[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 150 (Tuesday, October 20, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12720-S12725]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. CAMPBELL:
S. 2641. A bill to prevent Federal agencies from pursuing policies of
unjustifiable nonacquiescence in relitigation of precedents established
in the Federal judicial courts; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
THE FEDERAL AGENCY COMPLIANCE ACT
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I introduce the Federal Agency
[[Page S12721]]
Compliance Act. This legislation is the redraft of prior legislation
that I introduced, S. 1166, the Federal Agency Compliance Act, which
was the subject of a hearing on June 15, 1998 before the Senate
Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts,
chaired by Senator Grassley.
At the June 15 hearing, Lynn Conforti from Denver, CO, testified on
behalf of the thousands of Social Security disability claimants, who
are denied their claims not on the basis of Federal circuit court
opinions but on the basis of agency policy that is contrary to Federal
law. In November 1996, Ms. Conforti was forced to quit work because of
severe pain due to failed surgery on her back to correct corvature of
the spine, scoliosis. Until that time. Ms. Conforti had been employed
her entire life since she was 19 years old and paid her FICA taxes into
the Social Security Disability Program for 27 years. At the hearing,
she described her 32-month struggle with the Social Security
Administration that had twice denied her benefits, because they did not
give due weight to the medical opinion of her treating physicians or
the severity of her pain, contrary to Federal court decisions. Ms.
Conforti described her physical ordeal, having two back surgeries,
removing 10 discs, two sets of surgical rods and screws, 38 days in the
hospital, 334 physical therapy visits, 128 physician visits, and 16
months of chronic pain. Despite her disability, Ms. Conforti hopes to
be able to return to work in the future, but she needs the disability
resources to continue rehabilitation efforts.
Finally, in July 1998, Ms. Conforti was awarded her disability
benefits by an administrative law judge (ALJ) in an on-the-record
determination. The ALJ, unlike lower level decisionmakers at SSA, was
able to apply Federal court decisions to her case. For this reason, the
bill I am introducing today contains a provision included in a similar
bill, H.R. 1544, that states that agency employees and ALJ's shall
adhere to court of appeals precedent within the circuit, insuring that
Ms. Conforti and thousands of other claimants will no longer be victims
of agency intracircuit nonacquiescence with the passage of this
legislation.
I want to thank my colleagues, Senator Sessions and Senator Durbin,
for their support for this important legislation and for their
assistance in revising the legislation that I introduce today. Through
the effort of Senator Sessions, the bill clarifies that adherence by
agencies to court of appeals precedent shall be in civil cases and
there is no prohibition on an agency relitigating a matter in more than
three circuits if such relitigation is necessary. Also, Senator Durbin
clarified that certain agencies, such as the National Labor Relations
Board [NLRB], are not bound by adherence to court of appeals precedent
when it is not certain that the court of appeals that established the
NLRB precedent has exclusive jurisdiction over the matter or by another
circuit. Again, I want to thank my colleagues for these clariications
and for their support of the bill I introduce today.
Intracircuit agency nonacquiescence to appellate precedent is not
limited to the Social Security Administration, which was described at
our hearing, but has been a long-term problem with all agencies and one
that the Congress has struggled with since the early 1980's. Finally,
we have a consensus on legislation that will solve this problem and
return us to the rule of law that we expect and that citizens deserve.
I ask my colleagues to support this legislation to ensure Federal
agencies follow the law.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
legislation be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2641
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PROHIBITING INTRACIRCUIT AGENCY NON-ACQUIESCENCE
IN APPELLATE PRECEDENT.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Federal
Agency Compliance Act''.
(b) In General.--Chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 707. Adherence to court of appeals precedent
``(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), an agency (as
defined in section 701(b)(1) of this title) shall in civil
cases, in administering a statute, rule, regulation, program,
or policy within a judicial circuit, adhere to the existing
precedent respecting the interpretation and application of
such statute, rule, regulation, program, or policy, as
established by the decisions of the United States court of
appeals for that circuit. All officers and employees of an
agency, including administrative law judges, shall adhere to
such precedent.
