[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 20 (Tuesday, February 13, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1314-S1321]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr.  Biden, Mr. DeWine, and 
        Mr. Thurmond):
  S. 304. A bill to reduce illegal drug use and trafficking and to help 
provide appropriate drug education, prevention, and treatment programs; 
to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, today we are taking an important step in 
our effort to rid our nation of drug abuse. There has lately developed 
a bipartisan consensus that realizes that supply reduction needs to be 
complemented with demand reduction in our fight to combat drugs. Yes, 
we must continue our vigilant defense of our borders and our streets 
against those who make their living by manufacturing and selling these 
harmful substances. And yes, we must sustain our vigorous law 
enforcement offensive against these merchants of misery. But the time 
has come to increase the resources we devote to prevent people from 
using drugs in the first place and to breaking the cycle of addiction 
for those whose lives are devastated and consumed by these substances. 
Only through such a balanced approach can we remove the scourge of 
drugs from our society.
  Last session, to stem the maddening increase in methamphetamine 
manufacturing and trafficking in America, Congress passed and the 
President signed into law the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act, a 
bill which I had authored. It was a balanced bill that provided law 
enforcement with several needed tools to help turn back the tide of 
methamphetamine proliferation, and it also contained several 
significant prevention and treatment provisions. In particular, one of 
the treatment provisions offered an innovative approach to how drug 
addicted patients can seek and obtain treatment. As science and 
medicine continue to make significant strides in developing drugs that 
promise to make treatment more effective, we must pave the way to 
ensure that these drugs can be administered in an effective manner, 
Indeed, this provision did exactly that, by creating a decentralized 
system of treating heroin addicts with a new generation of anti-
addiction medications.
  Mr. President, the Drug Education, Prevention and Treatment Act of 
2001, which we introduce today, also embodies this balanced approach. 
While the bill furthers our law enforcement efforts by increasing 
penalties for those who involve minors in drug crimes and those who use 
our public lands for drug manufacturing, the bulk of the legislation 
advances our prevention and treatment efforts. Before detailing some of 
these measures, I want to thank my partner on the Judiciary Committee, 
Senator Leahy, as well as my colleagues Senators Biden, DeWine, and 
Thurmond for cosponsoring this bill. The effort and expertise they have 
contributed to this bill have helped make it worthy of the support of 
every member of this body.

  I am extremely pleased that this bipartisan bill has a friend in the 
new White House. President Bush has indicated on several occasions, and 
in the plan he unveiled last fall, that he also believes in a 
comprehensive drug control strategy. He, too, has stressed treatment as 
an important component in combating juvenile drug abuse. I look forward 
to working with the President, as well as with Attorney General 
Ashcroft, as we combat drug abuse in this country in a bipartisan 
fashion.
  This legislation recognizes that we must do more to prevent and treat 
substance abuse. Such efforts, it is safe to say, will prove well worth 
it. According to a report recently released by the National Center on 
Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University in 1998, States 
spent $81.3 billion--fully 13.1 percent of total state spending--on 
substance abuse and addiction. Only $3 billion of this, however, was 
spent on prevention and treatment. The remaining $78 billion was spent, 
in the words of the study's authors, ``to shovel up the wreckage of 
substance abuse and addiction.'' Remarkably, these staggering numbers 
do not even include the amount of federal matching funds that states 
spend, for example, on Medicaid and welfare, or the spending of local 
governments--which bear most of the law enforcement burden, or private 
sector costs such as employee health care, lost productivity, and 
facility security. The report urges us, as policymakers, to reexamine 
our priorities and shift our attention to drug prevention and 
treatment.
  This bill does just that, and, I hasten to add, it does so without 
undermining in any way our commitment to supply reduction. Indeed, this 
bill, it can be said, ultimately will help to cut supply by reducing 
the demand for drugs among those who are the most consistent and 
addicted users.
  Whilte this legislation will prove enormously helpful, it is no 
substitute for what is our most effective tool for preventing drug 
abuse: good parenting. Demand reduction starts with educating all of 
America's children about the harmful, destructive nature of drugs, and 
that education must start at home. According to the 1999 PRIDE survey, 
students whose parents never or seldom talk to them about drugs are 
36.5 percent more likely to use drugs; in contrast, students whose 
parents talk to them often, or a lot, about drugs are 33.5 percent less 
likely to use drugs.
  Parents need to talk seriously to their children about the risks of 
drug use before they fall prey to peer pressure or drug dealers who 
want nothing more than to create new addicts. Parents need to stop 
deluding themselves into believing that moving to the suburbs, away 
from the temptations and evils of the inner cities, will prevent

[[Page S1315]]

drug dealers from reaching their children. They need to stop thinking 
that it is always the other family's kid who is using drugs.
  Parents, grandparents, priests, pastors, rabbis, teachers, and 
everyone else involved in a child's life need to take an active role in 
educating our children about the dangers of drugs. Drug abuse knows no 
boundaries. It doesn't discriminate on the basis of gender, race, age, 
or class. It is truly an equal opportunity destroyer. Unless children 
are prepared with the knowledge and truth of how drugs will ruin their 
health and future, they are vulnerable to the lies of those who are 
peddling drugs.
  Sadly, studies reveal that many children will never have 
conversations with their parents about drug use. Some children have 
parents that are addicted to drugs, some have parents who are 
imprisoned, and some have parents who just don't understand how vital 
it is for them to talk to their children about drug use. This fact 
alone represents one important reason why communities and organizations 
need to be involved in educating both parent and children about the 
dangers of drug abuse.

  We need effective education and prevention programs in our schools 
and communities. Even for children blessed with dedicated, concerned 
parents, these school- and community-based programs are vitally 
important. Indeed, according to the 1999 PRIDE survey, students who 
never or seldom join in community activities are 52.6 percent more 
likely to use drugs. Additionally, students who report never taking 
part in gangs are 90.8 percent less likely to use drugs. It is clear 
that the more children hear the truth about what drug abuse and 
addiction can do to them, the more likely they will turn their backs on 
drug use and lead productive lives.
  To this end, this bill contains significant funding for drug abuse 
education and prevention programs in our schools and communities. It 
authorizes grants for school and community-based drug education and 
prevention programs that have been proven to be effective and research-
based. The bill also authorizes funding for the National Institutes of 
Health to continue its research toward identifying even more effective 
prevention and treatment programs. Learning how to treat drug addiction 
effectively is an inextricable component in America's battle to conquer 
drug abuse.
  An additional provision authorizes grants to eligible community-based 
organizations, including youth-serving organizations, faith-based 
organizations, and other community groups, to provide after-school or 
out-of-school programs that include a strong character education 
component. Another important provision authorizes funding for 
community-based organizations that provide counseling and mentoring 
services to children who have a parent or guardian that is 
incarcerated. We want all who can help to be in a position to help, and 
these drug education and prevention programs seek to get everyone in 
all communities involved.
  Mr. President, while I am confident these innovative drug education 
and prevention programs will help reduce the number of children who 
decide to use drugs, we also need to ensure that those who are addicted 
receive treatment. This bill authorizes, therefore, sizeable grants to 
States to provide residential treatment facilities specifically 
designed to treat drug-addicted juveniles. It is crucial that drug-
addicted children receive treatment while they are young before they 
ruin their lives and grow up to become hard core addicts, which often 
leads to criminal behavior.
  It does without saying that it is important to ensure that violent 
and repeat offenders are imprisoned and punished for their crimes. 
However, I believe that there is merit to giving nonviolent offenders, 
whose crimes are tied directly to their addictions, a chance to enter 
drug treatment in stead of prison. This bill contains several 
provisions that will assist States in providing nonviolent, drug-
addicted offenders with the opportunity to participate in drug 
treatment programs in lieu of incarceration.
  For example, one provision authorizes the Attorney General to make 
grants to State and local prosecutors for the purpose of developing, 
implementing, or expanding drug treatment alternatives to prison 
programs for nonviolent offenders. These programs are administered by 
prosecutors who determine which offenders are eligible to participate. 
All eligible offenders who participate are sentenced to, or placed 
with, a long-term, drug-free residential substance abuse treatment 
provider. If, however, the offender does not successfully complete 
treatment, he or she is required to serve a sentence of imprisonment 
with respect to the underlying crime.
  This program has been administered effectively by certain district 
attorneys in New York over the last decade. Last session, I worked hard 
with Senators Thurmond and Schumer, to get these very programs 
authorized so that other State and local prosecutors could benefit from 
this drug alternative to prison program. I look forward to the 
continuing support of Senators Thurmond and Schumer to ensure that this 
provision is enacted into law this session.

