[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 134 (Wednesday, September 25, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H11111-H11122]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           COMPREHENSIVE METHAMPHETAMINE CONTROL ACT OF 1996

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 3852) to prevent the illegal manufacturing and use of 
methamphetamine, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3852

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the 
     ``Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.

    TITLE I--IMPORTATION OF METHAMPHETAMINE AND PRECURSOR CHEMICALS

Sec. 101. Support for international efforts to control drugs.
Sec. 102. Penalties for manufacture of listed chemicals outside the 
              United States with intent to import them into the United 
              States.

   TITLE II--PROVISIONS TO CONTROL THE MANUFACTURE OF METHAMPHETAMINE

Sec. 201. Seizure and forfeiture of regulated chemicals.
Sec. 202. Study and report on measures to prevent sales of agents used 
              in methamphetamine production.
Sec. 203. Increased penalties for manufacture and possession of 
              equipment used to make controlled substances.
Sec. 204. Addition of iodine and hydrochloric gas to list II.
Sec. 205. Civil penalties for firms that supply precursor chemicals.
Sec. 206. Injunctive relief.
Sec. 207. Restitution for cleanup of clandestine laboratory sites.
Sec. 208. Record retention.
Sec. 209. Technical amendments.
Sec. 210. Withdrawal of regulations.

   TITLE III--INCREASED PENALTIES FOR TRAFFICKING AND MANUFACTURE OF 
                     METHAMPHETAMINE AND PRECURSORS

Sec. 301. Trafficking in methamphetamine penalty increases.
Sec. 302. Penalty increases for trafficking in listed chemicals.
Sec. 303. Enhanced penalty for dangerous handling of controlled 
              substances: amendment of sentencing guidelines.

   TITLE IV--LEGAL MANUFACTURE, DISTRIBUTION, AND SALE OF PRECURSOR 
                               CHEMICALS

Sec. 401. Diversion of certain precursor chemicals.
Sec. 402. Mail order restrictions.

                    TITLE V--EDUCATION AND RESEARCH

Sec. 501. Interagency methamphetamine task force.
Sec. 502. Public health monitoring.
Sec. 503. Public-private education program.
Sec. 504. Suspicious orders task force.
    TITLE I--IMPORTATION OF METHAMPHETAMINE AND PRECURSOR CHEMICALS

     SEC. 101. SUPPORT FOR INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS TO CONTROL DRUGS.

       The Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of 
     State, shall coordinate international drug enforcement 
     efforts to decrease the movement of methamphetamine and 
     methamphetamine precursors into the United States.

     SEC. 102. PENALTIES FOR MANUFACTURE OF LISTED CHEMICALS 
                   OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES WITH INTENT TO IMPORT 
                   THEM INTO THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Unlawful Importation.--Section 1009(a) of the 
     Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 
     959(a)) is amended--
       (1) in the matter before paragraph (1), by inserting ``or 
     listed chemical'' after ``schedule I or II''; and
       (2) in paragraphs (1) and (2), by inserting ``or chemical'' 
     after ``substance''.
       (b) Unlawful Manufacture or Distribution.--Paragraphs (1) 
     and (2) of section 1009(b) of the Controlled Substances 
     Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 959(b)) are amended by 
     inserting ``or listed chemical'' after ``controlled 
     substance''.
       (c) Penalties.--Section 1010(d) of the Controlled 
     Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 960(d)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (6), by striking the comma at the end and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) manufactures, possesses with intent to distribute, or 
     distributes a listed chemical in violation of section 959 of 
     this title.''.
   TITLE II--PROVISIONS TO CONTROL THE MANUFACTURE OF METHAMPHETAMINE

     SEC. 201. SEIZURE AND FORFEITURE OF REGULATED CHEMICALS.

       (a) Penalties for Simple Possession.--Section 404 of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 844) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by adding after the first sentence the following: ``It 
     shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally 
     to possess any list I chemical obtained pursuant to or under 
     authority of a registration issued to that person under 
     section 303 of this title or section 1008 of title III if 
     that registration has been revoked or suspended, if that 
     registration has expired, or if the registrant has ceased to 
     do business in the manner contemplated by his 
     registration.''; and
       (B) by striking ``drug or narcotic'' and inserting ``drug, 
     narcotic, or chemical'' each place it appears; and
       (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``drug or narcotic'' and 
     inserting ``drug, narcotic, or chemical''.
       (b) Forfeitures.--Section 511(a) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 881(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraphs (2) and (6), by inserting ``or listed 
     chemical'' after ``controlled substance'' each place it 
     appears; and
       (2) in paragraph (9), by--
       (A) inserting ``dispensed, acquired,'' after 
     ``distributed,'' both places it appears; and
       (B) striking ``a felony provision of''.
       (c) Seizure.--Section 607 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
     U.S.C. 1607) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(3), by inserting ``or listed 
     chemical'' after ``controlled substance''; and
       (2) by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
       ``(b) As used in this section, the terms `controlled 
     substance' and `listed chemical' have the meaning given such 
     terms in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 
     U.S.C. 802).''.

     SEC. 202. STUDY AND REPORT ON MEASURES TO PREVENT SALES OF 
                   AGENTS USED IN METHAMPHETAMINE PRODUCTION.

       (a) Study.--The Attorney General of the United States shall 
     conduct a study on possible measures to effectively prevent 
     the diversion of red phosphorous, iodine, hydrochloric gas, 
     and other agents for use in the production of 
     methamphetamine. Nothing in this section shall preclude the 
     Attorney General from taking any action the Attorney General 
     already is authorized to take with regard to the regulation 
     of listed chemicals under current law.
       (b) Report.--Not later than January 1, 1998, the Attorney 
     General shall submit a report to the Congress of its findings 
     pursuant to the study conducted under subsection (a) on the 
     need for and advisability of preventive measures.
       (c) Considerations.--In developing recommendations under 
     subsection (b), the Attorney General shall consider--
       (1) the use of red phosphorous, iodine, hydrochloric gas, 
     and other agents in the illegal manufacture of 
     methamphetamine;
       (2) the use of red phosphorous, iodine, hydrochloric gas, 
     and other agents for legal

[[Page H11112]]

     purposes, and the impact any regulations may have on these 
     purposes; and
       (3) comments and recommendations from law enforcement, 
     manufacturers of such chemicals, and the consumers of such 
     chemicals for legal purposes.

     SEC. 203. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR MANUFACTURE AND POSSESSION 
                   OF EQUIPMENT USED TO MAKE CONTROLLED 
                   SUBSTANCES.

       (a) In General.--Section 403(d) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 843(d)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(d) Any person'' and inserting ``(d)(1) 
     Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Any person who violates paragraph (6) or (7) of 
     subsection (a), if the controlled substance is 
     methamphetamine, shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment 
     of not more than 10 years, a fine under title 18, United 
     States Code, or both; except that if any person commits such 
     a violation after one or more prior convictions of that 
     person--
       ``(A) for a violation of paragraph (6) or (7) of subsection 
     (a);
       ``(B) for a felony under any other provision of this 
     subchapter or subchapter II of this chapter; or
       ``(C) under any other law of the United States or any State 
     relating to controlled substances or listed chemicals,

     has become final, such person shall be sentenced to a term of 
     imprisonment of not more than 20 years, a fine under title 
     18, United States Code, or both.''.
       (b) Sentencing Commission.--The United States Sentencing 
     Commission shall amend the sentencing guidelines to ensure 
     that the manufacture of methamphetamine in violation of 
     section 403(d)(2) of the Controlled Substances Act, as added 
     by subsection (a), is adequately punished.
       (c) Technical Amendment.--Section 403(d) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 843(d)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``of not more than $30,000'' and inserting 
     ``under title 18, United States Code''; and
       (2) by striking ``of not more than $60,000'' and inserting 
     ``under title 18, United States Code''.

     SEC. 204. ADDITION OF IODINE AND HYDROCHLORIC GAS TO LIST II.

       (a) In General.--Section 102(35) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(35)) is amended by adding the 
     end the following:
       ``(I) Iodine.
       ``(J) Hydrochloric gas.''.
       (b) Importation and Exportation Requirements.--(1) Iodine 
     shall not be subject to the requirements for listed chemicals 
     provided in section 1018 of the Controlled Substances Import 
     and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 971).
       (2) Effect of Exception.--The exception made by paragraph 
     (1) shall not limit the authority of the Attorney General to 
     impose the requirements for listed chemicals provided in 
     section 1018 of the Controlled Substances Import and Export 
     Act (21 U.S.C. 971).

     SEC. 205. CIVIL PENALTIES FOR FIRMS THAT SUPPLY PRECURSOR 
                   CHEMICALS.

       (a) Offenses.--Section 402(a) of the Controlled Substances 
     Act (21 U.S.C. 842(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (9), by striking ``or'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (10), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(11) to distribute a laboratory supply to a person who 
     uses, or attempts to use, that laboratory supply to 
     manufacture a controlled substance or a listed chemical, in 
     violation of this title or title III, with reckless disregard 
     for the illegal uses to which such a laboratory supply will 
     be put.

     As used in paragraph (11), the term `laboratory supply' means 
     a listed chemical or any chemical, substance, or item on a 
     special surveillance list published by the Attorney General, 
     which contains chemicals, products, materials, or equipment 
     used in the manufacture of controlled substances and listed 
     chemicals. For purposes of paragraph (11), there is a 
     rebuttable presumption of reckless disregard at trial if the 
     Attorney General notifies a firm in writing that a laboratory 
     supply sold by the firm, or any other person or firm, has 
     been used by a customer, or distributed further by that 
     customer, for the unlawful production of controlled 
     substances or listed chemicals a firm distributes and 2 weeks 
     or more after the notification the notified firm distributes 
     a laboratory supply to the customer.''.
       (b) Civil Penalty.--Section 402(c)(2) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 842(c)(2)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(C) In addition to the penalties set forth elsewhere in 
     this title or title III, any business that violates paragraph 
     (11) of subsection (a) shall, with respect to the first such 
     violation, be subject to a civil penalty of not more than 
     $250,000, but shall not be subject to criminal penalties 
     under this section, and shall, for any succeeding violation, 
     be subject to a civil fine of not more than $250,000 or 
     double the last previously imposed penalty, whichever is 
     greater.''.

     SEC. 206. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.

       (a) Ten-Year Injunction Major Offenses.--Section 401(f) of 
     the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(f)) is amended 
     by--
       (1) inserting ``manufacture, exportation,'' after 
     ``distribution,''; and
       (2) striking ``regulated''.
       (b) Ten-Year Injunction Other Offenses.--Section 403 of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 843) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e), by--
       (A) inserting ``manufacture, exportation,'' after 
     ``distribution,''; and
       (B) striking ``regulated''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(f) Injunctions.--(1) In addition to any penalty provided 
     in this section, the Attorney General is authorized to 
     commence a civil action for appropriate declaratory or 
     injunctive relief relating to violations of this section or 
     section 402.
       ``(2) Any action under this subsection may be brought in 
     the district court of the United States for the district in 
     which the defendant is located or resides or is doing 
     business.
       ``(3) Any order or judgment issued by the court pursuant to 
     this subsection shall be tailored to restrain violations of 
     this section or section 402.
       ``(4) The court shall proceed as soon as practicable to the 
     hearing and determination of such an action. An action under 
     this subsection is governed by the Federal Rules of Civil 
     Procedure except that, if an indictment has been returned 
     against the respondent, discovery is governed by the Federal 
     Rules of Criminal Procedure.''.

