumstances beyond the control of the

employee.

* * *

Sec. 105. Prohibited Acts.

(a) Interference With Rights.—

(1) Exercise of rights. It shall be unlawful for any

employer to interfere with, restrain, or deny the exercise of

or the attempt to exercise, any right provided under this

title.

(2) Discrimination. It shall be unlawful for any

employer to discharge or in any other manner discriminate

against any individual for opposing any practice made

unlawful by this title.

(b) Interference With Proceedings or Inquiries. It

shall be unlawful for any person to discharge or in any

other manner discriminate against any individual because

such individual—

(1) has filed any charge, or has instituted or caused to

be instituted any proceeding, under or related to this title;

(2) has given, or is about to give, any information in

connection with any inquiry or proceeding relating to any

right provided under this title; or

(3) has testified, or is about to testify, in any inquiry or

proceeding relating to any right provided under this title.

Source:

Congressional Record. 103rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1993, Vol. 139.

Violence Against Women Act, 1994

Two subtitles of law signed by President Bill Clinton Septem-

ber 13, 1994. The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) man-

dates a unified judicial response to sexual crimes committed

against women and provides funding ($1.6 billion over six

years) for programs intended to decrease the incidence of such

crimes. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) proposed the act and intro-

duced it in the Senate; Patricia Schroeder was its sponsor in

the House of Representatives.

The act’s provisions include: the creation of a national do-

mestic violence hotline; more severe penalties for sex crimes;

federal criminal penalties for anyone who crosses a state line

to injure a spouse; mandatory arrest policies in cases of

domestic violence; domestic violence education for police

officers, prosecutors and judges; increased funding for bat-

tered women’s shelters; the creation of a federal civil rights

cause of action for victims of gender-motivated crimes of vio-

lence; new policies permitting battered immigrant spouses to

1762 ERA 10: Contemporary United States

petition for legal resident status; interstate enforcement of

restraining orders; and prohibitions against gun ownership by

anyone subject to a restraining order.

By the end of 1999, 12 federal courts had upheld VAWA

as constitutional, and one—the Fourth Circuit Court in Rich-

mond, Virginia—had ruled it unconstitutional. The Virginia

case,

Brzonkala v. Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State Uni-

versity

, involved a female college student who brought a civil

lawsuit against two students she claimed had raped her. Judge

J. Michael Luttig ruled that the Violence Against Women Act,

which permits rape victims to bring civil lawsuits whether or

not the government presses criminal charges, was an imper-

missible federal intrusion into states’ rights. (Criminal charges

were not pressed because the college refused to refer the mat-

ter to the police.) In May 2000, the Supreme Court, in the

appeal of the Virginia case,

United States v. Morrison

(529 U.S.

598 [2000]), supported the 4th Circuit opinion and invalidated

the VAWA provision that had permitted women to sue rapists

in federal court.

________________________

_______________________

Subtitle B. National Stalker and

Domestic Violence Reduction

SEC. 40601. AUTHORIZING ACCESS TO FEDERAL

CRIMINAL INFORMATION DATABASES.

(a) ACCESS AND ENTRY- Section 534 of title 28,

United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the

following:

`(e)(1) Information from national crime information

databases consisting of identification records, criminal his-

tory records, protection orders, and wanted person records

may be disseminated to civil or criminal courts for use in

domestic violence or stalking cases. Nothing in this sub-

section shall be construed to permit access to such records

for any other purpose.

`(2) Federal and State criminal justice agencies autho-

rized to enter information into criminal information

databases may include—

`(A) arrests, convictions, and arrest warrants for stalk-

ing or domestic violence or for violations of protection

orders for the protection of parties from stalking or domes-

tic violence; and

`(B) protection orders for the protection of persons

from stalking or domestic violence, provided such orders

are subject to periodic verification.

`(3) As used in this subsection—

`(A) the term ‘national crime information databases’

means the National Crime Information Center and its

incorporated criminal history databases, including the

Interstate Identification Index; and

`(B) the term ‘protection order’ includes an injunction

or any other order issued for the purpose of preventing

violent or threatening acts or harassment against, or con-

tact or communication with or physical proximity to,

another person, including temporary and final orders

issued by civil or criminal courts (other than support or

child custody orders) whether obtained by filing an inde-

pendent action or as a pendente lite order in another pro-

ceeding so long as any civil order was issued in response to

a complaint, petition, or motion filed by or on behalf of a

person seeking protection.’

(b) RULEMAKING- The Attorney General may

make rules to carry out the subsection added to section

534 of title 28, United States Code, by subsection (a),

after consultation with the officials charged with manag-

ing the National Crime Information Center and the

Criminal Justice Information Services Advisory Policy

Board.

SEC. 40602. GRANT PROGRAM.

(a) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General is autho-

rized to provide grants to States and units of local govern-

ment to improve processes for entering data regarding

stalking and domestic violence into local, State, and

national crime information databases.

