[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 44 (Thursday, April 18, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2956-S2957]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. WYDEN.
  S. 2197. A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation of 
certain entries of roller chain; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, today I am introducing legislation whose 
purpose is to correct a gross injustice that has been carried out for 
more than two decades by bureaucrats at the International Trade 
Administration, ITA, and the U.S. Customs Service, Customs, against a 
small Oregon business, GS Associates, Inc., GS. What has been allowed 
to happen to this company at the hands of the federal government is a 
shocking and ultimately disturbing example of what can happen to 
ordinary, hardworking Americans when an overzealous Federal bureaucracy 
is allowed to run horribly amok.
  In 1973, imports of Japanese roller chain, not bicycle chain, 
potentially became subject to dumping duties, and in 1980, Congress 
instructed the International Trade Administration, ITA, to conduct 
complete annual administrative reviews of outstanding dumping findings 
to determine whether any dumping duties should be assessed. But ITA 
failed to complete its reviews on a timely basis. In fact, for my small 
Oregon importer, GS, the ITA wasn't just a day or two late in reporting 
the findings of its review of the company's Japanese supplier for 
shipments imported from April 1, 1981 through March 31, 1982, they were 
nine-and-a-half years late. When ITA finally got around to issuing a 
notice regarding its administrative review on September 22, 1992, a 
court challenge was initiated by the Japanese supplier and a court 
decision was rendered on July 11, 1995. Not surprisingly, ITA failed to 
publish notice of the court's decision in the Federal Register within 
ten days, as required by law. That was in 1995. The year is now 2002, 
and ITA still has not published that notice. And as if all of this 
ineptitude were not enough, ITA then failed to instruct Customs to 
begin assessing dumping duties on and to liquidate GS Associates' 
shipments until the Spring of 2000. When Customs finally began 
assessing duties, they added on enormous amounts of interest, dating 
back almost 20 years, in sums that were two to three times greater than 
the original dumping duty assessments. This outrageous pattern of 
conduct by the federal government threatens GS with bankruptcy.
  The level of ineptitude displayed in this case by bureaucrats at ITA 
and the Customs Service is egregious bordering on negligence. 
Legitimate small businesses in this country should have the expectation 
they will be treated fairly and forthrightly by their federal 
government. ITA and the Customs Service deserve a very strong rebuke. 
GS Associates deserves to have its case resolved quickly and fairly, 
and that is the point of my legislation. It will liquidate once and for 
all the $1.7 million in duties and interest that have accumulated over 
the past 20 years on these imports because of federal government 
negligence.
  I intend to work with the Finance Committee to assure that this 
measure is included in the legislation the committee is preparing on 
temporary duty suspensions, and hope that the duty suspension bill will 
enable this Oregon company to be able to put this terrible experience 
behind it.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CRAIG:
  S. 2199. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to 
permit additional States to enter into long-term care partnerships 
under the Medicaid Program in order to promote the use of long-term 
care insurance; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CRAIG. Madam President, I rise today to introduce the Long-Term 
Care Insurance Partnership Act.
  In the early 1990's, with support from a grant by the Robert Wood 
Johnson Foundation, four States, California, Connecticut, Indiana and 
New York, initiated programs to create public-private long-term care 
partnerships to provide citizens with options for long-term care 
coverage without having to spend down to Medicaid eligibility. However, 
current law prohibits additional States from including asset protection 
in any public-private partnerships they may develop. Other States may 
set up the policies, but the beneficiaries receive no asset protection 
in the event they exhaust the long-term care insurance policies. They 
would be forced to spend down to Medicaid levels, thereby removing the 
key incentive behind the partnership program--asset protection.
  Under the partnership program, States authorize the sale of approved 
long-term care insurance policies that meet certain benefit 
requirements. Individuals who purchase approved policies, would receive 
a guarantee from the State that should their policy benefits be 
exhausted, the State would then cover the cost of their continuing care 
through Medicaid. The primary incentive for purchasing partnership 
policies is asset protection.
  In other words, the State Medicaid program would become a payer of 
last resort rather than providing first-dollar coverage, in effect 
becoming a long-term care ``stop-loss'' program.
  The benefits of the program are significant for both seniors and 
government: Individuals are encouraged to take responsibility for their 
own long-term care needs rather than relying on a State benefit. It 
avoids forcing middle-class individuals to spend down to Medicaid 
levels, but gives these same individuals the knowledge that the 
government will be there if they need it. This program has been 
successful in the goal of keeping people from needing to use Medicaid. 
Under this program in four States, there are nearly 66,000 policies in 
force and so far only 28 policyholders have exhausted their long-term 
care insurance benefits and accessed Medicaid assistance. At a cost 
averaging $50,000 per year for long-term care services, the savings for 
State Medicaid budgets can be significant.
  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. 2199

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Long-Term Care Insurance 
     Partnership Program Act of 2002''.

[[Page S2957]]

     SEC. 2. PERMITTING ADDITIONAL STATES TO ENTER INTO LONG-TERM 
                   CARE PARTNERSHIPS TO PROMOTE USE OF LONG-TERM 
                   CARE INSURANCE.

       (a) In General.--Section 1917(b)(1)(C) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396p(b)(1)(C)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (i), by striking ``shall seek adjustment'' 
     and inserting ``may seek adjustment''; and
       (2) in clause (ii), by striking ``had a State plan 
     amendment approved as of May 14, 1993, which provided'' and 
     inserting ``has a State plan amendment approved which 
     provides''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______