[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 52 (Friday, May 1, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4035-S4040]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. ASHCROFT:
  S. 2023. A bill to provide increased penalties for drug offenses 
involving minors; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


                  THE PROTECT OUR CHILDREN ACT OF 1998

  S. 2024. A bill to increase the penalties for trafficking in 
methamphetamine in order to equalize those penalties with the penalties 
for trafficking in crack cocaine; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


    the methamphetamine trafficking penalty enhancement act of 1998

  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, today I am introducing three bills: No. 
1, The Protect Our Children Act. This legislation substantially 
increases the penalties on adults who distribute drugs to minors, who 
sell drugs in or near schools, and who use minors to distribute drugs.
  Each of these crimes currently carries a 1-year mandatory minimum 
sentence. My legislation would raise the mandatory term for each of 
these crimes to 3 years.
  The legislation also makes it a crime for an adult to use a minor to 
commit a violent crime. Adults found guilty of using a minor would be 
subject to two times the maximum imprisonment and two times the maximum 
fine for the violent crime itself. We need to make it especially costly 
for adults who decide to use minors to commit crimes, because they 
think they can avoid the penalty themselves and because they believe 
that the minor might not have a substantial liability for punishment.
  The second bill which I am introducing is the Methamphetamine 
Trafficking Penalty Enhancement Act. Meth production and trafficking 
are enormous problems across America, particularly in my home State of 
Missouri. The Methamphetamine Trafficking Penalty Enhancement Act 
equalizes penalties for crack cocaine and meth trafficking by setting a 
5-year mandatory term for 5 grams of methamphetamine and a 10-year 
mandatory sentence for 50 grams.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the texts of the bills be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bills were ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2023

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Protect Our Children Act of 
     1998''.

     SEC. 2. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR DISTRIBUTING DRUGS TO MINORS.

       Section 418 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
     859) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``one year'' and 
     inserting ``3 years''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``one year'' and 
     inserting ``5 years''.

     SEC. 3. INCREASED PENALTY FOR DRUG TRAFFICKING IN OR NEAR A 
                   SCHOOL OR OTHER PROTECTED LOCATION.

       Section 419 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
     860) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``one year'' and 
     inserting ``3 years''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``three years'' each 
     place that term appears and inserting ``5 years''.

     SEC. 4. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR USING MINORS TO DISTRIBUTE 
                   DRUGS.

       Section 420 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
     861) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by striking ``one year'' and 
     inserting ``3 years''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``one year'' and 
     inserting ``5 years''.

     SEC. 5. USE OF MINORS IN CRIMES OF VIOLENCE.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 18, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 25. Use of minors in crimes of violence

       ``(a) Penalties.--Except as otherwise provided by law, 
     whoever, being not less than 18 years of age, knowingly and 
     intentionally uses a minor to commit a crime of violence, or 
     to assist in avoiding detection or apprehension for a crime 
     of violence, shall--
       ``(1) be subject to 2 times the maximum imprisonment and 2 
     times the maximum fine for the crime of violence; and
       ``(2) for second or subsequent convictions under this 
     subsection, be subject to 3 times the maximum imprisonment 
     and 3 times the maximum fine otherwise provided for the crime 
     of violence in which the minor is used.
       ``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Crime of violence.--The term `crime of violence' has 
     the same meaning as in section 16.
       ``(2) Minor.--The term `minor' means a person who is less 
     than 18 years of age.
       ``(3) Uses.--The term `uses' means employs, hires, 
     persuades, induces, entices, or coerces.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 1 of 
     title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

``25. Use of minors in crimes of violence.''.

                                S. 2024

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Methamphetamine Trafficking 
     Penalty Enhancement Act of 1998''.

     SEC. 2. METHAMPHETAMINE PENALTY INCREASES.