     SEC. 207. RESTITUTION FOR CLEANUP OF CLANDESTINE LABORATORY 
                   SITES.

       Section 413 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
     853) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(q) The court, when sentencing a defendant convicted of 
     an offense under this title or title III involving the 
     manufacture of methamphetamine, may--
       ``(1) order restitution as provided in sections 3612 and 
     3664 of title 18, United States Code;
       ``(2) order the defendant to reimburse the United States 
     for the costs incurred by the United States for the cleanup 
     associated with the manufacture of methamphetamine by the 
     defendant; and
       ``(3) order restitution to any person injured as a result 
     of the offense as provided in section 3663 of title 18, 
     United States Code.''.

     SEC. 208. RECORD RETENTION.

       Section 310(a)(1) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 
     U.S.C. 830(a)(1)) is amended by striking the dash after 
     ``transaction'' and subparagraphs (A) and (B) and inserting 
     ``for two years after the date of the transaction.''.

     SEC. 209. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.

       Section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
     802) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (34), by amending subparagraphs (P), (S), 
     and (U) to read as follows:
       ``(P) Isosafrole.
       ``(S) N-Methylephedrine.
       ``(U) Hydriodic acid.''; and
       (2) in paragraph (35), by amending subparagraph (G) to read 
     as follows:
       ``(G) 2-Butanone (or Methyl Ethyl Ketone).''.

     SEC. 210. WITHDRAWAL OF REGULATIONS.

       The final rule concerning removal of exemption for certain 
     pseudoephedrine products marketed under the Federal Food, 
     Drug, and Cosmetic Act published in the Federal Register on 
     August 7, 1996 (61 FR 40981-40993) is null and void and of no 
     force or effect.
   TITLE III--INCREASED PENALTIES FOR TRAFFICKING AND MANUFACTURE OF 
                     METHAMPHETAMINE AND PRECURSORS

     SEC. 301. TRAFFICKING IN METHAMPHETAMINE PENALTY INCREASES.

       (a) Controlled Substances Act.--
       (1) Large amounts.--Section 401(b)(1)(A)(viii) of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1)(A)(viii)) is 
     amended by--
       (A) striking ``100 grams or more of methamphetamine,'' and 
     inserting ``50 grams or more of methamphetamine,''; and
       (B) striking ``1 kilogram or more of a mixture or substance 
     containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine'' and 
     inserting ``500 grams or more of a mixture or substance 
     containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine''.
       (2) Smaller amounts.--Section 401(b)(1)(B)(viii) of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1)(B)(viii)) is 
     amended by--
       (A) striking ``10 grams or more of methamphetamine,'' and 
     inserting ``5 grams or more of methamphetamine,''; and
       (B) striking ``100 grams or more of a mixture or substance 
     containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine'' and 
     inserting ``50 grams or more of a mixture or substance 
     containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine''.
       (b) Import and Export Act.--
       (1) Large amounts.--Section 1010(b)(1)(H) of the Controlled 
     Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 960(b)(1)(H)) is 
     amended by--
       (A) striking ``100 grams or more of methamphetamine,'' and 
     inserting ``50 grams or more of methamphetamine,''; and
       (B) striking ``1 kilogram or more of a mixture or substance 
     containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine'' and 
     inserting ``500 grams or more of a mixture or substance 
     containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine''.
       (2) Smaller amounts.--Section 1010(b)(2)(H) of the 
     Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 
     960(b)(2)(H)) is amended by--
       (A) striking ``10 grams or more of methamphetamine,'' and 
     inserting ``5 grams or more of methamphetamine,''; and

[[Page H11113]]

       (B) striking ``100 grams or more of a mixture or substance 
     containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine'' and 
     inserting ``50 grams or more of a mixture or substance 
     containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine''.

     SEC. 302. PENALTY INCREASES FOR TRAFFICKING IN LISTED 
                   CHEMICALS.

       (a) Controlled Substances Act.--Section 401(d) of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(d)) is amended by 
     striking the period and inserting the following: ``or, with 
     respect to a violation of paragraph (1) or (2) of this 
     subsection involving a list I chemical, if the Government 
     proves the quantity of controlled substance that could 
     reasonably have been manufactured in a clandestine setting 
     using the quantity of list I chemicals possessed or 
     distributed, the penalty corresponding to the quantity of 
     controlled substance that could have been produced under 
     subsection (b).''.
       (b) Controlled Substance Import and Export Act.--Section 
     1010(d) of the Controlled Substance Import and Export Act (21 
     U.S.C. 960(d)) is amended by striking the period and 
     inserting the following: ``, or, with respect to an 
     importation violation of paragraph (1) or (3) of this 
     subsection involving a list I chemical, if the Government 
     proves the quantity of controlled substance that could 
     reasonably have been manufactured in a clandestine setting 
     using the quantity of list I chemicals imported, the penalty 
     corresponding to the quantity of controlled substance that 
     could have been produced under title II.''.
       (c) Determination of Quantity.--
       (1) In general.--For the purposes of this section and the 
     amendments made by this section, the quantity of controlled 
     substance that could reasonably have been manufactured shall 
     be determined by using a table of manufacturing conversion 
     ratios for list I chemicals.
       (2) Table.--The table shall be--
       (A) established by the United States Sentencing Commission 
     based on scientific, law enforcement, and other data the 
     Sentencing Commission deems appropriate; and
       (B) dispositive of this issue.

     SEC. 303. ENHANCED PENALTY FOR DANGEROUS HANDLING OF 
                   CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES: AMENDMENT OF SENTENCING 
                   GUIDELINES.

       (a) In General.--Pursuant to its authority under section 
     994 of title 28, United States Code, the United States 
     Sentencing Commission shall determine whether the Sentencing 
     Guidelines adequately punish an offense described in 
     subsection (b) and, if not, promulgate guidelines or amend 
     existing guidelines to provide an appropriate enhancement of 
     the punishment for a defendant convicted of that offense.
       (b) Offense.--The offense referred to in subsection (a) is 
     a violation of section 401(d), 401(g)(1), 403(a)(6), or 
     403(a)(7) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(d), 
     841(g)(1), 843(a)(6), and 843(a)(7)), if in the commission of 
     the offense the defendant violated--
       (1) subsection (d) or (e) of section 3008 of the Solid 
     Waste Disposal Act (relating to handling hazardous waste in a 
     manner inconsistent with Federal or applicable State law);
       (2) section 103(b) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation and Liability Act (relating to failure 
     to notify as to the release of a reportable quantity of a 
     hazardous substance into the environment);
       (3) section 301(a), 307(d), 309(c)(2), 309(c)(3), 
     311(b)(3), or 311(b)(5) of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act (relating to the unlawful discharge of pollutants 
     or hazardous substances, the operation of a source in 
     violation of a pretreatment standard, and the failure to 
     notify as to the release of a reportable quantity of a 
     hazardous substance into the water); or
       (4) section 5124 of title 49, United States Code (relating 
     to violations of laws and regulations enforced by the 
     Department of Transportation with respect to the 
     transportation of hazardous material).
   TITLE IV--LEGAL MANUFACTURE, DISTRIBUTION, AND SALE OF PRECURSOR 
                               CHEMICALS

     SEC. 401. DIVERSION OF CERTAIN PRECURSOR CHEMICALS.

       (a) In General.--Section 102(39) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(39)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)(iv)(I)(aa), by striking ``as'' 
     through the semicolon and inserting ``, pseudoephedrine or 
     its salts, optical isomers, or salts of optical isomers, or 
     phenylpropanolamine or its salts, optical isomers, or salts 
     of optical isomers unless otherwise provided by regulation of 
     the Attorney General issued pursuant to section 204(e) of 
     this title;''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (A)(iv)(II), by inserting ``, 
     pseudoephedrine, phenylpropanolamine,'' after ``ephedrine''.
       (b) Legitimate Retailers.--Section 102 of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (39)(A)(iv)(I)(aa), by inserting before 
     the semicolon the following: ``, except that any sale of 
     ordinary over-the-counter pseudoephedrine, 
     phenylpropanolamine, or combination ephedrine products by 
     retail distributors shall not be a regulated transaction 
     (except as provided in section 401(d) of the Comprehensive 
     Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996)'';
       (2) in paragraph (39)(A)(iv)(II), by inserting before the 
     semicolon the following: ``, except that the threshold for 
     any sale of pseudoephedrine, phenylpropanolamine, or 
     combination ephedrine products by retail distributors or by 
     distributors required to submit reports by section 310(b)(3) 
     of this title shall be 24 grams of pseudoephedrine, 24 grams 
     of phenylpropanolamine, or 24 grams of ephedrine in a single 
     transaction'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (43) relating to felony drug 
     offense as paragraph (44); and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(45) The term `ordinary over-the-counter pseudoephedrine, 
     phenylpropanolamine, or combination ephedrine product' means 
     any product containing pseudoephedrine, phenylpropanolamine, 
     or ephedrine (where the ephedrine is combined with 
     therapeutically significant quantities of another active 
     medicinal ingredient) that is--
       ``(A) regulated pursuant to this title; and
       ``(B)(i) except for liquids, sold in package sizes of not 
     more than 3.0 grams of pseudoephedrine base, 3.0 grams of 
     phenylpropanolamine base or 2.0 grams of ephedrine base, and 
     that is packaged in blister packs, each blister containing 
     not more than two dosage units, or where the use of blister 
     packs is technically infeasible, that is packaged in unit 
     dose packets or pouches; and
       ``(ii) for liquids, sold in package sizes of not more than 
     3.0 grams of pseudoephedrine base or 3.0 grams of 
     phenylpropanolamine base.
       ``(46)(A) The term `retail distributor' means a grocery 
     store, general merchandise store, drug store, or other entity 
     or person whose activities as a distributor relating to 
     pseudoephedrine, phenylpropanolamine, or combination 
     ephedrine products are limited almost exclusively to sales 
     for personal use, both in number of sales and volume of 
     sales, either directly to walk-in customers or in face-to-
     face transactions by direct sales.
       ``(B) For purposes of this paragraph, sale for personal use 
     means the sale of below-threshold quantities in a single 
     transaction to an individual for legitimate medical use.
       ``(C) For purposes of this paragraph, entities are defined 
     by reference to the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 
     code, as follows:
       ``(i) A grocery store is an entity within SIC code 5411.
       ``(ii) A general merchandise store is an entity within SIC 
     codes 5300 through 5399 and 5499.
       ``(iii) A drug store is an entity within SIC code 5912.
       ``(47) The term `combination ephedrine product' means a 
     drug product containing ephedrine or its salts, optical 
     isomers, or salts of optical isomers and therapeutically 
     significant quantities of another active medicinal 
     ingredient.''.
       (c) Reinstatement of Legal Drug Exemption.--Section 204 of 
     the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 814) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Reinstatement of Exemption With Respect to Ephedrine, 
     Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine Drug Products.--
     Pursuant to subsection (d)(1), the Attorney General shall by 
     regulation reinstate the exemption with respect to a 
     particular ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine 
     drug product if the Attorney General determines that the drug 
     product is manufactured and distributed in a manner that 
     prevents diversion. In making this determination the Attorney 
     General shall consider the factors listed in subsection 
     (d)(2). Any regulation issued pursuant to this subsection may 
     be amended or revoked based on the factors listed in 
     subsection (d)(4).''.
       (d) Regulation of Retail Sales.--
       (1) Pseudoephedrine.--
       (A) Limit.--
       (i) In general.--Not sooner than the effective date of this 
     section and subject to the requirements of clause (ii), the 
     Attorney General may establish by regulation a single-
     transaction limit of 24 grams of pseudoephedrine base for 
     retail distributors. Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the single-transaction threshold quantity for 
     pseudoephedrine-containing compounds may not be lowered 
     beyond that established in this paragraph.
       (ii) Conditions.--In order to establish a single-
     transaction limit of 24 grams of pseudoephedrine base, the 
     Attorney General shall determine, following notice, comment, 
     and an informal hearing that since the date of the enactment 
     of this Act there are a significant number of instances where 
     ordinary over-the-counter pseudoephedrine products as 
     established in paragraph (45) of section 102 of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802 (45)), as added by 
     this Act, sold by retail distributors as established in 
     paragraph (46) in section 102 of the Controlled Substances 
     Act (21 U.S.C. 802(46)), are being widely used as a 
     significant source of precursor chemicals for illegal 
     manufacture of a controlled substance for distribution or 
     sale.
       (B) Violation.--Any individual or business that violates 
     the thresholds established in this paragraph shall, with 
     respect to the first such violation, receive a warning letter 
     from the Attorney General and, if a business, the business 
     shall be required to conduct mandatory education of the sales 
     employees of the firm with regard to the legal sales of 
     pseudoephedrine. For a second violation occurring within 2 
     years of the first violation, the business or individual 
     shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $5,000. 
     For any subsequent violation occurring within 2 years of the 
     previous violation, the business or individual shall be 
     subject to a civil penalty not to exceed the amount of the 
     previous civil penalty plus $5,000.

