[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 100 (Thursday, July 23, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8919-S8923]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. DORGAN:
  S. 2345. A bill to amend section 2681 of title 18, United States 
Code, relating to the special forfeiture of collateral profits of a 
crime; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


                     federal son of sam legislation

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing a bill to correct 
problems with the Federal ``Son of Sam'' law, as those problems were 
perceived by the United States Supreme Court. The New York statute 
analyzed by the Supreme Court, as well as the Federal statute which I 
seek to amend, forfeited the proceeds from any expressive work of a 
criminal, and dedicated those proceeds to the victims of the 
perpetrator's crime. Because of constitutional deficiencies cited by 
the Court, the Federal statute has never been applied, and without 
changes, it is highly unlikely that it ever will be. Without this bill, 
criminals can become wealthy from the fruits of their crimes, while 
victims and their families are exploited.
  The bill I now introduce attempts to correct constitutional 
deficiencies cited by the Supreme Court in striking down New York's Son 
of Sam law. In its decision striking down New York's law, the Court 
found the statute to be both over inclusive and under inclusive: Over 
inclusive because the statute included all expressive works, no matter 
how tangentially related to the crime; under inclusive because the 
statute only included expressive works, not other forms of property.

[[Page S8920]]

  To correct the deficiencies perceived by the Court, this bill changes 
significantly the concepts of the Federal statute. Because the Court 
criticized the statute for singling out speech, this bill is all 
encompassing: It includes various types of property related to the 
crime from which a criminal might profit. Because the Court criticized 
the statute for being over inclusive, including the proceeds from all 
works, no matter how remotely connected to the crime, this bill limits 
the property to be forfeited to the enhanced value of property 
attributable to the offense. Because the Court found fault with the 
statute for not requiring a conviction, this bill requires a 
conviction.
  The bill also attempts to take advantage of the long legal history of 
forfeiture. Pirate ships and their contents were once forfeited to the 
government. More recent case law addresses the concept of forfeiting 
any property used in the commission of drug related crimes, or proceeds 
from those crimes. Hopefully, courts interpreting this statute will 
look to this legal history and find it binding or persuasive.
  The bill utilizes the Commerce Clause authority of Congress to 
forfeit property associated with State crimes. This means that if funds 
are transferred through banking channels, if UPS or FedEx are used, if 
the airwaves are utilized, or if the telephone is used to transfer the 
property, to transfer funds, or to make a profit, the property can be 
forfeited. In State cases, this bill allows the State attorney general 
to proceed first. We do not seek to preempt State law, only to see that 
there is a law in place which will ensure that criminals do not profit 
at the expense of their victims and the families of victims.
  One last improvement which this bill makes over the former statutes: 
The old statute included only crimes which resulted in physical harm to 
another; this bill includes other crimes. Examples of crimes probably 
not included under the old statute, but included here are terrorizing, 
kidnaping, bank robbery, and embezzlement.
  Mr. President, our Federal statute, enacted to ensure that criminals 
not profit at the expense of their victims and victim's families, is 
not used today because it is perceived to be unconstitutional. I 
believe victims of crime deserve quick action on this bill, drafted to 
ensure that they are not the source of profits to those who committed 
crimes against them. I ask for your support.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ALLARD (for himself, Mr. D'Amato, Mr. Faircloth, Mr. 
        Hagel, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Mack, Mr. Shelby, and Mr. 
        Grams):
  S. 2346. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand 
S corporation eligibility for banks, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.


