[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 104 (Friday, July 26, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7431-S7433]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Sarbaness, Mr. 
        Edwards, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Smith of 
        Oregon, and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 2804. A bill to amend the National Maritime Heritage Act of 1994 
to reaffirm and revise the designation of America's National Maritime 
Museum, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to be introducing America's 
National Maritime Museums Act of 2002. This legislation would designate 
an additional 19 maritime museums as ``American National Maritime 
Museums'' nationwide. Maritime Museums are dedicated to advancing 
maritime and nautical science by fostering the exchange of maritime 
information and experience and by promoting advances in nautical 
education.
  The America National Maritime Museum designation would include a 
commitment on the part of each institution toward accomplishing a 
coordinated education initiative, resources management program, 
awareness campaign, and heritage grants program. Maritime museums in 
America will be dedicated to illuminating humankind's experience with 
the sea and the events that shaped the course and progress of 
civilization.
  Museum collections are composed of hundreds of thousands of maritime 
items, including ship models, scrimshaw, maritime paintings, decorative 
arts, intricately carved figureheads, working steam engines, and much 
more. Maritime museums offer a variety of learning experiences for 
children and adults through hands-on workshops and programs that focus 
on maritime history.
  Maritime lecture series presentations offer an opportunity to learn 
about the history and lore of the sea from some of the nation's leading 
maritime experts. Visitors learn the broad concept of sea power, the 
historic and modern importance of the sea in matters commercial, 
military, economic, political, artistic, and social.
  The legislation that I am proposing would help museums better 
interpret maritime and social history to the public using their 
extensive collections of artifacts, exhibits and expertise. These 
programs and facilities are used by schools, civic organizations, 
genealogists, maritime scholars, and the visiting public, thus, serving 
students of all ages.
  I urge all members of the Senate to join me in support of the 
America's National Maritime Museums Act of 2002.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CORZINE (for himself and Mr. TORRICELLI):
  S. 2805. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to provide for 
criminal and civil liability for permitting an intoxicated arrestee to 
operate a motor vehicle; to the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to 
address the serious national problem of drunk driving. The bill, 
entitled ``John's Law of 2002,'' would help ensure that when drunken 
drivers are arrested, they cannot simply get back into the car and put 
the lives of others in jeopardy.
  On July 22, 2000, Navy Ensign John Elliott was driving home from the 
United States Naval Academy in Annapolis for his mother's birthday when 
his car was struck by another car. Both Ensign Elliott and the driver 
of that car were killed. The driver of the car that caused the 
collision had a blood alcohol level that exceeded twice the legal 
limit.
  What makes this tragedy especially distressing is that this same 
driver had

[[Page S7432]]

been arrested and charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, 
DUI, just three hours before the crash. After being processed for that 
offense, he had been released into the custody of a friend who drove 
him back to his car and allowed him to get behind the wheel, with 
tragic results.
  We need to ensure that drunken drivers do not get back behind the 
wheel before they sober up. New Jersey took steps to do this when they 
enacted John's Law at the State level. I am pleased to offer a Federal 
version of this legislation today.
  This bill would require States to impound the vehicle of an offender 
for a period of at least 12 hours after the offense. This would ensure 
that the arrestee cannot get back behind the wheel of his car until he 
is sober.
  Further, the bill would require States to ensure that if a DUI 
offender arrestee is released into the custody of another, that person 
must be provided with notice of his or her potential civil or criminal 
liability for permitting the arrestee's operation of a motor vehicle 
while intoxicated. While this bill does not create new liability under 
Federal law, notifying such individuals of their prospective liability 
under State law should encourage them to act responsibly.
  John's Law of 2002 is structured in a manner similar to other Federal 
laws designed to promote highway safety, such as laws that encourage 
states to enact tough drunk driving standards. Under the legislation, a 
portion of Federal highway funds would be withheld from States that do 
not comply. Initially, this funding could be restored if States move 
into compliance. Later, the highway funding forfeited by one State 
would be distributed to other States that are in compliance. Experience 
has shown that the threat of losing highway funding is very effective 
in ensuring that States comply.
  I believe that this legislation would help make our roads safer and 
save many lives. I hope my colleagues will support it, and 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. 2805

       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 ``John's Law of 2002''.