       (a) Controlled Substances Act.--Section 401(b)(1) of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)(viii)--
       (A) by striking ``100 grams'' and inserting ``50 grams''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``1 kilogram'' and inserting ``500 grams''; 
     and
       (2) in subparagraph (B)(viii)--
       (A) by striking ``10 grams'' and inserting ``5 grams''; and
       (B) by striking ``100 grams'' and inserting ``50 grams''.
       (b) Controlled Substances Import and Export Act.--Section 
     1010(b) of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act 
     (21 U.S.C. 960(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(H)--
       (A) by striking ``100 grams'' and inserting ``50 grams''; 
     and

[[Page S4036]]

       (B) by striking ``1 kilogram'' and inserting ``500 grams''; 
     and
       (2) in paragraph (2)(H)--
       (A) by striking ``10 grams'' and inserting ``5 grams''; and
       (B) by striking ``100 grams'' and inserting ``50 grams''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. COVERDELL (for himself and Mr. Abraham):
  S. 2025. A bill to promote the safety of food, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.


      the food research, education, safety, and health act of 1998

  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I believe that protecting our nation's 
food supply should be a high priority for Congress and this 
Administration. Today, America produces the safest food in the world, 
however, more needs to be done in order to make it even safer. We are 
increasingly becoming a global economy. Agricultural trade is on the 
rise. Due to these circumstances, there are new and emerging food borne 
threats which need to be addressed. That is why I am introducing a 
comprehensive food safety proposal, The Food Research, Education, 
Safety, and Health Act of 1998, also known as the F.R.E.S.H. Act, which 
will provide the additional tools and resources necessary to make our 
food even safer. I am pleased to have the distinguished Senator from 
Michigan (Mr. Abraham), join me as an original co-sponsor of this 
legislation.
  As chairman of the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee with jurisdiction 
over food safety issues, I believe this proposal could not come at a 
more critical time. The public is becoming increasingly concerned with 
the safety of their food. Over the past year, there have been increased 
reports of people becoming sick due to food borne related illnesses. 
Children and some adults became ill with Hepatitis A from contaminated 
strawberries distributed to schools through USDA's school lunch 
program. In addition, there have been reports, even as late as 
yesterday, of ground beef contaminated with the E.coli 0157:H7 bacteria 
having to be recalled from grocery store shelves.
  In drafting this legislation, my staff and I have had numerous 
discussions with the University of Georgia. Dr. Mike Doyle, Director of 
the Center for Food Safety and Quality Enhancement and Department Head 
of Food Science and Technology at the University of Georgia, is a 
leading food safety authority and expert on the E.coli 0157:H7 
bacteria. We talked with others, including farmers, health experts, 
processors, and government officials, in crafting this comprehensive, 
responsible food safety approach.
  Several months ago, I traveled to Guatemala to investigate reports of 
unsanitary conditions existing within that country. This was prompted 
by reports of Guatemalan raspberries being contaminated with 
Cyclospora. While I was heartened and impressed by the investments and 
continuing efforts the Guatemalan producers have made in food safety 
infrastructure, there are still legitimate safety concerns we have for 
American consumers which need to be addressed.
  I believe we need to place a greater emphasis on food safety consumer 
education, research, and prevention efforts in order to continue to 
maintain our safe food supply. My legislation is intended to do just 
that. The F.R.E.S.H. Act provides for the following:
  Consumer education food safety block grants to the States.
  Directs the Department of Agriculture to carry out consumer education 
initiatives on the irradiation of foods.
  Establishes a Food Safety Council for the purpose of evaluating and 
establishing priorities for food safety research and education, and 
food-related prevention activities. The Council would be required to 
submit an annual report to Congress on actions taken by the Council, 
including any recommendations for improvement in food safety.
  Competitive research grants to study food borne pathogens and finding 
the best methods to reduce or eliminate them as a threat to humans.
  Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct a number of 
demonstration projects to determine the epidemiology and ecology of 
potential food borne pathogens and develop interventions. The Secretary 
would be required to submit report to Congress on these projects by no 
later than December 1, 2001.
  Authorizes $5 million for the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) to pay for expense associated with the detection of 
food borne pathogens. This funding will be used for the employment of 
new scientists and the acquisition of new scientific equipment.
  Authorizes $5 million to enable the National Institutes of Health 
(NIH) to conduct research concerning medical treatments for individuals 
infected with food borne pathogens.
  Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a Food Safety 
Research Information Office in the National Agricultural Library. This 
office will provide the scientific community and other interested 
persons with information on public and private research activities on 
food safety.
  Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct risk assessments for 
each species of animal that is used to produce food in the U.S., at 
each step in the food chain in order to determine the risk of pathogens 
posed by the species. Risk assessments would also be conducted for each 
type of fruit and vegetable.
  Authorizes $10.4 million for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 
to hire new microbiologists and inspectors in order to decrease the 
risk of importing unsafe food products.
  Mr. President, food safety is a matter of utmost importance to me, 
and the American people. I urge my colleagues and the Administration to 
support this important legislative initiative.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DeWINE (for himself and Mr. Hutchinson):
  S. 2026. A bill to require the Commissioner of Food and Drugs to 
conduct assessments and take other actions relating to the transition 
from use of chloroflurocarbons in metered-dose inhalers, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.


