[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 113 (Tuesday, September 2, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8651-S8655]
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 PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the hour of 2:15
having arrived, the Senate will proceed to the consideration of H.R.
2160, which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 2160) making appropriations for agricultural,
rural development, Food and Drug Administration and related
agencies, programs for the fiscal year ending September 30,
1998, and for other purposes.
The Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa, Mr. Harkin, is
recognized to offer an amendment. There will be 20 minutes of debate
equally divided.
Amendment No. 1057
(Purpose: To provide funding for activities of the Food and Drug
Administration relating to the prevention of tobacco use by youth, with
an offset)
Mr. HARKIN. I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself,
Senators Chafee, Lautenberg, Reed, Durbin, Kennedy, and Wyden.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Iowa [Mr. Harkin], for himself, Mr.
Chafee, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Reed, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Kennedy,
and Mr. Wyden, proposes an amendment numbered 1057.
Mr. HARKIN. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
In the matter under the heading ``salaries and expenses''
under the heading ``Food and Drug Administration'' in title
VI, add at the end the following:
In addition, the total amount made available under this
heading shall be increased so as to make available a total of
$34,000,000 for the Food and Drug Administration children's
tobacco initiative: Provided, That--
(1) the amount that may be expended for equipment of
services related to automated
[[Page S8652]]
data processing, information technologies, or related items
(including telecommunications equipment and computer hardware
and software) under section 4(g) of the Commodity Credit
Corporation Charter Act (15 U.S.C. 714b(g)) may not exceed
$36,914,000 for fiscal year 1998; and
(2) to the extent that funding becomes available for the
Food and Drug Administration children's tobacco initiative as
a result of the national tobacco settlement--
(A) any amounts made available under this Act, allocated
for the Food and Drug Administration children's tobacco
initiative, and not expended on the date that such funding
becomes available shall be rescinded; and
(B) the amount specified in paragraph (1) shall be
increased by the total of the amounts rescinded under
subparagraph (A):
Provided further, That in carrying out their responsibilities
under the Food and Drug Administration children's tobacco
initiative, States are encouraged to coordinate their
enforcement efforts with enforcement of laws that prohibit
underage drinking.''.
Mr. HARKIN. I understand I have 10 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
Mr. HARKIN. During previous consideration of the appropriations bill
on agriculture I offered an amendment, along with Senator Chafee and
others to protect America's kids and crack down on illegal tobacco
sales. We would do it by providing full funding for the FDA's youth
tobacco use prevention initiative.
That amendment was debated and received a strong bipartisan vote of
48 Senators, but some of my colleagues expressed concerns about certain
aspects of the amendment. Those concerns seemed to focus primarily on
the nature of the offset and on whether the FDA initiative should be
funded before the outcome of the pending tobacco settlement is known. I
have, in good faith, modified my amendment in two important respects
that I believe fully address both concerns.
First, this amendment contains an entirely different offset. It would
reduce spending by the USDA Commodity Credit Corporation on automated
data processing and information technology equipment during fiscal year
1998 by $29.1 million, just enough to allow full funding for the FDA
initiative.
Second, to clear up any uncertainty about the relationship of the FDA
initiative to the pending tobacco settlement, this amendment contains a
sunset provision that would become effective if funding for FDA youth
tobacco use prevention activities becomes available as a result of the
tobacco settlement.
I want to make it clear there is nothing in my amendment having to do
with tobacco marketing assessments or tobacco farmers or anything that
could remotely be called a revenue measure that could conceivably
interest the Ways and Means Committee of the House.
I also add the amendment includes language suggested by Senator Byrd
that would have the FDA encourage States to coordinate their
enforcement either under the youth tobacco use prevention initiative
with enforcement of laws against underage drinking. I want to commend
and thank Senator Byrd for that addition. As I said in the debate
earlier, the two go hand in glove. You find kids using illegal tobacco,
you find them illegally buying alcohol at the same time more often than
not.
With that background, Mr. President, I hope we can zero in on what
this is all about. Plain and simple--this amendment is about protecting
America's kids from killer tobacco. With a death toll of more than
400,000 a year, smoking kills more Americans than AIDS, alcohol, motor
vehicles, fires, homicides, illicit drugs, and suicide combined.
This is an epidemic, and we know where it starts. It starts with
kids. It starts with illegal underage smoking. Almost 90 percent of
adult smokers began at or before age 18.