  This bill also reauthorizes the drug court program and authorizes 
juvenile substance abuse courts, both of which provide continuing 
judicial supervision over nonviolent offenders with substance abuse 
problems while allowing them to enter treatment programs as an 
alternative to prison.
  A high percentage of offenders who otherwise don't qualify for 
participation in alternatives to prison programs, but nonetheless have 
serious drug addictions, far too often are released from incarceration 
without ever receiving treatment. To address this issue, this bill 
authorizes funding to provide drug treatment services to inmates. This 
funding will go a long way in ensuring safer neighborhoods and a more 
productive society once drug addicted offenders are released from 
incarceration.
  To further ensure safer neighborhoods, the bill also promotes the 
successful reintegration of inmates into society by authorizing 
demonstration projects in the federal and state court systems that 
incorporate new strategies and programs for alleviating the public 
safety risk posed by released prisoners. These projects, which 
establish court-based programs for monitoring the return of offenders 
into communities, include drug treatment, as well as vocation and basic 
educational training. Each program uses court sanctions and incentives 
to encourage positive behavior.
  Finally, the bill contains a provision that requires the government 
to consider, on the same basis as other non-governmental organizations, 
faith-based organizations to provide the assistance under all programs 
authorized by this bill, as long as the program is implemented in a 
manner consistent with the first amendment. I am aware of some concerns 
Senators Leahy and Biden may have with this provision relating to the 
participation of faith-based organizations, and I am committed to 
working with them in an effort to address their concerns as the 
legislation moves through the process.
  Mr. President, this bill bespeaks a compassionate concern for those 
who suffer from drug addiction. By passing this bill, we will be 
telling these people that we have not given up hope for them, 
especially for our children, that we will offer the means to help them 
help themselves, and that we will not leave them behind to be preyed 
upon by those who would make a profit on their misery. Above all, this 
legislation demonstrates our unwavering commitment to rid our nation of 
drug abuse. To those who traffic drugs, let there be no mistake about 
our resolve: we will put you in jail when we catch you, but we will 
also fight you for the soul of every person you would prey upon. And, 
in time, we will change them from helpless targets for your poison to 
productive, responsible members of our society. I invite my colleagues 
to join us in this effort.
  I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section summary of the bill 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

  Drug Abuse Education, Prevention, and Treatment Act of 2001--Summary


                 Title I: Offenses Involving Juveniles

     Sec. 101. Increased Penalties for Using Minors To Traffic 
         Drugs Across the Border
       This section directs the Sentencing Commission to review 
     and amend, if appropriate,

[[Page S1316]]

     the Sentencing Guidelines with respect to offenses relating 
     to the use of a minor to traffic controlled substances across 
     the border and to consider whether the base offense level for 
     such offenses should be increased to level 20.
     Sec. 102. Increased Penalties for Drug Offenses Committed in 
         the Presence of Minors
       This section directs the Sentencing Commission to review 
     and amend, if appropriate, the Sentencing Guidelines with 
     respect to offenses relating to drug offenses committed in 
     the line of sight or in the residence of a minor under the 
     age 16. The Sentencing Commission shall consider creating an 
     enhancement of 2 offense levels or 1 additional year 
     (whichever is greater) and 4 offense levels or 2 additional 
     years (whichever is greater) for subsequent offenses.
     Sec. 103. Increased Penalties for Using Minors To Distribute 
         Drugs
       This section directs the Sentencing Commission to review 
     and amend, if appropriate, the Sentencing Guidelines to 
     provide an appropriate sentencing enhancement for any offense 
     involving the use of minors to distribute drugs.
     Sec. 104. Increased Penalties for Distributing Drugs To 
         Minors
       21 U.S.C. 859 prohibits the distribution of controlled 
     substances to a person under 21 years old. This section 
     directs the Sentencing Commission to review and amend, if 
     appropriate, the Sentencing Guidelines to provide an 
     appropriate sentencing enhancement for offenses involving the 
     use of minors to distribute drugs.
     Sec. 105. Increased Penalties for Distributing Drugs Near 
         Schools
       21 U.S.C. 860 prohibits the distribution or manufacture of 
     controlled substances near schools and other places 
     frequented by minors. This section directs the Sentencing 
     Commission to review and amend, if appropriate the Sentencing 
     Guidelines to create a sentencing enhancement for such 
     violations.
     Sec. 106. Increased Penalties for Using Federal Property to 
         Manufacture Controlled Substances
       This section amends the Controlled Substances Act by 
     doubling the maximum punishment authorized by law for anyone 
     who cultivates or manufactures a controlled substances on any 
     property in whole or in part owned by or leased to the US or 
     any department or agency thereof. This section directs the 
     Sentencing Commission to review and amend, if appropriate, 
     the Sentencing Guidelines to provide an appropriate 
     sentencing enhancement for any offense under 21 U.S.C. 
     841(b)(5) that occurs on Federal property.
     Sec. 107. Clarification of Length of Supervised Release Terms 
         in Controlled Substance Cases
       This section clarifies an apparent conflict in the code 
     regarding the length of supervised release in controlled 
     substance cases.
     Sec. 108. Supervised Release Period after Conviction for 
         Continuing Criminal Enterprise
       Any sentence imposed for violating the continuing criminal 
     enterprise statute shall include a term of supervised release 
     of not less than 10 years, and if there was a prior 
     conviction, of not less than 15 years in addition to the term 
     of imprisonment.