``(b) An agency is not precluded under subsection (a) from
taking a position, either in administrative or litigation,
that is at variance with precedent established by a United
States court of appeals if--
``(1) it is not certain whether the administration of the
statute, rule, regulation, program, or policy will be subject
to review exclusively by the court of appeals that
established that precedent or a court of appeals for another
circuit;
``(2) the Government did not seek further review of the
case in which that precedent was first established, in that
court of appeals or the United States Supreme Court,
because--
``(A) neither the United States nor any agency or officer
thereof was a party to the case; or
``(B) the decision establishing that precedent was
otherwise substantially favorable to the Government; or
``(3) it is reasonable to question the continued validity
of that precedent in light of a subsequent decision of that
court of appeals or the United States Supreme Court, a
subsequent change in any pertinent statute or regulation, or
any other subsequent change in the public policy or
circumstances on which that precedent was based.''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
7 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the
end the following new item:
``707. Adherence to court of appeals precedent.''.
______
By Mr. THOMAS:
S. 2645. A bill to create an official parliamentary station in the
United States fully to participate in the Global Legal Information
Network; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
global legal information network participation act of 1998
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, as the world is catapulted into the
electronic information age, the United States has a rare opportunity
not only to participate in a truly international legal database but
also to sustain a leadership role in setting the highest standard for
the creation and maintenance of such a database. It is also a
fortuitous moment for the Congress to encourage and support an effort
that will inure to the direct benefit of the Congress in its
legislative functions by having access to foreign laws
contemporaneously with or shortly after publication in the country of
origin. This effort, conceived and developed by our own Law Library of
Congress, is the Global Legal Information Network, popularly referred
to as ``GLIN.''
GLIN is an international, cooperative, non-commercial database of
legal information contributed to by governments of member nations in
Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas. As a mission-driven project,
GLIN was developed by the Law Library as a way to organize and gain
access to legal information so that the Law Library could respond to
requests from Congress in a timely, efficient manner since the Law
Library is responsible for doing research and analysis on the laws of
other nations, comparative law, and international law. This continues
to be the goal of the Law Library's participation in GLIN.
The database comprises abstracts of legal material, full texts of
laws and regulations, and a legal thesaurus. The GLIN database is
structured so that the full range of legal material including
constitutions, laws and regulations, judicial decisions, parliamentary
debates, scholarly writings, and legal miscellanea can be added to the
database over time as countries are able to make these contributions.
Since 1995, GLIN has become a truly ``global'' legal information
network and the Law Library has trained technical and legal teams from
numerous countries plus a team from the United Nations. These countries
are at various stages of compliance with the GLIN standards for
organizational, technical, and telecommunications capabilities.
GLIN is the centerpiece of the Law Library's transition from a paper-
based library to one that effectively exploits the advantages of
electronic sources of information. The amount of time and resources
needed to acquire, process, and store foreign legal material make
[[Page S12722]]
GLIN a top priority for the Law Library, and as the United States
station for the network it has also undertaken the task of putting
United States law into the database using the same high standards
demanded of other nations. To date, the Law Library has not received
appropriated funds for work on GLIN.
What other Parliaments around the world are doing concerning many of
the issues we face is vital for our legislative functions. A 1886
treaty, still in force today, recognized the important need for the
exchange of official journals, parliamentary annals, and documents.
Congress needs access to the most reliable, current legal information
available. GLIN can provide this information, but only if it is
developed and maintained properly. With limited resources, and using
the only technology and technological support available from an already
strapped technology support staff in the Library of Congress which is
consumed by other Library programs, participation by the Law Library in
GLIN is at a critical point. The system now requires urgent updating
and upgrading to enhance the performance of the Network and to attract
additional countries, particularly those that are of interest to
Congress. To best serve Congress, it is essential that the Law Library
retain a leadership role technologically and content-wise. To
facilitate such participation, the Law Library needs a special
appropriation to bolster its staff and technological infrastructure on
its own without being dependent or in competition with other Library of
Congress programs.
