[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 105 (Wednesday, July 23, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7912-S7919]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998

  The Senate resumed consideration of the bill.


                     Amendment No. 963, as Modified

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I send a modification to amendment 
numbered 963 to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, that amendment is modified.
  The amendment (No. 963), as modified, is as follows:
       At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:

     SEC. ____. RURAL HOUSING PROGRAMS.

       (a) Housing in Underserved Areas Program.--The first 
     sentence of section 509(f)(4)(A) of the Housing Act of 1949 
     (42 U.S.C. 1479(f)(4)(A)) is amended by striking ``fiscal 
     year 1997'' and inserting ``fiscal year 1998''.
       (b) Housing and Related Facilities for Elderly Persons and 
     Families and Other Low-Income Persons and Families.--
       (1) Authority to make loans.--Section 515(b)(4) of the 
     Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1485(b)(4)) is amended by 
     striking ``September 30, 1997'' and inserting ``September 30, 
     1998''.
       (2) Set-aside for nonprofit entities.--The first sentence 
     of section 515(w)(1) of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 
     1485(w)(1)) is amended by striking ``fiscal year 1997'' and 
     inserting ``fiscal year 1998''.
       (3) Loan term.--Section 515 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 
     U.S.C. 1485) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(2), by striking ``up to fifty'' and 
     inserting ``up to 30''; and
       (B) in subsection (b)--
       (i) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
       ``(2) such a loan may be made for a period of up to 30 
     years from the making of the loan, but the Secretary may 
     provide for periodic payments based on an amortization 
     schedule of 50 years with a final payment of the balance due 
     at the end of the term of the loan;'';
       (ii) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (iii) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (iv) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) the Secretary may make a new loan to the current 
     borrower to finance the final payment of the original loan 
     for an additional period not to exceed twenty years, if--
       ``(A) the Secretary determines--
       ``(i) it is more cost-efficient and serves the tenant base 
     more effectively to maintain the current property than to 
     build a new property in the same location; or
       ``(ii) the property has been maintained to such an extent 
     that it warrants retention in the current portfolio because 
     it can be expected to continue providing decent, safe, and 
     affordable rental units for the balance of the loan; and
       ``(B) the Secretary determines--
       ``(i) current market studies show that a need for low-
     income rural rental housing still exists for that area; and
       ``(ii) any other criteria established by the Secretary has 
     been met.''.
       (c) Loan Guarantees for Multifamily Rental Housing in Rural 
     Areas.--Section 538 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 
     1490p-2) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (q), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) Annual limitation on amount of loan guarantee.--In 
     each fiscal year, the Secretary may enter into commitments to 
     guarantee loans under this section only to the extent that 
     the costs of the guarantees entered into in such fiscal year 
     do not exceed such amount as may be provided in appropriation 
     Acts for such fiscal year.'';
       (2) by striking subsection (t) and inserting the following:
       ``(t) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 1998 for costs 
     (as such term is defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974) of loan guarantees made under this 
     section such sums as may be necessary for such fiscal 
     year.''; and
       (3) in subsection (u), by striking ``1996'' and inserting 
     ``1998''.

  Mr. COCHRAN. For the information of Senators, this amendment modifies 
the amendment previously agreed to, that had been offered by me for 
Senators D'Amato and Sarbanes regarding rural housing.
  Mr. President, we hope to continue to consider amendments of Senators 
so we can proceed to complete action on this bill today. We now have 
two votes that have been set to occur beginning at 4 o'clock this 
afternoon.
  There are, to our knowledge, at least two more amendments that are 
going to be offered that will probably require rollcall votes. What we 
would like to do is to stack votes on those amendments immediately 
following the votes that have now been ordered, and then have final 
passage of the bill.
  To do that, we need to have the cooperation of all Senators who are 
interested in the passage of this bill and those who have amendments to 
the bill. We hope they will come to the floor as soon as possible to 
offer their amendments.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, first I want to commend the chairman, 
Senator Cochran, and the ranking Democratic member, Senator Bumpers, 
for their efforts in putting together this Agriculture appropriations 
measure. They have put a lot of work into crafting a bill that stays 
within the subcommittee's allocation while seeking to satisfy many 
competing demands for funding. I have appreciated very much working 
with them and with their staffs in the subcommittee on this bill.


                           Amendment No. 968

   (Purpose: To provide funding for tobacco and nicotine enforcement 
    activities of the Food and Drug Administration, with an offset)

  Mr. HARKIN. Overall, I believe it is an excellent bill and one I 
wholeheartedly support. However, there is in this bill, I believe, a 
glaring shortfall relating to the level of funding provided for the 
Food and Drug Administration's enforcement and outreach efforts to 
prevent smoking by America's children.
  The budget request for FDA includes $34 million for this purpose, but 
the reported bill provides only $4.9 million. The amendment that 
Senator Chafee and I will be offering will provide FDA the full $34 
million it needs to implement a nationwide effort in all 50 States to 
help our kids avoid the deadly trap of tobacco. The needed funding is 
truly a drop in the bucket compared to the $50 billion or more our 
Nation spends each year on medical costs attributable to smoking.
  Everyone, including even the tobacco companies, claims to be against 
underage smoking. But those assertions are just empty words if we fail 
to provide the necessary resources to carry out the FDA rules 
specifically designed to prevent sales of tobacco to children.
  With this amendment, the rubber really meets the road. It presents 
this body with a clear choice whether we are really serious about 
attacking underage smoking.
  In discussing our amendment, I hope that Members of the Senate will 
not lose sight of what is really at stake. Disease, suffering, and 
death caused by smoking and nicotine addiction is clearly at horrendous 
proportions in our Nation. With a death toll of more than 400,000 each 
year, smoking kills more Americans than AIDS, alcohol, motor vehicles, 
fires, homicides, illicit drugs and suicide all combined.
  Here is a chart, Mr. President, that shows that in graphic detail: 
The comparative causes of annual deaths in the United States. Here we 
see 30,000 in AIDS deaths, 105,000 from alcohol, and those from 
homicides, illicit drugs, suicides. Here is smoking, 418,000 per year. 
There are more deaths caused by smoking than all of the rest put 
together.
  This is truly an epidemic, an epidemic that begins with underage 
smoking. Mr. President, 4.5 million kids aged 12 to 17 are smokers 
today. Almost 90 percent of adult smokers began at or before the age of 
18. The average youth smoker begins at age 13 and becomes a daily 
smoker by the age of 14\1/2\. Thousands of our kids are drawn into 
smoking every day. It is no longer even an arguable point that they 
have been targeted for recruitment into a deadly habit. Today, just 
like every day, 3,000 young Americans will begin