                 Title II: Drug-Free Prisons and Jails

     Sec. 201. Drug-Free Prisons and Jails Incentive Grants
       This section authorizes grants to eligible States and 
     Indian tribes to encourage the establishment and maintenance 
     of drug-free prisons and jails. Eligible drug-free programs 
     shall include: (1) a zero-tolerance policy for drug use or 
     presence in State facilities, including routine sweeps and 
     inspections, random and frequent drug tests, and improved 
     screening for drugs; (2) enforcement of penalties, including 
     prosecution for the introduction, possession, or use of drugs 
     in any prison or jail; (3) implementation of residential drug 
     treatment programs; and (4) drug testing of all inmates upon 
     intake and release from incarceration, as appropriate. 
     Programs may include a system of incentives for prisoners to 
     participate in counter-drug programs such as treatment and to 
     be housed in wings with greater privileges, but incentives 
     may not include the early release of any prisoner convicted 
     of a crime of violence. Authorizes $50 million a year for 
     three years.
     Sec. 202. Jail-Based Substance Abuse Treatment Programs
       This section authorizes $100 million in additional funding 
     for residential substance abuse treatment programs, 
     outpatient treatment programs, and aftercare treatment 
     services in State and local prisons and jails.
     Sec. 203. Mandatory Revocation of Probation and Supervised 
         Release for Failing Drug Tests
       This section amends 18 U.S.C. 3565(b) and 3583(g) to 
     provide for mandatory revocation of probation or supervised 
     release if a defendant tests positive for illegal controlled 
     substances more than three times over the span of one year.
     Sec. 204. Increased Penalties for Providing an Inmate with a 
         Controlled Substance
       This section directs the Sentencing Commission to review 
     and amend, if appropriate, the Sentencing Guidelines with 
     respect to any offense relating to providing a Federal 
     prisoner a Schedule I or II controlled substance and to 
     consider increasing the base offense level for such 
     violations to not less than level 26. The Sentencing 
     Commission shall also consider increasing the base offense 
     level for such offenses by not less than 2 offense levels if 
     the defendant is a law enforcement or correctional officer or 
     employee, or an employee of the DOJ, at the time of the 
     offense.


            title III: treatment, education, and prevention

     Sec. 301. Prosecution Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison
       This section authorizes the Attorney General to make grants 
     to State and local prosecutors for the purpose of developing, 
     implementing, or expanding drug treatment alternatives to 
     prison programs for non-violent offenders. These programs are 
     administered by prosecutors who determine which offenders are 
     eligible to participate. All eligible offenders who 
     participate are sentenced to or placed with a long term, drug 
     free residential substance abuse treatment provider. If the 
     offender does not successfully complete treatment, he is 
     required to serve a sentence of imprisonment with respect to 
     the underlying crime. Authorizes $30 million a year for three 
     years.
     Sec. 302. Juvenile Substance Abuse Courts
       This section authorizes the Attorney General to make grants 
     to States and local governments to establish programs that 
     continue judicial supervision over non-violent juvenile 
     offenders with substance abuse problems with integrate 
     administration of other sanctions and services, which 
     include: (1) mandatory testing for controlled substances; (2) 
     substance abuse treatment for participants; (3) probation, 
     diversion, or other supervised release involving the 
     possibility of prosecution, confinement, or incarceration 
     based on noncompliance with program requirements; and (4) 
     aftercare services, such as relapse prevention. Authorizes 
     $50 million to be appropriated each year for FY 2002-2004.
     Sec. 303. Expansion of Drug Abuse Education and Prevention 
         Efforts
       This section allows the Administrator of the Substance 
     Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) to 
     make grants to public and nonprofit private entities to carry 
     out school-based programs concerning the dangers of abuse of 
     and addiction to illicit drugs and to carry out community-
     based abuse and addiction prevention programs that are 
     effective and research-based. The Administrator shall give 
     priority in making grants to rural and urban areas that are 
     experiencing a high rate or rapid increase in abuse, and the 
     amounts awarded may be used to carry out various programs, 
     including school-based and community-based programs that 
     focus on populations that are most at-risk for abuse of or 
     addiction to illicit drugs. Authorizes $100 million to be 
     appropriated for FY 2002 and such sums as necessary for each 
     succeeding FY.
     Sec. 304. Funding for Treatment in Rural States and 
         Economically Depressed Communities
       This section authorizes $50 million for grants to States to 
     provide treatment facilities in the neediest Rural States and 
     economically depressed communities that have high rates of 
     drug addiction but lack resources to provide adequate 
     treatment.
     Sec. 305. Funding for Residential Treatment Centers for Women 
         with Children
       This section authorizes $10 million for grants to States to 
     provide residential treatment facilities for methamphetamine, 
     heroin, and other drug addicted women who have minor 
     children. These facilities offer specialized treatment for 
     addicted mothers and allow their children to reside with them 
     in the facility or nearby while treatment is ongoing.
     Sec. 306. Drug Treatment for Juveniles
       This section authorizes $100 million a year for grants to 
     States to provide residential treatment facilities designed 
     to treat drug addicted juveniles.
     Sec. 307. Coordinated Juvenile Services Grants
       This section allows existing Juvenile Justice and 
     Delinquency and Prevention funds to be used to make grants to 
     encourage Federal, State, and local agencies (including 
     schools) and private childrens service providers to 
     coordinate the delivery of mental health and/or substance 
     abuse services to children at risk. Such grants leverage 
     limited Federal, State, and community-based adolescent 
     services to help fill the large unmet need for adolescent 
     mental health and substance abuse treatment.
     Sec. 308. Expansion of Research
       This section authorizes funding for the National Institutes 
     of Health to enter into cooperative agreements to conduct 
     research on drug abuse treatment and prevention and to 
     establish up to 12 new National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical 
     Trials Network (CTN) centers to develop and test an array 
     of behavioral and pharmacological treatments and to 
     determine the conditions under which novel treatments are 
     successfully adopted by local treatment clinics. 
     Authorizes $76.4 million to be appropriated in 2002 and 
     such sums as are necessary for FY 2003-2005.
     Sec. 309. Comprehensive Study By National Academy of Sciences
       This section directs the Attorney General to enter into 
     contracts to (1) evaluate the effectiveness of federally 
     funded programs for preventing youth substance abuse; (2) 
     identify federal programs and programs that receive federal 
     funds that contribute to reductions in youth substance abuse; 
     and (3) identify programs that have not achieved their

[[Page S1317]]

     intended results and to make recommendations on programs that 
     have proven successful and those that should have their 
     funding terminated or reduced because of lack of 
     effectiveness.
     Sec. 310. Report on Drug-Testing Technologies
       This section directs the National Institute on Standards 
     and Technology to conduct a study of drug-testing 
     technologies to identify and assess the efficacy, accuracy, 
     and usefulness of such technologies.
     Sec. 311. Use of National Institutes of Health Substance 
         Abuse Research
       This section ensures that the research on alcohol and drug 
     abuse conducted by NIDA is disseminated to treatment 
     practitioners to aid them in the treatment of addicts.