Besides affording the Law Library the ability to bolster resources to
meet this important growing initiative, this special appropriation will
permit the Law Library through development and training to fulfill its
natural role as the largest law library in the world to set the highest
of standards for the form and content of legal information to be
exchanged between nations to ensure that such material is accurate and
complete, and thereby totally reliable. It also fosters
interparliamentary cooperation.
Mr. President, 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. 2645
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
The Act may cited as the ``Global Legal Information Network
Participation Act of 1998.''
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS OF PURPOSE.
The Congress makes the following findings and declarations:
(1) It is the policy of the United States to promote the
reasonable, timely and authentic exchange of official legal
information between parliaments of nations of the world as
originally expressed in the 1886 Convention for the Immediate
Exchange of the Official Journals, Parliamentary Annals, and
Documents:
(2) participation by the United States in an international,
cooperative, noncommercial legal database contributed to by
governments of member nations, the ``Global Legal Information
Network'' (GLIN), which would be available over the Internet,
contributes to the promotion of security and international
understanding through the exchange of legal information and
promotes the rule of law, and therefore is in the interests
of the United States;
(3) the timely and accurate availability of laws and
regulations of the United States and other legislatures
around the world is of the utmost importance to the Congress,
both in its own work as well as in the interests of
developing and nurturing interparliamentary cooperation; and
(4) the centralization of the function and control of
participation by the United States in such an international
legal database will assist in establishing uniformity for the
electronic exchange and retrieval of legal information.
SEC. 3. THE UNITED STATES GLIN STATION.
In order to carry out the purposes of this Act,
(a) the United States station for the Global Legal
Information Network shall be the Law Library of Congress in
the Library of Congress;
(b) The Director of the United States GLIN station shall be
the Law Librarian of Congress.
______
By Mr. McCAIN:
S. 2646. A bill to authorize the Disabled Veterans' LIFE Memorial
Foundation to establish a memorial in the District of Columbia or its
environs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources.
to authorize a disabled veterans memorial in washington, dc
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer legislation to authorize
the Disabled Veterans' LIFE Memorial Foundation to establish a memorial
on Federal land in the District of Columbia to honor all disabled
American veterans. This legislation is not controversial, costs
nothing, and deserves immediate consideration and passage as the 105th
Congress prepares to adjourn for the year.
As a nation, we owe a debt of gratitude to all Americans who have
worn their country's uniform in the defense of her core ideals and
interests. We honor their service with holidays, like Veterans Day and
Memorial Day, and with memorials, including the Vietnam Wall and the
Iwo Jima Memorial. But nowhere in Washington can be found a material
tribute to those veterans whose physical or psychological health was
forever lost to a sniper's bullet, a landmine, a mortar round, or the
pure terror of modern warfare.
To these individuals we owe a measure of devotion not accorded those
who served honorably but without permanent damage to limb or spirit.
For these individuals, a memorial in Washington, DC, would stand as
testament to the sum of their sacrifices, and as proof that the country
they served values their contribution to its cause.
We cannot restore the health of those Americans who incurred a
disability as a result of their military service. It is within our
power, however, to authorize a memorial that would clearly signal the
nation's gratitude to all whose disabilities serve as a living reminder
of the toll war takes on its victims.
Under the terms of this legislation, the Disabled Veterans' LIFE
Memorial Foundation would be solely responsible for raising the
necessary funding. Our bill explicitly requires that no Federal funds
be used to pay any expense for the memorial's establishment.
I urge my colleagues to join me and Senators Cleland, Coverdell, and
Kerrey in support of this legislation. America's disabled veterans, of
whom Senator Cleland himself is one of our most distinguished, deserve
a lasting tribute to their sacrifice. They honored us with their
service; let us honor them with our support today.
Mr. KERREY. Mr. President, I rise as a proud original cosponsor of
legislation to establish a national Disabled Veterans Memorial here in
Washington, DC.
I am honored to join my fellow colleagues, veterans and friends
Senators McCain and Cleland in establishing a memorial to the brave men
and women who have served our Nation with honor and dignity, but have
paid a grave price.
I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate to
establish and construct a memorial that is not only a tribute to our
veterans, but will also serve the residents of the District as a place
of civic and national pride.