  the small business and financial institutions tax relief act of 1998

 Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce 
legislation that will expand and improve Subchapter S of the Internal 
Revenue Code. I am joined in this effort by Senators D'Amato, 
Faircloth, Hagel, Enzi, Bennett, Mack, Shelby, and Grams.
  The Subchapter S provisions of the Internal Revenue Code reflect the 
desire of Congress to eliminate the double tax burden on small business 
corporations. Pursuant to that desire, Subchapter S has been 
liberalized a number of times, most recently in 1996. This legislation 
contains several provisions that will make the Subchapter S election 
more widely available to small businesses in all sectors. It also 
contains several provisions of particular benefit to community banks 
that may be contemplating a conversion to Subchapter S. Financial 
institutions were first made eligible for the Subchapter S election in 
1996. This legislation builds on and clarifies the Subchapter S 
provisions applicable to financial institutions.
  Mr. President, as Congress considers credit union legislation and 
financial modernization legislation, it is important that we explore 
ways in which we can ensure that the tax and regulatory burden on our 
community bankers remains reasonable. This legislation is reflective of 
that desire.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and 
the attached explanation of the provisions of the bill be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2346

       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 ``Small Business and Financial 
     Institutions Tax Relief Act of 1998''.

     SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF S CORPORATION ELIGIBLE SHAREHOLDERS TO 
                   INCLUDE IRAS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1361(c)(2)(A) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to certain trusts permitted as 
     shareholders) is amended by inserting after clause (v) the 
     following:
       ``(vi) A trust described in section 408(a).''
       (b) Treatment as Shareholder.--Section 1361(c)(2)(B) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to treatment as 
     shareholders) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(vi) In the case of a trust described in clause (vi) of 
     subparagraph (A), the individual for whose benefit the trust 
     was created shall be treated as a shareholder.''
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1998.

     SEC. 3. EXCLUSION OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES INCOME FROM 
                   PASSIVE INCOME TEST FOR BANK S CORPORATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1362(d)(3)(C) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to passive investment income 
     defined) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(v) Exception for bank investment securities income.--In 
     the case of a bank (as defined in section 581), the term 
     `passive investment income' shall not include interest on 
     investment securities held by a bank.''
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1998.

     SEC. 4. INCREASE IN NUMBER OF ELIGIBLE SHAREHOLDERS TO 150.

       (a) In General.--Section 1361(b)(1)(A) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (defining small business corporation) is 
     amended by striking ``75'' and inserting ``150''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1998.

     SEC. 5. TREATMENT OF DIRECTOR QUALIFYING STOCK.

       (a) In General.--Section 1361(c) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to special rules for applying 
     subsection (b)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(7) Director qualifying stock.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of subsection (b)(1)(D), 
     director qualifying stock shall not be treated as a second 
     class of stock.
       ``(B) Director qualifying stock defined.--For purposes of 
     this paragraph, the term `director qualifying stock' means 
     any stock held by any director of a bank (as defined in 
     section 581) as mandated by banking regulatory 
     requirements.''
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1998.

     SEC. 6. BAD DEBT CHARGE OFFS IN YEARS AFTER ELECTION YEAR 
                   TREATED AS ITEMS OF BUILT IN LOSS.

       The Secretary of the Treasury shall modify Regulation 
     1.1374-4(f) for taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1998, with respect to bad debt deductions under section 166 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 by allowing such 
     deductions to be properly taken into account throughout the 
     recognition period (as defined in section 1374(d)(7) of such 
     Code).

     SEC. 7. INCLUSION OF BANKS IN 3-YEAR S CORPORATION RULE FOR 
                   CORPORATE PREFERENCE ITEMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1363(b) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to computation of corporation's 
     taxable income) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new flush sentence:

     ``Paragraph (4) shall apply to any bank whether such bank is 
     an S corporation or a qualified subchapter S subsidiary.''
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1998.
                                  ____



   Small Business and Financial Institutions Tax Relief Act of 1998--
             Legislation to expand and improve Subchapter S

       Subchapter S of the Internal Revenue Code was first enacted 
     in 1958 to reduce the tax burden on small business 
     corporations. The Subchapter S provisions have been 
     liberalized a number of times over the last two decades, most 
     significantly in 1982, and again in 1996. This liberalization 
     reflects a desire on the part of Congress to relieve the tax 
     burden on small business. S corporations do not pay corporate 
     level income taxes, earnings are passed through to the 
     shareholder level where income taxes are paid, thus 
     eliminating the double taxation of corporations. By contrast, 
     Subchapter C corporations pay corporate level income taxes on 
     earnings, and shareholders pay income taxes again on those 
     same earnings when they are passed through as dividends.
       This proposed S corporation improvement legislation would 
     be helpful to many small