[[Page H11114]]

       (2) Phenylpropanolamine.--
       (A) Limit.--
       (i) In general.--Not sooner than the effective date of this 
     section and subject to the requirements of clause (ii), the 
     Attorney General may establish by regulation a single-
     transaction limit of 24 grams of phenylpropanolamine base for 
     retail distributors. Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the single-transaction threshold quantity for 
     phenylpropanolamine-containing compounds may not be lowered 
     beyond that established in this paragraph.
       (ii) Conditions.--In order to establish a single-
     transaction limit of 24 grams of phenylpropanolamine base, 
     the Attorney General shall determine, following notice, 
     comment, and an informal hearing, that since the date of the 
     enactment of this Act there are a significant number of 
     instances where ordinary over-the-counter phenylpropanolamine 
     products as established in paragraph (45) of section 102 of 
     the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(45)), as added 
     by this Act, sold by retail distributors as established in 
     paragraph (46) in section 102 of the Controlled Substances 
     Act (21 U.S.C. 802(46)), are being widely used as a 
     significant source of precursor chemicals for illegal 
     manufacture of a controlled substance for distribution or 
     sale.
       (B) Violation.--Any individual or business that violates 
     the thresholds established in this paragraph shall, with 
     respect to the first such violation, receive a warning letter 
     from the Attorney General and, if a business, the business 
     shall be required to conduct mandatory education of the sales 
     employees of the firm with regard to the legal sales of 
     pseudoephedrine. For a second violation occurring within 2 
     years of the first violation, the business or individual 
     shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $5,000. 
     For any subsequent violation occurring within 2 years of the 
     previous violation, the business or individual shall be 
     subject to a civil penalty not to exceed the amount of the 
     previous civil penalty plus $5,000.
       (3) Combination ephedrine products.--
       (A) Limit.--
       (i) In general.--Not sooner than the effective date of this 
     section and subject to the requirements of clause (ii), the 
     Attorney General may establish by regulation a single-
     transaction limit of 24 grams of ephedrine base for retail 
     distributors of combination ephedrine products. 
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the single-
     transaction threshold quantity for combination ephedrine 
     products may not be lowered beyond that established in this 
     paragraph.
       (ii) Conditions.--In order to establish a single-
     transaction limit of 24 grams of ephedrine base, the Attorney 
     General shall determine, following notice, comment, and an 
     informal hearing, that since the date of the enactment of 
     this Act there are a significant number of instances where 
     ordinary over-the-counter combination ephredrine products as 
     established in paragraph (45) of section 102 of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(45)), as added by 
     this Act, sold by retail distributors as established in 
     paragraph (46) in section 102 of the Controlled Substances 
     Act (21 U.S.C. 802(46)), are being widely used as a 
     significant source of precursor chemicals for illegal 
     manufacture of a controlled substance for distribution or 
     sale.
       (B) Violation.--Any individual or business that violates 
     the thresholds established in this paragraph shall, with 
     respect to the first such violation, receive a warning letter 
     from the Attorney General and, if a business, the business 
     shall be required to conduct mandatory education of the sales 
     employees of the firm with regard to the legal sales of 
     combination ephedrine products. For a second violation 
     occurring within 2 years of the first violation, the business 
     or individual shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more 
     than $5,000. For any subsequent violation occurring within 2 
     years of the previous violation, the business or individual 
     shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed the amount 
     of the previous civil penalty plus $5,000.
       (4) Significant number of instances.--(A) For purposes of 
     this subsection, isolated or infrequent use, or use in 
     insubstantial quantities, of ordinary over-the-counter 
     pseudoephedrine, over-the-counter phenylpropanolamine, or 
     over the counter combination ephedrine, and sold at the 
     retail level, for the illicit manufacture of a controlled 
     substance may not be used by the Attorney General as the 
     basis for establishing the conditions for establishing a 
     single transaction limit under this section.
       (B) In making a determination under paragraph (1)(A)(ii), 
     paragraph (2)(A)(ii), or paragraph (3)(A)(ii), the Attorney 
     General shall consult with the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services in order to consider the effects on public health 
     that would occur from the establishment of new single 
     transaction limits under this section.
       (C) After making a determination under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii), paragraph (2)(A)(ii), or paragraph (3)(A)(ii), 
     the Attorney General shall transmit a report to the 
     Committees on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate in which the Attorney General will provide the 
     factual basis for establishing the new single transaction 
     limits under this section.
       (5) Definition of business.--For purposes of this 
     subsection, the term ``business'' means the entity that makes 
     the direct sale and does not include the parent company of a 
     business not involved in a direct sale regulated by this 
     subsection.
       (6) Judicial review.--Any regulation promulgated by the 
     Attorney General under this section shall be subject to 
     judicial review pursuant to section 507 of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 877).
       (e) Effect on Thresholds.--Nothing in the amendments made 
     by subsection (b) or the provisions of subsection (d) shall 
     affect the authority of the Attorney General to modify 
     thresholds (including cumulative thresholds) for retail 
     distributors for products other than ordinary over-the-
     counter pseudoephedrine, phenylpropanolamine, or combination 
     ephedrine products (as defined in section 102(45) of the 
     Controlled Substances Act, as added by this section) or for 
     non-retail distributors, importers, or exporters.
       (f) Effective Date of This Section.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of this Act, this section shall not apply to 
     the sale of any pseudoephedrine, phenylpropanolamine, or 
     combination ephedrine product prior to 12 months after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 402. MAIL ORDER RESTRICTIONS.

       Section 310(b) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
     830(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Mail order reporting.--(A) Each regulated person who 
     engages in a transaction with a nonregulated person which--
       ``(i) involves ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or 
     phenylpropanolamine (including drug products containing these 
     chemicals); and
       ``(ii) uses or attempts to use the Postal Service or any 
     private or commercial carrier;

     shall, on a monthly basis, submit a report of each such 
     transaction conducted during the previous month to the 
     Attorney General in such form, containing such data, and at 
     such times as the Attorney General shall establish by 
     regulation.
       ``(B) The data required for such reports shall include--
       ``(i) the name of the purchaser;
       ``(ii) the quantity and form of the ephedrine, 
     pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine purchased; and
       ``(iii) the address to which such ephedrine, 
     pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine was sent.''.
                    TITLE V--EDUCATION AND RESEARCH

     SEC. 501. INTERAGENCY METHAMPHETAMINE TASK FORCE.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a 
     ``Methamphetamine Interagency Task Force'' (referred to as 
     the ``interagency task force'') which shall consist of the 
     following members:
       (1) The Attorney General, or a designee, who shall serve as 
     chair.
       (2) 2 representatives selected by the Attorney General.
       (3) The Secretary of Education or a designee.
       (4) The Secretary of Health and Human Services or a 
     designee.
       (5) 2 representatives of State and local law enforcement 
     and regulatory agencies, to be selected by the Attorney 
     General.
       (6) 2 representatives selected by the Secretary of Health 
     and Human Services.
       (7) 5 nongovernmental experts in drug abuse prevention and 
     treatment to be selected by the Attorney General.
       (b) Responsibilities.--The interagency task force shall be 
     responsible for designing, implementing, and evaluating the 
     education and prevention and treatment practices and 
     strategies of the Federal Government with respect to 
     methamphetamine and other synthetic stimulants.
       (c) Meetings.--The interagency task force shall meet at 
     least once every 6 months.
       (d) Funding.--The administrative expenses of the 
     interagency task force shall be paid out of existing 
     Department of Justice appropriations.
       (e) FACA.--The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. 
     App. 2) shall apply to the interagency task force.
       (f) Termination.--The interagency task force shall 
     terminate 4 years after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 502. PUBLIC HEALTH MONITORING.

       The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall develop a 
     public health monitoring program to monitor methamphetamine 
     abuse in the United States. The program shall include the 
     collection and dissemination of data related to 
     methamphetamine abuse which can be used by public health 
     officials in policy development.

     SEC. 503. PUBLIC-PRIVATE EDUCATION PROGRAM.

