[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 127 (Wednesday, October 2, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9847-S9856]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. SESSIONS (for himself, Mr. Leahy, and Mr. Grassley):
  S. 3028. A bill to provide for a creditors' committee of employee and 
retiree representatives of a debtor in order to protect pensions of 
those employees and retirees; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Employee 
Pension Bankruptcy Protection Act of 2002. Today, when a company 
declares bankruptcy, it is often the employees and retirees who suffer. 
They suffer because they often lose their hard earned pensions and 
retirement benefits during the bankruptcy process. This is simply not 
right. When Americans lose the pensions and benefits that they have 
worked a lifetime to earn, it is the responsibility of the members of 
this body to act to protect them.
  Under current law, the pension fund is technically the ``creditor'' 
of the corporation, not the employees and retirees. Thus, in court, 
employees and retirees of a bankrupt corporation have their interests 
in their pensions represented by the pension plan trustee. If the 
pension fund itself is threatened with insolvency, the Pension Benefit 
Guaranty Corporation, PBGC, can step in. While PBGC often covers most 
of the pension obligation, the statutory limits can sometimes leave a 
significant amount of pension benefits unpaid. If employees and 
retirees are not satisfied with how the pension plan trustee or PGGC is 
representing their interests, current law provides no relief. There is 
no day in court for the people who earned the pensions in the first 
place.
  This problem has only recently been brought to my attention by Mr. 
John Nichols of Gadsden, AL, and his son, Phil, an attorney in 
Birmingham. The orderal faced by Mr. Nichols is a prime example of why 
employees and retirees need more representation before the bankruptcy 
court. Mr. Nichols spent his entire career at a steel plant in Gadsden. 
He began working for Republic Steel in 1956 and stayed with the 
operation through a buyout by LTV Steel and two subsequent ownership 
changes.
  When LTV bought out Mr. Nichols' employer, LTV Steel took over the

[[Page S9848]]