            Title IV: School Safety and Character Education

                       Subtitle A--School Safety

     Sec. 401. Alternative Education Demonstration Project Grants
       This section authorizes funding for the Attorney General, 
     in consultation with the Secretary of Education, to make 
     grants to State educational agencies or local educational 
     agencies to establish not less than 10 demonstration projects 
     that enable the agencies to develop models and carry out 
     alternative education for at-risk youths. This section 
     authorizes $15 million a year for FY 2002 through 2004.
     Sec. 402. Transfer of School Disciplinary Records
       This section requires a State that receives federal funds 
     to have a procedure to facilitate the transfer of 
     disciplinary records by local educational agencies to any 
     private or public elementary school or secondary school.

                    Subtitle B--Character Education

     Sec. 411. National Character Achievement Award
       This section establishes a National Character Achievement 
     Award for students who distinguish themselves as models of 
     good character.
     Sec. 421-424. Preventing Juvenile Delinquency through 
         Character Education
       This section authorizes $100 million for the Secretary of 
     HHS, in consultation with the Attorney General, to award 
     grants to eligible community-based organizations, including 
     youth serving organizations, businesses, and other community 
     groups, to provide after school or out of school programs to 
     youth that include a strong character education component. 
     Eligible organizations must have a demonstrated capacity to 
     provide after school or out of school programs to youth. 
     Character education is defined as an organized educational 
     program that works to reinforce core elements of character, 
     including caring, civic virtue and citizenship, justice and 
     fairness, respect, responsibility, and trustworthiness.
     Sec. 431-434. Counseling, Training, and Mentoring Children of 
         Prisoners
       This section authorizes $25 million for the Attorney 
     General to award grants to community-based organizations 
     providing counseling, training, and mentoring services to 
     America's most at-risk children and youth in low-income and 
     high-crime communities who have a parent or legal guardian 
     that is incarcerated in a Federal, State, or local 
     correctional facility. Such services will include counseling, 
     including drug prevention counseling; academic tutoring, 
     including online computer academic programs that focus on the 
     development and reinforcement of basic skills; technology 
     training; job skills and vocational training; and confidence 
     building mentoring services.


                TITLE V: REESTABLISHMENT OF DRUG COURTS

     Sec. 501. Reauthorization of Drug Courts
       This section reauthorizes the drug court programs that 
     provide continuing judicial supervision over non-violent 
     offenders with substance abuse problems and allow non-violent 
     offenders to enter treatment programs as an alternative to 
     prison. Authorizes $50 million to be appropriated in 2002 and 
     such sums as necessary for 2003-2004.


 TITLE VI: PROGRAM FOR SUCCESSFUL REEENTRY OF CRIMINAL OFFENDERS INTO 
                           LOCAL COMMUNITIES

     Sec. 601-618. Federal Reentry Demonstration Projects
       This section authorizes demonstration projects in Federal 
     judicial districts, the District of Columbia, States, and in 
     the Federal Bureau of Prisons using new strategies and 
     emerging technologies that alleviate the public safety risk 
     posed by released prisoners by promoting their successful 
     reintegration into the community. This section also 
     establishes court-based programs to monitor the return of 
     offenders into communities, which include drug treatment and 
     aftercare, mental and medical health treatment, vocational 
     and basic educational training. Each program uses court 
     sanctions and incentives to promote positive behavior and 
     graduated levels of supervision within the community 
     corrections facility to promote community safety.


            TITLE VII: ASSISTANCE BY RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS

     Sec. 701. Assistance by Religious Organizations
       This section provides that the government shall consider, 
     on the same basis as other non-governmental organizations, 
     faith-based organizations to provide the assistance under all 
     programs authorized by this bill, as long as the program is 
     implemented in a manner consistent with the First Amendment.

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I join with Senator Hatch and 
Senators Biden, DeWine, and Thurmond to introduce the Drug Abuse 
Education, Prevention, and Treatment Act of 2001. This bill provides a 
comprehensive approach to drug treatment, prevention, and enforcement. 
It is my hope that the innovative programs established by this 
legislation will assist all of our States in their efforts to address 
the drug problems that most affect our communities.
  No community is immune from the ravages of drug abuse. My own State 
of Vermont has one of the lowest crime rates in the nation, yet we are 
experiencing serious troubles because of the abuse of heroin and other 
drugs. Recent estimates indicate that heroin use in Vermont has doubled 
in just the past three years, and the number of people seeking drug 
treatment has risen even more rapidly. The average age of a first-time 
heroin user dropped from 27 to 17 during the 1990s, signaling a sharp 
rise in teenage drug abuse. The consequences of this rise have made 
themselves all too clear over the past months.
  On January 3, Christal Jones, a 16-year-old girl from Burlington, was 
murdered in New York City. According to news reports, she was recruited 
in Burlington to move to New York and become part of a prostitution 
ring, and she was motivated by a desire to get money to buy heroin. 
When she died, drugs were found in her body, although they were not the 
cause of her death. And Christal Jones' tragedy apparently is not 
unique as many as a dozen Vermont girls may have been involved in this 
New York ring. And since her death, others have come forward to say 
that teenage girls in Burlington are prostituting themselves to get 
money to buy heroin.
  These disturbing reports followed by only a few months a heinous 
drug-related triple murder in Rutland, Vermont. In that case, 20-year-
olds Robert Lee and Donald Fell reportedly spent the night drinking and 
taking crack cocaine, and then allegedly killed Fell's mother and her 
friend. Looking to get out of Vermont, they then allegedly carjacked a 
woman arriving for work at a local supermarket and drove to New York, 
where they are accused of beating her to death. Such a case surely 
deserves a strong law enforcement response, and last Thursday the 
accused were indicted by a federal grand jury for carjacking resulting 
in death and kidnapping, among other charges.
  Such violence is rarely visited upon my State. When it is, a swift 
law enforcement response is necessary, and we must do what we can to 
support the efforts of law enforcement to safeguard our communities. 
But we kid ourselves if we think that law enforcement alone, with ever-
increasing penalties, is the answer to the drug problem. Though 
effective enforcement of our drug laws, particularly to deter 
involvement of our young people, is a critical component, this is 
simply insufficient to meet the severe social effects of drug abuse. We 
need to provide a comprehensive approach to the drug problems of my 
State and our nation. In Vermont, as the Rutland Daily Herald recently 
editorialized, on January 26, 2001, ``agencies that treat addictions'' 
need ``a boost in resources and manpower.'' Those who work to prevent 
drug abuse from occurring in the first place need our strong support.
  I have tried to boost Vermont's anti-drug efforts by working to 
provide funding for drug prevention, law enforcement, and drug 
treatment projects. For example, I secured funding for the Vermont 
Coalition of Teen Centers in last year's Commerce-Justice-State 
Appropriations bill. These teen centers give adolescent Vermonters 
recreational alternatives to drug use. I was also able to help provide 
significant funding for the Vermont Multi-Jurisdictional Drug Task 
Force, facilitating the ability of law enforcement officials to work 
together to tackle Vermont's drug problems. In addition, at my request 
Congress approved substantial funding for Vermont to plan and establish 
a long-term residential treatment facility for adolescents.
  I believe that the bill I introduce today with Senator Hatch will 
build