       (a) Advisory Panel.--The Attorney General shall establish 
     an advisory panel consisting of an appropriate number of 
     representatives from Federal, State, and local law 
     enforcement and regulatory agencies with experience in 
     investigating and prosecuting illegal transactions of 
     precursor chemicals. The Attorney General shall convene the 
     panel as often as necessary to develop and coordinate 
     educational programs for wholesale and retail distributors of 
     precursor chemicals and supplies.
       (b) Continuation of Current Efforts.--The Attorney General 
     shall continue to--
       (1) maintain an active program of seminars and training to 
     educate wholesale and retail distributors of precursor 
     chemicals and supplies regarding the identification of 
     suspicious transactions and their responsibility to report 
     such transactions; and
       (2) provide assistance to State and local law enforcement 
     and regulatory agencies to facilitate the establishment and 
     maintenance of educational programs for distributors of 
     precursor chemicals and supplies.

     SEC. 504. SUSPICIOUS ORDERS TASK FORCE.

       (a) In General.--The Attorney General shall establish a 
     ``Suspicious Orders Task

[[Page H11115]]

     Force'' (the ``Task Force'') which shall consist of--
       (1) appropriate personnel from the Drug Enforcement 
     Administration (the ``DEA'') and other Federal, State, and 
     local law enforcement and regulatory agencies with the 
     experience in investigating and prosecuting illegal 
     transactions of listed chemicals and supplies; and
       (2) representatives from the chemical and pharmaceutical 
     industry, including representatives from the DEA/Distributor 
     Working Committee and the DEA/Pharmacy Working Committee.
       (b) Responsibilities.--The Task Force shall be responsible 
     for developing proposals to define suspicious orders of 
     listed chemicals, and particularly to develop quantifiable 
     parameters which can be used by registrants in determining if 
     an order is a suspicious order which must be reported to DEA. 
     The quantifiable parameters to be addressed will include 
     frequency of orders, deviations from prior orders, and size 
     of orders. The Task Force shall also recommend provisions as 
     to what types of payment practices or unusual business 
     practices shall constitute prima facie suspicious orders. In 
     evaluating the proposals, the Task Force shall consider 
     effectiveness, cost and feasibility for industry and 
     Government, an other relevant factors.
       (c) Meetings.--The Task Force shall meet at least two times 
     per year and at such other times as may be determined 
     necessary by the Task Force.
       (d) Report.--The Task Force shall present a report to the 
     Attorney General on its proposals with regard to suspicious 
     orders and the electronic reporting of suspicious orders 
     within one year of the date of enactment of this Act. Copies 
     of the report shall be forwarded to the Committees of the 
     Senate and House of Representatives having jurisdiction over 
     the regulation of listed chemical and controlled substances.
       (e) Funding.--The administrative expenses of the Task Force 
     shall be paid out of existing Department of Justice funds or 
     appropriations.
       (f) FACA.--The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. 
     App. 2) shall apply to the Task Force.
       (g) Termination.--The Task Force shall terminate upon 
     presentation of its report to the Attorney General, or two 
     years after the date of enactment of this Act, whichever is 
     sooner.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. McCollum] and the gentlewoman from California [Ms. 
Lofgren] each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida [Mr. McCollum].
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.


                             general leave

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks on H.R. 3852.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996 
represents a major, bipartisan effort to respond to the national 
methamphetamine crisis confronting our Nation today.
  Back in October 1995, the Crime Subcommittee held a hearing on the 
rapidly growing problem of methamphetamine. The testimony given by 
Federal and State law enforcement witnesses painted a grim picture of a 
problem that is no longer regional, but national in scope, and 
devastating some communities much like cocaine did in the 1980's.
  The witnesses also testified about the unique problems associated 
with meth. The profits involved in the meth trade are enormous; meth 
causes longer highs than cocaine, with many users becoming chronic 
abusers. Meth is processed in clandestine labs, often located in remote 
areas, making them difficult to detect. Mexican traffickers, now the 
major force in meth production and trafficking, have established 
clandestine labs throughout the Southwest, and have saturated the 
Western U.S. market with high-purity meth, leading to lower prices. The 
1994 mathamphetamine-related murder of DEA agent Richard Fass is a 
sober reminder of the violence associated with meth trafficking. In 
short, methamphetamine represents a dangerous, time-consuming, and 
expensive investigative challenge to law enforcement.
  H.R. 3852 is the most comprehensive congressional effort ever mounted 
to respond to the meth crisis. It was introduced by Representative 
Heineman of the Crime Subcommittee, who cannot be with us today because 
he is busy making a recovery from intestinal surgery. This bill is 
nearly identical to S. 1965, introduced by Senate Judiciary Chairman 
Hatch and a large, bipartisan group of Senators, including Senators, 
Biden, Daschle, and Feinstein. Representatives Riggs and Fazio, also 
introduced bills almost identical to the one before us today.
  On August 7, 1996, the DEA sought to respond to the problem of over-
the-counter-drugs being diverted to manufacture meth when it published 
a final rule, to take effect on October 7, 1996. The rule would remove 
the exemption for certain over-the-counter pseudoephedrine and 
phenylpropanolamine, or PPA, products from the regulatory chemical 
control provisions of the Controlled Substances Act.

  H.R. 3852 achieves the same objectives as the DEA rule by providing 
for the regulation of over-the-counter products when they are shown to 
be diverted to make meth. Its five titles, taken together, are a tough, 
smart, and balanced attack on the manufacturing and trafficking of 
meth.
  Title I calls on the Attorney General to coordinate international 
drug enforcement efforts to interdict methamphetamine precursor 
chemicals, and imposes tough penalties on those who manufacture 
precursor chemicals outside the United States with the intent to import 
them into the United States.
  Title II permits the seizure and forfeiture of certain precursor 
chemicals, and calls on the Attorney General to conduct a study and 
report to Congress on measures to prevent the diversion of agents used 
to produce meth. The title also increases the penalties for the 
possession of equipment used to make controlled substances and requires 
the Sentencing Commission to ensure that the manufacture of meth in 
violation of this section is adequately punished. Importantly, title II 
declares the DEA rule to be null and void. The DEA has agreed to this 
provision because of the other improvements made to the bill which make 
the rule unnecessary.
  Title III increases the penalties for trafficking meth so as to make 
them the same as those provided for trafficking crack cocaine, with 5 
grams of meth triggering a 5-year mandatory minimum prison sentence and 
50 grams triggering a 10-year mandatory minimum prison sentence. 
Importantly, the Justice Department's National Methamphetamine Strategy 
calls for the same sentence increase. The President even wrote to the 
Speaker 10 days ago and criticized the House for not passing these 
penalties. Let the record be clear: These increased penalties are being 
blocked by a small handful of Democrat Members in the other body. 
Unless a couple of Senators change their minds, the American people 
will not enjoy the additional protection and deterrence provided by 
tough mandatory prison sentences for trafficking meth, the penalties 
even the President wants to see pass.
  It's my hope that the President will pick up the phone and call those 
Members of the other body opposed to these penalties, and ask them to 
drop their opposition.
  Title III also increases the penalties for trafficking in listed 
precursor chemicals, and requires the Sentencing Commission to ensure 
that the sentencing guidelines adequately punish violations of 
environmental laws resulting from clandestine meth labs.
  Title IV establishes a so-called ``safe harbor,'' which provides that 
lawfully manufactured over-the-counter drug products that contain 
pseudoephedrine and PPA are exempt from regulation unless the Attorney 
General finds the need to control them because they're being diverted 
in large quantities. Under this title, if the Attorney General 
determines that ordinary, over-the-counter products containing 
pseudoephedrine and PPA are being widely used as a significant source 
of precursor chemicals used to manufacture methamphetamine, the 
Attorney General may establish a single transaction limit of 24 grams. 
Importantly, this bill requires the Attorney General to report to the 
Judiciary Committees of the House and Senate any finding of diversion 
before the single transaction limit is imposed. Under the bill, the DEA 
can begin to collect evidence of diversion of over-the-counter products 
upon the enactment of the act. Any delay in such data collection must 
be avoided so as to ensure prompt action against diversion. Both the 
DEA and the pharmaceutical industry have

[[Page H11116]]

worked long and hard with the Congress on this provision. I believe 
this title strikes a careful balance between providing Federal law 
enforcement the regulatory authority it needs to restrict diversion of 
over-the-counter products, and ensuring that the millions of annual 
consumers of cough and cold products have access to the products that 
bring much-needed relief.
  Finally, title V creates a methamphetamine interagency task force, 
headed by the Attorney General, to design, implement, and evaluate 
methamphetamine education, prevention, and treatment practices.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a smart, tough bill. The gentleman from North 
Carolina [Mr. Heineman] could not be with us today, but he should have 
been proud, and I know he was, to introduce this bill.
  The chief and his staffer are to be congratulated on their work on 
this bill. We urge him a speedy recovery, and we urge, I certainly 
urge, the adoption of this very fine bill he has crafted. It is a long 
overdue bill, to give us some real teeth in the laws against this 
horrible drug trafficking in the product known as methamphetamine; more 
commonly known to the public as speed.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, there is not a single Member of this Chamber who does 
not detest the evil of illegal drugs. Parents bury children killed by 
other children, locked into a deadly cycle of drugs and guns and gangs 
and violence. Fathers and mothers abandon children because they are 
driven mad by their addiction. Entire neighborhoods are laid waste. 
Every single Member of this Congress wants to stop this national 
sickness. So, we all support being tough on drug trafficking that is 
killing our young, destroying families, and damaging society.
  Most of us will support this bill. We will support it because we know 
that methamphetimine is dangerous and growing fast in cities, suburbs, 
and towns all across America. But, Mr. Speaker, there are some among us 
who take principled exception to one feature of the bill, the 
imposition of mandatory minimum penalties.
  Some of them will speak against those penalties, and some of them may 
even vote against the bill. I urge all of us to listen to their 
position carefully and to resist the temptation to engage in cheap 
theatrical politics, as if this principled opposition to mandatory 
minimum penalties were evidence of some kind of softness of drugs.
  On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, those who will speak against mandatory 
minimums will do so because they have seen firsthand the impact in 
their own communities, and they believe that the impact of this bill is 
futile as to mandatory minimums.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill, 
but to listen respectfully to the views of those who object to one of 
its features.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina [Mr. Burr].
  Mr. BURR. I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I am here today to speak on behalf of my colleague, the 
gentleman from North Carolina, Fred Heineman, who, unfortunately, is 
not here because of intestinal surgery. Congressman Heineman has 
dedicated the last 6 months to working on this issue. I really regret 
that he cannot be here to speak on his own bill.
  As all of us know, speed is a highly addictive, illegal drug which 
may cause brain damage in long-term users. It can cause users to go 
into deep depressions and violent rages. In fact, in Arizona, Phoenix 
specifically, local police attribute a 40-percent increase in homicides 
directly with an increase in methamphetamine production. As a former 
police chief, let me assure my colleagues, Fred Heineman understands 
the relationship between drugs and crime. It is time that Congress 
addresses this issue in a real way.
  One of the obstacles that law enforcement faces in dealing with 
methamphetamine production is that two of our most common cold, flu, 
and allergy drugs can be used to make speed. Congressman Heineman's 
bill meets this challenge head-on. It protects consumers' rights to buy 
cold and allergy medicine off the shelf, while at the same time 
increasing the penalties for manufacture, sale, and distribution of 
speed, making them equivalent to the penalties for crack cocaine.
  Fred Heineman worked closely with the Drug Enforcement 
Administration, the Clinton administration, and the pharmaceutical 
manufacturers on this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, this has broad bipartisan support and I urge my 
colleagues in Congressman Heineman's absence, support this bill, stop 
the production of speed in this country, and save the future generation 
of our children. With this legislation, we can do that.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Scott], a member of the committee.
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the bill. We all 
agree that we need to address the problem of methamphetamine 
manufacture, sale, and use. The question is whether we address it in a 
way that is clearly effective in reducing the problem or whether we 
address it in a way that is calculated only to enhance our political 
posture.
  This bill relies on mandatory minimum penalties as the primary 
vehicle for reducing the manufacture and use of methamphetamine. Yet 
there is no evidence that such penalties will have any impact on 
reducing drug use. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the 5-year mandatory minimum 
for crack cocaine has not demonstrated any effect in switching drug 
users from selling crack to powder cocaine, for which they can get 
probation for 99 times more drugs.
  Mr. Speaker, if we are going to look at the best way of reducing the 
use of speed, all of the credible evidence indicates that drug 
treatment is many times more effective and cheaper than mandatory 
minimum sentences. The drug court program has indicated that the costs 
of drug court is not only cheaper but more effective in reducing crime. 
In fact, using rehabilitation rather than prisons, we found that 
prisons cost five times more and result in much more crime.
  A drug study in California showed that $7 was saved in prison costs 
for every dollar put into drug rehabilitation. According to an impact 
statement, Mr. Speaker, we are going to spend $100 million in 
additional prison costs if we pass this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, those opposing the bill want to return it to the 
Committee on the Judiciary so that we can seriously address the best 
way of reducing the use of methamphetamine rather than this last-minute 
waste of the taxpayers' money.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I would hope that we would save money and reduce 
crime by defeating this bill.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina [Mr. Coble].
  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for 
yielding me this time. He and the gentleman from North Carolina have 
pretty well given Members a good review of this proposed legislation.
  Chief Heineman, as the gentleman from Florida said, is recuperating 
from intestinal surgery. Mr. Speaker, he may have a hole in his 
intestine but he has fire in his belly when it comes to diligent work 
for law enforcement. He is a former New York cop, a street cop, a 
former chief of police in Raleigh, the capital city of my State, and he 
has worked diligently on this methamphetamine control act bill as well 
as on the telemarketing fraud bill which we will discuss subsequently.
  Meth, or speed, is highly addictive and can cause permanent brain 
damage, as has already been indicated. Secret labs around the country 
have begun to manufacture speed with chemicals that have legitimate 
medical uses. Rogue chemists, Mr. Speaker, I am told, can easily 
convert cold and flu medicines into meth. Representative Heineman's 
bill strikes a balanced approach to combat this problem by, A, 
increasing penalties for possession and trafficking of meth, while at 
the same time establishing a safe harbor for ordinary over-the-counter 
products containing the relevant chemicals.
  It is a good piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker. I urge its passage.