                   the asthma inhaler protection act

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to 
introduce, along with my good friend Senator Tim Hutchinson of 
Arkansas, the Asthma Inhaler Protection Act.
  This bill is designed to protect the millions of Americans who use 
medical inhalers for diseases such as asthma and cystic fibrosis. This 
Asthma Inhaler Protection Act is needed to make sure that the Food and 
Drug Administration is extremely--extremely--careful in how it phases 
out the use of asthma inhalers that contain chlorofluorocarbons, or 
CFCs.
  This bill that Senator Hutchinson and I are introducing today makes 
sure that as FDA phases out the use of inhalers with CFCs, adequate 
replacements are available that meet all patients' needs. That is the 
key.
  Mr. President, there are 15 million Americans who have asthma, almost 
all of whom regularly use asthma inhalers such as this one, 15 million 
Americans who have asthma, many of whom use inhalers just like the one 
I took out of my pocket. They use these inhalers to help them control 
their disease. Without having access to a drug that meets his or her 
specific needs, each of these Americans would be adding much greater 
risk of having an asthma attack or, if they have an asthma attack, not 
being able to control it short of going to the emergency room in a 
hospital, which is where many people had to go before they had access 
to these inhalers.

  I had the personal experience with our daughter Becky a number of 
years ago when she was small and she had asthma. The doctor finally, 
after we had been to the emergency room time after time, said I think 
she needs to use these new inhalers that are on the market, even though 
they had not been prescribed for children at that time. He said go 
ahead and use it. So Becky started using these and it made her life a 
lot easier, certainly the life of her parents, as well.
  Without access to a drug that meets these specific needs, each of 
these asthma sufferers would be in greater danger. Without an 
appropriate medication, they also would have a much worse chance of 
stopping an asthma attack once it has begun.
  What is the problem? The problem is almost all asthma inhalers 
currently on the market contain CFCs. Almost every single one of them 
changes this.

[[Page S4037]]

 Under international agreement, this country has agreed to the goal of 
eventually eliminating all uses--all uses--of CFCs.
  What this means for asthma patients is that over a period of many 
years new inhalers that don't use CFCs will be brought to the market, 
and use of the old inhalers that contain CFCs will be phased out. But 
as we do this, as we comply with this international agreement--and 
this, of course, is something that was agreed to because of the concern 
for the environment, and I understand that--I think as we do this we 
must make sure this transition process is done very, very carefully and 
that we do it with the utmost attention to those individuals whose 
quality of life may depend on the use of these inhalers.
  We must be absolutely sure that if and when we take an inhaler that 
contains CFCs off the market there are adequate replacements that meet 
the needs of each and every person that currently uses the old-time 
inhaler. My one and only goal when it comes to this transition is to 
make sure that all people, all people who rely on these drugs, continue 
to have access to inhalers that have been proven, already proven to 
meet their needs. All other issues are secondary to making sure that 
these patients are, in fact, protected.
  In March of 1997 the FDA released its first proposal on how to go 
about this transition. Now, simply put, the FDA's initial response does 
not meet the goal of fully protecting asthma patients. The medical and 
patient communities have been unanimous in expressing concern that the 
FDA's proposal, when it goes into effect, could take existing 
medications away from patients without adequate replacements being at 
that time available. The bottom line is that the FDA's proposal could 
and will put patients at risk.
  What do we do about it? Where do we go from here? I understand that 
many people believe the FDA has seen the light. Some people tell me 
they plan to correct the problems in their initial proposal during the 
next step of the process, the next step of the process being the 
proposed rule. Now, I would like to believe that this will happen, but 
I am not sure it will.
  It is now over a year since the FDA released its earlier proposal, 
but despite all the public criticism which has ensued there has never 
been a single public statement by that agency that it intends to change 
the policy to address these very legitimate medical concerns. That is 
why I feel congressional action is necessary.
  That is why Senator Hutchinson and I are introducing this bill today. 
We need to be sure that the FDA, as it pursues this transition, writes 
its policy so that all patients are protected. Because of this, I am 
pleased to cosponsor this legislation, S. 1299, a bill that Senator 
Hutchinson introduced last year. Let me say that Senator Hutchinson has 
been someone who has taken the lead in this crusade.

