[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 81 (Friday, June 19, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6698-S6701]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. ROBERTS:
S. 2194. A bill to amend the Arms Export Control Act to provide the
President with discretionary authority to impose nuclear
nonproliferation controls on a foreign country; to the Committee on
Foreign Relations.
nuclear nonproliferation legislation
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill that
gives the President full discretionary authority to address the nuclear
tests recently conducted by India and Pakistan. My bill does not
require the severe mandatory sanctions imposed on India and Pakistan be
removed. Nuclear proliferation is a deadly serious issue. The actions
of India and Pakistan deserve a strong response from the United States
and the rest of the world.
[[Page S6699]]
Sanctions are only one of several policy tools. Obviously, one of the
best policy weapons we have available is hard-nosed diplomacy to
prevent such nuclear incidents from occurring in the first place.
The President must have full flexibility to implement a strong
foreign policy that addresses the recklessness of Pakistan, India or
any other nation that defines the world community. However, the
Administration should be able to do so without the constraints of a
Congressionally mandated list of sanctions. This flexibility should
also include the authority to remove sanctions when appropriate or when
in the best interest of the United States.
Under current law, the United States must impose specific and
mandatory sanctions on any non-nuclear weapons state that receives or
detonates a nuclear device. This mandated action removes the
President's authority to custom-tailor sanctions and set them for a
specific period of time. These constraints dangerously restrict the
President's ability to respond to world events.
My bill provides the Administration with discretionary authority over
sanctions placed on nations that practice nuclear proliferation. The
President and his diplomatic corp are given the authority to either
impose or not impose sanctions. They can decide the degree of
sanctions. They can later remove or modify any sanctions. Additionally,
the President is required to report his intentions to Congress within
30 days of informing the violating country of the sanctions. If it
disagrees, Congress remains free to react legislatively.
This bill represents an important step toward what I hope will be a
critical debate regarding U.S. foreign policy. Unilateral sanctions
rarely achieve their goals. Instead, they damage U.S. businesses and
workers. They diminish U.S. strength and prestige in international
affairs. They generate resentment from allies and competitors alike.
I would remind you that we now have in place unilateral sanctions
against more than 70 nations representing almost three-fourths of the
world's populations. Those are markets lost to the American economy.
Congress and the Administration must now work together to reassess
all instances where unilateral sanctions are imposed. This bill
represent an excellent step in the right direction.
______
By Mr. GORTON (for himself, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Grams, and Mr.
Bingaman):
S. 2196. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for
establishment at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of a
program regarding lifesaving interventions for individuals who
experience cardiac arrest, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Labor and Human Resources.
cardiac arrest survival act
Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, every day almost 1,000 Americans suffer
from Sudden Cardiac Arrest. It can claim the life of a promising young
athlete, a friend or family member regardless of age or health. Sudden
Cardiac Arrest occurs when the heart's electrical impulses become
chaotic causing the heart to stop pumping blood. Tragically, 95 percent
of Americans who suffer from sudden cardiac arrest will die. Today, I
am introducing a bill that can change that statistic.
We know that quick implementation of ``Chain of Survival''--calling
911, administering CPR and early access to defibrillation can
dramatically improve survival rates for victims of Sudden Cardiac
Arrest. Unfortunately, early access to defibrillation may be the most
critical link in the chain and the most difficult to come by. The
Cardiac Arrest Survival Act aims to improve community access to
automatic external defibrillators (AEDs), a machine designed to shock
the heart and restore its normal rhythm. If every community across
America made this easy-to-use technology more readily available, we
could increase the survival rate of cardiac arrest and possibly save
250 lives each day and 100,000 lives each year.
My home state of Washington has a long history of encouraging the use
of AEDs. King County, Washington boasts one of the highest cardiac
arrest survival rates in the nation at 30 percent--far above the
national average survival rate of 5 percent. Communities that have
improved survival rates have ensured that Emergency Medical Technicians
are trained and equipped with automatic external defibrillators. Some
communities have located AEDs in public places like sports stadiums,
airports and shopping malls, and others have worked to ensure that
police and firefighters, often the first to respond to an emergency,
are trained and equipped with AEDs.
Although the technology is proven effective, access to defibrillators
outside the hospital setting is limited. Patient care and survival
suffer from a patchwork of different state laws. Less than half of the
nation's Emergency Medical Technicians are even trained and equipped to
use AEDs. The Cardiac Arrest Survival Act aims to reduce the number of
cardiac arrest fatalities by encouraging a uniform system of state laws
and to improve current emergency medical training programs.
The bill asks the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to work
on model state legislation that addresses some of the barriers to
community access to AEDs such as good samaritan immunity and public
placement of these machines. NHLBI will also work with the National
Highway Transportation and Safety Administration to update the current
medical training curriculum to reflect the improvement in technology.
The bill will also coordinate a database to collect information on
cardiac arrest from existing databases on emergency care. While the
bill is far from mandating anything, I am convinced we can reduce the
number of cardiac arrest fatalities by encouraging states to train more
people to use AEDs right on the scene in a way that the state of
Washington is already doing.