[[Page S1318]]

upon those important efforts by providing a substantial boost for 
treatment, law enforcement, and prevention, both in Vermont and across 
the nation. It contains numerous grant programs to aid States and local 
communities in their efforts to prevent and treat drug abuse. Of 
particular interest to the residents of my State, it establishes drug 
treatment grants for rural States and authorizes money for residential 
treatment centers for mothers addicted to heroin, methamphetamines, or 
other drugs.
  This legislation also will help States and communities reduce drug 
use in prisons through testing and treatment, an effort I proposed in 
the Drug Free Prisons Act I introduced in the last Congress. It will 
provide funding for programs designed to reduce recidivism through 
funding drug treatment and other services for former prisoners after 
release. In addition, this bill will reauthorize drug courts another 
step I proposed in the Drug Free Prisons Act and create juvenile drug 
courts.
  Finally, the bill directs the Sentencing Commission to review and 
amend penalties for a number of drug crimes involving children. For 
example, in addressing circumstances such as those surrounding the 
death of Christal Jones, the bill instructs the Sentencing Commission 
to amend its guidelines to provide for any necessary sentencing 
enhancement for criminals who distribute drugs to minors in order to 
lure a minor into or keep a minor engaged in prostitution or other 
criminal activity.
  In short, there are programs in this legislation to benefit all 
Americans whose lives are disrupted by drug abuse in their families and 
communities. I strongly recommend this bipartisan bill to my 
colleagues, and hope that we can move quickly to make it law.
  As I mentioned earlier, I have worked to provide necessary funding 
for treatment, prevention, and enforcement efforts in Vermont. Last 
year, I secured $150,000 for the Vermont Coalition of Teen Centers, 
$400,000 for the Vermont Drug Task Force, $100,000 for an adolescent 
treatment facility, two grants worth $500,000 for a balanced and 
restorative justice project, $1.7 million in Byrne law enforcement 
grants, two grants worth $560,000 to reduce underage drinking, about 
$725,000 for Drug Free Communities Support Programs throughout Vermont, 
and $274,535 for Residential Substance Abuse Treatment, RSAT, programs 
in the Vermont Corrections Department. In 1999, I worked to procure 
$270,611 for RSAT programs for Vermont prisons and jails, $75,000 for 
the Vermont Coalition of Teen Centers and an additional $74,976 for the 
Essex Teen Center, two grants worth $660,000 to combat underage 
drinking, and about $172,000 for Drug Free Community Support programs 
throughout Vermont. And in 1998, I helped secure $249,864 for balanced 
and restorative justice programs, $274,938 for RSAT programs, $1.9 
million in Byrne law enforcement grants, $360,000 to combat drunk 
driving, and $424,494 in a Safe Kids/Safe Streets grant.

  This legislation will provide additional ways that Vermont and other 
States can benefit from federal assistance to prevent drug abuse and 
drug-related crime. I would like to describe in more detail some of its 
most important aspects.
  This bill authorizes a wide variety of treatment and prevention 
programs. Treatment and prevention efforts are often overshadowed by 
law enforcement needs. Indeed, a recent study by the Center on 
Addiction and Substance Abuse, CASA, showed that of every dollar States 
spent on substance abuse and addiction, only four cents went to 
prevention and treatment. The States and the Federal government have 
undeniably important law enforcement obligations, but we must do more 
to balance those obligations with farsighted efforts to prevent drug 
crimes from happening in the first place.
  As I have said, heroin is an increasing problem in Vermont. In other 
States, methamphetamines or other drugs present a growing challenge. 
This legislation will help States address their most pressing drug 
problems, and places a particular emphasis on States that may not have 
been able to address their treatment and prevention needs in the past. 
Indeed, among many other provisions, the bill offers funding for rural 
States like Vermont to establish or enhance treatment centers. It 
instructs the Director of the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment to 
make grants to public and nonprofit private entities that provide 
treatment and are approved by State experts. This will allow the 
Vermont agencies looking to provide heroin treatment or to prevent 
heroin abuse in the first place to acquire Federal funding to help in 
their efforts.
  The Drug Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act also authorizes funding 
for residential treatment centers that treat mothers who are addicted 
to heroin, methamphetamines, or other drugs. This will help mothers and 
the children who depend on them to rebuild their lives it will keep 
families together. And I hope it will help avoid further stories like 
one that appeared in last Sunday's edition of the Burlington Free 
Press, in which a young mother told a reporter how heroin ``made it 
easier for [her] to take care of [her] kids.''
  The bill also calls for funding drug treatment programs for 
juveniles. As the tragic story of Christal Jones and the disturbing 
reports about other girls in her position have shown, juveniles can see 
their lives quickly deteriorate under the influence of drugs. This is 
why I have worked to provide Vermont with funding to establish a long-
term residential treatment facility for adolescents. I hope to continue 
that effort through this bill, in the hope that we may be able to 
prevent future tragedies.
  Our efforts here must include reducing the lure of drugs, and 
educating our kids and making sure they have recreational alternatives 
are two key components. In light of that, this bill authorizes grants 
to carry out school- and community-based prevention and education 
programs, with priority given to rural and urban areas experiencing 
drug problems. It provides additional funding for after-school 
programs. Finally, it authorizes funding for States to establish 
demonstration projects of alternative education for at-risk youths. 
These steps should improve the quality and availability of drug 
education and prevention efforts throughout the United States.
  In addition to providing additional funds for treatment and 
prevention, the bill directs the United States Sentencing Commission to 
review existing criminal penalties and provide any necessary increases 
for drug crimes involving juveniles. In particular, the Sentencing 
Commission must review the current penalties for distributing drugs to 
minors, using minors to distribute drugs, trafficking near a school, 
and using Federal property to grow or manufacture controlled 
substances. I would like to highlight one provision in particular in my 
comments today.
  This bill calls for the Sentencing Commission to amend its guidelines 
to provide for a specific sentencing enhancement for anyone who 
distributes drugs to minors in order to lure a minor into or keep a 
minor engaged in prostitution or other criminal activity. Let me 
explain why this provision matters. If the law enforcement officials 
investigating the death of Christal Jones find that the person or 
people who brought her to New York and prostituted her were giving or 
selling her heroin to entice her, the punishment should be more severe. 
This provision will give prosecutors an additional tool to fight such 
odious conduct.
  I would also like to commend the approach taken in the criminal 
provisions in this legislation. Instead of imposing mandatory minimums, 
we have invested discretion in the Sentencing Commission to determine 
appropriate penalties. A 1997 study by the RAND Corporation of 
mandatory minimum drug sentences found that ``mandatory minimums are 
not justifiable on the basis of cost-effectiveness at reducing cocaine 
consumption, cocaine expenditures, or drug-related crime.'' Despite 
this study and mounting evidence of prison overcrowding, legislators 
continue to propose additional mandatory minimums. In light of the 
persistence of that idea, this legislation calls for a new study of the 
issue, including whether mandatory minimums have a disproportionate 
impact on any racial or ethnic groups and whether they are an 
appropriate vehicle to punish nonviolent offenders.
  Last year I introduced the Drug Free Prisons Act, which authorized 
grants to States to facilitate treatment and testing programs in 
prisons and jails.