monthly pension payments guaranteed to the former employees and 
retirees of Republic Steel, including Mr. Nichols. Soon after the 
takeover, however, LTV filed for bankruptcy, claiming that it could no 
longer make pension payments to Republic Steel's former employees. 
PBGC, initially stepped in to help make a small part of the pension 
payments, but LTV eventually stopped making payments at all.
  Because all the payments LTV had been making were not guaranteed by 
the PBGC, the long awaited pension payments earned by Mr. Nichols and 
by Republic Steel's other loyal employees were severely reduced. Mr. 
Nichols' pension payments went from approximately $2,225 per month to 
approximately $675 per month--only 30 percent of what he had been 
promised. A third of this payment now covers Mr. Nichols' health 
insurance premium that he can no longer purchase through LTV, leaving 
him with only 20 percent of his promised pension each month.
  Because PBGC could only pay the retirees the amount the statute 
allowed, and because no one had the responsibility of telling 
bankruptcy court what was happening to the retirees of Republic Steel, 
large portions of hard earned pensions were lost. PBGC itself 
recognized that the claims of the pensioners against LTV, ``are among 
the many claims that will probably never be paid, except perhaps in 
cents on the dollar'' and stated that PBGC's claims against LTV for the 
pension plan underfunding were perhaps ``[t]he largest of these claims 
[that will go upaid].''
  During LTV's bankruptcy case, various creditors were represented 
before the bankruptcy court, but not the employees and retirees. Thus, 
when the assets of LTV were divided among its creditors, employees and 
the retirees were not at the table. If the employees and retirees had 
had an opportunity to make their case before the bankruptcy judge, the 
result could have been different for Mr. Nichols and for the other 
employees of Republic Steel.
  The bill I introduce today does one very simple thing, it gives 
employees and retirees the right to be heard before the bankruptcy 
court with respect to their pensions. Under this bill, a representative 
of the employee and retirees can appear and be heard if it is likely 
that the employee benefit pension plan of the bankrupt corporation will 
be terminated or substantially underfunded and if it is possible that 
the beneficiaries of the plan will be adversely affected.
  By allowing employees and retirees to be hard before the bankruptcy 
court, we will ensure that the bankruptcy court hears from the people 
who earned the pensions before it disposes of the assets that could pay 
those pensions. Employees and retirees will be able to argue to the 
court that any division of assets or bankruptcy plan must be fair to 
the pensioners. The needs of the corporation's employees and retirees 
should be heard before the assets of a bankrupt corporation are split 
up among creditors and gone forever. They deserve to have their day in 
court.
  The Employee Pension Bankruptcy Protection Act of 2002 seeks to make 
sure that what happened to the retirees of Republic Steel in Gadsden, 
Alabama, will never happen again. By passing this legislation we can 
ensure that employees and retirees will never be deprived of their 
pensions without having their day in court. While a company may still 
be able to discharge its obligation to pay pensioners in bankruptcy, 
this bill at least takes the first modest step to protection pensions 
by providing them the opportunity to be part of the bankruptcy 
bargaining process. Before the bankruptcy court sells assets or adopts 
a plan of reorganization, the employees and retirees will be heard with 
respect to their pensions. This is only fair.
  I strongly urge my colleagues in the Senate to support this bill and 
to work with me to further ensure that employees and retirees of 
corporations are fairly treated and protected under the United States 
Bankruptcy Code.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KENNEDY:
  S. 3029. A bill to amend title IX of the Public Health Service Act to 
provide for the improvement of patient safety and to reduce the 
incidence of accidental medical injury; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today ``The 
Patient Safety Improvement and Medical Injury Reduction Act.'' This 
legislation will protect patients and save lives. It will do more for 
public health than a breakthrough new drug or a new therapy for deadly 
disease. The bill does this by providing a comprehensive plan to 
greatly reduce medical errors, promote a culture of greater patient 
safety and provider accountability, and improve the quality of medical 
care in the United States.
  As the Institute of Medicine, IOM, concluded in its landmark 1999 
study, medical errors kill up to 98,000 people in U.S. hospitals every 
year. That means that more Americans die from medical mistakes each 
year than from AIDS, breast cancer or highway accidents. In fact, each 
day, more than 250 people die because of medical mistakes, the 
equivalent of a major airplane crash every day.
  Other studies support the IOM's shocking conclusions.
  A Commonwealth Fund survey this year found that 22 percent of 
respondents reported that they or a family member had experienced a 
medical error of some kind. About 10 percent reported that they or a 
family member grew sicker as a result of a mistake made at a doctor's 
office or in a hospital, and 16 percent were given the wrong medication 
or wrong dose when filling a prescription at a pharmacy or while 
hospitalized.
  A study published September 9 by the Archives of Internal Medicine 
also concluded that medication errors occur in one of every five does 
administered to hospital patients. The magnitude of these costly and 
life-threatening mistakes is astonishing, and calls for immediate 
improvement.
  We can and should do better for our citizens. Americans deserve the 
highest quality health care, yet these errors put everyone at risk of 
unnecessary harm. This legislation raises patient safety to the 
national priority it deserves, and assures America's patients that they 
can expect high quality health care when they are sick or injured.
  To accomplish this goal, or legislation requires comprehensive 
action. The IOM concluded that improvements will require sweeping, 
systemic changes in our health care system. IOM made numerous, sensible 
recommendations, which are fully addressed by the Patient Safety 
Improvement and Medical Injury Reduction Act.
  The overwhelming majority of errors are caused by flaws in the health 
care system, not the outright negligence of individual doctors and 
nurses. Our hospitals, doctors, nurses, and other health care providers 
want to do the right thing. The bill gives the health care community 
the tools to identify the causes of medical errors, the resources to 
develop strategies to prevent them, and the encouragement to implement 
those solutions.
  A key concern addressed by this legislation is to allow doctors and 
other health professionals to share information regarding best 
practices and lessons learned from their mistakes without fear of 
winding up in court. At the same time, medical professionals and 
hospitals that injure patients through their negligence should still be 
held accountable in court, just as they are today.
  To balance these competing concerns, our legislation allows reports 
and analyses created under a new system of information-sharing between 
providers, patient safety organizations and a newly established 
National Patient Safety Database, to be immune from legal discovery. 
Health care professionals who submit reports to the programs would also 
be protected against discrimination in the workplace for participating 
in the reporting systems.
  By the same token, however, this new system will not become a shield 
to hide medical negligence. As a result, this legislation continues 
current law when it comes to those elements of patients' medical 
records that have nothing to do with the patient safety improvements 
contemplated by the Act. Nor would the privilege apply to such 
information merely because it is reported to a patient safety 
organization or the National Patient Safety Database. Just as 
importantly, the new privilege would not affect compliance with State 
accountability systems.