I will insist on an open and fair process as we move forward, and
will be diligent in representing the best interests of the veterans,
the District, the Nation, and the American people.
______
By Mr. HATCH:
S. 2647. A bill to provide for programs to facilitate a significant
reduction in the incidence and prevalence of substance abuse through
reducing the demand for illegal drugs and the inappropriate use of
legal drugs; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
drug demand reduction act
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Drug Demand
Reduction Act,'' a bill that improves demand reduction efforts by
focusing on the anti-drug media campaign, drug-free jails, and drug-
free schools. The bill also contains several congressional resolutions
aimed at encouraging community involvement, rejecting efforts to
legalize illegal drugs, and streamlining prevention and treatment
programs.
This legislation is supported by General Barry McCaffrey, Director of
the Office of National Drug Control Policy. The original companion bill
was introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Portman
and Congressman Barrett on September 16, 1998, and passed with
overwhelming bipartisan support, 396-9. I commend
[[Page S12723]]
them for their leadership and thank them for their efforts.
As many of you know, I worked hand in hand with my colleagues in the
House on this issue, I held hearings in the Senate Committee on the
Judiciary concerning these issues, and more recently, I worked with the
Leadership to include this bill into the legislative package of anti-
drug bills that is being incorporated into the Omnibus Appropriations
bill for Fiscal 1999. This bill represents a substantial step toward
reducing the rates of drug abuse in our country.
According to the respected Monitoring the Future from 1991 to 1997,
the lifetime use of marijuana--the gateway to harder drugs--has
increased among school-age youth. The lifetime use of marijuana by 8th
graders--that is those 8th graders who have ever used marijuana--
increased by 122% from 1991 to 1997. For 10th graders, marijuana use
increased by 81% and for 12th graders, 35%.
Cocaine use among our youth has also seen staggering increases. From
1991 to 1997, the lifetime use of cocaine increased by 91% for 8th
graders. The lifetime use of cocaine by 10th graders increased by 73%
during the same time period. The number of 8th graders who have used
cocaine within the past year increased by 154% from 1991 to 1997.
Heroin use has also exploded since 1991. The reported lifetime use of
heroin for both 8th and 10th graders increased by 75%. For 12th
graders, heroin use increased by 133%. The number of 8th graders who
have used heroin within the past year has increased by 86% from 1991 to
1997. For 10th and 12th graders, heroin use increased by 180% and 120%,
respectively.
These figures are staggering when you consider that each percentage
point represents thousands of teens who are much more likely to become
bigger problems for society as they become adults.
The drug abuse situation in our country is an issue about which I
care deeply. In June of this year, the Judiciary Committee held a
hearing on the growing national crisis of drug abuse among our
children. I think it is clear from all the available information and
from the testimony heard at the hearing that youth drug abuse is not
stable, but is instead rising sharply. Several of the witnesses who
testified described how accessible drugs were to our young people.
For example, Chris who works as an undercover investigator in high
schools in Dayton, Ohio, described to the Committee how easy it was to
get drugs in today's high schools. ``Within the first investigation, I
was approached within three weeks, by someone offering to sell to me.
The second investigation, I was approached in a week-and-a-half by
someone again wanting to sell to me. In high schools, you don't have to
do a lot of seeking, you know. . . . Pretty much, they are going to
come to you.''
What is the reason behind this surge in teen drug consumption? I
believe several things. First, there has been a decline in anti-drug
messages from elected leaders--like President Clinton and similar
messages in homes, schools, and--until recently with the airing of
anti-drug messages developed for the Youth Media Campaign--the media.
Second, the debate over the legalization of marijuana and the
glorification of drugs in popular culture has caused confusion in our
young people. Third, disapproval of drugs and perception of risk has
declined among young people. The percent of 8th, 10th and 12th graders
who ``disapproved'' or ``strongly disapproved'' of use of various drugs
declined steadily from 1991 to 1995. In 1992, 92% of 8th graders, 90%
of 10th graders, and 89% of 12th graders disapproved of people who
smoked marijuana regularly. By 1996, however, those figures had dropped
significantly.