[[Page S1319]]

This bill provides resources to achieve the same goal. It is critical 
that our prisons be drug-free, both because lawbreaking within our 
correctional system is a national embarrassment, and because prisoners 
who are released while still addicted to drugs are far more likely to 
commit future crimes than prisoners who are released sober. This bill 
will provide needed help to address drug abuse in prisons throughout 
the country. It authorizes $50 million for drug-free prisons and jails 
bonus grants, allows States to use Residential Substance Abuse 
Treatment, RSAT, grants to provide services for inmates or former 
inmates, and reauthorizes funding for substance abuse treatment in 
Federal prisons.

  As Joseph Califano, Jr., the president of CASA and former secretary 
of Health, Education, and Welfare, told the National Press Club last 
month: ``The next great opportunity to reduce crime is to provide 
treatment and training to drug and alcohol abusing prisoners who will 
return to a life of criminal activity unless they leave prison 
substance free and, upon release, enter treatment and continuing 
aftercare.'' This legislation will accomplish both of those goals.
  A prior CASA study found that drug and alcohol abuse was implicated 
in the crimes and incarceration of 80 percent of those currently 
serving time in America's prisons. This finding shows that we have a 
prison population that has a history of substance abuse, and will seek 
out opportunities to continue using drugs while imprisoned. Of course, 
if prisoners are using drugs in prison, this will create serious 
behavioral and other problems that corrections officers will have to 
address, at no small risk to them.
  The problem does not end there. The same CASA study shows that 
inmates who are illegal drug and/or alcohol abusers are the most likely 
to be repeat offenders. In fact, the study concluded that 61 percent of 
state prison inmates who have two prior convictions are regular drug 
users. The strong link between drug use and recidivism cannot be 
ignored. Prison should provide an opportunity for us to break this 
cycle and therefore reduce crime. We can do this through a concerted 
effort to test prisoners for drug use and penalize those who test 
positive and provide adequate drug treatment so that prisoners can lead 
productive, non-criminal lives upon their release.
  This approach to reducing drug use and addiction in prisons has the 
support of Jim Walton, Vermont's Commissioner of Public Safety, and 
John Perry, the Director of Planning for the Vermont Department of 
Corrections, who work with these issues every day. I have always valued 
their counsel, as they have first-hand knowledge of the real law 
enforcement needs in my state. They both feel strongly that the bill 
will give law enforcement the tools it needs to test and treat offender 
populations, both in jail and in the community. I hope and expect that 
this bill will have the same effect across the country.
  In addition to providing funding for drug treatment and testing in 
prisons, this legislation also adopts a proposal made by Senator Biden 
in both this Congress and the last that would provide funding for 
Federal and State programs designed to ease the transition of criminal 
offenders back into society after their release. It establishes court-
based programs to monitor the return of offenders into communities. 
These programs include drug treatment and aftercare, mental and medical 
health treatment, vocational and educational training, life skills 
instructions, and assistance in obtaining suitable affordable housing. 
Each program uses court sanctions and incentives to promote positive 
behavior and graduated levels of supervision within the community 
corrections facility to promote community safety. I commend Senator 
Biden for his leadership on this program.
  The bill also re-establishes the drug courts program and re-
authorizes funding for it, as I proposed in last year's Drug Free 
Prisons Act. The majority repealed the authorization of the drug courts 
program in the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act 
of 1996, in an apparent attempt to discredit Democratic programs. In my 
view, effective programs dealing with drug abuse should not be used as 
political footballs. That is why the Congress has continued to fund 
drug courts in every year's appropriations acts. This has been the 
right decision, and we should undo the repeal.
  Drug courts provide the opportunity to deal systematically with 
nonviolent drug offenders at a substantial savings to taxpayers. 
Instead of jailing these nonviolent offenders, the courts can order 
alternative punishments that are mixed with mandatory testing and drug 
treatment and human services such as education or vocational training. 
Meanwhile, imprisonment is held out as a stick to ensure good behavior. 
To qualify for federal assistance, a drug court program must mandate 
periodic drug testing during any supervised release or probation 
periods, provide drug abuse treatment for each participant, and hold 
out the possibility of prosecution, confinement, or incarceration for 
noncompliance or failure to show satisfactory process. Violent 
offenders are defined quite broadly, so we can be confident that we are 
not funding programs that put dangerous people back on the streets.
  In addition to reauthorizing drug courts for adults, this legislation 
authorizes the Attorney General to provide grants to State and local 
governments to establish juvenile drug courts, extending the drug court 
model that has shown significant promise in dealing with adult 
offenders to juveniles. Juvenile drug courts should provide a way to 
reach out to younger offenders before they turn to a life of crime, 
helping to save both lives and significant government resources.
  Finally, I would like to comment on the inclusion of charitable 
choice language in this legislation to allow religious groups to 
compete for grants on the same basis as other groups. Although the 
language in this bill mirrors language that was passed in the 
Children's Health Act last year as well as in previous legislation, I 
have serious reservations about it. I know that many of my colleagues 
share those reservations.
  Charitable choice is going to be a significant issue during this 
Congress. I would have preferred that we have hearings about charitable 
choice before including it in this bill, and I made my feelings known 
to Senator Hatch. I asked him to introduce the bill without the 
language and consider adding it later if specific language could be 
crafted for which there was bipartisan support. But Senator Hatch was 
committed to including this language in the bill as introduced. Let me 
be clear: its inclusion here does not represent my endorsement. As this 
legislation is considered by the Committee and the Senate, we need to 
give considerable thought to the approach taken here. I intend to work 
with Senator Hatch and the other sponsors of the bill to ensure that 
the important protections and prohibitions of the First Amendment are 
fully respected. At the very least, we need to ensure that those who 
receive federal drug treatment and prevention funds are trained 
professionals, and that the government funds are not used in any way, 
directly or indirectly, to support or promote discrimination.
  At the same time, I believe that this bill, taken as a whole, will do 
a great deal of good. While charitable choice language is in this bill 
today, I have made no commitment to having this charitable choice 
language in the bill when Congress passes it. My commitment is to help 
improve drug treatment, prevention, and education throughout the United 
States.
  I ask unanimous consent to print in the Record two newspaper 
articles.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

          [From the Rutland Daily Herald (VT), Jan. 26, 2001]

                            Now Is the Time

       It is time for Vermont lawmakers to take the initiative in 
     pushing for a comprehensive anti-drug program that will 
     respond constructively to the increased use of dangerous 
     drugs in Vermont.
       Major drug busts in the Rutland area, as well as a rise in 
     crimes related to drug addiction, have pointed to the heroin 
     problem in the region. City leaders have taken needed steps 
     to bolster efforts by city police to address the problem, and 
     Mayor John Cassarino has offered a tax proposal that would 
     provide necessary funding in the future.
       Statewide, the use of heroin has probably doubled in the 
     past three years. The number of Vermonters seeking treatment 
     rose from 164 to 344 in that time. That number doesn't