  That bill lets the FDA know in the clearest of terms that its initial 
proposal was unacceptable and that bill further gives the FDA guidance 
on how it should proceed with the rules for this transition.
  Let me again congratulate my colleague from Arkansas for his 
leadership on this issue and for the introduction of his work on that 
bill. Since last year, Mr. President, I have continued to work on this 
issue. I have had my staff explore various options and various 
proposals. We have identified several additional ideas I believe are 
important to make sure that patients are protected and that should be 
included in any legislation on the phaseout of CFC inhalers.
  Recently, I have worked with Senator Hutchinson to develop these 
thoughts into this piece of legislation that we are introducing today, 
the Asthma Inhaler Protection Act. Our bill does these things: First, 
it makes sure that the FDA, before it takes the next step of publishing 
a proposed rule, has looked at several issues that are necessary for 
the agency to make informed choices in this area. Second, our bill 
gives the FDA the broad outline of what the transition policy should 
look like so that all patients' needs are protected. Finally, our bill 
will help save FDA resources by telling the agency to not review any 
new drug applications for products that contain CFCs unless the new 
product represents a significant new medical advance.
  I want to make clear that this bill is not necessarily a finished 
product. We are open to additional ideas and suggestions. We will 
consider any additional thoughts and ideas on how to improve the bill 
to make sure that people who use asthma inhalers are truly protected.
  I hope my colleagues and anyone interested in the safety of Americans 
with asthma could look at this bill and consider supporting it. I 
believe this bill is crucial to get FDA back on the right course. It is 
absolutely necessary so that no asthma patients are ever put in a 
situation where they can't get the best inhalers that fit their very 
specific medical needs.
  Again, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this bill, which I believe 
is a matter of good common sense, and a bill that will help protect the 
asthma sufferers of this country.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BRYAN (for himself and Mr. Reid):
  S. 2027. A bill to clarify the fair tax treatment of meals provided 
hotel and restaurant employees in non-discriminatory employee 
cafeterias; to the Committee on Finance.


                     the working meals fairness act

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Working Meals 
Fairness Act for myself and Senator Bryan, which provides for the 
exemption of meals from consideration as taxable income when provided 
as a benefit to employees of the service sector.
  Mr. President, during the past few days the Finance Committee has 
conducted hearings in which victims of IRS injustice have provided 
poignant testimony of their experiences at the hands of overzealous IRS 
agents. Their testimony has made us all aware that the time has come to 
overhaul the manner in which the IRS deals with the honest law-abiding 
citizens of this country. This overhaul will require a fundamental 
restructuring of the IRS customer service organization and a fresh look 
at what constitutes fairness.
  Mr. President, as part of this fresh look, I am joining Senator Bryan 
today in introducing legislation to remedy an unquestionably unfair tax 
policy resulting from a recent tax court decision. It was a decision in 
support of the IRS' position which is going to have widespread effect 
on the working men and women who are employed by our hotels, 
restaurants and resorts. In short, this decision eliminated the 
deduction for meals provided to service industry employees by their 
employer. Our legislation would reform the manner in which gratuitous 
meals are treated as taxable income under current IRS code.
  Mr. President, all across this country, workers are going to be asked 
to pay taxes to the IRS for the meal they receive while on duty in the 
service industry. These workers often work more than one job, while 
raising a family, and for all intents and purposes play by the rules. 
It isn't enough that these same workers pay transportation costs and 
child care costs to hold these jobs. Now we must tax the hand that 
feeds them. These meals are often provided for the convenience of both 
the employer and employee in order to provide the enhanced customer 
service which has become the hallmark of the service sector in this 
country.
  Mr. President, our legislation, simply put, would exempt any meal, 
provided as a benefit of employment to an employee during their shift 
of duty, from being treated as taxable income.
  Mr. President, this nation depends heavily on the vital contributions 
of the service industry. It is an industry characterized by high 
employee turnover, low wages and in many cases, poor benefits. In order 
to recruit and retain the quality worker that the industry depends 
upon, and we as consumers have come to expect, the provision of a meal 
is the least we can offer. To tax this meal is going a bit too far in 
my judgement. Isn't it ironic that we maintain a policy which costs the 
average service worker $300 a year in additional taxes? Isn't it ironic 
. . . we often tax those who can least afford to pay?
  Mr. President, my job in this body is to stand up for the workers of 
Nevada. I ask my colleagues to stand with me on this matter on behalf 
of workers in their state. Because of policies like