We must change tactics and find a way to do something to stop this
epidemic from continuing and destroying the future of our children.
This bill, which I expect will be enacted as part of the Omnibus
Appropriation bill, will begin to address these problems and offer
incentives to help schools, and communities to reinforce the message
that drugs are dangerous. I urge all of my colleagues to support this
bill. I ask consent that the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2647
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Drug
Demand Reduction Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--TARGETED SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT PROGRAMS
Subtitle A--National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign
Sec. 101. Short title.
Sec. 102. Requirement to conduct national media campaign.
Sec. 103. Use of funds.
Sec. 104. Reports to Congress.
Sec. 105. Authorization of appropriations.
Subtitle B--Drug-Free Prisons and Jails
Sec. 111. Short title.
Sec. 112. Purpose.
Sec. 113. Program authorization.
Sec. 114. Grant application.
Sec. 115. Uses of funds.
Sec. 116. Evaluation and recommendation report to Congress.
Sec. 117. Definitions.
Sec. 118. Authorization of appropriations.
Subtitle C--Drug-Free Schools Quality Assurance
Sec. 121. Short title.
Sec. 122. Amendment to Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act.
TITLE II--STATEMENT OF NATIONAL ANTIDRUG POLICY
Subtitle A--Congressional Leadership in Community Coalitions
Sec. 201. Sense of Congress.
Subtitle B--Rejection of Legalization of Drugs
Sec. 211. Sense of Congress.
Subtitle C--Report on Streamlining Federal Prevention and Treatment
Efforts
Sec. 221. Report on streamlining Federal prevention and treatment
efforts.
TITLE I--TARGETED SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT PROGRAMS
Subtitle A--National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.
This subtitle may be cited as the ``Drug-Free Media
Campaign Act of 1998''.
SEC. 102. REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT NATIONAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN.
(a) In General.--The Director of the Office of National
Drug Control Policy (in this subtitle referred to as the
``Director'') shall conduct a national media campaign in
accordance with this subtitle for the purpose of reducing and
preventing drug abuse among young people in the United
States.
(b) Local Target Requirement.--The Director shall, to the
maximum extent feasible, use amounts made available to carry
out this subtitle under section 105 for media that focuses
on, or includes specific information on, prevention or
treatment resources for consumers within specific local
areas.
SEC. 103. USE OF FUNDS.
(a) Authorized Uses.--
(1) In general.--Amounts made available to carry out this
subtitle for the support of the national media campaign may
only be used for--
(A) the purchase of media time and space;
(B) talent reuse payments;
(C) out-of-pocket advertising production costs;
(D) testing and evaluation of advertising;
(E) evaluation of the effectiveness of the media campaign;
(F) the negotiated fees for the winning bidder on request
for proposals issued by the Office of National Drug Control
Policy;
(G) partnerships with community, civic, and professional
groups, and government organizations related to the media
campaign; and
(H) entertainment industry collaborations to fashion
antidrug messages in motion pictures, television programing,
popular music, interactive (Internet and new) media projects
and activities, public information, news media outreach, and
corporate sponsorship and participation.
(2) Advertising.--In carrying out this subtitle, the
Director shall devote sufficient funds to the advertising
portion of the national media campaign to meet the stated
reach and frequency goals of the campaign.
(b) Prohibitions.--None of the amounts made available under
section 105 may be obligated or expended--
(1) to supplant current antidrug community based
coalitions;
(2) to supplant current pro bono public service time
donated by national and local broadcasting networks;
(3) for partisan political purposes; or
(4) to fund media campaigns that feature any elected
officials, persons seeking elected office, cabinet level
officials, or other Federal officials employed pursuant to
section 213 of Schedule C of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations, unless the Director provides advance notice to
the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate, the Committee on Government
Reform and Oversight of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate.
(c) Matching Requirement.--Amounts made available under
section 105 should be
[[Page S12724]]
matched by an equal amount of non-Federal funds for the
national media campaign, or be matched with in-kind
contributions to the campaign of the same value.
SEC. 104. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.