[[Page S1320]]

     take into account the users who don't seek treatment.
       The Vermont State Police have made a compelling case for 
     boosting manpower, which has eroded substantially in the past 
     eight years. And Gov. Howard Dean has made the fight against 
     heroin one of his priorities.
       But so far Dean has not come up with resources for a long-
     term attack on the problem. The Legislature ought to use this 
     moment to take Dean's initiative further.
       Dean is well known for his punitive attitude toward drugs 
     and for his lack of faith in the efficacy of treatment for 
     drug users. But aggressive treatment, combined with 
     aggressive law enforcement, has not been tried. And at this 
     late date in the war on drugs, we ought to realize that law 
     enforcement alone has not done the job.
       Law enforcement agencies at the local and state levels can 
     use a boost in resources and manpower. But so can agencies 
     that treat addictions. Effective treatment is labor-intensive 
     and could be made available to people both inside and outside 
     of the state's corrections system.
       Mental health workers know that drug addiction is not an 
     easy affliction to cure. Addicts sometimes want no part of 
     treatment. But the state could establish institutions that 
     would respond more effectively to people who need help. Drug 
     courts could establish a regimen of treatment that would 
     expose people in state custody to the kind of help they may 
     never have seen before.
       Dean has promised to move quickly to set up clinics for 
     drug treatment, following passage last year of legislation 
     allowing for methadone treatment. But as Dean has often said, 
     methadone alone will not solve the problem. Methadone needs 
     to be part of a larger program of treatment.
       As of last week, only two hospitals in Vermont had 
     expressed firm interest in establishing methadone clinics. 
     Rutland Regional Medical Center is waiting to determine what 
     resources will be available and what kind of program the 
     regulations will establish. Health care facilities such as 
     RRMC need to be given the support and the resources to do the 
     job.
       Vermont is a small enough state that it could pioneer 
     methods for treating drug problems that go beyond the obvious 
     first step of locking people up. It would be in the state's 
     interest to do so both to prevent the kind of crime and 
     dereliction that is a drain on any community and to rescue 
     Vermonters who succumb to the deathly appeal of drugs.
       A package that included both law enforcement and treatment 
     measures might draw bipartisan support. Vermonters are not 
     helpless before the scourge of drug addiction if they have 
     the will to act.
                                  ____


          [From the Burlington Free Press (VT), Feb. 7, 2001]

                    Vt. Teen's Death Ruled Homicide

                           (By Sam Hemingway)

       Christal Jean Jones, the 16-year-old Burlington girl found 
     dead in a Bronx apartment Jan. 3, was the victim of a 
     homicide, according to New York City's top medical officer.
       ``The cause of death was asphyxiation, and the manner of 
     death is homicide,'' Ellen Borakove; spokeswoman for the New 
     York City Medical Examiner's Office, confirmed Tuesday.
       The medical examiner relied on police investigation and 
     toxicology tests to reach his conclusion. Borakove said Jones 
     was smothered.
       Drugs were found in Jones' body, but Borakove declined to 
     say what the drug was or how it had been administered.
       ``Whatever substance was found was not a contributing 
     factor in her death,'' Borakove said.
       Jones' mother, Kathleen Wright, received the news during an 
     emotional 11:30 a.m. phone call Tuesday from Borakove's 
     office.
       ``It's just what I expected,'' a weeping Wright said after 
     hanging up the phone. ``She was injected with drugs and then 
     she was killed.''
       Local and federal authorities say Jones was part of a 
     prostitution ring operating out of an apartment in the Hunts 
     Point section of the Bronx last fall and this winter. 
     Authorities also say drugs, particularly heroin, were 
     involved.
       As many as a dozen Vermont girls, many in the custody of 
     the state Social & Rehabilitation Services department at the 
     time, have been involved, say some of the teens who have 
     traveled to New York, their parents and authorities.
       Gov. Howard Dean has ordered an investigation into SRS's 
     handling of the girls' cases.
       Jose Rodriguez, a part-time Vermont resident with a 
     criminal record here, is being held on $100,000 bail in a New 
     York City prison because New York officials suspect he might 
     be involved in Jones' death. However, Rodriguez has been in 
     jail since Dec. 11, when he was arrested on two charges of 
     promoting prostitution and one charge of statutory rape 
     involving another Vermont teen-ager.
       At prosecutors' request his initial bail of $10,000 was 
     increased to $100,000.
       ``Our sympathy goes out the (Jones) family,'' Eric Sachs, 
     Rodriguez's court-appointed attorney, said Tuesday. ``We 
     don't wish that on anybody, especially a young girl.''
       He said Rodriguez has cooperated fully with authorities and 
     knows nothing about Christal Jones' death.
       ``He's in jail. Obviously, we know he didn't do it,'' Sachs 
     said.
       When he was told Tuesday that the medical examiner had 
     ruled Jones' death a homicide, Sachs called the District 
     Attorney's Office.
       He was assured, he said, ``there is no Christal Jones case, 
     and there is no accusation that my client is involved.''
       ``Nobody has ever seen him'' in the Zerega Avenue apartment 
     in which Jones was killed, Sachs said. ``It's not his 
     apartment. He has no connection to this apartment. Where 
     these girls live, or don't--he doesn't know.''
       However, in the police affidavit outlining the prostitution 
     and rape charges against Rodriguez, New York Police Office 
     Sean Iannucci said the victim said the crimes were committed 
     at the apartment where Jones' body was found.
       If convicted, Sachs said, Rodriguez faces a maximum jail 
     term of four years for the rape charge and 15 years for each 
     of two prostitution charges.
       Investigators who have interviewed witnesses and some of 
     those involved say Rodriguez was intimately linked to the 
     girls and a prostitution ring.
       ``I will kill you if you try to leave; I know people in 
     Vermont and New York,'' Rodriguez was said to have told two 
     of the Vermont girls before his arrest. Police also said he 
     beat one of the girls after learning she had tried to call a 
     family member for help.
       Since Jones' death, many of those involved have gone into 
     hiding. Some parents of the girls known to frequent New York 
     won't talk. When approached, they crack the door only to say 
     they don't know where their daughters are. Their fear is 
     palpable.
       In the Old North End and the King Street area of 
     Burlington, Jones' death--and life-- are well known. Local 
     residents are painfully aware of the extent of heroin use and 
     the hold the drug has over their neighbors. They say there is 
     no easy resolution to the problem they have watched reach 
     epidemic propositions in the past five years.
       ``We've got the demand,'' said Mike Larow, who owns Larow's 
     Market on North Street. ``Everyone seems to be afraid to 
     admit that it's here.''
       A federal grand jury in Burlington is reviewing evidence in 
     the case.
       Vermont state officials and local police knew of the 
     prostitution ring in the fall, according to a variety of 
     sources. Dean said state officials went to New York and 
     brought back two girls who had been at the apartment where 
     Jones eventually died.
       ``The only comment is how sad it is that this child has 
     died and how unnecessary,'' SRS Commissioner William Young 
     said Tuesday. ``I think everyone from our local office and 
     throughout the organization takes this kind of news hard.
       ``We certainly hope whoever is responsible for her death is 
     brought to justice.''
       Young said the case pointed out how vulnerable young women 
     are, especially when they abuse drugs. Young said this was 
     the first case that anyone in his agency was aware of in 
     which there was an organized effort to take girls from 
     Vermont to another location to work as prostitutes.