[[Page S8921]]

     businesses, but a number of its provisions are particularly 
     applicable to banks.
       Congress made S corporation status available to small banks 
     for the first time in the 1996 ``Small Business Job 
     Protection Act'' but many small banks are having trouble 
     qualifying under the current rules. The proposed legislation:
       Increases the number of S corporation eligible shareholders 
     from 75 to 150.
       Permits S corporation shares to be held as Individual 
     Retirement Accounts (IRAs).
       S corporations are restricted in the amount of passive 
     investment income they may generate. This bill makes clear 
     that any interest on investments maintained by a bank for 
     liquidity and safety and soundness purposes shall not be 
     ``passive'' income.
       S corporations may only have one class of stock. This bill 
     provides that any stock that bank directors must hold under 
     banking regulations shall not be a disqualifying second class 
     of stock.
       Banks that are converting to S corporations must recapture 
     any accumulated bad debt reserve. This bill permits banks to 
     deduct bad debt charge offs over the same number of years 
     that the accumulated bad debt reserve must be recaptured.
       S corporations that convert from C corporations are denied 
     certain interest deductions (preference items) for up to 
     three years following the conversion, at the end of three 
     years the deductions are allowed. The bill clarifies that 
     this Three Year S Corporation Rule for certain interest 
     deduction preference items applies to S corporation banks, 
     thereby providing equitable treatment for S corporation 
     banks.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN:
  S. 2347. A bill to provide for a coordinated effort to combat 
methamphetamine abuse, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Labor and Human Resources.


           COMPREHENSIVE METHAMPHETAMINE CONTROL ACT OF 1998

 Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, methamphetamine is fast becoming 
the leading illegal addictive drug in this nation. From quiet suburbs, 
to city streets, to the corn rows of Iowa, meth is destroying thousands 
of lives every year. A majority of those lives, unfortunately, are our 
children's.
  Methamphetamine is now commonly referred to as Iowa's illegal drug of 
choice. This drug is reaching epidemic proportions as it sweeps from 
the west coast, ravages through the Midwest, and is now beginning to 
reach the east. The trail of destruction of human life as a result of 
methamphetamine addiction is running across America from coast to 
coast. To illustrate the violence it elicits in people, methamphetamine 
is cited as a contributing factor in 80 percent of domestic violence 
cases in Iowa and a leading factor in a majority of violent crimes.
  In 1996, I was proud to be an original cosponsor of the 
Methamphetamine Control Act which has done some good. However, in 
talking to local law enforcement and concerned citizens across Iowa, it 
is obvious that the methamphetamine problem has exploded beyond 
anything we envisioned in 1996.
  The number of meth arrests, court cases, and confiscation of labs 
continues to escalate. In the Midwest alone, the number of clandestine 
meth labs confiscated and destroyed for 1998 is on pace to triple the 
number confiscated and destroyed in 1997. The cost of clean-up for each 
lab ranges from $5,000 to $90,000. This cost is being absorbed by 
communities who are not prepared, or experienced with the dangers of 
drug trafficking.
  Additionally, these clandestine meth labs create an enormous amount 
of hazardous waste. For every 1 pound of methamphetamine produced, 
there are 5 to 6 pounds of hazardous waste as a by-product. This waste 
is highly toxic and often seeps into the ground where eventually it 
ends up in our drinking water supply.
  The dangers posed to law enforcement officers also are greatly 
increased by these labs. Many peddlers of meth are now what they call 
``kitchen'' labs. Meth pushers are now simply using mobile homes or 
even pick-up trucks to produce their drugs. Combining many volatile 
chemicals in an uncontrolled environment, meth labs are time bombs to 
police officers and communities everywhere.
  Mr. President, today I am introducing the Comprehensive 
Methamphetamine Control Act of 1998. My legislation takes a 
comprehensive, common sense approach in battling this growing epidemic. 
It calls for an increase in resources to law enforcement working 
through the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) program and 
establishes swift and certain penalties for those producing and 
peddling meth.
  Also, my legislation expands school and community-based prevention 
efforts at the local level--targeting those areas that need it the 
most. Finally, this proposal calls on the National Institute on Drug 
Abuse to find exactly what makes methamphetamine so very addictive--
especially to our young people--and the best methods for beating the 
addiction.
  Mr. President, I believe that we have a window of opportunity as a 
nation to take a stand right now to defeat this scourge. Everyday, meth 
infiltrates our city streets and suburbs, leading more and more people 
down a path of personal destruction. Families are being devastated and 
communities are fighting an uphill battle against this powerful drug. 
The time is now to make a stand to protect our communities and schools 
by passing this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the bill and a summary of the 
legislation be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the items were ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2347