[[Page S4038]]

this, the average American is justified in their perception that the 
rich get richer and the poor stay poor. I therefore ask my colleagues 
in this body to join with me in taking another step on behalf of the 
American worker who sent us here to represent their interests.
  Mr. President, it is time we all ask the IRS to leave the service 
workers of America alone. They are already paying their fair share.
  Mr. President, I request unanimous consent that the Working Meals 
Fairness Act be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2027

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,
       Section 119 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 
     by adding the following new subsection:
       (e) In the case of an employee of a hotel or restaurant, 
     gross income shall not include the value of meals furnished 
     to such employee by an employer in a non-discriminatory 
     employee cafeteria located on the business premises of the 
     employer immediately before, immediately after, or during 
     work shifts.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ASHCROFT:
  S. 2028. A bill to amend the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 
1988 to extend the authorization for the Office of National Drug 
Control Policy until September 30, 2000, to expand the responsibilities 
and powers of the Director of the Office of National Drug Control 
Policy, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


      the drug czar responsibility and accountability act of 1998

  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I am introducing today the Drug Czar 
Responsibility and Accountability Act. It adds to the responsibilities 
of the drug czar's office the establishment of Federal policies, goals 
and performance measures, including specific reduction targets.
  Why is such a measure needed? Consider this: Overall illicit drug use 
among children age 12 to 17 was 5.3 percent when the President took 
office. In 1996, it was 9 percent. That is an increase of 70 percent 
since 1993. Now, the President proposes to cut drug use by 20 percent 
by the year 2002. In other words, 2 years after the President wants to 
leave office, he hopes to get teen drug use to only 128 percent of 
where it was when he took office.
  I happen to have been a Boy Scout. I think most of us in the Chamber 
have had some association with scouting. We either hauled kids to the 
campfires, to the Brownies, or to the Cub Scouts or Boy Scouts. The 
fundamental principle of scouting is you always leave the campground a 
little better than you found it.
  Here we have a President who, in terms of teen drug use, wants to set 
as a goal that there will be 128 percent of the drug use that there was 
when he came into office, and that goal isn't even supposed to be 
attained until 2 years after he leaves office.
  I don't think we will ever achieve greatness in our culture if we 
don't at least aspire to good things. Our opportunity is to leave the 
campground better than we found it, not worse than we found it, and 
certainly not 128 percent worse than we found it. We cannot defer 
maintenance of the campground until after we are gone.
  The tradition of America is to provide to the next generation a 
broader set of opportunities, a brighter set of horizons than we have 
ever known before. That should not be forgotten when we talk about 
curtailing the scourge of drugs on our young people.
  Here we have a President who wants to instruct a drug czar to ratchet 
the drug problem all the way back to 128 percent of what it was when he 
started and not to get that done until 2 years after he leaves office. 
I think it is disgraceful.
  Mr. President, because of my concern for combating underage drug use, 
I will also offer an amendment to the tobacco bill when it comes to the 
Senate floor to make certain the epidemic of underage illegal drug use 
is addressed in that respect. My amendment will allow States to use 
tobacco settlement funds for anti-illegal drug and law enforcement 
purposes, not just teen smoking programs.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2028