[[Page S7913]]

smoking and 1,000 of them will die from it. At current rates, 5 million 
American kids under 18 who are alive today will be killed by smoking-
related disease.
  The upward trend in teenage smoking is even more frightening. Smoking 
among high school seniors is at a 17-year high. Mr. President, again, 
here is a graph that shows it in detail. The smoking rates among high 
school seniors are at a 17-year high. These are the trends of cigarette 
smoking among high school seniors, 12th grade, 1980 to 1996. Look what 
has been happening since about 1991, 1992. This graph is going off the 
charts--a 17-year high.
  The statistics on smoking among young women and girls are just as 
shocking. Smoking among eighth grade girls--yes, I said that correctly, 
eighth grade girls--jumped over 60 percent from 1991 to 1996, with 
rates of smoking now higher for 8th- and 10th-grade girls than for 
boys. And smoking among black children of this age nearly doubled 
during this time period.
  Our children are our future, as we all know. But thanks to smoking, 
millions of American kids will not be leading long and fulfilling 
lives. Instead, they will be filling hospital beds and coffins long 
before their time.
  The epidemic of teenage smoking is a crisis that is beyond 
partisanship. Responding to it should lift us up above everyday 
politics. That is why I am so proud to have the distinguished Senator 
from Rhode Island, Senator Chafee, as a cosponsor of this bipartisan 
amendment.
  Unquestionably, Mr. President, a key factor in youth smoking is that 
it is far too easy for kids to buy tobacco. Not only is it far too 
easy, but we now know that the tobacco companies, through the use of 
slick advertising, through the use of Joe Camel, through the use of the 
Marlboro Man and Virginia Slims and all of the fancy advertising that 
they have done, have targeted kids with Marlboro gear, the Camel 
coupons you can redeem for Camel gear and for beach wear and radios and 
cassette players, jackets and all the things that teenagers like to 
accumulate. We know that the tobacco companies have targeted teenagers 
for smoking with their advertising.
  When you combine that targeting of the advertising with the easy 
access for kids to buy tobacco, that is why you have teenage smoking at 
a 17-year high. I believe that this recent rise is due to the 
tremendous amount of advertising targeted to our youth and the ease 
with which youth can buy tobacco.
  A review of numerous studies has shown that children and adolescents 
were able to buy tobacco products successfully 67 percent of the times 
that they tried. Over 60 percent of kids who smoke say they buy their 
own. One study showed that over 75 percent of underage high school 
students who had bought cigarettes in a store or a gas station in the 
past 30 days said they were not asked to show proof of age.
  It has been demonstrated that enforcement of youth access laws can 
successfully reduce tobacco sales to minors and reduce youth smoking 
rates. That just makes good common sense and that is exactly the basis 
on which the FDA acted.
  Let me describe the FDA initiative that our amendment funds. In 
August of 1996, FDA issued rules specifically designed to reduce the 
number of kids who start smoking. The most important of the rules set a 
national legal age of 18 for the purchase of tobacco products and 
require retailers to check photo ID's of consumers seeking to purchase 
tobacco who appear to be younger than 27 years of age. Those rules went 
into effect in February of this year.
  Now, some might say, is this necessary that we have this photo ID 
rule with a cutoff of 27 years of age? Well, I ask you, Mr. President, 
and other Senators to look at this picture. Which one is age 16? Is it 
Melissa here on the left or is it Amy here on your right, both coming 
up to the counter to buy cigarettes? Can you tell which one is 16? If 
they walked into a store, would the clerk know which one was under age 
18? Well, to eliminate the guesswork, FDA requires retailers to card 
anyone, to have proof of ID for anyone who appears under 27. In case 
you are wondering, Melissa here is 16 and Amy here is 25. That is the 
problem we have. And that is why FDA acted.
  The public overwhelmingly supports putting a stop to illegal sales of 
tobacco to minors. A new poll shows that 92 percent of Americans agree 
that young people should be required to show a photo ID to buy tobacco 
products. Eighty-seven percent agree with the FDA rule setting a 
national minimum age of 18 for buying tobacco mandating ID checks of 
all tobacco purchasers appearing to be under the age of 27.
  FDA needs $34 million for enforcement and outreach that will help all 
50 States carry out the minimum age and photo ID rules. There is no 
question that the States need help in the area of enforcement. Despite 
the fact that it is against the law in all 50 States to sell cigarettes 
and smokeless tobacco to minors, our young people purchase an estimated 
$1.26 billion--billion--worth of tobacco each year. The FDA initiative 
directly addresses these enforcement problems. It will keep tobacco out 
of the hands of children.
  Of the $34 million, $24 million will go to enforcement and 
evaluation, with the vast majority of that going out to the States 
through contracts. And $10 million of the $34 million will go to 
outreach efforts for educating retailers and the public about complying 
with the rules.

  The point of the initiative is to prevent our kids from buying 
tobacco illegally and to help our small businesses and our retailers to 
come into compliance with the law. The FDA initiative is not a new, big 
Federal regulatory program. The bulk of the money will go directly to 
support State and local efforts. Without this funding, the States will 
not have the resources they need for their efforts against illegal 
tobacco sales to kids. By the end of fiscal year 1997, FDA expects to 
have contracted with the first 10 States. The increased funding will 
allow a comprehensive national enforcement effort with contracts in all 
50 States.
  Now, Mr. President, it is true that the tobacco industry has 
challenged FDA's tobacco regulation in court. Well, they went to court. 
They had their day in court. However, the authority of FDA to carry out 
the minimum age and photo ID rules was fully upheld in April by the 
Federal district court in Greensboro, NC. The $34 million request in 
FDA's budget, which our amendment would provide, would be used for 
activities that the Greensboro Federal court gave the green light to. 
That decision did not reduce the need for fully funding the FDA 
initiative.
  Mr. President, I have a letter from Secretary of Health and Human 
Services Shalala supporting this point. I ask unanimous consent to have 
it printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                           The Secretary of Health


                                           and Human Services,

                                    Washington, DC, July 14, 1997.
     Hon. Thad Cochran,
     Chairman, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, 
         Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies 
         Appropriations Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: As you approach your subcommittee's 
     consideration of the Fiscal Year 1998 budget request for the 
     Food and Drug Administration, questions have been raised 
     about FDA's ability to spend the funds for the youth smoking 
     initiative requested by the President.
       Earlier this year, the Federal District Court in 
     Greensboro, North Carolina, upheld the FDA's assertion of 
     jurisdiction as well as all of the access and labeling 
     provisions of FDA's 1996 regulations. The Court kept in place 
     the age and photo ID provisions that have been in effect 
     since February 1997 and stayed the effective date of the 
     remaining provisions. Finally, it overturned the advertising 
     restrictions. FDA has appealed this portion of the ruling.
       The President requested $34 million in funding to enforce 
     the tobacco rule, which will be used to implement the 
     provisions upheld by the Court. Indeed, this funding is vital 
     to oversee the age and photo ID requirements already in 
     effect. There are approximately 500,000 retailers who sell 
     tobacco products in the United States. Each year, more than 
     $1 billion in illegal sales to children and adolescents 
     occur. Stopping the sale to minors is of paramount importance 
     to protect our nation's youth.
       The bulk of the $34 million will be spent on contracts with 
     the states that want to join FDA in ensuring retailer 
     compliance with the provisions already in place. (By the end 
     of this fiscal year, the agency expects to have contracted 
     with the first ten states who have joined with us to address 
     this problem.) Without these funds, FDA will not have the 
     credible national enforcement program required to reduce 
     significantly young people's access to tobacco.