[[Page S9849]]

  Consistent with the IOM recommendations, the Act also creates a new 
Center for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety in the Agency for 
Healthcare Research and Quality to promote patient safety. The Center 
would conduct and support research on medical errors, certify learning-
based patient safety organizations around the country, administer the 
voluntary National Patient Safety Database, and disseminate evidence-
based practices and other error reduction and prevention strategies to 
health care providers, purchasers and the public. Reports submitted 
would be analyzed to identify systemic faults that led to the errors 
and solutions to prevent future similar errors. The Act would also 
create a ``learning laboratory'' under the Center for focused study of 
errors and their correction in select health care facilities.
  The IOM also highlighted medication errors as a ``high priority area 
for all health care organizations'' and recommended the use of 
computerized physician order entry systems and advanced prescribing 
software to screen for inappropriate doses, allergies, and drug 
interactions. The Act would provide funding and uniform standards for 
the implementation of such systems, as well as grants for community 
partnerships for health care improvement.
  As widespread and serious as the problem of medical errors is, it can 
be solved by a national commitment of resolve and resources. 
Improvements are clearly possible. The field of anesthesia undertook 
such an effort almost twenty years ago. Today, the number of fatalities 
from errors in administering anesthesia has dropped 98 percent.
  Our goal should be to achieve equal or even greater success in 
reducing other types of medical mistakes. This legislation lays the 
foundation to achieve this goal. I look forward to working with my 
colleagues and with interested Members of the House of Representatives 
in enacting the Patient Safety Improvement and Medical Injury Reduction 
Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DeWine (For himself and Mr. Voinovich):
  S. 3030. A bill to designate the Federal building and United States 
courthouse located at 200 West 2d Street in Dayton, Ohio, as the ``Tony 
Hall Federal Building and United States Courthouse''; to the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today, along with my friend and 
colleague from Ohio, Senator Voinovich, to introduce a bill to name the 
federal building in Dayton, OH, after Congressman Tony Hall.
  This bill is a fitting tribute to Tony Hall, a tireless and dedicated 
public servant, who will be greatly missed in the United States 
Congress upon his retirement. I am confident that he will continue his 
commitment to public service as our U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.'s food 
and agriculture agencies.
  The people of Ohio and the American people can be proud of and 
thankful for the many years Tony Hall has served in the United States 
Congress. I've had the privilege of working closely with him since my 
early days in the House nearly 20 years ago. He has been a valuable 
legislator and a real statesman. Over the years, he has worked 
tirelessly on behalf of the people of Montgomery County and throughout 
Ohio.
  Tony Hall comes from a family rich in devotion to public service and 
dedication to Ohio. His father, in fact, once served as Dayton's 
Republican mayor. A graduate of Fairmont High School in Kettering and 
Denison University in Granville, where he was an all-star tailback on 
the football team, Tony served in the Ohio House from 1969-1972, in the 
Ohio Senate from 1973-1978, and as Dayton's Congressman since January 
1979.
  A devoted husband to his wife, Janet, and a dedicated father to Jyl 
and Matt, the entire Hall family struggled valiantly alongside Matt as 
he fought an unsuccessful battle against leukemia that ended in 1996.
  My wife, Fran, and I are proud to have worked over two decades with 
Tony and Janet on humanitarian efforts and other causes that bridge 
across the political aisle. Tony, who served in the Peace Corps in 1966 
and 1967, has been an unmatched advocate for the needy, the poor, the 
hungry, and the oppressed across Ohio, our Nation, and the world.
  Tony has been singularly responsible for much of the world's 
continued, focused attention on the serious hunger issues worldwide. 
His involvement in a 22-day hunger strike in 1989, forced the 
Department of Agriculture and the World Bank to call conferences on 
hunger, which ultimately resulted in the creation of the Congressional 
Hunger Center.
  I'm proud to have worked with Tony on several humanitarian 
initiatives through the years from Africa Seeds of Hope to the Global 
Food for Education Act to the Microenterprise for Self-Reliance Act to 
the Clean Diamond Act of 2001.
  We also share a commitment to the yet unborn. A staunch pro-life 
Democrat, Congressman Hall was responsible for language in the 
Democratic National Committee platform respecting the beliefs of those 
within his party who wished to protect the sanctity of life.
  I also have had the pleasure of working with Tony Hall on several 
projects important to the Miami Valley area of Ohio. We share a passion 
for the aviation heritage of the Wright Brothers in Dayton and have 
worked together to protect and preserve the monuments to the Wright 
Brothers legacy. And, we've also worked together on issues to build the 
unique resources of Wright Patterson Air Force base, as well.
  Today, it is a pleasure to take this opportunity to join Senator 
Voinovich to honor Tony Hall's many legislative efforts and 
achievements and to thank him for his commitment to the people of Ohio 
and this Nation. I urge my colleagues to support this bill to honor our 
good friend and statesman, Tony Hall.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill to designate the 
Federal building and United States courthouse located at 200 West 2nd 
Street in Dayton, Ohio, as the ``Tony Hall Federal Building and United 
States Courthouse'' be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 3030