The Cardiac Arrest Survival Act is the Senate companion to a bill
introduced by Congressman Stearns in the House of Representatives that
currently has 80 cosponsors. The bill enjoys broad support from more
than seventy associations including the American Heart Association, the
American Red Cross, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the
Congressional Fire Services Institute Advisory Committee with some 45
members, the Washington State Medical Association, the Washington State
Hospital Association and a number of other supporters. I am also
pleased to be joined by my colleagues Senators Murray, Grams, and
Bingaman as original cosponsors of the bill, the full text of which I
ask be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2196
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 ``Cardiac Arrest Survival
Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Each year more than 350,000 adults suffer cardiac
arrest, usually away from a hospital. More than 95 percent of
them will die, in many cases, because lifesaving
defibrillators arrive on the scene too late, if at all.
(2) These cardiac arrest deaths occur primarily from occult
underlying heart disease and from drownings, allergic or
sensitivity reactions, or electrical shocks.
(3) Survival from cardiac arrest requires successful early
implementation of a chain of events, the chain of survival
which begins when the person sustains a cardiac arrest and
continues until the person arrives at the hospital.
(4) A successful chain of survival requires the first
person on the scene to take rapid and simple initial steps to
care for the patient and to assure the patient promptly
enters the emergency medical services system.
(5) The first persons on the scene when an arrest occurs
are typically lay persons who are friends or family of the
victim, fire services, public safety personnel, basic life
support emergency medical services providers, teachers,
coaches, and supervisors of sports or other extracurricular
activities, providers of day care, school bus drivers,
lifeguards, attendants at public gatherings, coworkers, and
other leaders within the community.
(6) A coordinated Federal response is necessary to ensure
that appropriate and timely lifesaving interventions are
provided to persons sustaining nontraumatic cardiac arrest.
The Federal response should include, but not be limited to--
(A) significantly expanded research concerning the efficacy
of various methods of providing immediate out-of-hospital
lifesaving interventions to the nontraumatic cardiac arrest
patient;
[[Page S6700]]
(B) the development of research-based, nationally uniform,
easily learned and well retained model core educational
content concerning the use of such lifesaving interventions
by health care professionals, allied health personnel,
emergency medical services personnel, public safety
personnel, and other persons who are likely to arrive
immediately at the scene of a sudden cardiac arrest;
(C) an identification of the legal, political, financial,
and other barriers to implementing these lifesaving
interventions; and
(D) the development of model State legislation to reduce
identified barriers and to enhance each State's response to
this significant problem.
SEC. 3. NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH MODEL PROGRAM ON THE
FIRST LINKS IN THE CHAIN OF SURVIVAL.
Section 421 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
285b-3) is amended by adding at the end the following
subsection:
``(c) Programs under subsection (a)(1)(E) (relating to
emergency medical services and preventive, diagnostic,
therapeutic, and rehabilitative approaches) shall include
programs for the following:
``(1) The development and dissemination, in coordination
with the emergency services guidelines promulgated under
section 402(a) of title 23, United States Code, by the
Associate Administrator for Traffic Safety Programs,
Department of Transportation, of a core content for a model
State training program applicable to cardiac arrest for
inclusion in appropriate current emergency medical services
educational curricula and training programs that address
lifesaving interventions, including cardiopulmonary
resuscitation and defibrillation. In developing the core
content for such program, the Director of the Institute may
rely upon the content of similar curricula and training
programs developed by national nonprofit entities. The core
content of such program--
``(A) may be used by health care professionals, allied
health personnel, emergency medical services personnel,
public safety personnel, and any other persons who are likely
to arrive immediately at the scene of a sudden cardiac arrest
(in this subsection referred to as `cardiac arrest care
providers') to provide lifesaving interventions, including
cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation;
``(B) shall include age-specific criteria for the use of
particular techniques, which shall include infants and
children; and
``(C) shall be reevaluated as additional interventions are
shown to be effective.
``(2) The operation of a limited demonstration project to
provide training in such core content for cardiac arrest care
providers to validate the effectiveness of the training
program.
``(3) The definition and identification of cardiac arrest
care providers, by personal relationship, exposure to arrest
or trauma, occupation (including health professionals), or
otherwise, who could provide benefit to victims of out-of-
hospital arrest by comprehension of such core content.
``(4) The establishment of criteria for completion and
comprehension of such core content, including consideration
of inclusion in health and safety educational curricula.
``(5) The identification and development of equipment and
supplies that should be accessible to cardiac arrest care
providers to permit lifesaving interventions by preplacement
of such equipment in appropriate locations insofar as such
activities are consistent with the development of the core
content and utilize information derived from such studies by
the National Institutes of Health on investigation in cardiac
resuscitation.
``(6) The development in accordance with this paragraph of
model State legislation (or Federal legislation applicable to
Federal territories, facilities, and employees). In
developing the model legislation, the Director of the
Institute shall cooperate with the Attorney General, and may
consult with nonprofit private organizations that are
involved in the drafting of model State legislation. The
model legislation shall be developed in accordance with the
following:
``(A) The purpose of the model legislation shall be to
ensure--
``(i) access to emergency medical services through
consideration of a requirement for public placement of
lifesaving equipment; and
``(ii) good samaritan immunity for cardiac arrest care
providers; those involved with the instruction of the
training programs; and owners and managers of property where
equipment is placed.