[[Page S7914]]

       The remaining funds are necessary to educate retailers and 
     the public about the new rules. An effective compliance 
     outreach program will increase the likelihood that retailers 
     will understand and comply with the age and photo ID 
     provisions of the tobacco regulations. Retailers who do not 
     know about the rules cannot possibly comply with them.
       By providing the full funding requested by the agency, FDA 
     will be able to put in place a comprehensive enforcement and 
     outreach program. Every day, another 3,000 young people 
     become regular smokers; of these 1,000 will die prematurely 
     because of their smoking. If funds are provided by the 
     Congress, the new FDA tobacco regulation will significantly 
     help prevent another generation of young people from 
     endangering their lives because of this deadly addiction. I 
     appeal to you to help us assure that funding.
       An identical letter is being sent to Senator Bumpers.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Donna E. Shalala.

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, as the letter from Secretary Shalala makes 
clear, the full $34 million is needed to carry out the minimum age and 
photo ID rules. She states:

       Without these funds, FDA will not have the credible 
     national enforcement program required to reduce significantly 
     young people's access to tobacco.

  Again, the pending litigation has not reduced FDA's need for or its 
ability to utilize the $34 million. So our amendment provides the full 
funding for FDA to work with the States to carry out the minimum age 
and photo ID rules.
  Now, where do we get the money? We offset the full cost of the FDA 
youth smoking initiative by increasing the tobacco marketing assessment 
from the current 1 percent of the national price support level to 2.1 
percent for the 1998 crop of flue-cured tobacco and for the 1997 crop 
of burley and other tobacco. The increase will apply to assessments 
expected to be collected in fiscal year 1998. That is because flue-
cured tobacco is marketed in the summer, while burley and others are 
marketed almost entirely after October 1.
  The full cost of the increase would be borne by purchasers of 
tobacco, that is, the tobacco companies. In addition, for the tobacco 
covered by the amendment, half of the current 1 percent assessment now 
paid by producers would be shifted to purchasers, thus providing 
assessment relief to tobacco farmers.
  We have heard concerns expressed clearly and forcefully on the floor 
of the Senate about the consequences for our tobacco farmers of changes 
in tobacco policies. I am very sympathetic to the situation of any 
farmer, including tobacco farmers. They are just trying to make a 
living. I know how hard farmers work and what a struggle it is for them 
to make a living. So I am concerned, also, about the impacts on 
tobacco-farming families.
  For that reason, this amendment is crafted to relieve tobacco farmers 
of their obligation to pay a part of the marketing assessment on the 
tobacco covered by the amendment. Currently, the producer of domestic 
tobacco--that is the farmer --pays half of the assessment. That is one-
half of 1 percent of the support price, with the purchaser paying the 
other one-half of 1 percent. What our amendment says is that the 
tobacco companies will pay the whole assessment, including the 
increase. So this amendment provides relief for our tobacco farmers 
because it will relieve them of the burden they have now of paying that 
one-half of 1 percent of the assessment. I might add, parenthetically, 
Mr. President, I believe if tobacco companies have to pay the full 2.1 
percent, then they are going to pass costs along to the consumers--that 
is, those who smoke tobacco. On the one hand, we relieve the tobacco 
farmers of this burden and we have made those who use tobacco pay more.
  As a nation, we are in solid agreement that use of tobacco by minors 
must be reduced--or at least we say we are. When that happens, it also 
means that we eventually will have fewer adults smoking. So it is our 
national policy that there will be less of a market in this country for 
tobacco. Tobacco farmers need to recognize that change is coming. But I 
also know that when markets for agricultural commodities change, it is 
often the farmers who bear the brunt of that change. It is no different 
for tobacco than for corn or soybeans or hogs or wheat or cotton or any 
other commodity. I hope that we will find more ways to help tobacco 
farmers deal with this change. In the meantime, I am suggesting that at 
least we should require that tobacco companies pay the marketing 
assessment. It will ease the burden on tobacco farmers, who clearly are 
facing uncertainty.
  Mr. President, we simply cannot continue to postpone addressing the 
monumental costs to society of tobacco use on the grounds that doing so 
may have some negative impact on farmers. There are too many lives at 
stake--lives of people who are children today.
  Again, let me make it clear that this amendment does not give FDA any 
additional jurisdiction over tobacco farmers. It does not create any 
new authority for FDA to regulate tobacco farmers or become involved in 
the marketing by farmers of tobacco. The offset in the amendment 
involving an increase in the assessment involves only the Department of 
Agriculture, not the FDA.

  Now, Mr. President, there is some misinformation floating around to 
the effect that we do not need this FDA funding because of the proposed 
tobacco settlement that is now under review by the Congress and the 
administration. Well, Mr. President, this FDA initiative against youth 
smoking was begun long before the tobacco settlement talks even 
started. The minimum age and photo ID check rules are in place and are 
working. But there is a pressing need for more funding to allow all 50 
States to carry out enforcement efforts aimed at preventing youth 
smoking. There plainly is no good reason for delaying full 
implementation of the FDA initiative. We should not await the uncertain 
fate of the tobacco settlement before putting the necessary resources 
into FDA's enforcement and outreach efforts to stop underage smoking. 
As a nation, we cannot afford to continue losing our kids to tobacco at 
the horrendous rates that we are now experiencing. So the proposed 
tobacco settlement and this FDA initiative are totally separate 
matters--there should be no confusion on this point--and there is no 
inconsistency between them either.
  Mr. President, I have here a letter from 33 attorneys general 
involved in the settlement activities, who write in support of full 
funding for the FDA initiative, what our amendment here provides. The 
33 attorneys general who are involved in the settlement say they 
support full funding of this initiative. They would not have signed the 
letter if there were any reason to delay funding the FDA efforts 
pending possible legislation to carry out the settlement.
  I ask unanimous consent to have that letter printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                               Attorney General of Washington,

                                       Olympia, WA, June 20, 1997.
     Hon. Ted Stevens,
     Chair, Senate Appropriations Committee, Hart Senate Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.