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

     SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

       The Federal building and United States courthouse located 
     at 200 West 2d Street in Dayton, Ohio, shall be known and 
     designated as the ``Tony Hall Federal Building and United 
     States Courthouse''.

     SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

       Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, 
     or other record of the United States to the Federal building 
     and United States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall 
     be deemed to be a reference to the ``Tony Hall Federal 
     Building and United States Courthouse''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Warner, and Mr. 
        Craig):
  S. 3031. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to reduce 
delays in the development of highway and transit projects, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr President, I rise today to introduce the MEGA STREAM 
ACT. Maximizing Economic Growth for America through Environmental 
Streamlining.
  Moving goods and moving people is what this Nation's transportation 
system is all about. The backbone of our economy. But delays in 
completing transportation projects threaten our economy.
  These delays add to the cost of projects and deny the public the 
benefits of the projects. And those benefits are substantial, improving 
our economy, our competitiveness, and our quality of life. 
Unfortunately, there are delays for many projects, not only for 
controversial or complex projects, and those delays sometimes result 
from the environmental review process.
  My goal is to advance a common sense approach that will both 
strengthen our transportation system and support for our environmental 
laws.
  I doubt that there is a member in this chamber that has not heard 
complaints about delays in developing transportation projects.
  I was privileged to be one of the authors of TEA 21 a revolutionary 
transportation law. I helped write sections 1308 and 1309. These are 
the sections that direct the Secretary of Transportation to find ways 
to expedite the