[[Page H11117]]

  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Watt], a member of the committee.
  Mr. WATT of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this 
bill. There are a number of reasons that I could oppose it and do 
oppose it, but I want to speak to two or three of those in this debate 
since my time is limited.
  First of all, we asked the Justice Department, as is our prerogative, 
to give us a prison impact analysis of this bill. Their analysis 
indicates that over the next 5 years, this bill will cost the taxpayers 
over $268 million. This is money which, as the gentleman from Virginia 
[Mr. Scott] has indicated, could be better spent on preventing drug use 
rather than building more prison space and locking up more and more 
people and still not addressing the underlying problem.
  Second, my Republican colleagues know that this bill is going 
nowhere. They are just playing politics with this issue. The Senate has 
agreed to and passed a methamphetamine bill which does not contain 
mandatory minimum penalties and they have stated that they will not 
pass one that does have mandatory minimum sentences. We are too late to 
conference a bill, so passing a different bill in the House than the 
one that has passed in the Senate gets you, in the final analysis, 
absolutely nothing, and that is exactly what my Republican colleagues 
want. They do not want any bill. They just want to make political 
points.
  The third reason I oppose this bill is because they just absolutely 
abandoned the process. We were in the middle in the Judiciary Committee 
of marking up this bill. All of a sudden they took the bill from 
committee, vaulted out on the floor, put it on the suspension calendar 
and just absolutely disregarded the process that we should be going 
through. We are rushing to judgment on something that is a serious, 
serious issue, building another disparity in our sentencing mechanism 
just like the one that we have between crack cocaine and powder 
cocaine, ignoring the fact that prevention works better than prisons 
and doing something shortsighted that is simply political.
  Oppose this bill today.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I simply want to respond very briefly to the gentleman 
from North Carolina. He and I have had a long-standing difference of 
opinion, though I respect his opinion, over the question of these 
minimum mandatory sentences in crack and powder and so forth. What we 
are doing in this bill is very important with regard to minimum 
mandatory. We are setting the same minimum mandatory tough standards 
for methamphetamine that we have now for crack. A very small quantity 
of meth is even more potent than crack. Speed can do even more damage. 
A small quantity is all it takes, 5 grams, to do enormous damage to 
somebody. Because it is so, so, so bad, we need to send a message of 
deterrence out there. We need to take people off the streets who are 
dealing in this quantity. It is not a lot but it is enough to mean that 
anybody who has this amount on their person, just as is the case with 
crack, is a dealer, is a trafficker, is not simply a user. That message 
needs to be there. There is no other way you can send a message of 
deterrence than with a minimum mandatory sentence, and I believe in 
them for limited purposes. This is one of those purposes. That is why 
it is in the bill.
  As far as the process is concerned, we are here today because this is 
the only way we can get this bill on up in a quick period of time and 
consider it by the full House with what is left in this session of 
Congress. We do not want to just accept the other body's bill. This is 
our body doing our will.
  Mr. WATT of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McCOLLUM. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. WATT of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, the question I want to ask 
of the gentleman is if we are sending a message, has the message worked 
on crack cocaine? You have not deterred a thing with the failed 
policies of building more prisons, and so all we are doing now is 
spending $268 million more on prisons to send some other message that 
has already failed. This is a failed policy that we are pursuing.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. If I could reclaim my time, if your President would put 
the resources necessary for interdiction of cocaine coming into this 
country that are needed and to just say no to drugs and send that 
message out to the kids, if we had been doing that these last 3 years, 
we would have a lot better statistics on crack and cocaine and all of 
the other drugs in this country.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the President of the United States is all our President, 
just as Reagan was my President and Bush was my President. He is my 
President, not your President.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. 
Cummings].
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, the eradication of drug use and distribution in our 
communities is one of my highest priorities. Illegal drug abuse has 
created havoc on my congressional district of Balitmore and the entire 
country. It has led to increased crime rates, untimely and unnecessary 
deaths, gun violence, and skyrocketing health care costs.
  Our communities are being hard hit, with no relief in sight. Our 
precious resources are being depleted in this war against drugs. I 
believe in drug prevention to thwart drug abuse and treatment to assist 
struggling addicts. And I believe that we must prosecute drug dealers 
to the fullest extent that the law will allow. However, I believe that 
we must have parity in the penalties that we place on illegal drugs.
  Mr. Speaker, crack cocaine, powder cocaine, methamphetamine, LSD and 
heroin all ravage and devastate our communities. Their destruction is 
undiscriminating. This body should be just as undiscriminating when 
assessing penalties for their abuse. This body should not create drugs 
of choice by calling for stiffer penalties on some illegal drugs and 
not for others. The sale, distribution and use of all illegal 
substances is abhorrent, and I too want to be tough on all illegal 
drugs, but we must not continue to fill our prisons with poor persons 
involved in less expensive substances like crack and methamphetamine 
while the wealthy abusers dealing in more expensive drugs wreak havoc 
on our communities.
  This measure is not a solution to our drug epidemic. It is election 
year politics at the expense of poor, undeserved communities. Mr. 
Speaker, it is these kinds of unncesseary battles that prevent us from 
winning the war on drugs.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Nebraska [Mr. Christensen].
  Mr. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
legislation. I would first like to thank my colleague, the gentleman 
from North Carolina, Congressman Heineman, for his hard work and vision 
on this piece of legislation. I think he is in our thoughts, in each 
one of our thoughts, as he is on his way to a speedy recovery.
  Mr. Speaker, there is an epidemic taking place across this country, 
an epidemic that is casting a long, dark shadow over our land. The 
epidemic that I am referring to is this dramatic increase that we are 
seeing in the production, distribution, and consumption of 
methamphetamines.

                              {time}  1815

  This is not an east coast or west coast problem, it is not an urban 
or rural problem, it is a national problem, and the statistics show an 
alarming increase in the use of meth.
  Overall, the United States has seen an 80-percent increase in drugs 
under a President who would inhale if again he had the chance. In fact, 
Mr. Speaker, in a national survey released today by the Parents' 
Resource Institute for Drug Education, or PRIDE, as it is commonly 
referred to, shows that teen drug use has hit the highest level in the 
survey's 9-year history. An appalling one in five high school seniors 
now uses illegal drugs on a weekly base. Almost 1 in 10 high school 
seniors say they use illegal drugs every single day.
  The methamphetamine epidemic has hit home, particularly in America's 
heartland. The Nebraska State Patrol is seizing methamphetamine at 
alarming rates. The amount seized has gone