Put this in perspective: The Senate last took up this debate 40 days
ago with my previous amendment. Since that time, another 120,000 young
Americans got hooked on tobacco and began smoking; 40,000 of those will
die because of it. That is the toll just in the past 7 weeks. At
current rates, 5 million American kids under age 18 who are alive today
will be killed by smoking-related disease. And teenage smoking rates
are still climbing.
Smoking among high school seniors is at a 17-year high. The
statistics on smoking among young women and girls is just shocking.
Smoking among 8th 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.
Now, briefly reviewing what this amendment will fund at FDA. FDA
needs $34 million to carry out enforcement of rules setting a minimum
age of 18 for tobacco purchases and requiring photo ID checks. In its
initiative, FDA is signing contracts with State and local jurisdictions
for cooperation in carrying out enforcement of these rules.
The FDA initiative also includes funding to provide information to
retailers and the public about the rules to help retailers comply with
the rules and not sell tobacco to kids. This excerpt from an FDA
brochure shows why it is necessary to have a photo ID check.
FDA has $4.9 million in fiscal year 1997 that it is using to fund
contracts with 10 States. The $34 million will allow FDA to provide
money to all 50 States to help them prevent youth tobacco use. This is
not some big new bureaucratic program. The bulk of the money goes to
the States and local jurisdictions.
Of the $34 million, $24 million will go to enforcement and
evaluation, and $10 million will be used to educate retailers and the
public about the rules so retailers can comply. The point of the rules
is not to punish anyone, it is to protect kids. I add that these photo
ID check and minimum age rules were fully upheld by the Federal
district court in Greensboro, NC.
This funding request is part of the President's budget request for
the Food and Drug Administration. I have a letter from Vice President
Gore expressing the administration's strong support for my amendment. I
ask unanimous consent the letter, dated August 28, 1997, from the
Office of the Vice President, be printed at this point in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
The Vice President,
Washington, DC, August 28, 1997.
Hon. Tom Harkin,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Harkin: I am writing to inform you of the
Administration's strong support for your amendment to fully
fund the anti-youth access to tobacco initiative in fiscal
year 1998. As you know, every year, there are more than $1
billion in illegal sales of tobacco products to children and
adolescents in the United States. With approximately 500,000
retailers in the country who sell tobacco, it is critical
that the Food and Drug Administration's request for $34
million in funding be granted in order to stop these illegal
sales to our children.
The requested funding is intended to enforce the age and
photo ID provisions of the FDA rule, upheld by the Federal
District Court in Greensboro, North Carolina. The bulk of the
$34 million will be spent on contracts with states that want
to join the FDA in ensuring retailer compliance with these
provisions. While the FDA is in the process of providing
initial funding for 10 states to begin conducting compliance
checks, the $34 million is needed to allow state officials in
all interested states to undertake compliance checks in
fiscal year 1998.
The remaining funds are intended to educate retailers and
the public about the new rules. We believe that the vast
majority of retailers in this country will comply with the
age and photo ID requirements if they understand their
responsibilities and recognize the important role they can
play in protecting children from tobacco and its
consequences.
Funding the FDA initiative is vital if we are to have a
credible national youth tobacco program in the upcoming
fiscal year; the $4.9 million provided thus far by the Senate
will not enable us to do so. This amendment would add the
needed $29 million to the initiative, offset by reducing the
Department of Agriculture automated data processing funds
available through the Commodity Credit Corporation. The
Administration has determined that this modest limitation
will not impair the ability of USDA to carry out its programs
and provide services to the public.
Once again, let me assure you that the President and I
remain strongly committed to protecting young people from
tobacco and its consequences. Your amendment would allow the
government to have a meaningful enforcement and outreach
program that will ensure the safety of our children.
Sincerely,
Al Gore.
Mr. HARKIN. I have a letter from 33 attorneys general involved in the
tobacco settlement negotiations calling
[[Page S8653]]
for full funding of the FDA initiative. I ask unanimous consent a
letter from the attorneys general be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
There being no objection, the material 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 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 of Washington;
Bruce Ml. 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. Keep in mind the $34 million FDA needs is just a drop in
the bucket compared to the $50 billion in annual smoking-related
medical costs in our Nation.
As I close, I want to bring the discussion back to the central issue.
That is, whether we will stand up to big tobacco and stand up for
America's kids. If we cannot even take this modest step, $29.1 million,
what kind of message does that send?