     SEC. 2. LIABILITY FOR PERMITTING AN INTOXICATED ARRESTEE TO 
                   OPERATE A MOTOR VEHICLE.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 1 of title 23, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 165. Liability for permitting an intoxicated arrestee 
       to operate a motor vehicle

       ``(a) Definition of Motor Vehicle.--In this section, the 
     term `motor vehicle' means a vehicle driven or drawn by 
     mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public 
     highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a 
     rail.
       ``(b) Withholding of Apportionments for Noncompliance.--
       ``(1) Fiscal year 2005.--The Secretary shall withhold 5 
     percent of the amount required to be apportioned to any State 
     under each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of section 104(b) 
     on October 1, 2004, if the State does not meet the 
     requirements of paragraph (3) on that date.
       ``(2) Subsequent fiscal years.--The Secretary shall 
     withhold 10 percent of the amount required to be apportioned 
     to any State under each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of 
     section 104(b) on October 1, 2005, and on October 1 of each 
     fiscal year thereafter, if the State does not meet the 
     requirements of paragraph (3) on that date.
       ``(3) Requirements.--A State meets the requirements of this 
     paragraph if the State has enacted and is enforcing a law 
     that is substantially as follows:
       ``(A) Written statement.--If a person is summoned by or on 
     behalf of a person who has been arrested for public 
     intoxication in order to transport or accompany the arrestee 
     from the premises of a law enforcement agency, the law 
     enforcement agency shall provide that person with a written 
     statement advising him of his potential criminal and civil 
     liability for permitting or facilitating the arrestee's 
     operation of a motor vehicle while the arrestee remains 
     intoxicated. The person to whom the statement is issued shall 
     acknowledge, in writing, receipt of the statement, or the law 
     enforcement agency shall record the fact that the written 
     statement was provided, but the person refused to sign an 
     acknowledgment. The State shall establish the content and 
     form of the written statement and acknowledgment to be used 
     by law enforcement agencies throughout the State and may 
     issue directives to ensure the uniform implementation of this 
     subparagraph. Nothing in this subparagraph shall impose any 
     obligation on a physician or other health care provider 
     involved in the treatment or evaluation of the arrestee.
       ``(B) Impoundment of vehicle operated by arrestee; 
     conditions of release; fee for towing, storage.--
       ``(i) If a person has been arrested for public 
     intoxication, the arresting law enforcement agency shall 
     impound the vehicle that the person was operating at the time 
     of arrest.
       ``(ii) A vehicle impounded pursuant to this subparagraph 
     shall be impounded for a period of at least 12 hours after 
     the time of arrest or until such later time as the arrestee 
     claiming the vehicle meets the conditions for release in 
     clause (iv).
       ``(iii) A vehicle impounded pursuant to this subparagraph 
     may be released to a person other than the arrestee prior to 
     the end of the impoundment period only if--

       ``(I) the vehicle is not owned or leased by the person 
     under arrest and the person who owns or leases the vehicle 
     claims the vehicle and meets the conditions for release in 
     clause (iv); or
       ``(II) the vehicle is owned or leased by the arrestee, the 
     arrestee gives permission to another person, who has 
     acknowledged in writing receipt of the statement to operate 
     the vehicle and the conditions for release in clause (iv).

       ``(iv) A vehicle impounded pursuant to this subparagraph 
     shall not be released unless the person claiming the 
     vehicle--

       ``(I) presents a valid operator's license, proof of 
     ownership or lawful authority to operate the vehicle, and 
     proof of valid motor vehicle insurance for that vehicle;
       ``(II) is able to operate the vehicle in a safe manner and 
     would not be in violation of driving while intoxicated laws; 
     and
       ``(III) meets any other conditions for release established 
     by the law enforcement agency.

       ``(c) Period of Availability; Effect of Compliance and 
     Noncompliance.--
       ``(1) Period of availability of withheld funds.--Any funds 
     withheld under subsection (b) from apportionment to any State 
     shall remain available until the end of the fourth fiscal 
     year following the fiscal year for which the funds are 
     authorized to be appropriated.
       ``(2) Apportionment of withheld funds after compliance.--
     If, before the last day of the period for which funds 
     withheld under subsection (b) from apportionment are to 
     remain available for apportionment to a State under paragraph 
     (1), the State meets the requirements of subsection (a)(3), 
     the Secretary shall, on the first day on which the State 
     meets the requirements, apportion to the State the funds 
     withheld under subsection (b) that remain available for 
     apportionment to the State.
       ``(3) Period of availability of subsequently apportioned 
     funds.--
       ``(A) In general.--Any funds apportioned under paragraph 
     (2) shall remain available for expenditure until the end of 
     the third fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the 
     funds are so apportioned.
       ``(B) Treatment of certain funds.--Any funds apportioned 
     under paragraph (2) that are not obligated at the end of the 
     period referred to in subparagraph (A) shall be allocated 
     equally among the States that meet the requirements of 
     subsection (a)(3).
       ``(4) Effect of noncompliance.--If, at the end of the 
     period for which funds withheld under subsection (b) from 
     apportionment are available for apportionment to a State 
     under paragraph (1), the State does not meet the requirements 
     of subsection (a)(3), the funds shall be allocated equally 
     among the States that meet the requirements of subsection 
     (a)(3).''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for subchapter I of 
     chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