[[Page S9850]]

project approval process and get construction underway faster.
  I remember working with Senators Warner, Graham, Wyden and Chafee and 
with the House members to come to a compromise on the environmental 
streamlining provisions included in TEA 21.
  At the time, I had heard from my Department of Transportation and 
from others about how cumbersome a process it is to come to completion 
on a highway project. Everyone who worked on TEA 21 both the House and 
Senate, wanted to include a direction to the USDOT to streamline the 
planning and project development processes for the states.
  We were very clear, the environment and the environmental reviews 
should NOT get short shrift! But, we needed to find a way to make it 
easier to get a project done, eliminate unnecessary delays, move faster 
and with as little paperwork as possible.
  I cannot over-emphasize that the planning and environmental 
provisions of TEA-21 need to be implemented in a way that will 
streamline and expedite, not complicate, the process of delivering 
transportation projects.
  These projects that we're trying to expedite provide good paying jobs 
for the folks in Montana and for every State. Contracts must be met in 
a timely manner.
  That is why Congress directed the USDOT to include certain elements 
in their regulations on streamlining.
  We included concepts to be incorporated--like concurrent 
environmental reviews by agencies and reasonable deadlines for the 
agencies to follow when completing their reviews.
  Certainly we did not legislate an easy task to the USDOT. Trying to 
coordinate so many separate agencies is like trying to herd cats.
  The whole concept of environmental streamlining, that is, to make the 
permit and approval process work more smoothly and effectively, while 
still ensuring protection of the environment, is one of the more-
difficult challenges of TEA-21.
  So I waited for the rules to come out. And waited. And two years 
after the passage of TEA-21 I finally got them.
  I have to tell you, I was very disappointed when those rules came out 
in May of 2000. I believe those regulations hit very far from the mark.
  Those regulations were supposed to help the State DOTS get their jobs 
done better and more efficiently--not make their jobs harder.
  They were supposed to answer questions--but what is contained in 
those documents raises even more questions than before because they 
were vague where they needed to be precise.
  Those proposed rules would make it even harder, if not impossible to 
come to a decision.
  It would have been even more difficult for States to deliver their 
programs. Contracts wouldn't get met and jobs would be lost.
  So the DOT solicited comments, which I understand were overwhelmingly 
negative, and went back to the drawing board and we never heard from 
them again. Even when a new President took over. New administration. No 
new rules.
  And today we have nothing. We're exactly where we were in 1998.
  As for sections 1308 and 1309. Nothing has been done to implement 
them. Its just as cumbersome today to bring a highway project to 
completion.
  The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held 4 hearings on 
the subject of environmental streamlining since the passage of TEA 21 
in 1998.
  A few weeks ago, on the eve of the fourth EPW hearing, the President 
signed an Executive Order calling for a handful of projects to be 
supervised by the heads of USDOT and CEQ. The highest levels would 
personally make sure that there were timely environmental reviews.
  That would have been a good start in 1998. But, its too little too 
late now.
  We are on the verge of reauthorization of TEA 21. This time, I would 
like to see us specifically legislate environmental streamlining. No 
waiting for regulations or more executive orders. Congress needs to be 
clear about what they want to see and put it into law.
  To that end, along with Senator Crapo and others, I am introducing a 
proposal on environmental streamlining. It is part of a series of bills 
that we are introducing on highway reauthorization.
  This bill will address three issues.
  First, the USDOT needs to be the lead agency on at least two 
requirements, ``Purpose and Need'' for a project and ``Scope of 
Alternatives.'' This will make sure that any stalemates are resolved 
quickly.
  Second, we should allow States to take over the role of the USDOT if 
they can meet certain requirements and if they choose to take on that 
role. This will eliminate another step of bureaucracy.
  Last, we must ensure that resource agencies act in a timely manner. 
When it comes time for an agency like Fish and Wildlife to assess the 
extent of damage (if any) to a wetlands or the Army Corps of Engineers 
to issue a permit, these agencies shouldn't be able to take years to 
make these decisions.
  We need to legislate specific time limits for them to follow. No 
answer at all is not acceptable. It is unacceptable for agencies to sit 
on their decision for years. We can't make them issue the permit and we 
don't want to, but we can make them make a decision in a timely manner.
  The rest of the world works on deadlines. They can too.
  These three things will help to expedite the planning and project 
development processes.
  These three things are not meant to be comprehensive streamlining, 
but I believe that they will be a big help and a great start. The bill 
we will introduce will be a solid beginning to Congress setting some 
specific guidelines for expediting the planning and environmental 
review processes.
  Once again, I want to reiterate that I want to make sure that 
environmental laws and policies are obeyed to the letter. But, there's 
got to be a faster, easier way to do the work that needs to be done on 
our surface transportation system, while continuing to protect the 
environment.
  I believe our bill will be a means to those ends.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SARBANES (for himself, Mr. DeWine, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Dodd, 
        and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 3032. A bill to amend the Microenterprise for Self-Reliance Act of 
2000 and the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to increase assistance for 
the poorest people in developing countries under microenterprise 
assistance programs under those Acts, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to amend 
the Microenterprise for Self-Reliance Act of 2000 and the Foreign 
Assistance Act of 1961 to increase assistance for poor people in 
developing countries under microenterprise assistance programs. I am 
joined in this effort by my colleagues, Senator DeWine of Ohio, Senator 
Clinton of New York, Senator Dodd of Connecticut, and Senator Kerry of 
Massachusetts.
  Microenterprises play a critical role in helping poor people the 
world over raise their incomes, build assets, start new businesses, and 
improve their lives. Access to microenterprise loans and services with 
the attendant obligations allows poor people to establish good credit, 
engage in commerce, and begin to lift themselves out of poverty. The 
U.S. Government has been the leading donor for microenterprise 
development over the past two decades. In collaboration with diverse 
partner institutions like PVOs, private voluntary organizations, U.S. 
support, primarily through USAID, for microenterprise activities 
enables over 2 million people throughout the developing world to have 
access to microfinance services.
  The legislation I am introducing today authorizes $175 million in 
fiscal year 03 and $200 million in fiscal year 04 for microenterprise 
assistance, an increase over the $155 million authorization level in 
fiscal year 02.
  The other provisions of this legislation include a reaffirmation of 
the provision in the Microenterprise for Self-Reliance Act of 2000 
stipulating that 50 percent of all microenterprise assistance shall be 
targeted to the very poor. The term ``very poor'' has been defined in 
the new legislation as those living in the bottom 50 percent below the 
poverty line established by their respective national governments, or 
on less