(b) ELIGIBILITY- To be eligible to receive a grant

under subsection (a), a State or unit of local government

shall certify that it has or intends to establish a program

that enters into the National Crime Information Center

records of—

(1) warrants for the arrest of persons violating protec-

tion orders intended to protect victims from stalking or

domestic violence;

(2) arrests or convictions of persons violating protec-

tion or domestic violence; and

(3) protection orders for the protection of persons

from stalking or domestic violence.

SEC. 40603. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIA-

TIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out

this subtitle—

(1) $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1996;

(2) $1,750,000 for fiscal year 1997; and

(3) $2,750,000 for fiscal year 1998.

SEC. 40604. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS.

An application for a grant under this subtitle shall be

submitted in such form and manner, and contain such

information, as the Attorney General may prescribe. In

addition, applications shall include documentation show-

ing—

(1) the need for grant funds and that State or local

funding, as the case may be, does not already cover these

operations;

(2) intended use of the grant funds, including a plan of

action to increase record input; and

Social Developments 1763

(3) an estimate of expected results from the use of the

grant funds.

SEC. 40605. DISBURSEMENT.

Not later than 90 days after the receipt of an applica-

tion under this subtitle, the Attorney General shall either

provide grant funds or shall inform the applicant why grant

funds are not being provided.

SEC. 40606. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, TRAIN-

ING, AND EVALUATIONS.

The Attorney General may provide technical assis-

tance and training in furtherance of the purposes of

this subtitle, and may provide for the evaluation of pro-

grams that receive funds under this subtitle, in addition

to any evaluation requirements that the Attorney General

may prescribe for grantees. The technical assistance,

training, and evaluations authorized by this section may

be carried out directly by the Attorney General, or

through contracts or other arrangements with other enti-

ties.

SEC. 40607. TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR

JUDGES.

The State Justice Institute, after consultation with

nationally recognized nonprofit organizations with exper-

tise in stalking and domestic violence cases, shall conduct

training programs for State (as defined in section 202 of

the State Justice Institute Authorization Act of 1984 (42

U.S.C. 10701)) and Indian tribal judges to ensure that a

judge issuing an order in a stalking or domestic violence

case has all available criminal history and other informa-

tion, whether from State or Federal sources.

SEC. 40608. RECOMMENDATIONS ON INTRA-

STATE COMMUNICATION.

The State Justice Institute, after consultation with

nationally recognized nonprofit associations with expertise

in data sharing among criminal justice agencies and famil-

iarity with the issues raised in stalking and domestic vio-

lence cases, shall recommend proposals regarding how

State courts may increase intrastate communication

between civil and criminal courts.

SEC. 40609. INCLUSION IN NATIONAL INCI-

DENT-BASED REPORTING SYSTEM.

Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of

this Act, the Attorney General, in accordance with the

States, shall compile data regarding domestic violence and

intimidation (including stalking) as part of the National

Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS).

SEC. 40610. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

The Attorney General shall submit to the Congress an

annual report, beginning one year after the date of the

enactment of this Act, that provides information concern-

ing the incidence of stalking and domestic violence, and

evaluates the effectiveness of State antistalking efforts and

legislation.

SEC. 40611. DEFINITIONS.

As used in this subtitle—

(1) the term `national crime information databases’

refers to the National Crime Information Center and its

incorporated criminal history databases, including the

Interstate Identification Index; and

(2) the term `protection order’ includes an injunction

or any other order issued for the purpose of preventing

violent or threatening acts or harassment against, or con-

tact or communication with or physical proximity to,

another person, including temporary and final orders

issued by civil or criminal courts (other than support or

child custody orders) whether obtained by filing an inde-

pendent action or as a pendente lite order in another pro-

ceeding so long as any civil order was issued in response to

a complaint, petition, or motion filed by or on behalf of a

person seeking protection.

Source:

U.S. Department of Justice. Available on-lin. URL: www.usdoj.

gov/. Accessed December 2003.

Amendments to the American Indian

Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA), 1994

These amendments passed in 1994 provided for the traditional

use of peyote by Indians for religious purposes. In 1990, the

U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of

Smith v. Oregon

(494

U.S. 1990) that it was constitutionally permissible for a state to

prohibit the use of peyote if a state felt a compelling reason to

do so. In 1994, only 28 states had laws protecting the sacra-

mental use of peyote. In response to this lack of uniformity,

Congress enacted AIRFA to do away with the “hardship for

Indian people who participate in such religious ceremonies.”

In some states, members of the Native American Church could

be arrested and brought to trial on narcotics charges for pey-

ote use, although most practitioners so charged were acquitted

on the grounds of freedom of religion. Even so, many peyotists

were subject to felony arrest and prosecution and carried

criminal records for practicing their faith. These amendments

sought to decriminalize activities surrounding peyotism.

Also boosting protection for traditional Indian practices,

President George H. W. Bush signed the Native American

Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) into law.

This initiative required federal agencies and museums that

received federal funding to consult various Native American

authorities regarding the care of human remains, funerary

objects, sacred objects, and objects of enduring cultural value.

Although the Smithsonian Institution is exempt from this law,

it is required to repatriate cultural objects under the National

Museum of the American Indian Act. In addition to the various

1764 ERA 10: Contemporary United States

artifacts mentioned, NAGPRA also protects burial sites located

on tribal and federal lands. NAGPRA is enforced by the Sec-

retary of the Interior, a review committee of seven members,

and an Interior Department archeologist.

