[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 35 (Thursday, March 14, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2031-S2033]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BALANCED BUDGET DOWNPAYMENT ACT, II
The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
Amendment No. 3495 to Amendment No. 3466
(Purpose: To provide additional funding for the Office of National Drug
Control Policy)
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, today I am going to offer an amendment to
increase the drug czar's office. I think it is critical to this country
that we start taking the matter of drug control more seriously than we
have over the last number of years.
So, I rise to offer an amendment to provide an adequate level of
funding for the Office of National Drug Control Policy, better known as
the drug czar's office.
This amendment increases ONDCP's budget by a modest $3.9 million to a
total of $11.4 million for fiscal year 1996. That is still well below
ONDCP's funding level during President Bush's administration but higher
than the administration has requested. In fiscal year 1992, when George
Bush was President, ONDCP was getting $18.1 million for operating
expenses.
We all know why this amendment is necessary. By many accounts,
President Clinton has downgraded the war on drugs. One of his first
acts upon taking office was to cut the drug czar's staff from 146 down
to 25. The President said he was fulfilling a campaign pledge to cut
staff, but several of us on both sides of the aisle warned that the new
drug czar would not be effective without the tools to do his job. We
were right. Indeed, the President's own drug czar conceded in 1993 that
drugs were no longer ``at the top of the agenda.'' That was in the
Washington Post on July 8, 1993.
For 3 years, President Clinton gave us an imbalanced strategy
focusing primarily on the treatment of hardcore users. The strategy
left law enforcement and interdiction agencies twisting in the wind.
Federal drug prosecutions fell, drug seizures dropped, the ability of
U.S. forces to seize or otherwise turn back drug shipments in the
transit zone plummeted by 53 percent. This is just over the first 3
years of President Clinton's administration.
Although the President's stated policy was to focus on hardcore
users, President Clinton also presided over record increases in the
quality and purity of drugs reaching American streets, as well as
staggering increases in the number of drug-related emergency room
admissions of hardcore users.
As for supply reduction efforts, there appeared to be none. As
recently as 1 month ago, White House staff were arguing that more money
for interdiction would be wasted money. This irresponsible talk was
coming from people who are supposed to be advocates for the drug war,
not advocates against the drug war.
It is indisputable that under President Clinton's leadership, we have
been losing ground on this issue. Just look at what has happened since
1992 with our young people. Last year, the number of 12 to 17-year-olds
using marijuana hit 2.9 million, almost double the 1992 level,
according to the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse in November of
1995.
LSD use is way up among high school seniors. Mr. President, 11.7
percent of the class of 1995 have tried it at least once. That is the
highest rate since recordkeeping started in 1975.
A parents' group survey released this November found that one in
three high school seniors now smoke marijuana--one in three.
Methamphetamine abuse has become a major problem, particularly in the
Western States, including mine. Emergency room cases are up 256 percent
over the 1991 level.
After 3 years of inaction, President Clinton now wants to give his
drug officials a fighting chance. OMB has requested $3.4 million to
beef up the office. This will allow them to hire 80 additional staff.
Mr. President, in closing, I want to give the President some credit
for giving us a new drug czar who, by all accounts, is dynamic and
energetic. The unanswered question here is whether the selection of
General McCaffrey signals President Clinton's newfound commitment to
lead in the drug war or whether it is more simply an election year
makeover.
Adopting this amendment is ultimately about helping our children,
about helping the 48.4 percent of the class of 1995 that had tried
drugs by graduation day. It is about doing something to stem the
increasing number of 12 to 17-year olds using marijuana, currently 2.9
million of them. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and
give General McCaffrey the tools he needs to do this job.
Mr. President, we have to get serious about this drug problem. It is
eating us alive. It is funding most, if not all, of the organized crime
in this country. It is debilitating our young people. One in three
seniors is trying marijuana, one in three senior high school students
in the senior class happens to be trying marijuana. Think about that.
There is an 85 times greater likelihood for them to move on to harder
drugs, especially cocaine, if they have tried marijuana.
The vast majority of these kids think, today, both users and
nonusers, that marijuana usage is less harmful to them than ordinary
tobacco usage, than smoking simple cigarettes. Both, as anyone who
knows anything about health will tell you, both are harmful to you. It
is terrible to smoke cigarettes because they are going to lead to
cancer and heart disease and a whole raft of other problems, but it is
even worse to smoke marijuana, which can lead to all kinds of
debilitations that deteriorate our society as a whole and make it
difficult for people to do what is right and to live up to what is
right.
On top of all that, we have those in the administration who are
arguing that the only side of the equation that really needs to receive
some consideration happens to be the demand side, that means those who
are taking drugs. They take the limited resources that we have and put
almost all of them toward hard-core drug addicts, of whom the potential
of saving is very, very low.