The Director shall--
(1) submit to Congress on an annual basis a report on the
activities for which amounts made available under section 105
have been obligated during the preceding year, including
information for each quarter of such year, and on the
specific parameters of the national media campaign; and
(2) not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of
this Act, submit to Congress a report on the effectiveness of
the national media campaign based on measurable outcomes
provided to Congress previously.
SEC. 105. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Office of
National Drug Control Policy to carry out this subtitle
$195,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 through 2002.
Subtitle B--Drug-Free Prisons and Jails
SEC. 111. SHORT TITLE.
This subtitle may be cited as the ``Drug-Free Prisons and
Jails Act of 1998''.
SEC. 112. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this subtitle is to provide for the
establishment of model programs for comprehensive treatment
of substance-involved offenders in the criminal justice
system to reduce drug abuse and drug-related crime, and
reduce the costs of the criminal justice system, that can be
successfully replicated by States and local units of
government through a comprehensive evaluation.
SEC. 113. PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION.
(a) Establishment.--The Director of the Bureau of Justice
Assistance shall establish a model substance abuse treatment
program for substance-involved offenders by--
(1) providing financial assistance to grant recipients
selected in accordance with section 114(b); and
(2) evaluating the success of programs conducted pursuant
to this subtitle.
(b) Grant Awards.--The Director may award not more than 5
grants to units of local government and not more than 5
grants to States.
(c) Administrative Costs.--Not more than 5 percent of a
grant award made pursuant to this subtitle may be used for
administrative costs.
SEC. 114. GRANT APPLICATION.
(a) Contents.--An application submitted by a unit of local
government or a State for a grant award under this subtitle
shall include each of the following:
(1) Strategy.--A strategy to coordinate programs and
services for substance-involved offenders provided by the
unit of local government or the State, as the case may be,
developed in consultation with representatives from all
components of the criminal justice system within the
jurisdiction, including judges, law enforcement personnel,
prosecutors, corrections personnel, probation personnel,
parole personnel, substance abuse treatment personnel, and
substance abuse prevention personnel.
(2) Certification.--A certification that--
(A) Federal funds made available under this subtitle will
not be used to supplant State or local funds, but will be
used to increase the amounts of such funds that would, in the
absence of Federal funds, be made available for law
enforcement activities; and
(B) the programs developed pursuant to this subtitle meet
all requirements of this subtitle.
(b) Review and Approval.--Subject to section 113(b), the
Director shall approve applications and make grant awards to
units of local governments and States that show the most
promise for accomplishing the purposes of this subtitle
consistent with the provisions of section 115.
SEC. 115. USES OF FUNDS.
A unit of local government or State that receives a grant
award under this subtitle shall use such funds to provide
comprehensive treatment programs to inmates in prisons or
jails, including not less than 3 of the following:
(1) Tailored treatment programs to meet the special needs
of different types of substance-involved offenders.
(2) Random and frequent drug testing, including a system of
sanctions.
(3) Training and assistance for corrections officers and
personnel to assist substance-involved offenders in
correctional facilities.
(4) Clinical assessment of incoming substance-involved
offenders.
(5) Availability of religious and spiritual activity and
counseling to provide an environment that encourages recovery
from substance involvement in correctional facilities.
(6) Education and vocational training.
(7) A substance-free correctional facility policy.
SEC. 116. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION REPORT TO CONGRESS.
(a) Evaluation.--
(1) In general.--The Director shall enter into a contract,
with an evaluating agency that has demonstrated experience in
the evaluation of substance abuse treatment, to conduct an
evaluation that incorporates the criteria described in
paragraph (2).
(2) Evaluation criteria.--The Director, in consultation
with the Directors of the appropriate National Institutes of
Health, shall establish minimum criteria for evaluating each
program. Such criteria shall include--
(A) reducing substance abuse among participants;
(B) reducing recidivism among participants;
(C) cost effectiveness of providing services to
participants; and
(D) a data collection system that will produce data
comparable to that used by the Office of Applied Studies of
the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
and the Bureau of Justice Statistics of the Office of Justice
Programs.