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT REFERENCES.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Drug Czar 
     Responsibility and Accountability Act of 1998''.
       (b) Amendment References.--Except as otherwise expressly 
     provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of the National 
     Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Overall drug use among children aged 12 to 17 in 1992 
     was 5.3 percent. In 1996, it was 9 percent, an increase of 70 
     percent.
       (2) Use of any illicit drug among 8th graders in 1992 was 
     12.9 percent. In 1997, it was 22.1 percent, an increase of 71 
     percent.
       (3) Use of any illicit drug among 10th graders in 1992 was 
     20.4 percent. In 1997, it was 38.5 percent, an increase of 91 
     percent.
       (4) Use of any illicit drug among 12th graders in 1992 was 
     27.1 percent. In 1997, it was 42.4 percent, an increase of 56 
     percent.
       (5) Use of marijuana among 8th graders in 1992 was 3.7 
     percent. In 1997, it was 10.2 percent, an increase of 176 
     percent.
       (6) Use of marijuana among children aged 12 to 17 in 1992 
     was 3.4 percent. In 1996, it was 7.1 percent, an increase of 
     109 percent.
       (7) Use of cocaine among children aged 12 to 17 in 1992 was 
     0.3 percent. In 1996, it was 0.6 percent, an increase of 100 
     percent.
       (8) Marijuana-related medical emergencies in 1992 totaled 
     23,997. In 1996, there were 50,037 such emergencies, an 
     increase of 108 percent.
       (9) Cocaine-related medical emergencies in 1992 totaled 
     119,843. In 1996, there were 144,180 such emergencies, an 
     increase of 20 percent.
       (10) Heroin-related medical emergencies in 1992 totaled 
     48,003. In 1996, there were 70,463 such emergencies, an 
     increase of 47 percent.

     SEC. 3. EXPANSION OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF DIRECTOR.

       (a) Expansion of Responsibilities.--Section 1003(b) (21 
     U.S.C. 1502(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) establish Federal policies, objectives, goals, 
     priorities, and performance measures (including specific 
     annual agency targets expressed in terms of precise 
     percentages) for the National Drug Control Program and for 
     each National Drug Control Program agency, which shall 
     include targets for reducing the levels of overall unlawful 
     drug use, adolescent unlawful drug use, and drug-related 
     emergency room incidents to January 19, 1993 levels;'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) coordinate, oversee, and evaluate the effectiveness 
     of the implementation of the policies, objectives, goals, 
     performance measures, and priorities established under 
     paragraph (1) and the fulfillment of the responsibilities of 
     the National Drug Control Program agencies under the National 
     Drug Control Strategy;'';
       (3) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``and nongovernmental 
     entities involved in demand reduction'' after 
     ``governments'';
       (4) in paragraph (7), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (5) in paragraph (8), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon; and
       (6) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(9) require each National Drug Control Program agency to 
     submit to the Director on a semi-annual basis (beginning with 
     the first 6 months of 1999) an evaluation of progress by the 
     agency with respect to drug control program goals using the 
     performance measures referred to in paragraph (1), including 
     progress with respect to--
       ``(A) success in reducing domestic and foreign sources of 
     illegal drugs;
       ``(B) success in protecting the borders of the United 
     States (and in particular the Southwestern border of the 
     United States) from penetration by illegal narcotics;
       ``(C) success in reducing violent crime associated with 
     drug use in the United States;
       ``(D) success in reducing the negative health and social 
     consequences of drug use in the United States; and
       ``(E) implementation of drug treatment and prevention 
     programs in the United States and improvements in the 
     adequacy and effectiveness of such programs;
       ``(10) submit to Congress on a semiannual basis, not later 
     than 60 days after the date of the last day of the applicable 
     6-month period, a summary of--
       ``(A) each evaluation received by the Director under 
     paragraph (9); and
       ``(B) the progress of each National Drug Control Program 
     agency toward the drug control program goals of the agency 
     using the performance measures described in paragraph (1);
       ``(11) require the National Drug Control Program agencies 
     to submit to the Director not later than February 1 of each 
     year a detailed accounting of all funds expended by the 
     agencies for National Drug Control Program activities during 
     the previous fiscal

[[Page S4039]]