     Hon. Robert Byrd,
     Ranking Member, Senate Appropriations Committee, Hart Senate 
         Office Building, Washington, DC.

     Hon. Thad Cochran,
     Chair, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, 
         Rural Development and Related Agencies, Russell Senate 
         Office Building, Washington, DC.

     Hon. Dale Bumpers,
     Ranking Member, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on 
         Agriculture, Rural Development and Related Agencies, 
         Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Stevens: We are writing as the attorneys 
     general for our respective states in support of the Food and 
     Drug Administration's (FDA) request for $34 million to 
     implement the tobacco initiative in the Agriculture 
     Appropriations bill. This funding is critical to our efforts 
     to protect kids from tobacco sales.
       There is no reason not to fully fund the FDA tobacco 
     regulations. A Federal District Court recently upheld FDA's 
     general jurisdiction over the sale of tobacco products to 
     minors, and the American public overwhelmingly supports this 
     initiative. The tobacco industry failed in its legal effort 
     to derail FDA's important protections for kids. Now, local, 
     state and federal officials must move forward and work 
     together to implement FDA's regulations.
       In 1994, attorneys general from around the country issued a 
     report illustrating the need for comprehensive new policies 
     to protect kids from tobacco. In the past three years, 40 
     attorneys general have filed suit against the tobacco 
     industry to recover damages caused by their behavior. To stop 
     the marketing of tobacco products to kids is a primary goal 
     of these lawsuits against the tobacco industry.
       We are prepared to work hand-in-hand with FDA to ensure 
     that the provisions of its tobacco initiative are fully 
     enforced. Towards this end, FDA has allocated a significant 
     portion of the $34 million to go directly to

[[Page S7915]]

     the states to help with enforcement. This money is critical 
     to ensuring our country's success in reducing tobacco use by 
     youth.
       We need to act without delay: cigarette smoking among high 
     school seniors is at a 17 year high and smoking among 8th and 
     10th graders has increased by more than 50 percent since 
     1991. Tobacco use is clearly a problem that starts with 
     children: almost 90 percent of adult smokers started using 
     tobacco at or before age 18, and the average youth smoker 
     begins at age 13 and becomes a daily smoker by age 14\1/2\.
       While some provisions of FDA's initiative are on hold 
     pending appeal, the court fully upheld FDA's funding that 
     cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products are both drugs and 
     drug delivery devices. In addition, the court provided FDA 
     with full authority to continue implementing provisions 
     requiring retailers to check photo identification of 
     consumers seeking to purchase tobacco who appear to be 
     younger than 27 years of age. Strong enforcement of this 
     provision is key to reducing youth access to tobacco 
     products. The $34 million requested by FDA will provide much 
     needed funding for enforcement by state and local officials.
       Currently, it is far too easy for kids to buy cigarettes 
     and chewing tobacco through vending machines and at retail 
     outlets. A review of thirteen studies of over-the-counter 
     sales found that, on average, children and adolescents were 
     able to successfully buy tobacco products 67 percent of the 
     time. We can substantially improve on this record by 
     providing funding for the FDA regulations.
       The tobacco industry's record of targeting our kids is 
     clear. Now is the time to stand up for America's kids and 
     protect them from cigarettes and chewing tobacco. FDA's 
     jurisdiction over sales to minors has been upheld in court 
     and enjoys strong support among the people of our states. We 
     hope you will vote for full-funding of this critical 
     initiative.
           Sincerely,
                                            Christine O. Gregoire,
                                                 Attorney General.
         Bruce M. Botelho, Attorney General of Alaska; Grant 
           Woods, Attorney General of Arizona; Gale A. Norton, 
           Attorney General of Colorado; Richard Blumenthal, 
           Attorney General of Connecticut; A. Jane Brady, 
           Attorney General of Delaware; Robert A. Butterworth, 
           Attorney General of Florida; Alan G. Lance, Attorney 
           General of Idaho; Jim Ryan, Attorney General of 
           Illinois; Tom Miller, Attorney General of Iowa; Carla 
           J. Stovall, Attorney General of Kansas; Richard P. 
           Ieyoub, Attorney General of Louisiana; Andrew Ketterer, 
           Attorney General of Maine; A. Joseph Curran, Jr., 
           Attorney General of Maryland; Scott Harshbarger, 
           Attorney General of Massachusetts; Hubert H. Humphrey 
           III, Attorney General of Minnesota.
         Mike Moore, Attorney General of Mississippi; Jeremiah W. 
           Nixon, Attorney General of Missouri; Joseph P. Mazurek, 
           Attorney General of Montana; Frankie Sue Del Papa, 
           Attorney General of Nevada; Philip McLaughlin, Attorney 
           General of New Hampshire; Peter Verniero, Attorney 
           General of New Jersey; Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney 
           General of New York; Heidi Heitkamp, Attorney General 
           of North Dakota; Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General 
           of Ohio; A. A. Drew Edmondson, Attorney General of 
           Oklahoma; Hardy Myers, Attorney General of Oregon; D. 
           Michael Fisher, Attorney General of Pennsylvania; 
           Jeffrey B. Pine, Attorney General of Rhode Island; Jan 
           Graham, Attorney General of Utah; William H. Sorrell, 
           Attorney General of Vermont; Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., 
           Attorney General of West Virginia; James E. Doyle, 
           Attorney General of Wisconsin.

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, our amendment would in no way prejudice or 
in any way affect the outcome of any legislation designed to implement 
the settlement. Mr. President, I also have two additional letters here. 
One is from Secretary Shalala and one is from Michael Moore, the 
Mississippi attorney general who has led the attorneys general in the 
tobacco settlement negotiations. As you know, Mississippi already 
reached a settlement with the tobacco companies. Michael Moore led 
these efforts. I just want to read an excerpt from his letter dated 
July 21, 1997:

       Dear Senator Harkin:
       I am writing to express my strong support for your 
     amendment to the Agriculture Appropriations bill to provide 
     full funding for the Food and Drug Administration's 
     initiative to protect kids from tobacco. This is a critical 
     program that must be supported without delay.