(b) Report.--The Director shall submit to the appropriate
committees, at the same time as the President's budget for
fiscal year 2001 is submitted, a report that--
(1) describes the activities funded by grant awards under
this subtitle;
(2) includes the evaluation submitted pursuant to
subsection (a); and
(3) makes recommendations regarding revisions to the
authorization of the program, including extension, expansion,
application requirements, reduction, and termination.
SEC. 117. DEFINITIONS.
In this subtitle:
(1) Appropriate committees.--The term ``appropriate
committees'' means the Committees on the Judiciary and the
Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives
and the Senate.
(2) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of
the Bureau of Justice Assistance.
(3) Substance-involved offender.--The term ``substance-
involved offender'' means an individual under the supervision
of a State or local criminal justice system, awaiting trial
or serving a sentence imposed by the criminal justice system,
who--
(A) violated or has been arrested for violating a drug or
alcohol law;
(B) was under the influence of alcohol or an illegal drug
at the time the crime was committed;
(C) stole property to buy illegal drugs; or
(D) has a history of substance abuse and addiction.
(4) Unit of local government.--The term ``unit of local
government'' means any city, county, township, town, borough,
parish, village, or other general purpose political
subdivision of a State, an Indian tribe which performs law
enforcement functions as determined by the Secretary of the
Interior and any agency of the District of Columbia
government or the United States Government performing law
enforcement functions in and for the District of Columbia,
and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.
SEC. 118. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this subtitle from the Violent Crime Reduction
Trust Fund as authorized by title 31 of the Violent Crime and
Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14211)--
(1) for fiscal year 1999, $30,000,000; and
(2) for fiscal year 2000, $20,000,000.
(b) Reservation.--The Director may reserve each fiscal year
not more than 20 percent of the funds appropriated pursuant
to subsection (a) for activities required under section 116.
Subtitle C--Drug-Free Schools Quality Assurance
SEC. 121. SHORT TITLE.
This subtitle may be cited as the ``Drug-Free Schools
Quality Assurance Act''.
SEC. 122. AMENDMENT TO SAFE AND DRUG-FREE SCHOOLS AND
COMMUNITIES ACT.
Subpart 3 of title IV of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7141 et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 4134. QUALITY RATING.
``(a) In General.--The chief executive officer of each
State, or in the case of a State in which the constitution or
law of such State designates another individual, entity, or
agency in the State to be responsible for education
activities, such individual, entity, or agency, is authorized
and encouraged--
``(1) to establish a standard of quality for drug, alcohol,
and tobacco prevention programs implemented in public
elementary schools and secondary schools in the State in
accordance with subsection (b); and
``(2) to identify and designate, upon application by a
public elementary school or secondary school, any such school
that achieves such standard as a quality program school.
``(b) Criteria.--The standard referred to in subsection (a)
shall address, at a minimum--
``(1) a comparison of the rate of illegal use of drugs,
alcohol, and tobacco by students enrolled in the school for a
period of time to be determined by the chief executive
officer of the State;
``(2) the rate of suspensions or expulsions of students
enrolled in the school for drug, alcohol, or tobacco-related
offenses;
``(3) the effectiveness of the drug, alcohol, or tobacco
prevention program as proven by research;
``(4) the involvement of parents and community members in
the design of the drug, alcohol, and tobacco prevention
program; and
``(5) the extent of review of existing community drug,
alcohol, and tobacco prevention programs before
implementation of the public school program.
``(c) Request for Quality Program School Designation.--A
school that wishes to receive a quality program school
designation shall submit a request and documentation of
compliance with this section to the chief executive officer
of the State or the individual, entity, or agency described
in subsection (a), as the case may be.
``(d) Public Notification.--Not less than once a year, the
chief executive officer of
[[Page S12725]]
each State or the individual, entity, or agency described in
subsection (a), as the case may be, shall make available to
the public a list of the names of each public school in the
State that has received a quality program school designation
in accordance with this section.''.
TITLE II--STATEMENT OF NATIONAL ANTIDRUG POLICY
Subtitle A--Congressional Leadership in Community Coalitions
SEC. 201. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Illegal drug use is dangerous to the physical well-
being of the Nation's youth.