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the 
     ``Comprehensive Methamphetamine Abuse Reduction Act''.

     SEC. 2. EXPANDING METHAMPHETAMINE ABUSE PREVENTION EFFORTS.

       Section 515 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     290bb-21) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Prevention of Methamphetamine Abuse and Addiction.--
       ``(1) Grants.--The Director of the Center for Substance 
     Abuse Prevention (referred to in this section as the 
     `Director') may make grants to and enter into contracts and 
     cooperative agreements with public and non-profit private 
     entities to enable such entities--
       ``(A) to carry out school-based programs concerning the 
     dangers of methamphetamine abuse and addiction, using methods 
     that are effective and evidence-based; and
       ``(B) to carry out community-based methamphetamine abuse 
     and addiction prevention programs that are effective and 
     evidence-based.
       ``(2) Use of funds.--Amounts made available under a grant, 
     contract or cooperative agreement under paragraph (1) shall 
     be used for planning, establishing, or administering 
     methamphetamine prevention programs in accordance with 
     paragraph (3).
       ``(3) Prevention programs and activities.--
       ``(A) In general.--Amounts provided under this subsection 
     may be used--
       ``(i) to carry out school-based programs that are focused 
     on those districts with high or increasing rates of 
     methamphetamine abuse and addiction and targeted at 
     populations which are most at risk to start methamphetamine 
     abuse;
       ``(ii) to carry out community-based prevention programs 
     that are focused on those populations within the community 
     that are most at-risk for methamphetamine abuse and 
     addiction;
       ``(iii) to assist local government entities to conduct 
     appropriate methamphetamine prevention activities;
       ``(iv) to train and educate State and local law enforcement 
     officials on the signs of methamphetamine abuse and addiction 
     and the options for treatment and prevention;
       ``(v) for planning, administration, and educational 
     activities related to the prevention of methamphetamine abuse 
     and addiction;
       ``(vi) for the monitoring and evaluation of methamphetamine 
     prevention activities, and reporting and disseminating 
     resulting information to the public; and
       ``(vii) for targeted pilot programs with evaluation 
     components to encourage innovation and experimentation with 
     new methodologies.
       ``(B) Priority.--The Director shall give priority in making 
     grants under this subsection to rural and urban areas that 
     are experiencing a high rate or rapid increases in 
     methamphetamine abuse and addiction.
       ``(4) Analyses and evaluation.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not less than $500,000 of the amount 
     available in each fiscal year to carry out this subsection 
     shall be made available to the Director, acting in 
     consultation with other Federal agencies, to support and 
     conduct periodic analyses and evaluations of effective 
     prevention programs for methamphetamine abuse and addiction 
     and the development of appropriate strategies for 
     disseminating information about and implementing these 
     programs.
       ``(B) Annual reports.--The Director shall submit to the 
     Committee on Labor and Human Resources and Committee on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Commerce 
     and Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives, an annual report with the results of the 
     analyses and evaluation under subparagraph (A).
       ``(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out paragraph (1), $20,000,000 
     for fiscal

[[Page S8922]]

     year 1999, and such sums as may be necessary for each 
     succeeding fiscal year.''.