On May 24, 1996, the Clinton administration further pro-

tected Native American interests in Executive Order 13007,

calling for the protection of indigenous sacred sites. The exec-

utive order, which has no enforceable power, requires each

executive branch agency to accommodate access to and cer-

emonial use of Indian sacred sites by Indian religious practi-

tioners and to avoid adversely affecting the physical integrity

of such sacred sites.

________________________

_______________________

January 25, 1994

An act to amend the American Indian Religious Freedom

Act to provide for the traditional use of peyote by Indians

for religious purposes, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Represen-

tatives of the United States of America in Congress assem-

bled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘American Indian Reli-

gious Freedom Act Amendments of 1994’.

SECTION 2. TRADITIONAL INDIAN RELI-

GIOUS USE OF THE PEYOTE SACRAMENT.

The Act of August 11, 1978 (42 U.S.C. 1996), commonly

referred to as the ‘American Indian Religious Freedom

Act,’ is amended by adding at the end thereof the follow-

ing new section:

SECTION 3.

(a) The Congress finds and declares that—

(1) for many Indian people, the traditional ceremonial

use of the peyote cactus as a religious sacrament has for

centuries been integral to a way of life, and significant in

perpetuating Indian tribes and cultures;

(2) since 1965, this ceremonial use of peyote by Indi-

ans has been protected by Federal regulation;

(3) while at least 28 States have enacted laws which

are similar to, or are in conformance with, the Federal reg-

ulation which protects the ceremonial use of peyote by

Indian religious practitioners, 22 States have not done so,

and this lack of uniformity has created hardship for Indian

people who participate in such religious ceremonies;

(4) the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case

of Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990),

held that the First Amendment does not protect Indian

practitioners who use peyote in Indian religious cere-

monies, and also raised uncertainty whether this religious

practice would be protected under the compelling State

interest standard; and

(5) the lack of adequate and clear legal protection for

the religious use of peyote by Indians may serve to stigma-

tize and marginalize Indian tribes and cultures, and

increase the risk that they will be exposed to discrimina-

tory treatment.

(b)

(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the

use, possession, or transportation of peyote by an Indian

for bona fide traditional ceremonial purposes in connec-

tion with the practice of a traditional Indian religion is

lawful, and shall not be prohibited by the United States or

any State. No Indian shall be penalized or discriminated

against on the basis of such use, possession or transporta-

tion, including, but not limited to, denial of otherwise ap-

plicable benefits under public assistance programs.

(2) This section does not prohibit such reasonable reg-

ulation and registration by the Drug Enforcement Admin-

istration of those persons who cultivate, harvest, or

distribute peyote as may be consistent with the purposes of

this Act.

(3) This section does not prohibit application of the

provisions of section 481.111(a) of Vernon’s Texas Health

and Safety Code Annotated, in effect on the date of enact-

ment of this section, insofar as those provisions pertain to

the cultivation, harvest, and distribution of peyote.

(4) Nothing in this section shall prohibit any Federal

department or agency, in carrying out its statutory res-

ponsibilities and functions, from promulgating regula-

tions establishing reasonable limitations on the use or

ingestion of peyote prior to or during the performance of

duties by sworn law enforcement officers or personnel

directly involved in public transportation or any other

safety-sensitive positions where the performance of such

duties may be adversely affected by such use or ingestion.

Such regulations shall be adopted only after consultation

with representatives of traditional Indian religions for

which the sacramental use of peyote is integral to their

practice. Any regulation promulgated pursuant to this sec-

tion shall be subject to the balancing test set forth in sec-

tion 3 of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (Public

Law 103-141; 42 U.S.C. 2000bb-1).

(5) This section shall not be construed as requiring

prison authorities to permit, nor shall it be construed to

prohibit prison authorities from permitting, access to pey-

ote by Indians while incarcerated within Federal or State

prison facilities.

(6) Subject to the provisions of the Religious Freedom

Restoration Act (Public Law 103-141; 42 U.S.C. 2000bb-

1), this section shall not be construed to prohibit States

from enacting or enforcing reasonable traffic safety laws or

regulations.

(7) Subject to the provisions of the <B>Religious

Freedom Restoration Act (Public Law 103-141; 42 U.S.C.

2000bb-1), this section does not prohibit the Secretary of

Defense from promulgating regulations establishing rea-

Social Developments 1765

sonable limitations on the use, possession, transportation,

or distribution of peyote to promote military readiness,

safety, or compliance with international law or laws of

other countries. Such regulations shall be adopted only

after consultation with representatives of traditional

Indian religions for which the sacramental use of peyote is

integral to their practice.

(1) the term ‘Indian’ means a member of an Indian

tribe;

(2) the term ‘Indian tribe’ means any tribe, band,

nation, pueblo, or other organized group or community of

Indians, including any Alaska Native village (as defined in,

or established pursuant to, the Alaska Native Claims Set-

tlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)), which is recognized

as eligible for the special programs and services provided

by the United States to Indians because of their status as

Indians;

(3) the term ‘Indian religion’ means any religion—

(A) which is practiced by Indians, and

(B) the origin and interpretation of which is from

within a traditional Indian culture or community; and

(4) the term ‘State’ means any State of the United

States, and any political subdivision thereof.