I am not saying we should not help hard-core drug addicts. We should.
But we certainly ought to be putting what limited resources we have
into helping these first-time offenders and these young kids who have
really got caught up in the drug world to come out of it and
rehabilitate themselves. It is important to do the demand side of the
equation. I am for that.
I think we ought to put money in that, and the drug czar needs to
spend some time on it. But unless we are doing the supply side as well,
we will never make any headway because we have to interdict and stop
the flow of drugs coming into this country and we have to interdict and
stop those who are making drugs in this country, especially with the
new methamphetamine rise that is inundating the Western States and is
moving eastward with rapidity.
We have to start fighting against these things, and we have to have
our young people understand the importance of fighting against drug
abuse in our society today.
I look at all the drive-by shootings, kids with weapons, the murders
in our country's Capital here. I look at all these things, and I know
that a lot of this is driven by the drug trade, it is driven by the
drug community, it is driven by those who should know a lot better.
Mr. President, there is a second half to this amendment that we are
going to file here today. This is an amendment that I am filing on
behalf of myself and Senator Grassley. We are adding various funds to
the budget, even above what the President has requested for the drug
czar, because I believe that this drug czar has to have our support,
[[Page S2032]]
and we simply have to do a good job in helping him to get his job done.
Let me just say that, in addition to the drug czar's office, we are
including in this amendment that no less than $20 million shall be for
the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department to be used at
the discretion of the police chief for law enforcement purposes,
conditioned upon appropriate consultation with the chairmen and ranking
members of the House-Senate Committees on the Judiciary and
Appropriations.
In other words, what we are going to do is we are going to quit
mouthing off about the greatest city in the world and how corrupt it is
and how drug ridden it is and how murder ridden it is, and we are going
to put our money where our mouths are and put $20 million into helping
this police chief to clean up this mess.
I met with Chief Soulsby a week ago. I have to say I have a lot of
confidence in him. One of his problems is that he has politicians
interfering with the use of these law enforcement moneys from time to
time. We are going to stop that by giving these funds directly to him.
He will have to consult with both the Judiciary Committees of the House
and the Senate and both of the Appropriations Committees of the House
and the Senate as to how he is going to use these funds.
We are going to give him a chance to straighten this out and to start
making a turnaround on what is needed here in the District of Columbia.
If we find $20 million is not enough to really make that much of a
dent, I will come back and fight for more.
This is the greatest city on Earth, in the sense of governmental
action. This is the seat of our Government. It is an absolute crime
that people cannot walk down the streets in the District of Columbia
without absolute assurance they are not going to be shot by some drug-
infested, drug-crazed human being, or that they are safe in their
homes, which is what is happening here. Not only are they not safe on
the streets, they are not even safe in their homes. The people of this
community, the vast majority of whom are law-abiding, decent,
honorable, religious citizens, deserve better.
I am convinced that Chief Soulsby will do an excellent job if he is
not hindered by some of the politicians in this town. By the way, I
think some of the politicians are very good, so I do not mean to lump
them all in a category of people who have been part of the problem
here. But there are some who are part of the problem as well. There are
some in the police department who need to be put in the appropriate
positions or drummed out of the department. I am hoping that Chief
Soulsby will set a system in motion that will get the very best people
to be part of our police department in the metropolitan police
department of Washington, DC.
This is the first step of trying to make this a better system. But
while we are making this first step in accordance with what I said I
would do, then I think we ought to also consider that we have 37
different Federal law enforcement organizations in this town, 37
different Federal law enforcement agencies. They are not coordinated
with the metropolitan police department. We have to use all these
agencies to make this the safest and most important capital city in the
world.
I think we have to put our money where our mouths are and we have to
start now. I am going to rely on Chief Soulsby, and the administration
of the city under Mayor Barry. I am going to rely on the help of
Eleanor Holmes Norton, who is the Representative over in the House of
Representatives, who I believe is very eager to do a good job in this
area for her constituents and for whom I have the greatest fondness and
admiration, and others who, in the best interest of this city, want to
do what is right.
So, Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk, and I ask for its
immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Craig). The clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Utah [Mr. Hatch], for himself, Mr.
Grassley, and Mr. Shelby proposes an amendment numbered 3495.
Mr. HATCH. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 755 between lines 20 and 21 insert the following:
TREASURY, POSTAL SERVICE AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE
PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY
salaries and expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses,''
$3,900,000.
THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE
salaries and expenses
(rescission)
Of the funds made available under this heading in Public
Law 104-52, $650,000 are rescinded.