``(B) In the development of the model legislation, there
shall be consideration of requirements for training in the
core content and use of lifesaving equipment for State
licensure or credentialing of health professionals or other
occupations or employment of other individuals who may be
defined as cardiac arrest care providers under paragraph (3).
``(7) The coordination of a national database for reporting
and collecting information relating to the incidence of
cardiac arrest, the circumstances surrounding such arrests,
the rate of survival, the effect of age, and whether
interventions, including cardiac arrest care provider
interventions, or other aspects of the chain of survival,
improve the rate of survival. The development of such
database shall be coordinated with other existing databases
on emergency care that have been developed under the
authority of the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.''.
______
By Mr. ASHCROFT:
S. 2198. A bill to amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for
Congressional review of rules establishing or increasing taxes; to the
Committee on Governmental Affairs.
the taxpayers' defense act
Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Taxpayer's
Defense Act. Quite simply, this bill prohibits any agency from
establishing a tax on the American people.
Mr. President, as we all know, the United States was founded on one
simple and fundamental principle--no taxation without representation.
In ``The Second Treatise of Government'', John Locke said, ``if
anyone shall claim a power to lay and levy taxes on the people . . .
without . . . consent of the people, he thereby . . . subverts the end
of government.'' According to Locke, consent required agreement by a
majority of the people, ``either by themselves or their representatives
chosen by them.'' The Declaration of Independence listed, among the
despotic acts of King George, his ``imposing taxes on us without our
consent.''
The Boston Tea Party remains the symbol of Americans' opposition to
taxation without representation. The Constitutional authority--given
only to Congress--to establish federal taxes is clear. Its reasoning
also is clear. It is the Congress that represents the people. Only
Congress considers and weighs every issue that rises to national
importance. While federal agencies consider their own priorities to be
paramount, only Congress can determine which goals merit a tax on the
American people.
The modern era of restricted federal budgets, however, threatens to
erode the essential principle of ``no taxation without
representation.'' In many subtle and often hidden ways, federal
agencies are receiving from Congress the power to tax.
They tax by adding unnecessary charges to legitimate government user
fees. They tax through federal mandates. These taxes pass the cost of
government on to the American people--without their knowledge.
The worst example of administrative taxation is the Federal
Communications Commission's Universal Service tax. ``Universal
service'' is the idea that everyone should have access to affordable
telecommunications services. It originated at the beginning of the
century when the first national telecommunications service was still
being created. This idea was expanded in the Telecommunications Act of
1996, which allowed the FCC to extend universal service funds to
provide ``discount telecommunications services'' to schools, libraries,
and rural health care facilities.
Most importantly, the Act gave the FCC the power to decide the level
of ``contributions''--taxes--that telecommunications companies would
have to pay to support universal service. The FCC now determines how
much must be collected in taxes that subsidize a variety of ``universal
service'' spending programs. Long distance providers pass the costs on
to consumers in the form of higher telephone bills. In the first half
of 1998, the tax was $625 million, and the Clinton Administration's
budget projects it will rise to $10 billion per year. This
administrative tax is already out of control.
This is possible because Congress delegated its authority to tax. The
FCC is able to collect taxpayer dollars at levels it sets--without
approval from Congress or the people. The FCC can defy Congress and the
people because it has the power to levy taxes.
Mr. President, some people thought the tax and spend liberals had
left Washington. Not so. Washington interest groups who want to feed at
this new federal trough already are geared up to accuse the Republic
Congress of cutting funding for education and health care if any
attempt is made to rein in the FCC. They will frame the issue as a
matter of federal entitlements for sympathetic causes and groups.
The most sympathetic group is the American taxpayer, whose money is
being taken, laundered through the Washington bureaucracy, and returned
for purposes set by unelected Washington bureaucrats. This is why the
FCC must be required to get the approval of
[[Page S6701]]
Congress before setting future tax rates.
Should tax dollars be used for federal universal service programs and
what amounts or should Americans spend what they earn on their own,
real, local priorities? Requiring Congress to review any administrative
taxes would answer this question.
My bill would create a new section to the Congressional Review Act
for mandatory review of certain agency rules. Any rule that establishes
or raises a tax would have to be submitted to and receive the approval
of Congress before taking effect. In essence, the Act would disable
agencies from setting taxes, but would allow them to formulate
proposals under existing rulemaking procedures.
Once submitted to Congress, a taxing regulation would be introduced
in both the House and Senate by the Majority Leader. The rule would
then be subject to expedited procedures, allowing a prompt decision on
whether or not to approve a rule. The rule would have to be approved by
both Houses and signed by the President.
Congress must not allow a federal agency--unelected and unaccountable
federal bureaucrats--to determine the amount of taxes hardworking
Americans must pay. The Taxpayers' Defense Act will require Congress to
stand up and face the American people when it decides to tax. The cry
of ``no taxation without representation'' has gone up in the land
before, and today we are hearing it again. It is time that we respond.
____________________