``165. Liability for permitting an intoxicated arrestee to operate a 
              motor vehicle.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU:
  S. 2806. A bill to provide that members of the Armed Forces 
performing services on the Island of Diego Gracia shall be entitled to 
tax benefits in the same manner as if such services were performed in a 
combat zone, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU:
  S. 2807. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify 
the treatment of dependent care assistance programs sponsored by the 
Department of Defense for members of the Armed Forces of the United 
States; to the Committee on Finance.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce two bills. One 
will give tax relief to a small group of men and women in our armed 
services stationed on the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, 
supporting the war on terrorism in Afghanistan. The second bill will 
exclude from gross income childcare benefits paid to members of our 
armed forces. These are small measures,but both will be of great 
benefit to the men and women serving our country.
  Diego Garcia is a British Territory lying seven degrees South 
Latitude off

[[Page S7433]]

the coast of India, in the middle of the Indian Ocean. The island is 40 
miles around and encompasses an area of 6,720 acres, most of it 
dominated by a large lagoon. The land mass is actually very small. It 
is home to a joint British-United States Naval Support Facility, and 
while there are only a small handful of British Royal Navy personnel on 
the island, there is a larger, tight-knit team of American Air Force, 
Navy, and Army personnel on the island. These men and women serving on 
Diego Garcia are supporting B-52 bombing missions and other operations 
over Afghanistan. Many of them are from the 2nd Bomb Wing and the 917th 
Wing. Both units call Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana their home.
  As a Nation, we provide members of our armed forces with a variety of 
benefits, all of them deserve. They receive hardship duty pay of $150 
per monthly for serving in austere regions of the World. They get 
imminent danger pay of $150 per month as compensation for being in 
physical danger. One of the most generous benefits for those serving in 
the war on terrorism is the combat zone tax exclusion. Members of the 
armed services do not pay Federal tax on compensation they for any 
month of service inside a combat one. They only have to serve on day in 
the combat zone to get this benefit. The exclusion only applies to 
personnel who receive imminent danger pay.
  On Diego Garcia, the pilots and flight crews who fly the missions 
over Afghanistan are eligible for the income tax exclusion because they 
receive imminent danger pay. But the men and women who load the 
bombers, fuel them, and maintain them are not eligible because they do 
not enter the combat zone. My office was contacted by the officers who 
fly the bombing missions about this discrepancy. They asked me to help 
out their support crews, a gesture of selflessness that I want to 
honor.
  I recognize that the support crews may not receive imminent danger 
pay, but their situation is not too different from Naval personnel 
performing the same tasks on ships in the Arabian Sea. Naval support 
crews receive imminent danger pay and are eligible for the tax 
exclusion, but they do not enter Afghanistan.
  Diego Garcia is a beautiful place, but it is a long way from home. 
The least we could do is treat everyone who has served on the island 
the same. That is what my bill will do.
  My second bill will correct an omission in the Tax Reform Act of 
1986. That Act contained a provision consolidating the laws regarding 
the tax treatment of certain military benefits. The Conference Report 
to that Act contains a long list of benefits to be excluded from gross 
income of military personnel. According to the report, this list was to 
be exhaustive. The problem is that child car benefits are not on that 
list.
  I do not know if this omission was intentional. Perhaps at that time, 
child care benefits were relatively unknown in the military. The 
Conference Report gives the Treasury Secretary the authority to expand 
the list of eligible benefits, but so far the Secretary has not 
provided any guidance to the Department of Defense as to how these 
benefits should be treated for tax purposes. While military families 
are not currently being taxed for child care benefits, the Department 
of Defense has indicated that it would like Congress to clarify that 
child care benefits are not subject to tax. My bill will give our 
military families and the Department of Defense a greater degree of 
certainty.
  Throughout our history, in time of war we have worked to make sure 
that our armed forces have everything they need and we have spared no 
expense in meeting that need. But the men and women on the ground often 
have families back at home. We should make sure that we support them as 
well. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

                          ____________________