     SEC. 3. EXPANDING CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT 
                   FUNDING.

       (a) Swift and Certain Punishment of Methamphetamine 
     Laboratory Operators.--
       (1) Federal sentencing guidelines.--
       (A) In general.--Pursuant to its authority under section 
     994(p) of title 28, United States Code, the United States 
     Sentencing Commission shall promulgate Federal sentencing 
     guidelines or amend existing Federal sentencing guidelines 
     for any offense relating to the manufacture, attempt to 
     manufacture, or conspiracy to manufacture amphetamine or 
     methamphetamine in violation of the Controlled Substances Act 
     (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Controlled Substances Import and 
     Export Act (21 U.S.C. 951 et seq.), or the Maritime Drug Law 
     Enforcement Act (46 U.S.C. App. 1901 et seq.) in accordance 
     with this paragraph.
       (B) Requirements.--In carrying out this paragraph, the 
     United States Sentencing Commission shall, with respect to 
     each offense described in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) increase the base offense level for the offense--

       (I) by not less than 3 offense levels above the applicable 
     level in effect on the date of enactment of this Act; or
       (II) if the resulting base offense level after an increase 
     under subclause (II) would be less than level 27, to not less 
     than level 27; or

       (ii) if the offense created a substantial risk of danger to 
     the health and safety of another person (including any 
     Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer lawfully 
     present at the location of the offense, increase the base 
     offense level for the offense--

       (I) by not less than 6 offense levels above the applicable 
     level in effect on the date of enactment of this Act; or
       (II) if the resulting base offense level after an increase 
     under clause (i) would be less than level 30, to not less 
     than level 30.

       (C) Emergency authority to sentencing commission.--The 
     United States Sentencing Commission shall promulgate the 
     guidelines or amendments provided for under this paragraph as 
     soon as practicable after the date of enactment of this Act 
     in accordance with the procedure set forth in section 21(a) 
     of the Sentencing Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-182), as though 
     the authority under that Act had not expired.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendments made pursuant to this 
     subsection shall apply with respect to any offense occurring 
     on or after the date that is 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (b) Increased Resources For Law Enforcement.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Office of National Drug 
     Control Policy to combat the trafficking of methamphetamine 
     in areas designated by the Director of National Drug Control 
     Policy as high intensity drug trafficking areas--
       (1) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
       (2) such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 
     2000 through 2004.

     SEC. 4. TREATMENT OF METHAMPHETAMINE ABUSE.