We talk a lot around here about protecting kids. Well, it is time to
quit talking and do something about it. Let's do what is right for our
kids, right for law enforcement, right for the future. Let's pass this
amendment and give our kids what they deserve--better health and a
brighter future.
Again, I point out that this amendment is in full compliance with the
rules. This Senator is offering the amendment parliamentarily to the
House-passed bill as it came over here under the unanimous-consent
agreement reached with the majority leader prior to the Senate going
out in early August.
How much time is remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 2 minutes and 53 seconds
remaining.
Mr. HARKIN. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi
Mr. COCHRAN. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. President, let me say at the outset, when we started the
consideration of appropriations bills this year it became important
that we work out an arrangement whereby we proceed to consider bills
even though they may not have passed by the House. And as all Senators
know, it is the past custom, and the practice has been that
appropriations bills originate in the House, they come to the Senate,
and they are amended, and then they go to conference to work out the
differences.
Because of the crush of the time and the negotiations on a budget
resolution and for a number of other reasons, it was considered
appropriate for the Senate committee to proceed to consider original
legislation on appropriations here in the Senate, for the subcommittees
to mark up bills and the full committee to report out bills, whether or
not the House had passed the bill or even met in the Committee on
Appropriations to act on legislation.
Consistent with that procedure, it was assumed that it would be
appropriate at the conclusion of the Senate's action on an
appropriations bill to obtain unanimous consent to hold the bill here,
and that upon receipt of the bill as passed by the House, the Senate's
action on the bill would be substituted for the House-passed bill. That
it would then be considered as passed, conference would be invited, and
we would proceed to work out our differences in conference.
The Senate has passed 10 appropriations bills, all but two were
Senate-originated bills; the House has passed only 7 appropriations
bills. The process was working just fine, and with the cooperation of
all Senators, until the agriculture appropriations bill was considered
and action on the bill was nearly completed. Our leadership sought to
get unanimous consent to substitute the Senate-passed bill, to insert
it as an amendment to the House-passed bill when that bill was
received. We could not get unanimous consent because the distinguished
Senator from Iowa had offered an amendment, as other Senators had,
during the course of consideration of the bill. The amendment had been
disposed of, but he wanted to offer
[[Page S8654]]
it again in a different form. So to do that, he objected.
It was discovered that unanimous consent had to be obtained under the
procedure we were using. So if he objected, he could hold up passage of
the House bill, offer his amendment again, reconfigure it, and have the
Senate vote on it again. That is what has happened.
I think the Senate should reject the amendment on the grounds that
the procedure is one where we will have to either stop considering
Senate appropriations bills until the House has acted, or at the
beginning of the consideration of an appropriations bill either get
unanimous consent in advance to taking up amendments, or take some
other action that would keep from happening what the Senator from Iowa
is trying to make happen now. That is, on the whim or on the action of
any individual Senator, to force this Senate to vote on all the
amendments again or versions of the amendments that were defeated when
we were considering the Senate bill. This becomes a terribly unwieldy
and impossible procedure to follow.
We have certain understandings all the time about how things will be
done here in the Senate. There are certain procedures and rules that
are institutionalized. After third reading, you cannot offer any more
amendments, for example. I don't know of anybody that has tried to
overturn or undo that rule. There are other procedures that have become
a part of the practice of the Senate in doing business. The reason for
the rule on third reading is that at some point there has to be an end
to the offering of amendments. No one objected to the procedure we were
following on the other appropriations bills; there was no alternative
proposed; everybody agreed it was fair; it was serving the purpose of
expediting action on appropriations bills; it was not a problem with
the House; no one objected and said they were not going to permit the
Senate to act on appropriations bills until the House has completed its
action. We heard nothing like that from the House leadership.
So what I am suggesting, Mr. President, as respectfully as I can, is
that this is an unfortunate effort to go around the practices and the
procedures that have been established for this purpose, to facilitate
the orderly consideration of appropriations bills, and the Senate ought
to reject this effort. The Senate ought to vote down this amendment.
Tomorrow morning, after all time has been used under the unanimous-
consent request, I will move to table the Harkin amendment. I urge the
Senate to vote to table the Harkin amendment.