     year, and require such accounting to be authenticated by the 
     Inspector General for each agency prior to submission to the 
     Director;
       ``(12) submit to Congress not later than April 1 of each 
     year the information submitted to the Director under 
     paragraph (11);
       ``(13) submit to Congress not later than August 1 of each 
     year a report including--
       ``(A) the budget guidance provided by the Director to each 
     National Drug Control Program agency for the fiscal year in 
     which the report is submitted and for the other fiscal years 
     within the applicable 5-year budget plan relating to such 
     fiscal year; and
       ``(B) a summary of the request of each National Drug 
     Control Program agency to the Director under this Act (prior 
     to review of the request by the Office of Management and 
     Budget) for the resources required to achieve the targets of 
     the agency under this Act;
       ``(14) act as a representative of the President before 
     Congress on all aspects of the National Drug Control Program;
       ``(15) act as the primary spokesperson of the President on 
     drug issues;
       ``(16) make recommendations to National Drug Control 
     Program agency heads with respect to implementation of 
     Federal counter-drug programs;
       ``(17) take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt 
     to legalize the use of a substance (in any form) that--
       ``(A) is listed in schedule I of section 202 of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and
       ``(B) has not been approved for use for medical purposes by 
     the Food and Drug Administration; and
       ``(18) ensure that drug prevention and drug treatment 
     research and information is effectively disseminated by 
     National Drug Control Program agencies to State and local 
     governments and nongovernmental entities involved in demand 
     reduction by--
       ``(A) encouraging formal consultation between any such 
     agency that conducts or sponsors research, and any such 
     agency that disseminates information in developing research 
     and information product development agendas;
       ``(B) encouraging such agencies (as appropriate) to develop 
     and implement dissemination plans that specifically target 
     State and local governments and nongovernmental entities 
     involved in demand reduction; and
       ``(C) developing a single interagency clearinghouse for the 
     dissemination of research and information by such agencies to 
     State and local governments and nongovernmental agencies 
     involved in demand reduction.''.
       (b) Survey of Drug Use.--
       (1) In general.--The University of Michigan shall not be 
     prohibited under any law from conducting the survey of drug 
     use among young people in the United States known as the 
     Monitoring the Future Survey.
       (2) Other surveys.--The National Parents' Resource 
     Institute for Drug Education in Atlanta, Georgia, shall not 
     be prohibited under any law from conducting the survey of 
     drug use among young people in the United States known as the 
     National PRIDE Survey.

     SEC. 4. EXPANSION OF POWERS OF DIRECTOR.

       Section 1003(d) (21 U.S.C. 1502(d)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (9), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(10) require the heads of National Drug Control Program 
     agencies to provide the Director with statistics, studies, 
     reports, and any other information regarding Federal control 
     of drug abuse;
       ``(11) require the heads of National Drug Control Program 
     agencies to provide the Director with information regarding 
     any position (before an individual is nominated for such 
     position) that--
       ``(A) relates to the National Drug Control Program;
       ``(B) is at or above the level of Deputy Assistant 
     Secretary; and
       ``(C) involves responsibility for Federal counternarcotics 
     or antidrug programs; and
       ``(12) make recommendations to the National Drug 
     Intelligence Center on the specific projects that the 
     Director determines will enhance the effectiveness of 
     implementation of the National Drug Control Strategy.''.

     SEC. 5. SUBMISSION OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY.