       Section 507 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     290bb) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Treatment of Methamphetamine Abuse and Addiction.--
       ``(1) Grants.--The Director of the Center for Substance 
     Abuse Treatment (referred to in this section as the 
     `Director') may make grants to and enter into contracts and 
     cooperative agreements with public and non-profit private 
     entities for the purpose of expanding activities for the 
     treatment of methamphetamine abuse and addiction.
       ``(2) Use of funds.--Amounts made available under a grant, 
     contract or cooperative agreement under paragraph (1) shall 
     be used for planning, establishing, or administering 
     methamphetamine treatment programs in accordance with 
     paragraph (3).
       ``(3) Treatment programs and activities.--
       ``(A) In general.--Amounts provided under this subsection 
     may be used for--
       ``(i) evidence-based programs designed to assist 
     individuals to quit their use of methamphetamine and remain 
     drug-free;
       ``(ii) training in recognizing methamphetamine abuse and 
     addiction for health professionals, including physicians, 
     nurses, dentists, health educators, public health 
     professionals, and other health care providers;
       ``(iii) training in methamphetamine treatment methods for 
     health plans, health professionals, including physicians, 
     nurses, dentists, health educators, public health 
     professionals, and other health care providers;
       ``(iv) planning, administration, and educational activities 
     related to the treatment of methamphetamine abuse and 
     addiction;
       ``(v) the monitoring and evaluation of methamphetamine 
     treatment activities, and reporting and disseminating 
     resulting information to health professionals and the public;
       ``(vi) targeted pilot programs with evaluation components 
     to encourage innovation and experimentation with new 
     methodologies; and
       ``(vii) coordination with the Center for Mental Health 
     Services on the connection between methamphetamine abuse and 
     addiction and mental illness.
       ``(B) Priority.--The Director shall give priority in making 
     grants under this subsection to rural and urban areas that 
     are experiencing a high rate or rapid increases in 
     methamphetamine abuse and addiction.
       ``(4) Analyses and evaluation.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not more than $1,000,000 of the amount 
     available in each fiscal year to carry out this subsection 
     shall be made available to the Director, acting in 
     consultation with other Federal agencies, to support and 
     conduct periodic analyses and evaluations of effective 
     treatments for methamphetamine abuse and addiction and the 
     development of appropriate strategies for disseminating 
     information about and implementing treatment services.
       ``(B) Annual report.--The Director shall submit to the 
     Committee on Labor and Human Resources and Committee on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Commerce 
     and Committee on Appropriations of the House or 
     Representatives, an annual report with the results of the 
     analyses and evaluation conducted under subparagraph (A).
       ``(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out paragraph (1), $40,000,000 
     for fiscal year 1999, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     each succeeding fiscal year.''.

     SEC. 5. EXPANDING METHAMPHETAMINE RESEARCH.

       Section 464N of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     285o-2) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Methamphetamine Research.--
       ``(1) Grants.--The Director of the Institute may make 
     grants to expand interdisciplinary research relating to 
     methamphetamine abuse and addiction and other biomedical, 
     behavioral and social issues related to methamphetamine abuse 
     and addiction.
       ``(2) Use of funds.--Amounts made available under a grant 
     under paragraph (1) may be used to conduct interdisciplinary 
     research on methamphetamine abuse and addiction, including 
     research on--
       ``(A) the effects of methamphetamine abuse on the human 
     body;
       ``(B) the addictive nature of methamphetamine and how such 
     effects differ with respect to different individuals;
       ``(C) the connection between methamphetamine abuse and 
     mental illness;
       ``(D) the identification and evaluation of the most 
     effective methods of prevention of methamphetamine abuse and 
     addiction;
       ``(E) the identification and development of the most 
     effective methods of treatment of methamphetamine addiction, 
     including pharmacological treatments;
       ``(F) risk factors for methamphetamine abuse;
       ``(G) effects of methamphetamine abuse and addiction on 
     pregnant women and their fetuses;
       ``(H) cultural, social, behavioral, neurological and 
     psychological reasons that individuals abuse methamphetamine, 
     or refrain from abusing methamphetamine.
       ``(3) Research results.--The Director shall promptly 
     disseminate research results under this subsection to 
     Federal, State and local entities involved in combating 
     methamphetamine abuse and addiction.
       ``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out paragraph (1), $16,000,000 
     for fiscal year 1999, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     each succeeding fiscal year.''.
                                  ____