  Attorney General Moore of Mississippi goes on to say:

       There has been some confusion regarding your amendment and 
     whether it would interfere or conflict with the proposed 
     settlement with the tobacco industry. Some Members of 
     Congress have also stated that they believe funding FDA's 
     tobacco program is unnecessary because money will be 
     forthcoming from a settlement. No one is more anxious than I 
     to have Congress promptly address the settlement; but let me 
     be very clear:

  Again, I am reading from Attorney General Moore's letter.

     passage of your amendment is critical because we can't be 
     certain that the tobacco settlement will be passed or 
     implemented in time to provide the needed funds for the 
     upcoming fiscal year. Congress should not jeopardize the 
     current FDA tobacco initiative unless we are assured of the 
     immediate passage of legislation regarding the settlement.
       Immediate full funding for the FDA rule is appropriate 
     because the agency's initiative is already in place and has 
     been implemented.

  Secretary Shalala, in her letter dated July 22, says:

       Let me emphasize that the funding requested by the 
     administration is separate from any funds that might be 
     available sometime in the future as a result of any 
     settlement. Further, I do not believe it would prejudice or 
     predetermine in any way future congressional action regarding 
     the settlement.

  I ask unanimous consent that the letter from Secretary Shalala and 
the one from Attorney General Mike Moore of Mississippi be printed at 
this point in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                           The Secretary of Health


                                           and Human Services,

                                    Washington, DC, July 22, 1997.
     Hon. Tom Harkin,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Tom: Thank you for your leadership in the effort to 
     fully fund the Food and Drug Administration's fiscal year 
     1998 budget request for the youth smoking initiative. I 
     understand that questions have been raised regarding the 
     relationship of this amendment to the funds discussed in the 
     proposed tobacco settlement.
       Let me emphasize that the funding requested by the 
     Administration is separate from any funds that might be 
     available sometime in the future as a result of any 
     settlement. Further, I do not believe it would prejudice or 
     predetermine in any way future congressional action regarding 
     the settlement.
       As you know, the Department intends to use the funding 
     requested by the President for FY 1998 to enforce the age and 
     photo ID provisions of the tobacco regulation that are 
     already in effect. This regulation has been upheld by the 
     Federal District Court in Greensboro, North Carolina and has 
     the force of law.
       By contrast, the proposed tobacco settlement is still under 
     review by the Administration. No legislation has been 
     considered by Congress and the appropriate committees have 
     just begun to hold hearings. For these reasons, the time 
     frame and likelihood for final action by the White House and 
     Congress on the proposed settlement are entirely unclear. 
     Even under the most optimistic scenario, it is unlikely that 
     any funds under such a settlement would be available in FY98.
       I hope that this addresses the questions that have been 
     raised. Please let me know if any additional information is 
     necessary.
           Sincerely,
     Donna E. Shalala.
                                                                    ____

                                             State of Mississippi,


                               Office of the Attorney General,

                                       Jackson, MS, July 21, 1997.
     Hon. Tom Harkin,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Harkin. I am writing to express my strong 
     support for your amendment to the Agriculture Appropriations 
     bill to provide full funding for the Food and Drug 
     Administration's initiative to protect kids from tobacco. 
     This is a critical program that must be supported without 
     delay.
       There has been some confusion regarding your amendment and 
     whether it would interfere or conflict with the proposed 
     settlement with the tobacco industry. Some Members of 
     Congress have also stated that they believe funding FDA's 
     tobacco program is unnecessary because money will be 
     forthcoming from a settlement. No one is more anxious than I 
     to have Congress promptly address the settlement; but let me 
     be very clear; passage of your amendment is critical because 
     we can't be certain that the tobacco settlement will be 
     passed or implemented in time to provide the needed funds for 
     the upcoming fiscal year. Congress should not jeopardize the 
     current FDA tobacco initiative unless we are assured of the 
     immediate passage of legislation regarding the settlement.
       Immediate full funding for the FDA rule is appropriate 
     because the agency's initiative is already in place and has 
     been implemented. A Federal Court in Greensboro, North 
     Carolina, fully upheld FDA's authority over tobacco products. 
     I sincerely hope the settlement with the tobacco companies 
     will be enacted into law, but in the meantime, let's 
     immediately stop the illegal sale of tobacco to minors.
       Regardless of what happens with the settlement, the FDA 
     rule is in place and should remain a national priority. I 
     commend you for your efforts to provide full funding for this 
     historic program and wish you success.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Mike Moore,
                                                 Attorney General.


[[Page S7916]]


  Mr. HARKIN. Again, Mr. President, both letters make it clear that the 
tobacco settlement does not obviate the need for the FDA funding that 
we provide in our amendment and that providing the funding would not 
interfere with the settlement.
  In closing, Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Byrd for his 
excellent addition to our amendment. Senator Byrd has been the leader 
in the Senate in focusing, also, on the horrendous problem of youth 
drinking and the need to clamp down on young people buying alcohol. 
Senator Byrd's addition requires that States be encouraged to 
coordinate their enforcement of the tobacco ID check with enforcement 
of laws that prohibit underage drinking.
  Mr. President, this is a significant improvement to our original 
proposal. I commend my distinguished senior colleague from West 
Virginia for providing this language. As I said to Senator Byrd, if we 
tighten down on these ID checks, if we provide the funding so that when 
Melissa--Melissa is 16 and she looks older than Amy who is age 25--goes 
in to buy tobacco we will also attack underage drinking. A lot of times 
they may be buying beer or wine along with tobacco. As long as an ID 
check is made, it will stop underage drinking as well as smoking. So I 
agree with Senator Byrd that the States should coordinate their 
enforcement of tobacco ID checks with enforcement of laws that prohibit 
underage drinking.
  Mr. President, again, I have an amendment here that incorporates that 
language from Senator Byrd. I thank my colleague, Senator Chafee, for 
his cosponsorship.
  Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Iowa [Mr. Harkin], for himself, Mr. 
     Chafee, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Byrd, and Mr. Reed, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 968.

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  Mr. HELMS. I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The clerk will continue reading the amendment.
  The bill clerk read as follows:
       At the end of title VII, insert the following:

     SEC.   . TOBACCO ASSESSMENTS.

       Section 106 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1445) 
     is amended--
  (1) in subsection (g)(1), by striking ``Effective'' and inserting 
``Except as provided in subsection (h), effective''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) Marketing Assessment for Certain 1997 and 1998 
     Crops.--
       ``(1) In general.--Effective only for the 1997 crop of 
     tobacco (other than Flue-cured tobacco) and the 1998 crop of 
     Flue-cured tobacco for which price support is made available 
     under this Act, each purchaser of such tobacco, and each 
     importer of the same kind of tobacco, shall remit to the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation a nonrefundable marketing 
     assessment in an amount equal to--
       ``(A) in the case of a purchaser of domestic tobacco, 2.1 
     percent of the national price support level for each such 
     crop; and
       ``(B) in the case of an importer of tobacco, 2.1 percent of 
     the national support price for the same kind of tobacco;

     as provided for in this section.
       ``(2) Collection and enforcement.--The purchaser and 
     importer assessments under paragraph (1) shall be--
       ``(A) collected in the same manner as provided for in 
     section 106A(d)(2) or 106B(d)(3), as applicable; and
       ``(B) enforced in the same manner as provided in section 
     106A(h) or 106B(j), as applicable.
       ``(3) Enforcement.--The Secretary may enforce this 
     subsection in the courts of the United States.

     Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, $964,261,000 
     is provided for salaries and expenses of the Food and Drug 
     Administration. In carrying out their responsibilities under 
     the Food and Drug Administration's youth tobacco use 
     prevention initiative, States are encouraged to coordinate 
     their enforcement efforts with enforcement of laws that 
     prohibit underage drinking''.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I strongly support the Harkin amendment 
to the Agriculture appropriations bill. The illegal sale of tobacco 
products to teenagers is a serious national problem. Each year, it is 
estimated that a half a billion cigarettes are sold to Americans under 
the age of 18.
  The Harkin amendment is an important test of the genuineness of the 
Senate's commitment to reducing teenage smoking by fully funding the 
enforcement of the FDA tobacco regulations. These FDA rules prohibit 
the sale of tobacco to minors, and require retailers to check the photo 
identification of consumers who purchase tobacco products if they 
appear to be 27 years old or younger. Of the $34 million, $24 million 
will go to the States for enforcement.
  The Harkin amendment also represents an important test of the 
Senate's resolve to support FDA regulation of tobacco. Three months 
ago, a federal court in Greensboro, NC upheld FDA's authority to issue 
the youth access regulations. But rather than strengthening the FDA's 
hand by providing the agency with the necessary funds to enforce the 
rules, the current bill shamefully weakens the FDA's authority 
appropriating only $5 million for enforcement, or just one-seventh of 
the President's request for $34 million.
  Some argue that the Senate should wait until the so-called global 
tobacco settlement is enacted into law before funding the regulations, 
despite the fact that serious concerns have been raised that the 
settlement doesn't adequately protect the public health. Even if some 
version of the settlement is approved, it will not be in time for the 
current budget cycle. In addition, 33 of the State attorneys general 
who negotiated the settlement support the $34 million funding level.
  Each day we delay in funding the FDA regulations, 3,000 new smokers 
between the ages of 12 and 17 will take up smoking--or 1 million a 
year.
  According to a spring 1996 survey conducted by the University of 
Michigan Institute for Social Research, the prevalence of youth tobacco 
use in America has been on the increase over the last 5 years. It rose 
by nearly 50 percent among 8th and 10th graders, and by nearly 20 
percent among high school seniors between 1991 and 1996.
  When children are hooked on cigarette smoking at a young age, it is 
especially hard for them to quit. Ninety percent of current adult 
smokers began to smoke before they reached the age of 18. Ninety-five 
percent of teenage smokers say they intend to quit in the near future--
but only a quarter of them will actually do so within the first 8 years 
of beginning to smoke.
  Tobacco companies have known this fact for years--and used it 
cynically to their advantage. Many experts believe that if the industry 
cannot persuade children to take up smoking, the industry will collapse 
within a generation.
  That's why ``Big Tobacco'' targets children with billions of dollars 
in advertising and promotional giveaways, promising popularity, 
excitement, and success for those who take up smoking.
  Because of these marketing practices, the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention estimate that 5 million of today's children will die 
prematurely from smoking-caused illnesses.
  In addition, the Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia 
University has found that smoking is a gateway to the use of illegal 
drugs. Children between the ages of 12 and 17 who smoke are 12 times 
more likely to use heroin and 19 times more likely to use cocaine than 
nonsmokers. The younger a person begins to use tobacco, the higher the 
likelihood of regular drug use as adults.
  By providing the full $34 million that President Clinton requested to 
implement photo I.D. checks for the purchase of tobacco products by 
anyone under the age of 27, the Senate can make an important difference 
in reducing tobacco use among the Nation's youth.
  The additional Federal funds in the Harkin amendment to enforce the 
FDA tobacco regulations are clearly needed, and I urge the Senate to 
approve the amendment.
  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.


                 Amendment No. 969 to Amendment No. 968

      (Purpose: To impose an assessment on ethanol manufacturers)

  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hagel). The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Helms], for himself, 
     and Mr. Faircloth, proposes an amendment numbered 969 to 
     amendment numbered 968.


[[Page S7917]]


       Strike all after the first word and insert the following:

     ASSESSMENT FOR ETHANOL PRODUCERS.

       (a) In General.--For fiscal year 1998, the rate of tax 
     otherwise imposed on a gallon of ethanol under the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 shall be increased by 3 cents and such 
     rate increase shall not be considered in any determination 
     under section 9503(f)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986.
       (b) Establishment of Trust Fund.--
       (1) In general.--Subchapter A of chapter 98 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to trust fund code) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 9512. TRUST FUND FOR ANTI-SMOKING ACTIVITIES.

       ``(a) Creation of Trust Fund.--There is established in the 
     Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the 
     `Trust Fund for Anti-Smoking Activities' (hereafter referred 
     to in this section as the `Trust Fund'), consisting of such 
     amounts as may be appropriated or transferred to the Trust 
     Fund as provided in this section or section 9602(b).
       ``(b) Transfers to Trust Fund.--The Secretary shall 
     transfer to the Trust Fund an amount equivalent to the net 
     increase in revenues received in the Treasury attributable to 
     section   (a) of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and 
     Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     1998, as estimated by the Secretary.
       ``(c) Distribution of Amounts in Trust Fund.--Amounts in 
     the Trust Fund shall be available, as provided by 
     appropriation Acts, to the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services for anti-smoking programs through the Substance 
     Abuse and Mental Health Administration.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--The table of sections for such 
     subchapter A is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new item:

         ``SEC. 9512. TRUST FUND FOR ANTI-SMOKING ACTIVITIES.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply fuel removed after September 30, 1997.