OFFICE OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT
salaries and expenses
(rescission)
Of the funds made available under this heading in Public
Law 104-52, $650,000 are rescinded.
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
salaries and expenses
(rescission)
Of the funds made available under this heading in Public
Law 104-52, $500,000 are rescinded.
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
FEDERAL BUILDING FUND
LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF REVENUE
(rescission)
Of the funds made available for installment acquisition
payments under this heading in Public Law 104-52, $1,900,000
are rescinded: Provided, That the aggregate amounts made
available of the Fund shall be $5,064,249,000.
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
salaries and expenses
(rescission)
Of the funds made available under this heading in Public
Law 104-52, $200,000 are rescinded.
CHAPTER 12
On page 755, line 22 redesignate the section number, and
On page 756, line 8 redesignate the section number.
D.C. METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
Page 29, line 18, insert the following:
``Provided further, That no less than $20,000,000 shall be
for the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department
to be used at the discretion of the police chief for law
enforcement purposes, conditioned upon appropriate
consultation with the Senate Committees on the Judiciary and
Appropriations.''
Mr. HATCH. Let me add in closing that this earmark would be applied
against the crime control block grant. We think it is about time we do
this.
I also mention for the record that the chairman and ranking member of
the D.C. Appropriations Committee, Senators Jeffords and Kohl, support
that part of the amendment granting $20 million for the District of
Columbia Police Force to be utilized by Chief Soulsby, with his
consultation, with both Judiciary Committees and both Appropriations
Committees.
Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, I support this amendment which will
provide $3,900,000 in supplemental funding to the Office of National
Drug Control Policy to permit our new Drug Czar, General McCaffrey to
increase staffing by some 80 full-time equivalent positions.
During the debate on fiscal year 1996 funding for this Office, many
of us were critical of the administration's dedication to reducing drug
use in this country.
Continued surveys show that drug use among our Nation's youth,
particularly those aged 12-17, show increases for use across the
spectrum of illegal drugs.
The latest National Household Survey, released early this year, found
that any drug use, and specifically, crack and cocaine use for 12 to
17-year-olds had increased above the previous year.
In addition, the recent Pulse Check Survey found that the
distribution of heroin and cocaine by the same dealers and in the same
markets appear in more areas than ever before.
Equally disturbing, Mr. President, is the fact that the number of
hard-core drug users remains unchanged despite an investment of over
$100 billion on the so-called ``War on Drugs'' since 1987. In 1987 we
had 2.7 million hard-core drug users; in 1996, we still have 2.7
million hard-core drug users.
The significance of these statistics, Mr. President, is that while
hardcore
[[Page S2033]]
drug represent less than 1 percent of the population in this country,
they consume 66 percent of all illegal drugs and are responsible for
34-36 percent of all violent crime in this country.
It very well could be that this is a given, that no matter what we do
to reduce drug use in this country, we will always have 2.7 million
hardcore users.
However, I believe we have an obligation to see that we use the
latest innovations in both the public and private arenas to reach this
group, Mr. President, before we write them off.
We have a new Drug Czar, who I believe, exemplifies the meaning of
the word ``Czar''. He is a decorated war hero and general and someone
who brings enormous credibility to this drug war.
I have met with him, Mr. President, and he is very impressive.
General McCaffrey has taken this job, not because he wanted it or
sought it out, but because he recognizes the devastating effects drug
abuse has on this country and he wants to personally dedicate himself
to seeing that we do conduct an all-out effort, on every level, to rid
this country from the scourge of drugs for the long term.
He has asked for the resources he believes he needs to put together a
strategy that will work. What we've done up to this point clearly is
not working.
He has asked for an additional $3.4 million to increase the number of
full-time staff at ONDCP to 125. In addition, he has requested
permission to detail 30 planners from the Department of Defense to
ONDCP.
Currently, ONDCP has 45 personnel who are responsible for overseeing
the proper implementation of an annual $14.6 billion national drug
control budget.
The Office budget is currently $7.5 million. If this amendment is
successful, it will bring the total budget for his office operations up
to $11.4 million or less than 1 percent of the total annual amount
spent on Federal drug control programs.
Mr. President, General McCaffrey has the confidence of this Senator
and Members on both sides of the aisle, to lead our anti-drug efforts.
I think we have an obligation to give him an opportunity to show us
what he can do.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. HATCH. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call
be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I also note for the Record that Senator
Shelby, who worked very hard on the Appropriations Committee, would
also like to be added as a cosponsor. I hope other Senators will also
be cosponsors.
I hope all Senators will vote for this so we can do good for our
Nation's Capital while at the same time adding enough funds now for the
drug czar's office.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, I ask the Chair, what is the pending
business and what are the time restraints on it?
____________________