[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 19 (Tuesday, March 3, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1224-S1225]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT OF 1997

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.


                           Amendment No. 1679

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I might ask the Senator from Rhode 
Island if he has any questions. He said he wanted to ask some questions 
of me.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I would like to direct, if I might, a 
couple of questions to the Senator from Minnesota.
  I have looked over this amendment, and it's an amendment, obviously, 
that is in the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee, as the Senator 
from Minnesota has indicated. And the amendment has just been 
introduced, so, obviously, there have been no hearings before the 
Finance Committee, and it's not a matter that has previously been 
considered by the Finance Committee, if I understand this correctly. I 
ask the Senator from Minnesota if that is accurate.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, that is accurate. Since we are not in 
court, and the Senator from Rhode Island is always gracious, let me go 
beyond the ``yes or no'' answer. It is not at all clear that there will 
be necessarily a welfare bill from the Finance Committee or a bill that 
I can raise this question on. We now have a vehicle out here on the 
floor. My feeling was that, since this amendment calls for nothing more 
than just to ask the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide 
data and analysis to us, based upon what data she has as to what is 
going on with welfare reform, it doesn't seem to me that this really 
needs a hearing. It is pretty clear and straightforward and, I think, 
pretty noncontroversial.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I am voting against Senator Wellstone's 
amendment because I think it is inappropriate to place it on the 
pending bill, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act.
  I do believe it is a good idea to have the Secretary of Health and 
Human Services obtain information from the States as to the impact of 
the welfare reform law on current and former recipients of federal aid, 
but this critical transportation bill should be moved as expeditiously 
as possible to get highway, transit, and safety funding moving to the 
States and our communities as rapidly as possible.
  When the 1996 welfare reform law was considered, I noted that only 
time will tell if that legislation resulted in an unacceptable level of 
hardship on poor Americans, particularly children. Current law contains 
data collection requirements with respect to the impact of the changes 
in welfare law, and as Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee 
which funds the Department of Health and Human Services, I was pleased 
to provide $26 million for Fiscal Year 1998 for the Department to 
undertake the kinds of research and analysis we need to determine the 
true impact of the 1996 law. Further, as Chairman, I will continue to 
monitor closely the Department's performance in administering the new 
welfare regime. If Senator Wellstone offers this amendment on an 
appropriate bill, I will likely support it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I note that this is a piece of legislation 
that would direct the Secretary to develop a plan. In other words, as I 
read page 2 here, it says the Secretary shall develop a plan, to the 
extent possible based on all available information, and so forth.

  What I would like to do, Mr. President, is hear from our people on 
the Finance Committee, which should be very shortly, and I will then 
see that the Senator from Minnesota has every opportunity to bring this 
to a vote, should he wish to, this afternoon. We will work it out. He 
is not going to be blocked in any fashion. But I would like to hear, 
and it may well be that we can accept the amendment, and that would 
save us all some time.
  We are now just trying to check with the Finance Committee. It may be 
well that something from the Labor Committee is involved likewise, 
although it seems to me that this is pretty much a Finance Committee 
matter. When we get back, after our luncheon recess has concluded, I 
will speak to the Senator from Minnesota, and we will then be able to 
go from there.
  Mr. WELLSTONE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Rhode Island. 
I say to him that I will bring the amendment to the floor in good faith 
with some sense of urgency, because I think it is important that we 
know what is happening in this matter. I take the Senator at his word. 
I am pleased that we will proceed this way. I say to my colleague that 
I hope there will be support for it. That is, of course, the whole 
purpose of my effort. If there should be some disagreement, then I 
would want, of course, the opportunity to respond to whatever other 
positions are taken on this amendment.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  Mr. CHAFEE. 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. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sessions). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be 
allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I want to discuss a very important 
matter relating to the safety of our Nation's highways and streets, and 
that is DWI-related injuries and fatalities. To use more common 
parlance, drunk driving. This is a problem that, in spite of many 
prevention efforts, remains a very serious concern in our country.
  The statistics are compelling. For example, on Thanksgiving, 
Christmas, New Year's Eve and New Year's Day 1996, those 4 days 
combined, there were 576 DWI-related fatalities on our Nation's 
highways. In that same year, 1996, nearly 1.1 million people were 
injured in alcohol-related crashes.
  Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for 15- to 20-
year-olds. I think that statistic alone should get the attention of the 
U.S. Senate and the Congress of this country. Motor vehicle crashes are 
the leading cause of death for 15- to 20-year-olds throughout this 
country. About 3 in 10 Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related 
crash at some time in their lives. Alcohol-related crashes cost society 
$45 billion annually, and to make matters worse, the loss of quality of 
life and pain and suffering costs are estimated to total over $134 
billion annually.
  My home State of New Mexico is not exempt from these problems. In 
fact, the National Traffic Safety Administration reports that my State 
of New Mexico leads the country in DWI-related deaths per capita. The 
rate in New Mexico is 11.79 deaths per 100,000 people. This rate is 19 
percent higher than the No. 2 State, which is Mississippi, and it is 
more than twice the national rate, which is merely 5.05 deaths per 
100,000 people.
  Indeed, these statistics paint a very grim picture. What makes the 
picture even more tragic, Mr. President, is that DWI-related injuries 
and fatalities are preventable. It clearly is within our national 
interest to do what we can to reverse this statistic. One obvious way 
to prevent further deaths is to ensure the sobriety of drivers. That is 
why I am proud to cosponsor the bill that Senators Lautenberg and 
DeWine have introduced to establish a national blood-alcohol content 
standard of .08. Additionally, I am cosponsoring Senator Dorgan's bill 
to prohibit open containers of alcohol in automobiles. I urge my 
colleagues to help pass these bills this year.
  Another contributing factor to the problem that I believe would make 
a significant difference in eliminating the problem is the practice of 
selling alcoholic beverages through drive-up