     COMPREHENSIVE METHAMPHETAMINE CONTROL ACT OF 1998--Highlights

       Increased Resources for Law Enforcement. Two years ago, 
     Senator Harkin and other members of the Iowa Congressional 
     delegation worked to provide Iowa law enforcement with 
     enhanced support to fight the rise in methamphetamine abuse. 
     Iowa (along with Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska) was 
     designated as a High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA). 
     As a HIDTA, Iowa law enforcement has received funding to 
     increase the number of federal prosecutors and state and 
     local police available to crack down on meth. This 
     legislation would expand HIDTA funding to combat 
     methamphetamine abuse from $8 million to $25 million, 
     allowing law enforcement officials to significantly expand 
     their efforts and make our communities safer.
       Swift and Certain Punishment of Meth Lab Operators. 
     Federal, state and local law enforcement officials have been 
     working hard to prosecute those found to be making 
     methamphetamine. However, because of the great number of 
     cases in Iowa and other states and the inflexibility of 
     current laws, there are often long delays in prosecution. 
     Therefore, this legislation includes a recommendation by the 
     Midwest HIDTA to provide for swifter and more certain 
     punishment of these offenders. It would direct the U.S. 
     Sentencing Commission to increase the penalties for those 
     convicted of manufacturing, attempting to manufacture or 
     conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. It would also 
     increase jail time for meth lab cases where the offense 
     created a substantial danger to the health and safety to 
     others, including law enforcement personnel.
       Stepping Up Community-Based Prevention Efforts. Critical to 
     any successful comprehensive effort to combat methamphetamine 
     is a strong school and community-based prevention program. 
     This legislation authorizes an additional $20 million to fund 
     expanding school and community-based prevention efforts at 
     the state and local level. Funds are to be targeted to rural 
     and other areas, like Iowa, that are experiencing high or 
     rapid increases in methamphetamine abuse. Funds would be used 
     for education of children, parents, local law enforcement,

[[Page S8923]]

     businesses and others about the dangers of methamphetamine 
     and on how to identify likely users and producers of the 
     drug.
       Expanded Treatment to Fight Meth Addiction. Also critical 
     to a successful effort to combat methamphetamine abuse is a 
     well-designed, adequately funded treatment program for those 
     who become addicted to the drug. Once again, funds would be 
     targeted to rural and other areas, like Iowa, that are 
     experiencing high or rapid increases in methamphetamine 
     abuse. Funds would be used to develop and evaluate effective 
     treatment methods for methamphetamine abusers, to train 
     health professionals about effective treatment methods and to 
     help individuals quit their use of the drug. The bill would 
     encourage targeted pilot programs to develop new and 
     innovative treatment methods.
       Expanded Research to Develop Improved Prevention and 
     Treatment Strategies. While there are a number of local 
     programs and strategies that are working to combat meth, 
     additional research is needed to develop improved approaches. 
     Our legislation calls on the National Institute on Drug Abuse 
     (NIDA) to fund research to identify and evaluate the most 
     effective methods of treatment and prevention, as well as the 
     biomedical, neurological and physiological causes and effects 
     of methamphetamine abuse and addiction. In addition, NIDA 
     would be required to promptly disseminate their research 
     results to Federal, State and local organizations involved in 
     combating meth abuse.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN:
  S. 2349. A bill to authorize appropriations for the hazardous 
materials transportation program, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


     HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1998

 Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the 
Hazardous Materials Transportation Reauthorization Act of 1998. This 
legislation is identical to the reauthorizing provisions approved by 
the Senate earlier this year under Subtitle B of Title III of S. 1173, 
the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998.
  Mr. President, the Commerce Committee spent considerable time and 
effort developing and debating the safety provisions that were 
incorporated into the ISTEA reauthorization bill, ultimately entitled 
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century--TEA--21 (P.L. 105-
178). Once in conference with our House counterparts, we were faced 
with many difficult decisions and compromises. The one area that we did 
not reach agreement regarded the provisions associated with the 
Hazardous Materials Transportation programs administered by the 
Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) of the Department 
of Transportation.
  Since the House had not acted to reauthorize this program in its 
version of ISTEA reauthorizing legislation, we found ourselves unable 
to reach agreement on including it in the conference report. Therefore, 
the Senate must again take action to reauthorize the Hazardous 
Materials Transportation Act.
  Mr. President, I want to stress that this bill I am introducing today 
is identical to the hazardous materials reauthorization the Senate 
passed earlier this year. The legislation proposing reauthorizes 
funding for programs that ensure the safe transportation of hazardous 
materials. It also includes a number of provisions requested by the 
Administration that are intended to strengthen and improve the 
hazardous materials transportation program. And again Mr. President, I 
will reiterate, this bill is identical to the proposal passed by the 
Senate on March 12, 1998.
  Mr. President, it is very important for the Congress to complete its 
work and reauthorize all of our nation's critical transportation safety 
programs. Therefore, I will be seeking to move this legislation through 
the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee in the very near 
future.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mr. Santorum):
  S. 2350. A bill to clarify the application of toll restrictions to 
Delaware River Port Authority bridges; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.