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed as abro-

gating, diminishing, or otherwise affecting—

(1) the inherent rights of any Indian tribe;

(2) the rights, express or implicit, of any Indian tribe

which exist under treaties, Executive orders, and laws of

the United States;

(3) the inherent right of Indians to practice their reli-

gions; and

(4) the right of Indians to practice their religions

under any Federal or State law.’

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.

Source:

Statutes at Large, Vol. 108, p. 3,126.

Glass Ceiling Commission Report, 1995

The Glass Ceiling Commission, a bipartisan federal panel

established in 1991 to study the demography of the U.S. work-

place, issued its report March 15, 1995. Entitled “Good for

Business: Making Full Use of the Nation’s Human Capital,” the

report revealed that women and minorities were extremely

underrepresented in senior management posts. According to

the commission’s report, the so-called glass ceiling and other

discriminatory barriers that stymied the careers of women and

minorities were still firmly in place, despite three decades of

affirmative-action efforts to eradicate them.

________________________

_______________________

(excerpt)

Highlights of the Research

Federal Glass Ceiling Commission research papers, as well

as testimony presented at the public hearings, clearly doc-

ument that today’s American labor force is gender and race

segregated—white men fill most top management posi-

tions in corporations.

According to surveys of Fortune 1500 companies

conducted by Korn/Ferry International and Catalyst over

the last decade, 95 to 97 percent of senior managers

—vice presidents and above—were men. A 1989 Korn/

Ferry survey found that 97 percent of male executives are

white. A 1992 survey of Fortune 1500 companies found

that 95 percent of the three to five percent of the top

managers who were women were white non-Hispanic

women. In 1994, two women were CEOs of Fortune 1000

companies.

The representation of women and minorities on For-

tune 1500 boards of directors is also limited. Cox and

Smolinski point out that less than 10 percent of the largest

employers have women on their board of directors.

According to a 1992 Heidrick & Struggles survey, Minori-

ties and Women on Corporate Boards, non-U.S. citizens

held 2.85 percent of the board seats of 806 Fortune com-

panies, slightly less than the 3.11 percent combined total

held by all racial and ethnic minorities.

Conversely, the American workforce is increasingly

diverse. In 1950, white men comprised 65 percent of the

labor force; in 1990 white male representation has

dropped to 43 percent. During the same period, presen-

tation of white women in the labor force increased from

24.2 percent to 35.3 percent. At the same time, minority

representation in the labor force doubled, to 15.2 per-

cent. Over the last decade, the size of the Asian and

Pacific Islander American population has doubled,

becoming the fastest growing of minority groups in the

United States.

A larger proportion of women and minorities are

locked into low-wage, low prestige, and dead- end jobs,

which according to Harlan and Bertheide, are not con-

nected to any career ladder . . .

Source:

U.S. Department of Labor. Glass Ceiling Final Report. Avail-

able on-line. URL: www.dol.gov/asp/programs/history/reich/

reports/ceiling2.pdf. Accessed November 2003.

1766 ERA 10: Contemporary United States

The Personal Responsibility and Work

Opportunity Reconciliation Act, 1996

Better known as the Welfare Reform Act, this legislation (P.L.

104–193) overhauled the federal welfare system. The political

debate over welfare revision intensified with the 1994 national

congressional elections. One of the pledges made in the “Con-

tract with America,” the conservative campaign manifesto en-

dorsed by many Republican candidates for the House of

Representatives, was sweeping welfare reform. The Republi-

can victories in the House spurred a legislative showdown on

welfare. Defying traditional Democratic precepts, President

Bill Clinton moved to the political center on this issue and

signed the law August 22, 1996. Liberal fellow Democrats

objected and accused him of selling out America’s poor. The

legislation shifted responsibility for administering welfare from

Washington to the states, which would receive federal welfare

funds in lump-sum payments (“block grants”). It ended the fed-

eral guarantee of cash assistance to poor families and intro-

duced nationwide work requirements for welfare recipients

and placed time limits on recipients’ eligibility for assistance.

The law effectively ended welfare as a federal entitlement.

One of the ironies in this law, which disproportionately

affected mothers with children, was that Republicans, who

touted family values, required even the mothers of small chil-

dren to go to work. While welfare roles shrank substantially in

the five years after the passage of the act, the United States was

also undergoing unprecedented prosperity, with low unem-

ployment generally making the statistics somewhat difficult to

interpret.

________________________

_______________________

An Act To provide for reconciliation pursuant to section

201(a)(1) of the concurrent resolution on the budget for

fiscal year 1997.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Represen-

tatives of the United States of America in Congress

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘’Personal Responsibility

and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.’’

* * *

Title I—Block Grants for Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families Sec. 101. Findings.

The Congress makes the following findings:

(1) Marriage is the foundation of a successful society.