[[Page S9851]]

than $1 a day. The legislation also provides that the microenterprise 
programs should target both rural and urban poor.
  Ensuring that 50 percent of all microenterprise assistance is 
targeted to the very poor has been problematic. This legislation calls 
for the adoption of a monitoring system using proven effective poverty 
assessment tools to identify more precisely the very poor and ensure 
that they receive microenterprise loans, savings, and assistance 
authorized under this act. The legislation also stipulates that the 
USAID Administrator, in consultation with microenterprise institutions 
and other appropriate organizations, shall develop no fewer than two 
low-cost methods for partner institutions to use to assess the poverty 
levels of their current or prospective clients. By October 1, 2004, 
USAID shall certify that no fewer than two of such methods are being 
used for measuring poverty levels of current or prospective clients. 
Additionally, the legislation says that USAID, beginning no later than 
October 1, 2005, shall require all microenterprise organizations 
applying for U.S. assistance to use one of these methods.
  Finally, the legislation requires the USAID Administrator to submit a 
report to Congress, no later than September 30, 2005, on the 
development and application of the poverty assessment procedures and, 
beginning with fiscal year 2006, an annual report documenting the 
percentage of its resources allocated to the very poor, based on the 
certified methods and the absolute number of the very poor that was 
reached.
  The legislation, which builds on somewhat similar legislation that 
passed the House earlier this year (H.R. 4073), was the result of many 
weeks of hard work and negotiations between USAID and the 
Microenterprise Coalition, a group that represents the microenterprise 
institutions. Both USAID and the Microenterprise Coalition strongly 
support this legislation. I commend them for their efforts and I urge 
the Senate to pass this important legislation.
  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. 3032

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

     SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS TO THE MICROENTERPRISE FOR SELF-
                   RELIANCE ACT OF 2000.