  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the 
underlying amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. It would take unanimous consent to have the 
vote on underlying amendment.
  Is there objection?
  Mr. HARKIN. I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. HELMS. I suggest the absence of a quorum, Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HAGEL). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I am pleased to cosponsor the Harkin 
amendment to fund the Food and Drug Administration's youth smoking 
prevention initiative at $34 million for fiscal year 1998. This is a 
worthwhile amendment which has my support. I applaud the efforts of Mr. 
Harkin to provide funding for this important initiative. Tobacco use 
among minors is illegal, and we should make every effort to prevent it.
  I am particularly pleased that the amendment by Mr. Harkin has been 
strengthened at my urging to encourage States to couple their youth 
smoking prevention efforts with State laws that prohibit underage 
drinking. These issues go hand in hand in preventing our youth from 
using destructive substances.
  Alcohol is the drug of choice among teens as well as a lot of adults, 
I am sorry to say, and the consequences are devastating. According to 
statistics compiled by the National Center on Addiction and Substance 
Abuse, among children between the ages of 16 and 17, 69.3 percent have 
at one point in their lifetime experimented with alcohol. In the last 
month, approximately 8 percent of the Nation's eighth graders have been 
drunk.
  Think of that, eighth graders. Approximately 8 percent of the 
Nation's eighth graders have been drunk. What's the matter with the 
parents? I wonder what the parents are doing letting their children in 
the eighth grade drink. I wouldn't consider myself much of a parent if 
I let my children drink. If they do that, I blame myself. But the fact 
is that 8 percent of the Nation's eighth graders have been drunk. It is 
pretty hard to believe. That would not have happened in my day going to 
school.
  In 1995, there were 2,206 alcohol-related fatalities of children 
between the ages of 15 and 20. According to the National Center on 
Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, 37.5 percent of 
the young people who have consumed alcohol have also used some illicit 
drug, while only 5 percent of young people who have never consumed 
alcohol have used some illicit drug; 26.7 percent of those who have 
consumed alcohol have tried marijuana, while of those who have never 
consumed alcohol only 1.2 percent have tried marijuana. And 5 percent 
of youths who have partaken of alcohol have tried cocaine, while of 
those who do not drink alcohol only one-tenth of 1 percent have tried 
cocaine.
  So it is not just that alcohol is a real starter not only for more 
alcohol but for illicit drugs, for marijuana, for cocaine.
  Every State has a law prohibiting the sale of alcohol to individuals 
under the age of 21. How is it then that two out of every three 
teenagers who drink report that they can buy their own alcoholic 
beverages? Again, what is wrong with the parents? The parents are 
sleeping on the job. Two out of every three teenagers who drink report 
that they can buy their own alcoholic beverages. In my case, they would 
buy a good basting as well. My parents, they would not have put up with 
that, not with me, nor would other parents back in those days. We are 
living in a time, of course, when anything goes.
  Our children are besieged with media messages that create the 
impression that alcohol can help to solve life's problems, lead to 
popularity, and enhance athletic skills. Do you want to be a good 
athlete? Drink. Drink beer. Do you want to be popular with the girls? 
Drink beer. Do you want to be popular with the boys? Drink beer. The 
media messages help to leave that impression. These messages, coupled 
with insufficient enforcement of laws prohibiting the consumption of 
alcohol by minors, give our Nation's youth the impression that it is OK 
for them to drink. This impression has deadly consequences. In the 
three leading causes of death for 15- to 24-year-olds--accidents, 
homicides and suicides--alcohol is a factor. Alcohol is involved in the 
three leading causes of death for 15- to 24-year-olds.

  Efforts to curb the sale of alcohol to minors have high payoffs in 
helping to prevent children from drinking and driving death or injury. 
So I urge my colleagues to join me in support of the Harkin amendment 
to actively address two areas that so seriously harm the physical and 
mental health of our Nation's children. We have seen a great drive on 
in recent years by our Nation to curb the use of tobacco. All that is 
very well and good. I am not against that at all. But who has the nerve 
to raise the finger against alcohol? Who has the nerve to say, ``Don't 
drink, period.'' ``Don't drink, period.''
  I congratulate my colleague, and I thank him for allowing me to join 
in the support of his amendment and for allowing me to add the language 
of my proposal that deals with drinking.
  Mr. HARKIN. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. BYRD. I will yield provided, Mr. President, I do not lose the 
floor. I have to do this----
  Mr. HARKIN. I understand.
  Mr. BYRD. Yes.
  Mr. HARKIN. I just wanted to thank the Senator from West Virginia for 
his addition to this amendment. The Senator from West Virginia, as I 
mentioned earlier, is the leading voice in this Chamber about the 
dangers of alcohol and alcohol addiction, especially drinking under 
age. It has become, like tobacco, the scourge of our Nation, 
especially, as the Senator said, beer drinking among teenagers in 
college, and that is just a gateway to harder alcohol and other drugs.
  The Senator from West Virginia has done us a great service because 
most of the data that we have seen indicate that the teenagers who 
illegally buy tobacco also illegally buy alcohol.
  Sometimes we tend to get blinders on around here; we don't see other 
things, and I would admit freely and openly that I had been focusing on 
the teenage smoking and had not thought about the other aspects of the 
teenager who walks in to buy the tobacco. And you can bet your bottom 
dollar, I say to my friend from West Virginia, that if this

[[Page S7918]]

girl here--as I said earlier, which one of these is underage--you 
really cannot tell--Melissa or Amy. This one looks the youngest. She 
has a pair of overalls on. This one looks older. But it turns out this 
one is 16 and this one is 25.
  And you bet your bottom dollar, I ask the Senator from West Virginia, 
if this one, who is 16, walks in and is successful in buying 
cigarettes, then the next thing might be, well, as long as she got by 
with that, how about a six-pack of beer, too.
  Mr. BYRD. Sure. Why not?
  Mr. HARKIN. Why not? So the Senator is right on the mark. As long as 
you ID them, you better make sure they don't get the alcohol, too.
  So I thank the Senator from West Virginia for helping us take the 
blinders off to see this has broader implications than just tobacco. 
This can help us cut down a lot on teenage drinking, and I thank my 
friend.
  Mr. BYRD. Absolutely. And I say this not in defense of smoking, but 
the young lady or the young man who buys alcohol, or who buys tobacco 
is not likely to go out and take a smoke and wrap his car around the 
telephone pole killing himself or possibly some other teenagers or 
striking an automobile and killing a lady and her daughter who are out 
grocery shopping.
  Mr. HARKIN. The Senator is right on the mark.
  Mr. BYRD. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. HARKIN. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I promised the distinguished Senator from 
North Carolina, [Mr. Helms], if he would have no objection in my 
calling off the quorum, I would ask for a quorum when I completed my 
statement.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask the distinguished Senator from North 
Carolina whether----
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield for that purpose, for the purpose--
--
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia has the floor.
  Mr. BYRD. The Senator is asking a question of the Senator from North 
Carolina.
  Mr. HELMS. I will if the Senator will ask for the yeas and nays on 
the second-degree amendment.
  Mr. CHAFEE. I do not want to get involved in the second-degree 
amendment. I just want to deliver a few pearls of wisdom in 
connection----
  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I object.
  Mr. CHAFEE. With the underlying amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia has the floor.
  Mr. BYRD. I promised the Senator from North Carolina, the State whose 
motto is ``To Be Rather Than To Seem,'' that I would suggest the 
absence of a quorum when I had finished. I will keep my promise. I 
suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  Mr. HARKIN. I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The assistant legislative clerk continued to call the roll.
  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the following, and 
I believe it has been agreed to on the other side. One, that the yeas 
and nays be deemed to have been ordered on the second-degree amendment, 
the perfecting amendment; two, that the yeas and nays will be deemed to 
have been ordered on the underlying amendment; and then, at the 
appropriate time, that the vote to proceed, first on the second-degree 
perfecting amendment, and, if that fails, then there be an up-or-down 
vote on the underlying amendment--meaning that there will be rollcall 
votes, up or down, on both amendments.