(2) Marriage is an essential institution of a successful

society which promotes the interests of children.

(3) Promotion of responsible fatherhood and mother-

hood is integral to successful child rearing and the well-

being of children.

(4) In 1992, only 54 percent of single-parent families

with children had a child support order established and, of

that 54 percent, only about one-half received the full

amount due. Of the cases enforced through the public

child support enforcement system, only 18 percent of the

caseload has a collection.

(5) The number of individuals receiving aid to families

with dependent children (. . . AFDC) has more than tripled

since 1965. More than two-thirds of these recipients are

children. Eighty-nine percent of children receiving AFDC

benefits now live in homes in which no father is present.

(A)

(i) The average monthly number of children receiving

AFDC benefits—

(I) was 3,300,000 in 1965;

(II) was 6,200,000 in 1970;

(III) was 7,400,000 in 1980; and

(IV) was 9,300,000 in 1992.

(ii) While the number of children receiving AFDC

benefits increased nearly threefold between 1965 and

1992, the total number of children in the United States

aged 0 to 18 has declined by 5.5 percent.

(B) The Department of Health and Human Services

has estimated that 12,000,000 children will receive AFDC

benefits within 10 years.

public assistance is closely related to the increase in births

to unmarried women. Between 1970 and 1991, the per-

centage of live births to unmarried women increased

nearly threefold, from 10.7 percent to 29.5 percent.

(6) The increase of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and

births is well documented as follows:

(A) It is estimated that the rate of nonmarital teen

pregnancy rose 23 percent from 54 pregnancies per 1,000

unmarried teenagers in 1976 to 66.7 pregnancies in 1991.

The overall rate of nonmarital pregnancy rose 14 percent

from 90.8 pregnancies per 1,000 unmarried women in

1980 to 103 in both 1991 and 1992. In contrast, the over-

all pregnancy rate for married couples decreased 7.3 per-

cent between 1980 and 1991, from 126.9 pregnancies per

1,000 married women in 1980 to 117.6 pregnancies in

1991.

(B) The total of all out-of-wedlock births between

1970 and 1991 has risen from 10.7 percent to 29.5 percent

and if the current trend continues, 50 percent of all births

by the year 2015 will be out-of-wedlock.

(7) An effective strategy to combat teenage pregnancy

must address the issue of male responsibility, including

statutory rape culpability and prevention. The increase of

teenage pregnancies among the youngest girls is particu-

larly severe and is linked to predatory sexual practices by

men who are significantly older.

Social Developments 1767

(A) It is estimated that in the late 1980’s, the rate for

girls age 14 and under giving birth increased 26 percent.

(B) Data indicates that at least half of the children

born to teenage mothers are fathered by adult men. Avail-

able data suggests that almost 70 percent of births to

teenage girls are fathered by men over age 20.

majority of such mothers have histories of sexual and phys-

ical abuse, primarily with older adult men.

(8) The negative consequences of an out-of-wedlock

birth on the mother, the child, the family, and society are

well documented as follows:

(A) Young women 17 and under who give birth outside

of marriage are more likely to go on public assistance and

to spend more years on welfare once enrolled. These com-

bined effects of ‘’younger and longer’’ increase total AFDC

costs per household by 25 percent to 30 percent for 17-

year-olds.

(B) Children born out-of-wedlock have a substantially

higher risk of being born at a very low or moderately low

birth weight.

experience low verbal cognitive attainment, as well as

more child abuse, and neglect.

(D) Children born out-of-wedlock were more likely to

have lower cognitive scores, lower educational aspirations,

and a greater likelihood of becoming teenage parents

themselves.

(E) Being born out-of-wedlock significantly reduces

the chances of the child growing up to have an intact mar-

riage.

(F) Children born out-of-wedlock are 3 times more

likely to be on welfare when they grow up.

(9) Currently 35 percent of children in single-parent

homes were born out-of-wedlock, nearly the same per-

centage as that of children in single-parent homes whose

parents are divorced (37 percent). While many parents

find themselves, through divorce or tragic circumstances

beyond their control, facing the difficult task of raising

children alone, nevertheless, the negative consequences of

raising children in single-parent homes are well docu-

mented as follows:

(A) Only 9 percent of married-couple families with

children under 18 years of age have income below the

national poverty level. In contrast, 46 percent of female-

headed households with children under 18 years of age are

below the national poverty level.

(B) Among single-parent families, nearly \1/2\ of the

mothers who never married received AFDC while only

\1/5\ of divorced mothers received AFDC.

assistance are 3 times more likely to be on welfare when

they reach adulthood than children not born into families

receiving welfare.

(D) Mothers under 20 years of age are at the greatest

risk of bearing low birth weight babies.

(E) The younger the single-parent mother, the less

likely she is to finish high school.

(F) Young women who have children before finishing

high school are more likely to receive welfare assistance

for a longer period of time.

(G) Between 1985 and 1990, the public cost of

births to teenage mothers under the aid to families with

dependent children program, the food stamp program,

and the medicaid program has been estimated at

$120,000,000,000.

(H) The absence of a father in the life of a child has a

negative effect on school performance and peer adjust-

ment.