          delaware river port authority compact clarification

 Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I introduce noncontroversial 
legislation which is essential to the ability of the Delaware River 
Port Authority to raise funds in the bond markets. Specifically, this 
bill clarifies that the 1987 law which repealed the thirty-year limit 
on bridge toll collection set by the General Bridge Act of 1946 also 
applies to the Delaware River Port Authority's bridges in Southeastern 
Pennsylvania and Southern New Jersey. It is arguable that this 
legislation is not necessary and that a court would construe the 1987 
law in the Port Authority's favor. However, to assure certainty for the 
financial markets and entities considering purchasing bonds issued by 
the Port Authority, I believe it is worthwhile for Congress to adopt 
legislation making this technical clarification.
  By way of background, for many years, federal regulations governed 
the collection of tolls on bridges throughout the nation. Then, in the 
1987 highway bill, congress repealed section 506 of the 1946 General 
Bridge Act which imposed a 30-year time limit on the collection of 
tolls. The bridges owned and operated by the Delaware River Port 
Authority, however, are governed by a 1952 public law by which Congress 
ratified the Pennsylvania-New Jersey compact establishing the Port 
Authority. Section 3 of that public law provided that the Port 
Authority's bridges were expressly exempt from the 30-year limit of the 
General Bridge Act and were instead subject to a 50-year limit on the 
collection of tolls.
  A strong case could be made that any existing statutory limit on the 
Port Authority was implicitly repealed by the 1987 highway bill because 
the limit in the 1952 compact legislation was drafted as an exception 
to a law that is no longer in effect (i.e., Section 506 of the General 
Bridge Act of 1946). However, since the 1952 Port Authority provision 
has not been technically repealed, I am proposing legislation to 
correct this oversight.
  The legislative history of the Section 3 of the Port Authority 
compact legislation also suggests that the 50-year toll-collection 
limit should no longer apply. Instead of having a lesser restriction 
than the 30-year limit, as was intended by Congress, if the 50-year 
limit were enforced, the Port Authority would be subject to a more 
stringent limitation on toll collection than all other American 
bridges. Accordingly, I believe that my legislation is consistent with 
the intent behind the 1987 highway law to deregulate the collection of 
tolls nationwide.
  The Port Authority is authorized to pledge its revenue, including 
that from tolls, to secure debts. To obtain financing for future 
economic development and to preserve the bridges it owns and operates, 
the Port Authority must have a guaranteed revenue stream. Although a 
court very likely would rule that the fifty-year limit on toll 
collection was implicitly repealed by the Highway Act of 1987, without 
direct legislation to that effect, the Port Authority's bond counsel 
suggests it will be unable to borrow in the financial markets.
  The importance of ensuring this borrowing ability is reflected in the 
Port Authority's essential role in the economic development of 
Southeastern Pennsylvania and Southern New Jersey. The Port Authority 
owns and operates the Benjamin Franklin, Betsy Ross, Commodore Barry, 
and Walt Whitman bridges as well as the mass transit PATCO High Speed 
Line. The Port Authority is involved in port unification through 
another of its subsidiaries, the Port of Philadelphia and Camden. 
Finally, the Port Authority has been instrumental in regional 
development and the commercial revitalization of the Philadelphia-
Camden waterfront. Its programs include the addition of public 
attractions at Penns Landing and the Camden Aquarium as well as low-
interest loans to expand Philadelphia's American Street Enterprise 
Zone.
  Given the importance of revitalizing the Delaware River region, I 
urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

                          ____________________