It is the same amendment, in effect, that was offered and argued
before the Senate on July 23. A motion to table that amendment was made
and agreed to by the Senate on a record vote. Then, after amendments
had been considered, a unanimous-consent request was made by our
leadership, jointly supported, to limit the remaining amendments to a
stated number. This was after the Harkin amendment had been defeated on
a motion to table. The Senator should have asked, if he wanted to offer
another amendment on this subject, that he be permitted to do so under
that unanimous-consent request. And there was no request that he be
permitted to do so. There were a few amendments left to be considered
at that time, and so the Senate heard that request. There was no
objection, and so it was ordered that the remaining amendments on the
bill be limited to those stated in that order. The Harkin amendment was
not one of them. No amendment to be offered by Senator Harkin was one
of them.
He or any Senator under that situation should be stopped from urging
a right to offer another amendment then after that order was entered.
After the order was entered, then we voted on the bill, as amended, and
it passed 99 to 0 on a rollcall vote. Now, after that has happened, the
Senate is obliged to consider this amendment in order to get unanimous-
consent to receive the House-passed bill, which was adopted on the same
day the Senate adopted its bill. We have to consider this amendment
before the Senate again and have the Senate act on it in exchange for a
unanimous consent agreement that we can then substitute the Senate-
passed bill, as amended, for the provisions of the House bill and go to
conference.
I hope the Senate will not encourage this kind of activity in the
future and make it impossible for us to proceed as we have been
proceeding by acting favorably on the Harkin amendment. The Senate has
to vote down the Harkin amendment or vote for a motion to table, which
will be made tomorrow.
Mr. HARKIN addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa is recognized.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, first of all, I appreciate the arguments
made by my friend, the chairman of the Senate Agriculture
Appropriations Committee. However, let me point out that, first of all,
no point of order lies against my amendment. Therefore, it is in full
compliance with the rules of the Senate. I know of no one who would say
that something ought to be defeated because it is in compliance with
the rules.
I, through my staff, consulted the Parliamentarian's office about
researching any precedents for the procedural situation of my amendment
on the bill. My staff was told it would be virtually impossible to
research precedence because offering an amendment in this posture is
clearly within the rules and would not be identified as having set a
precedent. By the same token, I believe that adopting my amendment
would not set any precedent whatsoever. We are simply using the rules.
Now, the fact is that, as the chairman said, most of the time bills
are passed in the House and they come over and we substitute, in the
beginning, before the process, the House-passed bill, and therefore we
work on one bill, and when third reading is made, that is the end of
it. But in this case, we passed the bill prior to the House passing it.
The rules clearly allow that any bill that comes over from the House
taken up by the Senate is amendable. That is all this Senator is doing.
It sets no precedent whatsoever.
Second, I point out that I did not need a unanimous-consent agreement
to offer my amendment. I could have done it without any unanimous
consent agreement whatsoever. The only reason the unanimous consent was
entered into is I was accommodating to the majority leader that night,
who wanted to get the bill done. I want to make it clear that I didn't
need unanimous consent to offer this amendment.
Third, there was a lot of confusion at the time that I offered this
amendment that, by offering it, it would go to the House, it would be
blue-slipped by the House, would go to the House Ways and Means
Committee, all of which I thought at the time was spurious. But I think
some Members were swayed by that. Even in light of that, this amendment
got 48 votes. I now point out that no such argument can be held on
this, because this will not go back to the House. It will go right to
conference. Therefore, it cannot be blue-slipped. It will not go to the
Ways and Means Committee in the House. So, therefore, there was some
confusion about that at the time.
Next, there was a feeling by some that the offsets I had were not
appropriate. So we changed the offsets, as I said in my initial opening
comments, to accommodate certain Senators who didn't feel I had the
right offsets.
I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from Iowa has expired.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, Mr. Harkin's amendment uses a budgetary
gimmick to offset increased spending in 1998.
The amendment merely delays $29 million in mandatory Commodity Credit
Corporation [CCC] spending for USDA computers and related items until
1999 to offset increased spending in 1998.
The 1996 farm bill included $275 million for computer and related
expenses over the 1997 through 2002 fiscal years. Based upon the
language in the farm bill CBO had to estimate the flow of funds over
the 6-year period.
The CBO estimated that approximately $66 million will be spent on
computers and related expenses in 1998. The Harkin amendment merely
delays the expenditure of $29 million into 1999 thus increasing
spending in 1999.
Under our scoring rules if the appropriations bill changes a
mandatory program the Appropriations Committee will get scored with the
change. If this
[[Page S8655]]
amendment becomes law, the discretionary spending caps will be adjusted
downward in 1999.