[[Page H11118]]

from less than 1 pound in 1992 to more than 5 pounds in the first 9 
months of 1996. In 1995 law enforcement officials found crank in nearly 
six times the items than just 2 years earlier.
  The number of Nebraska arrests by law enforcement officials jumped 
from 23 in 1990 to 370 in 1995. Unfortunately, convictions have not 
been on that same percentage increase because of slick criminal trial 
lawyers getting them off on legal loopholes and technicalities. But 
these are unconscionable statistics, statistics we can no longer afford 
to ignore.
  The ingredients used to make this drug are available in States like 
Nebraska that have a strong agricultural base. Interstate 80 has long 
been a drug pipeline for methamphetamine. This is a good legislation, 
and I urge the committee for its passage.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio], a member who has a long history 
of fighting methamphetamines and an author of a companion bill, H.R. 
3908.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the 
gentlewoman from California, for her help on this bill and for yielding 
me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the bill before us, 
H.R. 3852. The Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996 is the 
product of many long hours of complex negotiations between industry 
representatives, members of the Drug Enforcement Administration, the 
Department of Justice, and many Members of both the House and the 
Senate.
  Before I speak to the merits of this fine bipartisan legislation, I 
want to thank a number of individuals: My Senator, Dianne Feinstein of 
California; the gentleman from Illinois, Chairman Hyde; Chairman Hatch; 
the gentleman from Florida, Chairman McCollum; and the ranking member, 
the gentleman from New York, Mr. Schumer, for their work on this bill 
and for their determination to see this bill passed before the 
adjournment of the 104th Congress. Also I would like to thank my 
colleagues and coauthor, the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. 
Heineman, for his work on this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the legislation before the House 
today. For many of us, both in the Congress and in the law enforcement 
community, it represents the culmination of many years of hard work on 
this issue.
  I have been working on legislative solutions to the problems created 
by methamphetamine since the 101st Congress, when I introduced the 
Regulated Precursor Chemical Act of 1990. While we have enacted 
antimeth legislation in almost every subsequent Congress, the illicit 
manufacturers and sellers of this drug have remained a step ahead of 
law enforcement and devised new ways to produce methamphetamine. In 
addition, Mexican drug cartels are now involved in the importation of 
many of the precursor chemicals used to manufacture meth. These cartels 
present additional problems and burdens for law enforcement, requiring 
a truly national approach to this problem's solution.
  As a result, production and usage of methamphetamine in the United 
States has grown at alarming proportions over the last several years. 
According to the DEA, it has been the most prevalent clandestinely 
produced drug in the United States since 1979. Unfortunately, much of 
this production is centered in my home State of California and 
throughout other Western and Southwestern States.
  Methamphetamine has caused a dramatic escalation in the number of 
overdoses, emergency hospital admissions, and drug shootings, from 
America's largest western cities to our most rural areas. Crack is more 
potent, more addictive, and much cheaper. It represents a tremendous 
challenge. It is a public health and law enforcement crisis of truly 
epidemic proportions, and we must respond to it now.
  I believe this bill, H.R. 3852, offers the right solution to this 
crisis. It includes tough enforcement provisions which increase the 
penalties for production and trafficking of methamphetamine, enhanced 
penalties for the possession and trafficking of precursor chemicals and 
the equipment used to make meth, and more stringent reporting 
requirements on the sale of products containing precursor chemicals.
  The bill also contains provisions which will make a better 
coordinated international effort, and strengthens provisions against 
illegal important of meth.
  Finally, this bill requires all levels of law enforcement, in 
addition to public health officials, to stay ahead of the meth epidemic 
by creating a national working group which would educate the public on 
the dangers of meth production, trafficking, and abuse.
  The story of our failure to foresee and prevent the crack cocaine 
epidemic is one of the most significant public policy mistakes in our 
recent history. We now face similar warnings with methamphetamine. We 
are seeing the destruction of families all across America as a result 
of the abuse of crack, and we must act now to stop it, for without 
swift action, this sad history may repeat itself.
  The Fazio-Heineman-McCollum legislation is the comprehensive tool 
that we need to stay ahead of the meth epidemic and avoid the mistakes 
made during the early stages of the crack cocaine epidemic. I urge all 
my colleagues to support this much-needed legislation and vote for this 
bill, giving the opportunity for it to be taken up for a final vote on 
the morrow.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida for his assistance in 
making it possible to bring this bill to the floor.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee, a distinguished member of our committee.
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding time and thank her for her service on the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  This is a difficult topic, primarily because all of us face the 
rising tide of drug use, and I do not think this is now a time to 
suggest who said, ``Just say no,'' who said, ``Just don't do it.'' All 
of us who are parents and all of us who are members of our community 
clearly want to be on the side of expressing to our teenagers, in 
particular, the devastation of the impact of drug use.
  H.R. 3852 has good intentions. Having just listened to an array of 
leaders in my community at a drug hearing, I do realize that there is 
cause for concern. But to a one, starting with the special agent of the 
Drug Enforcement Agency in my community, the U.S. attorney, police 
officers and, yes, those involved in prevention and treatment, they 
emphasized more than mandatory sentencing that we need to now focus, if 
you will, on treatment and prevention.
  One of the concerns I have about this legislation is that it does not 
address what we have been discussing with the U.S. Sentencing 
Commission, a bipartisan commission that argued vigorously to change 
the disparate sentencing between crack and cocaine. This was ignored by 
the Republican Congress, for they wanted to leave and go home and beat 
their respective chests to talk about how they are tough on drugs.

  We have young people dying every day. They do not die because we lock 
up people in jail. We realize that people must be incarcerated. They 
are dying because we do not have a serious prevention program and 
education program. We are not getting to the bottom question, of 
getting those to not buy into slogans, but buy into a commitment to 
save their lives by staying off drugs.
  Methamphetamine is a dangerous drug. So is crack, so is cocaine, and 
so is heroin. But there must be an opportunity to have our Federal 
judges have discretion, to penalize those who are suppliers but yet to 
have some sort of response to those who are addicted, and as well be 
served by treatment.
  I am also here to suggest that we have a major problem in dealing 
with a real problem in our community, and that is the recognition of 
the allegations made in the report in the San Jose Mercury newspaper in 
California, that alleges that individuals associated with the 
Nicaraguan contra rebel group sold cocaine to gangs in the south 
central area of Los Angeles. These news articles indicate that the CIA 
used the proceeds from these drug sales to purchase weapons for the 
contras to overthrow the Sandinista Government in the 1980's.
  These allegations need to be investigated. Several Members of this 
House

[[Page H11119]]

have gone to the CIA Director requesting the CIA and the Justice 
Department as well as this House investigate it. I think if we are 
serious about drug prevention, we will get to the source of those drugs 
in Los Angeles and other cities around the Nation and emphasize 
prevention and treatment. That is the way we should go.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from California [Ms. Waters], a respected member of the Committee on 
the Judiciary.
  (Ms. WATERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from 
California for yielding me this time and for providing some leadership 
on this issue.
  Mr. Speaker, there has been an awful lot of discussion about drugs of 
late. It is in the campaign now, with candidate Dole accusing President 
Clinton of not paying attention, somehow blaming on him the fact that 
there appears to be an increase in the use of drugs by teenagers.
  We watch this political debate and we begin to watch legislating and 
legislation come forward at this time that really does not do justice 
to this issue. It should not be about politicking. It should not be 
about trying to make the public believe that something important is 
really happening as we look at the drug problem.
  The fact of the matter is there has not been a war on drugs, and 
there will never be a war on drugs as long as we do this kind of 
legislating. We debated for hours about the disparity in crack cocaine 
and powder cocaine sentening. We have mandatory sentencing, and the 
prisons are filling up with young black and Latino males, for the most 
part, got with one rock cocaine, small amounts of cocaine, thrown into 
the Federal system in prison, prisons just running over.
  Where are the big drug dealers? Where are the people who bring in the 
huge amounts of cocaine? Where are the big time manufacturers of crack? 
They are not really talked about. We do not really understand, or do we 
not care perhaps, where and how this gets into the communities in the 
first place.
  If we really want to do something about drugs, we will stop this 
penny ante legislating and we will do some real studying. We will get 
to the bottom of where the precursors are, how do they get involved in 
the manufacture of crack. We will get down to who the big guys are, so 
we can really take it off the street.
  This does not do this that. This is simply on of these little 
piecemeal bills at election time, trying to make the public believe we 
are doing something about drugs, and we are not.
  I think we are better legislators than this. I think we are better 
public policy makers than this. I think we should stop, we should 
focus, take this out of the political arena, come back here in January, 
and get together and really develop some public policy that is going to 
help the children and the young people of this Nation.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, a number of comments have been made, and accurately 
made, in the course of this debate. The gentleman from North Carolina 
[Mr. Watt] pointed out that the committee process was truncated midway 
and this bill brought directly to the floor, and that is the truth.
  There have been comments made that prevention and treatment is the 
most effective tool against drugs in America, and I think that it is 
clear that is true. Our own Governor Wilson's administration released a 
report last year showing that treatment and prevention efforts were 
massively more successful in fighting drugs than just pure law 
enforcement.
  However, that does not mean that we should not pass this bill today, 
and I highly recommend it.
  I agree with the speakers who said that sentencing for crack and 
powdered cocaine should be equalized. I agree with that. But that is 
also not about this bill.
  Unfortunately, speed and methamphetamine is an equal opportunity 
drug. You will find it being manufactured in suburban and rural areas 
all across California. It is a very dangerous drug, not only to the 
users, but to neighborhoods. In my own district, I can recall just a 
short while ago a lab bursting and exploding into flames, posing 
threats not only from the scourge of drugs but also to firefighters and 
police officers and neighbors from the conflagration that ensued.

                              {time}  1830

  A lot of people in America do not realize that this bill deals very 
severely with the precursor drugs that are used by those who would make 
methamphetamines illegally for sale to the young and others in our 
communities.
  What is that? Well, I sometimes have allergies, especially in the 
spring, and I must confess I take Sudafed and the generic equivalent 
with some frequency when that happens, and I like to buy it in the 
little bottle so I do not have to struggle with the little bubble caps. 
After this bill is enacted into law we are all going to have to 
struggle with the little bubble caps, because one of the things we are 
going to do is to make it harder to buy the precursor chemicals so that 
people cannot manufacture this drug.
  That is going to involve some inconvenience for consumers across this 
country, including myself, and I think it is a small price to pay in 
order to take effective efforts against this drug.
  As I said at the opening of this discussion, we have many principled 
Members on our side who have spoken quite eloquently on the issue of 
mandatory minimum sentencing. I know each one of these individuals 
well. I know that perhaps even more than those of us who may not 
represent areas that have been targeted for drug sales, they and their 
constituents know the heavy price paid by those who are involved in 
drugs and how terrible the dealing of drugs is.
  I again respect that the issue over mandatory minimum sentences 
really says nothing about their concern to fight drugs. I urge that we 
pass this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to concur with a lot of what the gentlewoman from 
California just said. This is a bipartisan bill. There are a few 
disagreements among some of the Members over the minimum mandatory 
sentences in this bill and perhaps with some other features in it.
  The bottom line though is we need to pass this legislation tonight. 
We need to get it enacted into law, because methamphetamine, better 
known as speed, is a really dangerous drug. It give you a higher and 
longer high, they tell me, than crack cocaine does. It is commonly 
found, it is pretty darn cheap, and it is manufactured synthetically 
and manufactured with chemicals, we call them pseudoephedrine, which is 
a big word, but basically is found in most of our cough and flu 
medications in the drugstore, the grocery store, whatever.
  It takes large quantities of this and normally and historically those 
large quantities have been acquired through chemical plant sources from 
abroad or elsewhere, and they have been done illegally and 
surreptitiously, but more recently we have been seeing the folks in the 
United States, and that is where this is made usually, are going to the 
drugstore or going somewhere and buying very large quantities of off-
the-counter, over-the-counter I should say, off-the-shelf products, and 
that is not good. We need to stop that.
  This bill goes a long way toward stopping that, while still providing 
access for every American to have their flu and cough medications found 
in the so-called pseudoephedrine product line.
  In addition to that, it takes care of being sure that we have the 
right kind of sentencing in here. While some may disagree with it, and 
I have heard somebody say this is penny-ante legislation and somebody 
else say it is too expensive, I would suggest it is neither one. There 
is nothing that would be too expensive, in my judgment, to stop the 
kind of crisis we are getting in this particular drug.
  We have already heard about the statistics that are so alarming about 
our young people tonight, generally with drugs, in this Nation. We are 
seeing this dramatic increase in the last couple of years in 12- to 17-
year-olds using drugs, period. Over the last 3 years I

[[Page H11120]]

think the figure is close to a 100-percent increase in drug usage among 
teenagers of that age group in this Nation. And it is very, very high 
with cocaine, 166 percent in 1 year, while it is also very, very high 
with methamphetamine, which is becoming a choice drug over crack 
cocaine, even more popular in some parts of the country than cocaine.