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, substance abuse is one of our Nation's most 
pervasive problems. Addiction is a disease that does not discriminate 
based on age, gender, socio-economic status, race or creed. And while 
we tend to stereotype drug abuse as an urban problem, the steadily 
growing number of heroin and methamphetamine addicts in rural villages 
and suburban towns shows that is simply not the case.
  We have nearly 15 million drug users in this country, four million of 
whom are hard-core addicts. We all know someone--a family member, 
neighbor, colleague or friend--who has become addicted to drugs or 
alcohol. And we are all affected by the undeniable correlation between 
substance abuse and crime--an overwhelming 80 percent of the two 
million men and women behind bars today have a history of drug and 
alcohol abuse or addiction or were arrested for a drug-related crime.
  All of this comes at a hefty price. Drug abuse and addiction cost 
this Nation $110 billion in law enforcement and other criminal justice 
expenses, medical bills, lost earnings and other costs each year. 
Illegal drugs are responsible for thousands of deaths each year and for 
the spread of a number of communicable diseases, including AIDS and 
Hepatitis C. And a study by The National Center on Addiction and 
Substance Abuse at Columbia University, CASA, shows that seven out of 
ten cases of child abuse and neglect are caused or exacerbated by 
substance abuse and addiction.
  Another CASA study released last week revealed that for each dollar 
that States spend on substance-abuse related programs, 96 cents goes to 
dealing with the consequences of substance abuse and only four cents to 
preventing and treating it. Investing more in prevention and treatment 
is cost-effective because it will decrease much of the street crime, 
child abuse, domestic violence, and other social ills that can result 
from substance abuse.

[[Page S1321]]

  The bill I am introducing today with Senators Hatch, Leahy, DeWine 
and Thurmond authorizes more than $900 million a year for prevention 
and treatment programs to reduce the criminal justice, health care, and 
human costs associated with substance abuse.
  We know that if someone gets through age 21 without smoking, abusing 
alcohol, or using drugs, they are unlikely ever to have a substance 
abuse problem. That is why prevention programs for kids are vital. This 
bill provides $200 million a year in grants to drug prevention programs 
like those run by the Boys and Girls Clubs and by law enforcement 
through the DARE program to get the message out to kids that drugs can 
ruin their lives.
  While there is good news that overall drug use has stabilized among 
students, there is also bad news--use of Ecstasy by high school seniors 
has increased more than 66 percent. Prevention programs funded by this 
Act will get the message out to kids that drugs like Ecstasy are 
incredibly dangerous--even if their friends or a cover story in the New 
York Times Magazine might make it seem like it is ``no big deal.'' 
Studies show that Ecstasy can damage regions of the brain responsible 
for thought and memory. If that isn't a big deal, I don't know what is.
  This bill also authorizes additional funding for drug treatment, 
which is desperately needed. Every year since 1989, I have published my 
own drug report, each of which has advocated a three-prong approach to 
address the drug problem--prevention, treatment and enforcement. I have 
always urged more money for treatment because it always gets the short 
end of the stick.
  Drug addiction is a chronic relapsing disease. And as with other 
chronic relapsing diseases--such as diabetes, hypertension and asthma--
there is no cure, although a number of treatments can effectively 
control the disease. According to an article published in the Journal 
of the American Medical Association in October, the rate of adherence 
to the treatment program and the relapse rate are similar for drug 
addiction and other chronic diseases--meaning that treatment for 
addiction works just as well as treatment for other chronic relapsing 
diseases.
  Unfortunately, only two million of the estimated five million people 
who need drug treatment are receiving it. The Drug Abuse Education, 
Prevention and Treatment Act takes steps to close this ``treatment 
gap'' by targeting drug treatment to rural and economically depressed 
areas, funding adolescent treatment and residential treatment centers 
for women with children, and increasing funding for the National 
Institute on Drug Abuse--whose brilliant scientists conduct 85 percent 
of the world's research on drug abuse--to conduct clinical trials on 
new treatments for addiction.

  The bill also reauthorizes two key programs created in the 1994 Biden 
Crime Law that fund prison-based drug treatment in the state and 
federal systems.
  Providing treatment to criminal offenders is not ``soft''; it is 
smart crime prevention policy as the Key and Crest programs in my home 
state of Delaware have shown. If we do not treat addicted offenders 
before they are released, they will return to our streets with the same 
addiction problem that got them in trouble in the first place, and they 
are likely to re-offend. This is not my opinion; it is fact. More than 
80 percent of inmates with five or more prior convictions have been 
habitual drug users, compared to approximately 40 percent of first-time 
offenders. Re-authorizing prison-based treatment programs is a good 
investment and an important crime prevention initiative.
  This legislation would also re-authorize the drug court program, a 
program I have championed and introduced legislation to reauthorize. 
The Federal Government has funded drug courts since 1994 as a cost-
effective, innovative way to deal with non-violent offenders who need 
drug treatment. Rather than just churning people through the revolving 
door of the criminal justice system, drug courts help these folks get 
their acts together so they won't be back. When they graduate from drug 
court programs they are clean and sober and more prepared to 
participate in society. In order to graduate, they are required to 
finish high school or obtain a GED, hold down a job, and keep up with 
financial obligations, including drug-court fees and child-support 
payments.
  Drug courts have been proven effective at keeping offenders with 
little previous treatment history in treatment, providing closer 
supervision than other community programs to which the offenders could 
be assigned, reducing crime and being cost-effective.
  According to the Department of Justice, drug courts save at least 
$5,000 per offender each year in prison costs alone. That says nothing 
of the savings associated with future crime prevention and freeing 
scarce prison beds for violent criminals. But most important, more than 
500 drug-free babies have been born to female drug court participants, 
a sizable victory for society and the budget alike.
  This Act also includes my ``Offender Reentry and Community Safety Act 
of 2001,'' which creates demonstration programs to oversee the 
reintegration of high-risk, high-need offenders into society upon 
release. These individuals have served their prison sentences, but they 
pose the greatest risk of re-offending because they lack the education, 
job skills, stable family or living arrangements, and the substance 
abuse treatment and other mental and medical health services they need 
to successfully re-integrate into society.
  According to the Department of Justice, 1.25 million offenders are 
now living in prisons and another 600,000 offenders are incarcerated in 
local jails. A record number of those inmates--nearly 590,000--will 
return to communities this year. Historically, two-thirds of returning 
prisoners have been re-arrested for new crimes within three years.
  The safety threat posed by this number of prisoner returns has been 
exacerbated by the fact that states and communities can't possibly 
properly supervise all their returning offenders. In fact, parole 
systems have been abolished in thirteen States, and policy shifts 
toward more determinate sentencing have reduced the courts' authority 
to impose supervisory conditions on offenders returning to their 
communities.
  The demonstration reentry programs created by this bill would help 
supervise these people when they are released from jail and make sure 
they get the mental health, substance abuse and other services they 
need so that they won't go back to a life of crime and can be 
productive members of our society.
  I believe that the Drug Abuse Education, Prevention and Treatment Act 
is a good piece of legislation. Strong treatment and prevention 
programs are a vital part of a comprehensive drug strategy. 
Forestalling drug abuse and treating it when it occurs is sensible 
policy in terms of saving money, preventing crime and sparing lives. I 
urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
                                 ______