(I) Children of teenage single parents have lower cog-

nitive scores, lower educational aspirations, and a greater

likelihood of becoming teenage parents themselves.

(J) Children of single-parent homes are 3 times more

likely to fail and repeat a year in grade school than are chil-

dren from intact 2-parent families.

(K) Children from single-parent homes are almost

4 times more likely to be expelled or suspended from

school.

(L) Neighborhoods with larger percentages of youth

aged 12 through 20 and areas with higher percentages of

single-parent households have higher rates of violent

crime.

(M) Of those youth held for criminal offenses within

the State juvenile justice system, only 29.8 percent lived

primarily in a home with both parents. In contrast to these

incarcerated youth, 73.9 percent of the 62,800,000 chil-

dren in the Nation’s resident population were living with

both parents.

(10) Therefore, in light of this demonstration of the

crisis in our Nation, it is the sense of the Congress that pre-

vention of out-of-wedlock pregnancy and reduction in out-

of-wedlock birth are very important Government interests

and the policy contained in part A of title IV of the Social

Security Act (as amended by section 103(a) of this Act) is

intended to address the crisis.

* * *

PART A—BLOCK GRANTS TO STATES FOR TEMPO-

RARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES

SEC. 401. PURPOSE.

(a) In General.—The purpose of this part is to

increase the flexibility of States in operating a program

designed to— ‘’(1) provide assistance to needy families so

that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the

homes of relatives; ‘’(2) end the dependence of needy par-

1768 ERA 10: Contemporary United States

ents on government benefits by promoting job prepara-

tion, work, and marriage; ‘’(3) prevent and reduce the inci-

dence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual

numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence

of these pregnancies; and ‘’(4) encourage the formation

and maintenance of two-parent families. ‘’(b) No Individ-

ual Entitlement.—This part shall not be interpreted to

entitle any individual or family to assistance under any

State program funded under this part.

SEC. 402. ELIGIBLE STATES; STATE PLAN.

(a) In General.—As used in this part, the term ‘eligi-

ble State’ means, with respect to a fiscal year, a State that,

during the 2-year period immediately preceding the fiscal

year, has submitted to the Secretary a plan that the Secre-

tary has found includes the following: ‘’(1) Outline of fam-

ily assistance program.— ‘’(A) General provisions.—A

written document that outlines how the State intends to do

the following: ‘’(i) Conduct a program, designed to serve

all political subdivisions in the State (not necessarily in a

uniform manner), that provides assistance to needy fami-

lies with (or expecting) children and provides parents with

job preparation, work, and support services to enable them

to leave the program and become self-sufficient. ‘’(ii)

Require a parent or caretaker receiving assistance under

the program to engage in work (as defined by the State)

once the State determines the parent or caretaker is ready

to engage in work, or once the parent or caretaker has

received assistance under the program for 24 months

(whether or not consecutive), whichever is earlier. ‘’(iii)

Ensure that parents and caretakers receiving assistance

under the program engage in work activities in accordance

with section 407. ‘’(iv) Take such reasonable steps as the

State deems necessary to restrict the use and disclosure of

information about individuals and families receiving assis-

tance under the program attributable to funds provided by

the Federal Government. ‘’(v) Establish goals and take

action to prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wed-

lock pregnancies, with special emphasis on teenage preg-

nancies, and establish numerical goals for reducing the

illegitimacy ratio of the State . . . for calendar years 1996

through 2005. ‘’(vi) Conduct a program, designed to reach

State and local law enforcement officials, the education

system, and relevant counseling services, that provides

education and training on the problem of statutory rape so

that teenage pregnancy prevention programs may be

expanded in scope to include men. ‘’(B) Special provi-

sions.— ‘’(i) The document shall indicate whether the

State intends to treat families moving into the State from

another State differently than other families under the

program, and if so, how the State intends to treat such

families under the program. ‘’(ii) The document shall indi-

cate whether the State intends to provide assistance under

the program to individuals who are not citizens of the

United States, and if so, shall include an overview of such

assistance. ‘’(iii) The document shall set forth objective cri-

teria for the delivery of benefits and the determination of

eligibility and for fair and equitable treatment, including

an explanation of how the State will provide opportunities

for recipients who have been adversely affected to be

heard in a State administrative or appeal process. ‘’(iv) Not

later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act,

unless the chief executive officer of the State opts out of

this provision by notifying the Secretary, a State shall, con-

sistent with the exception provided in section 407(e)(2),

require a parent or caretaker receiving assistance under

the program who, after receiving such assistance for 2

months is not exempt from work requirements and is not

engaged in work, as determined under section 407(c), to

participate in community service employment, with mini-

mum hours per week and tasks to be determined by the

State. ‘’(2) Certification that the state will operate a child

support enforcement program.—A certification by the

chief executive officer of the State that, during the fiscal

year, the State will operate a child support enforcement

program under the State plan approved under part D. ‘’(3)