  So tonight's bill is not a small, penny-ante bill. It is not too 
expensive. It is just right. It is the formula to give our law 
enforcement community the tools they need to try to stop the use of 
methamphetamine and the production of methamphetamine, better known as 
speed. If we can give them more tools, there is nothing in this bill 
that would be too expensive.
  Frankly, there is no money involved in this bill. It is a bill, 
however, that does contain minimum mandatory sentences. Those minimum 
mandatory sentences are very tough because small quantities, 5 grams, 
just like with crack, are trafficking quantities of meth. It does not 
take much to do the job, and I do not think anybody here should be 
ashamed to vote for 5 years minimum mandatory sentence for somebody 
caught with 5 grams of this stuff because they are trafficking in it. 
They are causing hardship and death in some cases to our young people, 
and they are the villains in this process.
  We cannot lock everybody up, but we can certainly lock up the drug 
traffickers. If somebody is the big, big, big drug dealer, we have the 
death penalty for that. We have a lot harsher punishment for them. What 
we need is the will to go carry out those laws and to come and do the 
interdiction, the ``just say no'' education programs for young people, 
the drug treatment and the work abroad, where that is necessary, in a 
balanced war against drugs.
  When need to come together as a Nation. This is a good step in the 
right direction tonight. It is a bipartisan product. Democrats and 
Republicans alike have worked on this bill, and it is a bill which the 
President should sign.
  I hope that when this gets over to the Senate, if President Clinton 
will pick up that telephone and call those Senators who say that they 
are going to try to block this bill from passing over there, and it 
does not take very many of them in the other body to do that because 
they have procedural problems at the end of a session, I hope he will 
get on the phone and call those members of his own party who say they 
are going to block it over these minimum mandatory sentences. I urge 
him to do that tonight, and if he does it, we will have a bill. It will 
get passed into law, and the Nation will be far better as a result of 
that and we will have many better law enforcement tools.
  Mr. Speaker, again I urge the passage of this bill.
  Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, in recent years, Sacramento County has been 
increasingly troubled by the prevalence of the drug methamphetamine. 
Last year, the Sacramento Sheriff's Department made 1,117 arrests for 
methamphetamine charges, a number that greatly exceeded the amount of 
arrests for cocaine, marijuana, and heroin combined. The Sheriff's 
Department also discovered and dismantled seven methamphetamine labs, a 
significant accomplishment but one that drained the county government 
of approximately $40,000 of its valuable resources.
  This year, the Sacramento Sheriff's Department conducted an 
investigation that led to the arrest of four individuals and the 
seizure of 80 pounds of methamphetamine, valued at $2.9 million. 
Although law enforcement officials have made great progress, there is 
much more work to be done.
  I am proud to support the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act 
of 1996, which takes a big step in addressing this very serious 
problem. In light of the public health, safety, and law enforcement 
challenges posed by methamphetamine in California and elsewhere in the 
United States, this bill represents an effective means of attacking its 
production, distribution and use. It is my hope that we will soon rid 
Sacramento County and the rest of the country of the terrible 
consequences of this dangerous drug.
  Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3852. The 
legislation increases penalties for trafficking and manufacturing 
methamphetamine substances or other materials used to produce 
methamphetamines. The bill also establishes an interagency task force 
to design, implement, and evaluate methamphetamine education, 
prevention, and treatment practices.
  Section 207 also contains a provision which permits judges, as a 
condition of sentencing, to require those convicted of running an 
illegal methamphetamine lab to (1) pay for the costs of cleaning up any 
toxic wastes, (2) reimburse the government for any costs it incurs in 
cleaning up any toxic waste at the site, and (3) to pay restitution to 
any person injured by a release of toxic substances at the site. Unlike 
Superfund's system of strict, joint and several, and retroactive 
liability, this is a ``polluter pays'' provision which makes sense--
someone who acts illegally should be held responsible for the costs to 
clean up the mess that they made.
  I support the legislation; however, I must point out that the bill 
has not been fully considered by the committees of jurisdiction. H.R. 
3852 was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee 
on Commerce. The Crime Subcommittee has considered the bill, but the 
full Judiciary Committee has not; in addition, the Commerce Committee 
has not considered this legislation. Given the limited time remaining 
in this session of Congress, I will not object to this bill moving 
forward. In doing so, however, the Committee on Commerce in no way is 
yielding any of its jurisdiction on this and other similar matters.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member is pleased to support H.R. 
3852, the Methamphetamine Control Act. Methamphetamine is a powerful 
drug that is relatively easy to manufacture. The use of this dangerous 
drug is escalating rapidly due to its low cost and highly addictive 
qualities.
  Methamphetamine use is expanding into the Midwest. According to the 
Nebraska State Patrol, in 1991, Nebraska had 25 arrests for possession 
of methamphetamine or delivery. In 1995, there were 374 methamphetamine 
arrests. This is a 350-percent increase. Communities along the I-80 
corridor are the hardest hit. The severity of the problem in Nebraska 
was highlighted last spring by the tragic death of a teenager in York, 
NE, at his prom from an overdose of methamphetamine. It was a shock and 
wake-up call to this prototypical county seat community of 7,500 and to 
all of Nebraska.
  The Methamphetamine Control Act increases penalties for trafficking 
and manufacturing methamphetamine substances or other materials used to 
produce methamphetamines. It appropriately establishes mandatory 
minimum sentences for methamphetamine trafficking. For trafficking 5 to 
49 grams of the drug there will be a 5-year minimum sentence. The bill 
requires a 10-year minimum sentence for trafficking 50 or more grams. 
These new penalties are crucial to efforts to decrease the availability 
of this dangerous and proliferating drug.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, we must pass this bill in the short time 
left in this session of Congress. It must also be passed by the Senate 
with these tough but appropriate sentencing provisions so that it can 
be sent to the President for signature. The Nation must become serious 
and effective in combating this very serious problem. This bill must 
become law this year in order to do all we can to fight the use of this 
dangerous drug.
  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the 
Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996. This is a bipartisan bill designed 
to attack the production, distribution, and use of methamphetamine in 
the United States.
  Methamphetamine poses a serious and growing public health concern in 
this country, and requires immediate government attention. While 
regulations recently promulgated by the Drug Enforcement Administration 
provide a first step towards combating methamphetamine trafficking, 
further action is needed to close loopholes in those regulations and 
provide a more complete response to control methamphetamine in this 
country.
  H.R. 3852 would combat this drug scourge by giving the law 
enforcement community the muscle it needs to fight trafficking in 
methamphetamine and its precursor chemicals. To this end, the bill 
restricts the importation of methamphetamine and precursor chemicals 
into the United States; increases criminal penalties for 
methamphetamine manufacturers and traffickers; cracks down on the 
ability of rogue companies to sell bulk quantities of precursor 
chemicals that are diverted to clandestine laboratories for the 
manufacture of methamphetamine; and expands regulatory enforcement of 
all precursor chemicals used to make methamphetamine, which, in turn, 
will plug a loophole in current Drug Enforcement Administration 
regulations that apply only to a narrow range of products that could 
potentially be diverted to illegally manufacture methamphetamine.
  Importantly, the Methamphetamine Control Act balances these critical 
law enforcement objectives with the need to protect consumer access to 
over-the-counter medicines.
  Thus, while imposing measures to decrease the availability of 
precursor chemicals, the legislation does not restrict the ability of 
law-abiding citizens to use common remedies for colds and allergies. 
Nor does the legislation subject sales of such legal products to 
onerous record keeping requirements at the retail level.

[[Page H11121]]

  Finally, the bill institutes a number of programs to improve and 
expand existing education and research activities related to 
methamphetamine and other drug abuse, and to monitor methamphetamine 
abuse in the United States and improve reporting of suspicious 
precursor chemical orders.
  Mr. Speaker, I have received letters in support of the 
Methamphetamine Control Act from law enforcement and health officials 
across California. Among those who have contacted me are Jim Maready, 
Sheriff-Coroner of Del Norte County, and James Tuso, Sheriff-Coroner of 
Mendocino County. Both jurisdictions have experienced increases in 
violence related to the trafficking and use of methamphetamine.
  The tragic death of 14-year-old Raina Shirley in March of this year 
as the result of methamphetamine furnished to her focused national 
attention to the problem in Northern California.
  As cosponsor of the original version of Methamphetamine Control Act, 
I strongly endorse the measure before the House today. H.R. 3852 
represents a comprehensive response to this spreading national menace. 
It is my hope that Congress will move rapidly to enact the bill, and 
help prevent future tragedies like the one that methamphetamine brought 
to Raina Shirley and her family.
  Mr. Speaker, I include the letters referenced earlier.

                                              County of Del Norte,


                                        Office of the Sheriff,

                            Crescent City, CA, September 18, 1996.
     Re Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996.

     Congressman Frank Riggs,
     Longworth Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Hon. Congressman Riggs: I understand that the 
     Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996 bill is making its way 
     through Congress and came up for mark-up in committee last 
     Wednesday. Ideally, the fewer changes made to the bill, the 
     better. This will help facilitate passage through the Senate.
       Methamphetamine at this stage in our society, even in small 
     rural counties, is in many cases to the young people of today 
     what marijuana was to the same age group in the '60's and 
     '70's.
       The precursers used in the process of manufacturing 
     methamphetamine are readily available to those that wish to 
     manufacture the illegal drug. In addition, the new processes 
     used in the making of the drug is much less sophisticated, 
     thus novices can manufacture the drug in a very short period 
     of time.
       I would urge any new sanctions that could be used in 
     fighting this invasive drug that is crippling many of our 
     young people. I am in constant contact with the young people 
     of our community through my office as Sheriff, coaching high 
     school football, D.A.R.E., and other civic involvements. 
     Please do not hesitate in contacting me if I can be of any 
     assistance.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Jim Maready,
     Sheriff-Coroner.
                                                                    ____

                                    Office of the Sheriff-Coroner,


                                          County of Mendocino,

                                    Ukiah, CA, September 16, 1996.
     Congressman Frank Riggs,
     U.S. Congress,
     Longworth Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Riggs: I am in receipt of Senator 
     Feinstein's correspondence in regards to the Methamphetamine 
     Control Act of 1996, and will be most honored to endorse this 
     proposed legislation and offer any assistance for it's 
     successful passage. In Mendocino County, methamphetamine 
     continues to be the drug of choice, and as such, presents a 
     most serious and dangerous problem for law enforcement and 
     community members.
       Here in our county, the Mendocino County Major Crimes Task 
     Force has conducted 832 investigations involving 
     methamphetamine during Fiscal Years 1992-1993, 1993-1994, 
     1994-1995, and 1995-1996. From these investigations, 719 
     arrests were made and 58 clandestine laboratories were 
     seized.