This amendment will therefore make it more difficult for Congress to
fund agriculture research and extension, education, and environment
programs in next year's appropriation bills as less money is available
to spend.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I presume all time has now expired.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 1 minute 15 seconds.
Mr. COCHRAN. I hope everybody will read Senator Domenici's remarks in
the Record tonight. They refer to the fact that the offset this
amendment proposes really isn't anything more than a temporary, 1-year
offset. In order to achieve the savings that are purported to be added
to the FDA account by this amendment being offered by the distinguished
Senator from Iowa, a limitation on the use of Commodity Credit
Corporation funds is imposed. But that is only for 1 year. In other
words, that deserves some consideration, as Senator Domenici indicates.
I agree with him.
In addition, if $47 million in Commodity Credit Corporation funds is
really needed for the Department of Agriculture to operate and maintain
its computer systems in fiscal year 1998, as the Department indicates,
those funds will have to be reprogrammed from other accounts, putting
pressure on possibly the Farm Service Agency or other USDA agencies.
I am focusing on and I hope the Senate will focus on why we are going
to have to reject this effort to undermine the procedure we have, or
either change the procedure. We had a procedure that seemed to satisfy
everybody. And now there is an effort to undermine it completely. It
ought to be rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BINGAMAN. 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. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be
allowed to speak for up to 5 minutes on the Harkin amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am a cosponsor of the amendment that
the Senator from Iowa has offered on increasing the funding for the FDA
youth tobacco initiative. This amendment will restore full funding for
the Food and Drug Administration's tobacco initiative in order to
prevent tobacco use by teenagers and adolescents. The goal of the
amendment is to prevent illegal sales of tobacco products to children.
In the bill presently before us, the Senate has allocated $4.9
million for the implementation of the FDA regulations that restrict the
sale and distribution of tobacco products to young people.
This is not adequate funding. The FDA will not be able to enforce the
restrictions on the sale of tobacco to children unless the additional
funds proposed by the Harkin amendment are agreed to. Some have said
that the amendment is premature and the tobacco settlement is still
being reviewed. Here in the Congress we will provide the money that the
FDA needs in order to go ahead with the enforcement called for in the
current regulations.
First, I point out that it is not that clear that Congress will go
ahead and approve a settlement similar to that proposed by the
attorneys general and the tobacco industry. Even if we are able to
agree upon legislation to implement such an agreement, money for FDA
enforcement through that settlement is not likely to be provided before
fiscal year 1999, and the FDA enforcement and outreach efforts are very
important and should not be delayed until that time.
It should also be noted that the amendment has a sunset provision.
The Harkin amendment has a sunset provision, and if funding for the FDA
tobacco initiative is provided for fiscal year 1998 through any tobacco
settlement legislation, then the extra funds covered by that offset
would be rescinded under the amendment. The amendment would raise the
level to $34 million in fiscal year 1998 so that the FDA, working with
the States, can carry out rules to prevent kids from smoking.
Clearly, the need to give more attention and more effort and more
resources to the effort to prevent young people from smoking is clear:
4.5 million young people, ages 12 through 17, are smokers today. High
school seniors are smoking at the highest rates they have in 17 years.
Nearly 90 percent of adult smokers began at or before the age of 18 and
began with that habit. Today, just like every other day of the year,
another 3,000 young people will become regular smokers. If current
rates continue, more than 5 million children under age 18 who are alive
today will wind up being killed by smoking-related diseases.
A root cause of youth smoking is the easy access that kids have to
tobacco. A survey by the Centers for Disease Control shows that
children and adolescents were able to buy tobacco products 67 percent
of the time that they tried. The CDC found that most young smokers
usually buy cigarettes without questions being asked and without any
identification being requested. The American people support the effort
that the FDA is making to reduce smoking among young people. Their
strong support is shown in recent polls among the public with the use-
access provisions of the FDA rule in the enforcement of those
provisions. Eighty-seven percent of the public agreed with the FDA
policy setting a national minimum age of 18 for the purchase of tobacco
products. It is estimated that there are more than $1 million in
illegal sales of tobacco products to children and adolescents in the
United States every year.
Mr. President, let me just conclude by saying that this amendment,
which Senator Harkin has offered and I have cosponsored with him, will
allow us to enforce the law that is in effect in all 50 States--the law
against the sale of tobacco products to minors. It simply restores full
funding to the FDA's tobacco initiative to prevent teenage tobacco use.
I urge all of my colleagues in the Senate to support the amendment.
I yield the floor.
____________________