Certification that the state will operate a foster care and

adoption assistance program. . . . ‘’(4) Certification of the

administration of the program. . . . ‘’(5) Certification that

the state will provide [I]ndians with equitable access to

assistance. . . . ‘’(6) Certification of standards and proce-

dures to ensure against program fraud and abuse. . . . ‘’(7)

Optional certification of standards and procedures to

ensure that the state will screen for and identify domestic

violence.— ‘’(A) In general.—At the option of the State, a

certification by the chief executive officer of the State that

the State has established and is enforcing standards and

procedures to— ‘’(i) screen and identify individuals receiv-

ing assistance under this part with a history of domestic

violence while maintaining the confidentiality of such indi-

viduals; ‘’(ii) refer such individuals to counseling and sup-

portive services; and ‘’(iii) waive, pursuant to a

determination of good cause, other program requirements

such as time limits (for so long as necessary) for individu-

als receiving assistance, residency requirements, child sup-

port cooperation requirements, and family cap provisions,

in cases where compliance with such requirements would

make it more difficult for individuals receiving assistance

under this part to escape domestic violence or unfairly

penalize such individuals who are or have been victimized

by such violence, or individuals who are at risk of further

domestic violence. . . .

* * *

Provisions.—The following provisions of law shall apply to

any program or activity which receives funds provided

under this part: ‘’(1) The Age Discrimination Act of 1975,

Social Developments 1769

‘’(2) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, ‘’(3)

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990,”

(4) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, ‘’(d)

Aliens.—For special rules relating to the treatment of

aliens, see section 402 of the Personal Responsibility and

Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.

* * *

SEC. 412. DIRECT FUNDING AND ADMINISTRA-

TION BY INDIAN TRIBES.

‘’(a) Grants for Indian Tribes.— ‘’(1) Tribal family

assistance grant.— ‘’(A) In general.—For each of fiscal

years 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002, the Secre-

tary shall pay to each Indian tribe that has an approved

tribal family assistance plan a tribal family assistance grant

for the fiscal year. . . .

‘’(B) Eligible indian tribe.-. . .The term ‘eligible

Indian tribe’ means an Indian tribe or Alaska Native orga-

nization that conducted a job opportunities and basic skills

training program in fiscal year 1995. . . . ‘(C) Use of

grant.—Each Indian tribe to which a grant is made under

this paragraph shall use the grant for the purpose of oper-

ating a program to make work activities available to mem-

bers of the Indian tribe. . . .

‘’SEC. 413. RESEARCH, EVALUATIONS, AND

NATIONAL STUDIES.

‘’(a) Research.—The Secretary shall conduct research

on the benefits, effects, and costs of operating different

State programs funded under this part, including time lim-

its relating to eligibility for assistance. The research shall

include studies on the effects of different programs and

the operation of such programs on welfare dependency,

illegitimacy, teen pregnancy, employment rates, child well-

being, and any other area the Secretary deems appropri-

ate. The Secretary shall also conduct research on the costs

and benefits of State activities under section 409. ‘’(b)

Development and Evaluation of Innovative Approaches To

Reducing Welfare Dependency and Increasing Child

Well-Being.— ‘’(1) In general.—The Secretary may assist

States in developing, and shall evaluate, innovative

approaches for reducing welfare dependency and increas-

ing the well-being of minor children living at home with

respect to recipients of assistance under programs funded

under this part. The Secretary may provide funds for train-

ing and technical assistance to carry out the approaches

developed pursuant to this paragraph. ‘’(2) Evaluations.—

In performing the evaluations under paragraph (1), the

Secretary shall, to the maximum extent feasible, use ran-

dom assignment as an evaluation methodology. ‘’(c) Dis-

semination of Information.—The Secretary shall develop

innovative methods of disseminating information on any

research, evaluations, and studies conducted under this

section, including the facilitation of the sharing of infor-

mation and best practices among States and localities

through the use of computers and other technologies. . . .

(g) Report on Circumstances of Certain Children and

Families.— ‘’(1) In general.—Beginning 3 years after the

date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health

and Human Services shall prepare and submit to the Com-

mittees on Ways and Means and on Economic and Educa-

tional Opportunities of the House of Representatives and

to the Committees on Finance and on Labor and

Resources of the Senate annual reports that examine in

detail. . .: ‘’(A) Individuals who were children in families

that have become ineligible for assistance under a State

program funded under this part by reason of having

reached a time limit on the provision of such assistance.

‘’(B) Children born after such date of enactment to parents

who, at the time of such birth, had not attained 20 years of

age. ‘’(C) Individuals who, after such date of enactment,

became parents before attaining 20 years of age. ‘’(2) Mat-

ters described.—The matters described in this paragraph

are the following: ‘’(A) The percentage of each group that

has dropped out of secondary school (or the equivalent),

and the percentage of each group at each level of educa-

tional attainment. ‘’(B) The percentage of each group that

is employed. ‘’(C) The percentage of each group that has

been convicted of a crime or has been adjudicated as a

delinquent. ‘’(D) The rate at which the members of each

group are born, or have children, out-of-wedlock, and the

percentage of each group that is married. ‘’(E) The per-

centage of each group that continues to participate in State

programs funded under this part. ‘’(F) The percentage of

each group that has health insurance provided by a private

entity (broken down by whether the insurance is provided

through an employer or otherwise), the percentage that

has health insurance provided by an agency of govern-

ment, and the percentage that does not have health insur-

ance. ‘’(G) The average income of the families of the

members of each group. ‘’(H) Such other matters as the

Secretary deems appropriate. . . .