[[Page S1225]]

sales windows. This practice only makes it more easy for a drunk driver 
to purchase alcohol and contributes heavily to the DWI fatality rate in 
my home State and throughout the country. Eliminating these drive-up 
liquor windows is essential to reducing these injuries and fatalities.
  Tomorrow I will introduce legislation entitled the ``Drunk Driving 
Casualty Prevention Act of 1998'' to prohibit the sale of alcohol 
through drive-up sales windows. I hope to have some cosponsors for that 
provision at that time.
  Mr. President, this ban will make a difference. According to one 
study, there are 26 States that do not permit drive-up windows. In 
1996, these States had, as a combined effort, a 15-percent lower 
average drunk driving fatality rate than the 24 States that permit 
sales through drive-up windows.
  In the States with the ban, the average rate was 4.6 for 100,000 
people as opposed to 5.46 in all other States. On a percentage basis, 
States with a ban had a 14.5 percent lower drunk driving fatality rate 
than States that permit sales through windows.
  In 1996, comparing 19 Western States in particular, the nine States 
that have a ban in place had a 31 percent lower average drunk driving 
fatality rate than the States that permit sales.
  In 1995, there were 231 drunk driving fatalities in my home State of 
New Mexico. Based on the 14 percent lower drunk driving fatality rate, 
it is estimated that closing drive-up liquor windows could have saved 
between 32 and 35 lives in that year in my State. Nowhere is it more 
true that if we can save one life by closing these windows, we need to 
do that.
  The difference can be explained because there are three main benefits 
that accrue when you close drive-up liquor windows.
  First, once the windows are closed, it is easier and more accurate to 
check the identification when the customers have to purchase their 
liquor over the counter. Minors have testified that it is very easy to 
illegally purchase alcohol at a drive-up window where it is difficult 
to determine their age.
  A second benefit is that it is easier to visually observe a customer 
for clues that that customer is impaired by alcohol or other substances 
if they have to walk into a well-lighted establishment to make their 
purchase.
  In one municipal court in New Mexico, 33 percent of the DWI offenders 
reported having purchased their liquor at drive-up windows. Some 
members of Alcoholics Anonymous say they now realize they could have 
known each other years earlier if they only looked in their rearview 
mirror while waiting in line at the drive-up window to buy their 
liquor.
  And third, it sends a clear message to the population that drinking 
and driving will not be allowed to mix.
  The Behavior Health Research Center of the Southwest conducted a 
study, the purpose of which was to determine the characteristics and 
the arrest circumstances of DWI offenders who bought alcohol at drive-
up liquor windows compared to those who obtained it elsewhere. Nearly 
70 percent of the offenders studied reported having purchased the 
alcohol that they drank prior to arrest. Of those offenders, 42 percent 
bought packaged liquor, and the drive-up window was the preferred place 
of purchase.
  The study showed that drive-up window users were 68 percent more 
likely to have a serious alcohol problem than other offenders. Drive-up 
window users also are 67 percent more likely to be drinking in their 
vehicle prior to arrest than other offenders are.
  Mr. President, we have had one sort of test case in New Mexico, and 
that is in McKinley County. It was one county in our State that had a 
terrible problem with DWI and petitioned our legislature for permission 
to close the windows in that county, the drive-up windows. They did 
close those windows. Businesses in that community did not see their 
profits cut in two--the liquor businesses. In fact, they saw their 
profits jump. The DWI prevention strategy that was employed in McKinley 
County reduced the fatality rate from 272 per 100,000 in 1989 to 183 
per 100,000 in 1997.
  Mr. President, I believe we have a great opportunity here to reduce 
DWI injuries and fatalities. I plan to offer this amendment to the 
ISTEA legislation tomorrow or later this week. I urge my colleagues to 
join me in cosponsoring that legislation.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator withhold suggesting the 
absence of a quorum?
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I do withhold.

                          ____________________