                     Amendment No. 969, As Modified

  First of all, I send to the desk a modification, before this is acted 
on.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified.
  The amendment (No. 969), as modified, is as follows:

       Strike all after the first word and insert the following:

     ASSESSMENT FOR ETHANOL PRODUCERS.

       (a) In General.--For fiscal year 1998, the rate of tax 
     otherwise imposed on a gallon of ethanol under the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 shall be increased by 3 cents and such 
     rate increase shall not be considered in any determination 
     under section 9503(f)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986.
       (b) Establishment of Trust Fund.--
       (1) In general.--Subchapter A of chapter 98 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to trust fund code) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 9512. TRUST FUND FOR ANTI-SMOKING ACTIVITIES.

       ``(a) Creation of Trust Fund.--There is established in the 
     Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the 
     `Trust Fund for Anti-Smoking Activities' (hereafter referred 
     to in this section as the `Trust Fund'), consisting of such 
     amounts as may be appropriated or transferred to the Trust 
     Fund as provided in this section or section 9602(b).
       ``(b) Transfers to Trust Fund.--The Secretary shall 
     transfer to the Trust Fund an amount equivalent to the net 
     increase in revenues received in the Treasury attributable to 
     section (a) of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and 
     Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     1998, as estimated by the Secretary.
       ``(c) Distribution of Amounts in Trust Fund.--Amounts in 
     the Trust Fund shall be available, as provided by 
     appropriation Acts, to the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services for anti-smoking programs through the Substance 
     Abuse and Mental Health Administration.''. The Secretary is 
     directed to encourage States, in carrying out their 
     responsibilities under the youth tobacco use prevention 
     initiative, to coordinate their enforcement efforts with 
     enforcement of laws that prohibit underage drinking.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--The table of sections for such 
     subchapter A is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new item:

         ``SEC. 9512. TRUST FUND FOR ANTI-SMOKING ACTIVITIES.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply fuel removed after September 30, 1997.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, reserving right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is an objection?
  Mr. BYRD. Reserving the right to object, and I will object. I 
certainly have no objection to having the yeas and nays, but I prefer 
to do it in the constitutional route, have them ordered by one-fifth of 
the Senators who are present. For years we have objected to ordering 
the yeas and nays by unanimous consent.
  Mr. HELMS. Very well.
  Mr. BYRD. So I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. HELMS. I object to the same thing, but I tried to hasten it a 
little bit.
  I ask for the yeas and nays on the second-degree amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. HELMS. The second-degree amendment, as modified, of course.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. It has already been modified.
  Mr. HARKIN. We ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to ordering the yeas and 
nays on the first amendment?
  Mr. BYRD. No objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection? Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. HARKIN. Parliamentary inquiry. I just want to know where we 
stand. We have now ordered the yeas and nays on both the underlying 
amendment and on the perfecting amendment, is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. HARKIN. As I further understand----
  Mr. HELMS. As modified.
  Mr. HARKIN. As I understand it----
  Mr. HELMS. No, I mean the second-degree perfecting amendment, as 
modified.
  Mr. HARKIN. I understand. As I further understand, the Senator from 
North Carolina asked consent that we have an up-or-down vote on his 
amendment, his perfecting amendment, and then an up-or-down vote on the 
underlying amendment.
  Mr. HELMS. If the perfecting amendment is defeated.
  Mr. HARKIN. If the perfecting amendment is defeated. Is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That amendment was objected to.

[[Page S7919]]

  Mr. COCHRAN. Reserving the right to object, this is a new request, as 
I understand it.
  Parliamentary inquiry. Would this Senator have the right, for 
example, when Senators have indicated that they do not care to debate 
the issue any further, to move to table the underlying amendment and 
get the yeas and nays and have a vote on the motion to table the 
underlying amendment?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Not if this agreement were entered into.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Further inquiring of the Chair, there have been two 
unanimous-consent requests granted, or there have been the yeas and 
nays ordered on two amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. COCHRAN. But now there is a request pending that there be an up-
or-down vote on both amendments; is that a correct understanding of the 
request?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is the Senator from Iowa making that request?
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, let this Senator be clear. This Senator, 
in good faith, just went over to my friend from North Carolina and 
asked if we could get past this impasse in the following manner: Could 
we agree to have the yeas and nays on this Senator's underlying 
amendment, then to let the Senator from North Carolina modify his 
amendment and then ask for the yeas and nays on that amendment, and 
further, we agreed and shook hands that we would then have a vote on 
his amendment up or down, and then if he failed, then we would have a 
vote up or down on my amendment. I believe that was what the agreement 
was.
  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, let me be sure I understand the Senator. 
The first vote would be on the perfecting amendment, is that it?
  Mr. HARKIN. That is correct. It would be an up-or-down vote on the 
perfecting amendment.
  Mr. HELMS. I have no objection to that.
  Mr. COCHRAN. And that is the amendment of the Senator from North 
Carolina, is that correct?
  Mr. HELMS. Yes, the perfecting amendment, as modified.
  Mr. HARKIN. And then if that amendment failed, then there would be an 
up-or-down vote on the underlying amendment, and that is what we are 
asking the Senate to do, to carry out that agreement that we made.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. McCONNELL. Reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Then I gather the Senator from Iowa is making the 
point that a motion to table the underlying amendment would not be in 
order.
  Mr. HARKIN. That is correct.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Under this request.
  Mr. HARKIN. That is correct.
  Mr. McCONNELL. That is an agreement we have already entered into?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Not yet.
  Mr. FORD. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. FORD. I think I am getting to the point here where I don't like 
this agreement, and, I say with all respect, of what we are trying to 
do. One, if this agreement is accepted, then as I understand it--and I 
am not as good at the rules as I used to be or should be--but this 
precludes a tabling motion on the underlying amendment if we agree to 
this.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. FORD. And, second, if we agree to this and the second-degree 
amendment is defeated, then I am precluded from offering another 
amendment in the second degree.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. FORD. Then I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. HARKIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. HARKIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum. We are going to be 
here for a long time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________