SEC. 414. STUDY BY THE CENSUS BUREAU.

‘’(a) In General.—The Bureau of the Census shall con-

tinue to collect data on the 1992 and 1993 panels of the

Survey of Income and Program Participation as necessary

to obtain such information as will enable interested persons

to evaluate the impact of the amendments made by title I

of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Rec-

onciliation Act of 1996 on a random national sample of

recipients of assistance under State programs funded under

this part and (as appropriate) other low-income families,

and in doing so, shall pay particular attention to the issues

of out-of-wedlock birth, welfare dependency, the beginning

and end of welfare spells, and the causes of repeat welfare

1770 ERA 10: Contemporary United States

spells, and shall obtain information about the status of chil-

dren participating in such panels.

* * *

SEC. 104. SERVICES PROVIDED BY CHARITABLE,

RELIGIOUS, OR PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS.

* * *

(b) Religious Organizations—The purpose of this

section is to allow States to contract with religious organi-

zations, or to allow religious organizations to accept cer-

tificates, vouchers, or other forms of disbursement . . . on

the same basis as any other nongovernmental provider

without impairing the religious character of such organiza-

tions, and without diminishing the religious freedom of

beneficiaries of assistance funded under such program.

tions.—In the event a State exercises its authority . . . reli-

gious organizations are eligible, on the same basis as any

other private organization, as contractors to provide assis-

tance, or to accept certificates, vouchers, or other forms of

disbursement . . . so long as the programs are implemented

consistent with the Establishment Clause of the United

States Constitution. Except as provided in subsection (k),

neither the Federal Government nor a State receiving

funds under such programs shall discriminate against an

organization . . . on the basis that the organization has a

religious character.

(d) Religious Character and Freedom.—

(1) Religious organizations.—A religious organization

with a contract. . .or which accepts certificates, vouchers,

or other forms of disbursement. . .shall retain its indepen-

dence from Federal, State, and local governments, includ-

ing such organization’s control over the definition,

development, practice, and expression of its religious

beliefs.

(2) Additional safeguards.—Neither the Federal Gov-

ernment nor a State shall require a religious organization

to—

(A) alter its form of internal governance; or

(B) remove religious art, icons, scripture, or other

symbols; in order to be eligible. . .

(e) Rights of Beneficiaries of Assistance.—

(1) In general.—If an individual described in para-

graph (2) has an objection to the religious character of the

organization or institution from which the individual

receives, or would receive, assistance . . . the State in which

the individual resides shall provide such individual (if oth-

erwise eligible for such assistance) within a reasonable

period of time after the date of such objection with assis-

tance from an alternative provider that is accessible to the

individual and the value of which is not less than the value

of the assistance which the individual would have received

from such organization.

* * *

(f) Employment Practices.—A religious organization’s

exemption provided under section 702 of the Civil Rights

Act of 1964 regarding employment practices shall not be

affected by its participation in, or receipt of funds from

[these] programs.

(g) Nondiscrimination Against Beneficiaries.—Except

as otherwise provided in law, a religious organization shall

not discriminate against an individual in regard to render-

ing assistance . . . on the basis of religion, a religious belief,

or refusal to actively participate in a religious practice.

(h) Fiscal Accountability.—

(1) In general . . . any religious organization contract-

ing to provide assistance . . . shall be subject to the same

regulations as other contractors to account in accord with

generally accepted auditing principles for the use of such

funds provided under such programs.

(j) Limitations on Use of Funds for Certain Pur-

poses.—No funds provided directly to institutions or orga-

nizations to provide services and administer programs. .

.shall be expended for sectarian worship, instruction, or

proselytization.

(k) Preemption.—Nothing in this section shall be con-

strued to preempt any provision of a State constitution or

State statute that prohibits or restricts the expenditure of

State funds in or by religious organizations.

* * *

SEC. 107. ((NOTE: 42 USC 613 note.)) STUDY ON

ALTERNATIVE OUTCOMES MEASURES.

(a) Study.—The Secretary shall, in cooperation with

the States, study and analyze outcomes measures for eval-

uating the success of the States in moving individuals out

of the welfare system through employment as an alterna-

tive to the minimum participation rates described in sec-

tion 407 of the Social Security Act. The study shall include

a determination as to whether such alternative outcomes

measures should be applied on a national or a State-by-

State basis. . . .

* * *

SEC. 115. ((NOTE: 42 USC 862a.)) DENIAL OF ASSIS-

TANCE AND BENEFITS FOR CERTAIN DRUG-

RELATED CONVICTIONS.

(a) In General.—An individual convicted (under Fed-

eral or State law) of any offense which is classified as a

felony by the law of the jurisdiction involved and which has

as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a con-

trolled substance . . . shall not be eligible for—

Social Developments 1771