                     Methamphetamine Investigations

Fiscal year:
  1992-93...........................................................220
  1993-94...........................................................245
  1994-95...........................................................226
  1995-96...........................................................141
                                                               ________
                                                               
    Total...........................................................832

       Of the total number of all narcotics investigations 
     conducted by the Mendocino County Major Crimes Task Force 
     during this time period (1357), 61% were directly related to 
     methamphetamine.

                        Methamphetamine Arrests

Fiscal year:
  1992-93...........................................................176
  1993-94...........................................................220
  1994-95...........................................................199
  1995-96...........................................................124
                                                               ________
                                                               
    Total...........................................................719

       Of the total number of all narcotics arrests made by our 
     Major Crimes Task Force during this time period (1174), 61% 
     were for offenses related to methamphetamine.

                         Methamphetamine Seized

Fiscal year 1992-93:
  Cost.......................................................$1,003,000
  Amount (grams)..............................................10,030.00
Fiscal year 1993-94:
  Cost.........................................................$231,390
  Amount (grams)...............................................2,313.90
Fiscal year 1994-95:
  Cost.........................................................$545,283
  Amount (grams)...............................................5,452.83
Fiscal year 1995-96:
  Cost.........................................................$221,535
  Amount (grams)...............................................2,408.00
Total:
  Cost.......................................................$2,001,208
  Amount (grams)..............................................20,204.73

       Our Major Crimes Task Force reported witnessing an increase 
     in the number and sophistication of clandestine laboratories 
     in our county. Out-of-county methamphetamine laboratory 
     operators are paying lab-site brokers to secure areas to 
     manufacture methamphetamine. The property owners are paid a 
     fee to allow the process to occur. Once the cooking process 
     is complete, the clandestine laboratory is moved. Some of 
     these cooking processes yield up to 350 pounds of 
     methamphetamine.

                        Clandestine Laboratories

Fiscal year:
  1992-93.............................................................6
  1993-94............................................................12
  1994-95............................................................19
  1995-96............................................................21
                                                               ________
                                                               
    Total............................................................58

       Like other jurisdictions, Mendocino County has experienced 
     an increase in violence related to the use and trafficking of 
     methamphetamine. Our most heinous act of violence occurred on 
     August 23, 1993, when 21 year old Ronald Trever Harden shot 
     and killed his mother, father, sister and 16 month old niece 
     while under the influence of methamphetamine. He then took 
     his own life.
       The tragic death of 14 year old Raina Bo Shirley in March 
     of this year as a result of the ingestion of methamphetamine 
     furnished to her brought national attention to our small 
     county due to the circumstances surrounding her disappearance 
     and death. As you know, the suspect is still being sought in 
     her death. In another tragedy, 17 year old Angel Ann Miller 
     died from methamphetamine toxicity after being furnished the 
     drug by a male friend, who has since been arrested for murder 
     as a result of her death.
       Therefore, it is without hesitation that I offer my support 
     to your efforts in seeking legislation to further enhance our 
     ability to curb methamphetamine production. If necessary, we 
     can provide testimony to what we have encountered.
           Sincerely,
                                      James Tuso, Sheriff-Coroner.
  Mr. HEINEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Crime Subcommittee 
Chairman Bill McCollum and his staff for all their assistance in 
getting this vital legislation to the floor. I introduced H.R. 3852, 
the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996 because of the 
growing scourge of meth. Senator Hatch introduced companion 
legislation, S. 1965, which passed the Senate earlier this month.
  Meth, commonly known as speed, is highly addictive and causes 
permanent brain damage in long-term users. Meth has become a public 
health crisis in California and the Southwest and is moving East. DEA 
records indicate a 57-percent increase in meth lab seizures from 
January to May of this year alone. In 1994, California experienced a 
49-percent increase in meth-related emergency room admissions. In 
Phoenix, police link a 40-percent increase in homicides directly to the 
sudden rise in meth production. Meth produces a euphoric high, but also 
produces deep depression and violent rages. In one particularly 
gruesome incident, Eric Smith of Chandler, AZ, binged on meth for 24 
hours and then beheaded his son and tossed his son's head from the 
window of his van onto a busy highway.
  Secret labs manufacture meth from chemicals with legitimate medical 
uses. Two of the most common precursor drugs--ephedrine and 
pseudoephedrine--are common ingredients in cold, cough, and flu 
medications. More than 100 over-the-counter cold and allergy medicines 
contain pseudoephedrine. These products are used by more than 90 
million Americans and account for $1 billion a year in lawful sales. 
However, rogue chemists can easily convert these cold and allergy 
medicines containing pseudoephedrine into meth.
  While I am committed to eliminating meth, I believe that we can do so 
without forcing drug stores from removing cold and allergy medication 
from their shelves because of overlyburdensome regulations. As written, 
the DEA regulations apply new recordkeeping requirements to retailers, 
forcing individual clerks to engage in complicated calculations 
concerning base chemical quantities. Failure to comply or make correct 
calculations can result in $30,000 in fines or incarceration. Instead 
of complying with these criminal regulations, drug stores will simply 
remove most cold and allergy medicines from the shelves. This will 
dramatically affect the 90 million consumers who rely on this medicine. 
My bill revokes these DEA regulations.
  This is a nonpartisan issue. Ranking member Charles Schumer wrote DEA 
Administrator Tom Constantine on February 28, 1996, to express the very 
same concerns regarding DEA's proposed regulations that Congressmen Mel 
Watt and Howard Coble and I

[[Page H11122]]

raised in a March 19, 1996, letter. In addition, I was pleased to work 
closely with Congressman Vic Fazio from California who introduced 
similar legislation. The administration is also on record as being 
supportive of this bill. This is indicative of the bipartisan nature of 
this legislation.
  As a 38-year law enforcement veteran, I have seen epidemics of 
heroin, LSD, cocaine, and crack infect our cities and communities. We 
must take immediate and dramatic action to ensure that meth is 
eradicated, while at the same time enabling consumers access to cold, 
flu, and allergy medication. That is why I introduced H.R. 3852, which:
  Increases penalties for possession and trafficking of 
methamphetamine, making them equivalent to the penalties for crack-
cocaine
  Increases penalties for illegal possession and trafficking of 
precursor chemicals used for the manufacture of methamphetamine and 
other controlled substances.
  Reduces single transaction reporting requirements for all sales other 
than ordinary over-the-counter pseudoephedrine or phenylpropanolamine 
containing products from 1 kg to 24 grams.
  Creates a safe harbor for ordinary over-the-counter products 
containing pseudoephedrine or phenylpropanolamine to cover those 
products packaged in package sizes of not greater than three grams of 
pseudoephedrine or phenylpropanolamine base and packaged in blister 
packs. This will effectively combat shelf sweeping.
  Establishes new reporting requirements for firms that sell 
pseudoephedrine or phenylpropanolamine products via mail order.
  Imposes tougher penalties on those who import meth or its precursor 
chemicals with the intent to distribute them within the United States.
  H.R. 3852 represents a common sense approach to a dangerous problem. 
It fairly balances the concerns of consumers with those of law 
enforcement so that meth can be eliminated. It is my sincere hope that 
the President joins our antidrug initiative and signs H.R. 3852 into 
law. I urge my colleagues to support this tough, bipartisan 
legislation. Pass H.R. 3852!
  Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. HEINEMAN. Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased that the House is 
poised to pass my bill, H.R. 1499, the Telemarketing Fraud Punishment 
and Prevention Act of 1996. H.R. 1499 protects senior citizens from a 
sophisticated type of white collar criminal--telemarketing scam artists 
who target vulnerable elderly citizens.
  These crimes are among the most outrageous in society because 
telemarketing scam artists prey on the most vulnerable--seniors who can 
least afford to lose their limited savings. In fact, Members have 
already spoken against telemarketing fraud once before, and many of my 
colleagues thought that the job of getting tough on these kinds of 
crimes was already completed. However, the job is only half done. The 
1994 crime bill included important language cracking down on 
telemarketing fraud. Today we will pass legislation which completes 
what was begun in the 1994 crime bill, legislation that takes the tough 
sentences included in the 1994 crime bill and makes certain that 
telemarketing scam artists actually receive tougher penalties.
  H.R. 1499 was approved unanimously by the Subcommittee on Crime 
together with a technical amendment offered by Chairman Bill McCollum. 
This legislation was developed in consultation with the Department of 
Justice and staff of the U.S. Sentencing Commission. It is a 
reasonable, bipartisan bill, and I want to thank my colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle who have expressed their support for this 
legislation.
  Why is this legislation needed? Telemarketing fraud against seniors 
is on the rise, but the average sentence for this kind of crime is only 
18 months. The 1994 Crime bill directed the U.S. Sentencing Commission 
to review the Federal sentencing guidelines and report back to Congress 
on amendments to the guidelines that would ensure tough sentences for 
telemarketing frauds. Unfortunately, when the Sentencing Commission 
reported back to Congress in March of 1995, it concluded that no 
enhancements for telemarketing fraud were needed.
  This past April, the Subcommittee on Crime heard the tragic testimony 
of senior citizens who lost their life savings to telemarketing scams. 
One of my constituents, Mary Ann Downs from Raleigh lost over $74,000. 
In Durham, NC, an elderly woman was victimized for $212,000. The FBI 
estimates that U.S. consumers lose over $40 billion a year to 
fraudulent telemarketers.
  My legislation directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to amend the 
sentencing guidelines so that sentences for general telemarketing fraud 
offenses are enhanced by 4 levels, and telemarketing fraud offenses 
committed against seniors are enhanced by 8 levels.
  According to staff of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, a 4-level 
enhancement for telemarketing frauds would equal roughly 11 months, or 
a 60-percent increase from the average 18 months sentence currently 
received. An 8-level increase would equal roughly an additional 25 
months, or a 140-percent increase from the current average 18-month 
sentence for these frauds. This still falls short of the full extent of 
the 5 years and 10 years additional prison time envisioned by the 1994 
Crime bill, but it is a critical step in combating telemarketing fraud.
  The bill also includes a sentencing enhancement of 2 levels for 
frauds committed by defendants in a foreign country. This is in 
response to the fact that increasing numbers of telemarketers are 
moving their operations to foreign jurisdictions in an attempt to evade 
prosecution in the United States. In addition, H.R. 1499 provides for 
criminal forfeiture of the proceeds of telemarketing scams.
  I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1499, the Telemarketing Fraud 
Punishment and Prevention Act of 1996 and help protect their senior 
constituents from telemarketing predators. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Dickey). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Florida [Mr. McCollum] that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3852, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5 of rule I and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________