(2) Illegal drug use can destroy the lives of the Nation's
youth by diminishing their sense of morality and with it
everything in life that is important and worthwhile.
(3) According to recently released national surveys, drug
use among the Nation's youth remains at alarmingly high
levels.
(4) National leadership is critical to conveying to the
Nation's youth the message that drug use is dangerous and
wrong.
(5) National leadership can help mobilize every sector of
the community to support the implementation of comprehensive,
sustainable, and effective programs to reduce drug abuse.
(6) As of September 1, 1998, 76 Members of the House of
Representatives were establishing community-based antidrug
coalitions in their congressional districts or were actively
supporting such coalitions that already existed.
(7) The individual Members of the House of Representatives
can best help their constituents prevent drug use among the
Nation's youth by establishing community-based antidrug
coalitions in their congressional districts or by actively
supporting such coalitions that already exist.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the individual Members of the House of Representatives,
including the Delegates and the Resident Commissioner, should
establish community-based antidrug coalitions in their
congressional districts or should actively support any such
coalitions that have been established.
Subtitle B--Rejection of Legalization of Drugs
SEC. 211. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Illegal drug use is harmful and wrong.
(2) Illegal drug use can kill the individuals involved or
cause the individuals to hurt or kill others, and such use
strips the individuals of their moral sense.
(3) The greatest threat presented by such use is to the
youth of the United States, who are illegally using drugs in
increasingly greater numbers.
(4) The people of the United States are more concerned
about illegal drug use and crimes associated with such use
than with any other current social problem.
(5) Efforts to legalize or otherwise legitimize drug use
present a message to the youth of the United States that drug
use is acceptable.
(6) Article VI, clause 2 of the Constitution of the United
States states that ``[t]his Constitution, and the laws of the
United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and
all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of
the land; and judges in every state shall be bound thereby,
any thing in the Constitution or laws of any state to the
contrary notwithstanding.''.
(7) The courts of the United States have repeatedly found
that any State law that conflicts with a Federal law or
treaty is preempted by such law or treaty.
(8) The Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.)
strictly regulates the use and possession of drugs.
(9) The United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic
in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrophic Substances Treaty
similarly regulates the use and possession of drugs.
(10) Any attempt to authorize under State law an activity
prohibited under such Treaty or the Controlled Substances Act
would conflict with that Treaty or Act.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the several States, and the citizens of such States,
should reject the legalization of drugs through legislation,
ballot proposition, constitutional amendment, or any other
means; and
(2) each State should make efforts to be a drug-free State.
Subtitle C--Report on Streamlining Federal Prevention and Treatment
Efforts
SEC. 221. REPORT ON STREAMLINING FEDERAL PREVENTION AND
TREATMENT EFFORTS.
(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the efforts of the Federal Government to reduce the
demand for illegal drugs in the United States are frustrated
by the fragmentation of those efforts across multiple
departments and agencies; and
(2) improvement of those efforts can best be achieved
through consolidation and coordination.
(b) Report Requirement.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of National
Drug Control Policy shall prepare and submit to the
appropriate committees a report evaluating options for
increasing the efficacy of drug prevention and treatment
programs and activities by the Federal Government. Such
option shall include the merits of a consolidation of
programs into a single agency, transferring programs from 1
agency to another, and improving coordinating mechanisms and
authorities. The report shall also include a thorough review
of the activities and potential consolidation of existing
Federal drug information clearinghouses.
(2) Recommendation and explanatory statement.--The study
submitted under paragraph (1) shall identify options that are
determined by the Director to have merit, and an explanation
which options should be implemented.
(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to the Office of National Drug Control
Policy to carry out this subsection $1,000,000 for
contracting, policy research, and related costs.
(c) Appropriate Committees Defined.--In this section, the
term ``appropriate committees'' means the Committee on
Appropriations, the Committee on Commerce, and the Committee
on Education and the Workforce of the House of
Representatives, and the Committee on Appropriations, and
Committee on Labor and Human Resources of the Senate.
____________________