       (a) In General.--Section 1005(a) (21 U.S.C. 1504(a)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(A) include comprehensive, research-based, specific, 
     long-range goals and performance measures (including specific 
     annual targets expressed in terms of precise percentages) for 
     reducing drug abuse and the consequences of drug abuse in the 
     United States;'';
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (C) by striking subparagraph (D);
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) include 4-year projections for National Drug Control 
     Program priorities (including budget priorities); and
       ``(E) review international, Federal, State, local, and 
     private sector drug control activities to ensure that the 
     United States pursues well-coordinated and effective drug 
     control at all levels of government.'';
       (2) in paragraph (3)(A), by striking clauses (iv) and (v) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(iv) private citizens and organizations with experience 
     and expertise in demand reduction;
       ``(v) private citizens and organizations with experience 
     and expertise in supply reduction; and
       ``(vi) appropriate representatives of foreign 
     governments.'';
       (3) in paragraph (4)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking clauses (i) through 
     (vi) and inserting the following:
       ``(i) the quantities of cocaine, heroin, marijuana, 
     methamphetamine, ecstasy, and rohypnol available for 
     consumption in the United States;
       ``(ii) the amount of cocaine, heroin, marijuana, ecstasy, 
     rohypnol, methamphetamine, and precursor chemicals entering 
     the United States;
       ``(iii) the number of hectares of marijuana, poppy, and 
     coca cultivated and destroyed domestically and in other 
     countries;
       ``(iv) the number of metric tons of marijuana, cocaine, 
     heroin, and methamphetamine seized;
       ``(v) the number of cocaine and methamphetamine processing 
     labs destroyed domestically and in other countries;
       ``(vi) changes in the price and purity of heroin and 
     cocaine, changes in price of methamphetamine, and changes in 
     tetrahydrocannabinol level of marijuana;'';
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (C) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) assessment of the cultivation of illegal drugs in the 
     United States.''; and
       (4) in paragraph (5)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``February 1, 1995'' and inserting ``February 1, 1999'';
       (B) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``second'';
       (C) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (D) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (E) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) a description of the National Drug Control Program 
     performance measures described in subsection (a)(2)(A).''.
       (b) Goals and Performance Measures for National Drug 
     Control Strategy.--Section 1005(b) (21 U.S.C. 1504(b)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the heading, by striking ``, Objectives, and 
     Priorities'' and inserting ``and Performance Measures'';
       (2) in the matter after the heading, by inserting ``(1)'' 
     before ``Each National Drug Control Strategy'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (6) as 
     subparagraphs (A) through (F), respectively;
       (4) in subparagraph (A) (as redesignated by paragraph (3)), 
     by striking ``and priorities'' and inserting ``and 
     performance measures'';
       (5) in subparagraph (C) (as redesignated by paragraph (3)), 
     by striking ``3-year projections'' and inserting ``4-year 
     projections''; and
       (6) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) In establishing the performance measures required by 
     this subsection, the Director shall--
       ``(A) establish performance measures and targets expressed 
     in terms of precise percentages for each National Drug 
     Control Strategy goal and objective;
       ``(B) revise such performance measures and targets as 
     necessary, and reflect such performance measures and targets 
     in the National Drug Control Program budget submitted to 
     Congress;
       ``(C) consult with affected National Drug Control Program 
     agencies;
       ``(D) identify programs and activities of National Drug 
     Control Program agencies that support the goals of the 
     National Drug Control Strategy;
       ``(E) evaluate in detail the implementation by each 
     National Drug Control Program agency of program activities 
     supporting the National Drug Control Strategy;
       ``(F) monitor consistency between the drug-related goals of 
     the National Drug Control Program agencies and ensure that 
     drug control agency goals and budgets fully support, and are 
     fully consistent with, the National Drug Control Strategy;
       ``(G) coordinate the development and implementation of 
     national drug control data collection and reporting systems 
     to support Federal policy formulation and performance 
     measurement;
       ``(H) ensure that no Federal drug control funds are 
     expended for any study or contract relating to the 
     legalization (for a medical use or any other use) of a 
     substance listed in schedule I of section 202 of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and
       ``(I) ensure that no Federal funds appropriated for the 
     High Intensity Drug Trafficking Program are expended for the 
     expansion of drug treatment programs.''.

     SEC. 6. REPORT ON DESIGNATION OF HIGH INTENSITY DRUG 
                   TRAFFICKING AREAS.

       Section 1005(c)(3) (21 U.S.C. 1504(c)(3)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(3) Annual report.--Not later than March 1 of each year, 
     the Director shall submit to Congress a report--
       ``(A) on the effectiveness of, and need for, the 
     designation of areas under this subsection as high intensity 
     drug trafficking areas; and
       ``(B) that includes any recommendations of the Director for 
     legislative action with respect to such designation.''.

[[Page S4040]]

     SEC. 7. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 1011 (21 U.S.C. 1508) is amended by striking ``8 
     succeeding fiscal years'' and inserting ``10 succeeding 
     fiscal years''.

     SEC. 8. REPORT REQUIRED.

       Not later than November 1, 1998, the Director of the Office 
     of National Drug Control Policy shall submit to Congress a 
     report including--
       (1) proposed goals, targets, performance measures (as 
     described in section 1003(b)(1) of the National Narcotics 
     Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1502(b)(1))), and specific 
     initiatives with respect to the National Drug Control 
     Program, including the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area 
     Program; and
       (2) proposals to coordinate the efforts of all National 
     Drug Control Program agencies.

     SEC. 9. CONSISTENCY WITH NATIONAL SECURITY ACT OF 1947.

       Section 1004 (21 U.S.C. 1503) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``(1)'';
       (B) by striking ``(2)(A)'' and inserting ``(b) Consistency 
     With National Security Act of 1947.--(1)'';
       (C) by striking ``(B)'' and inserting ``(2)''; and
       (D) by striking ``subparagraph (A)'' and inserting 
     ``paragraph (1)''; and
       (2) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections 
     (c) and (d), respectively.

                          ____________________