       (a) Purposes.--Section 103 of the Microenterprise for Self-
     Reliance Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-309) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``microentrepreneurs'' 
     and inserting ``microenterprise households'';
       (2) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (3) in paragraph (5)--
       (A) by striking ``microfinance policy'' and inserting 
     ``microenterprise policy'';
       (B) by striking ``the poorest of the poor'' and inserting 
     ``the very poor''; and
       (C) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     and''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) to ensure that in the implementation of this title at 
     least 50 percent of all microenterprise assistance under this 
     title, and the amendments made under this title, shall be 
     targeted to the very poor.''.
       (b) Definitions.--Section 104 of such Act is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``for 
     microentrepreneurs'' and inserting ``to microentrepreneurs 
     and their households''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) Very poor.--The term `very poor' means individuals--
       ``(A) living in the bottom 50 percent below the poverty 
     line established by the national government of the country in 
     which those individuals live; or
       ``(B) living on the equivalent of less than $1 per day.''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE MICRO- AND SMALL ENTERPRISE 
                   DEVELOPMENT CREDITS PROGRAM UNDER THE FOREIGN 
                   ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961.

       (a) Findings and Policy.--Section 108(a)(2) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151f(a)(2)) is amended by 
     striking ``the development of the enterprises of the poor'' 
     and inserting ``the access to financial services and the 
     development of microenterprises''.
       (b) Program.--Section 108(b) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 
     2151f(b)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Program.--To carry out the policy set forth in 
     subsection (a), the President is authorized to provide 
     assistance to increase the availability of financial services 
     to microenterprise households lacking full access to credit, 
     including through--
       ``(1) loans and guarantees to microfinance institutions for 
     the purpose of expanding the availability of savings and 
     credit to poor and low-income households;
       ``(2) training programs for microfinance institutions in 
     order to enable them to better meet the financial services 
     needs of their clients; and
       ``(3) training programs for clients in order to enable them 
     to make better use of credit, increase their financial 
     literacy, and to better manage their enterprises to improve 
     their quality of life.''.
       (c) Eligibility Criteria.--Section 108(c) of such Act (22 
     U.S.C. 2151f(c)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence of the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1)--
       (A) by striking ``credit institutions'' and inserting 
     ``microfinance institutions''; and
       (B) by striking ``micro- and small enterprises'' and 
     inserting ``microenterprise households''; and
       (2) in paragraphs (1) and (2), by striking ``credit'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``financial services''.
       (d) Additional Requirement.--Section 108(d) of such Act (22 
     U.S.C. 2151f(d)) is amended by striking ``micro- and small 
     enterprise programs'' and inserting ``programs for 
     microenterprise households''.
       (e) Availability of Funds.--Section 108(f)(1) of such Act 
     (22 U.S.C. 2151f(f)(1)) is amended by striking ``for each of 
     fiscal years 2001 and 2002'' and inserting ``for each of 
     fiscal years 2001 through 2004''.
       (f) Conforming Amendment.--Section 108 of such Act (22 
     U.S.C. 2151f) is amended in the heading to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 108. MICROENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT CREDITS.''.

     SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE MICROENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT GRANT 
                   ASSISTANCE PROGRAM UNDER THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE 
                   ACT OF 1961.

       (a) Findings and Policy.--Section 131(a) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2152a(a)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(a) Findings and Policy.--Congress finds and declares 
     that--
       ``(1) access to financial services and the development of 
     microenterprise are vital factors in the stable growth of 
     developing countries and in the development of free, open, 
     and equitable international economic systems;
       ``(2) it is therefore in the best interest of the United 
     States to facilitate access to financial services and assist 
     the development of microenterprise in developing countries;
       ``(3) access to financial services and the development of 
     microenterprises can be supported by programs providing 
     credit, savings, training, technical assistance, business 
     development services, and other financial and non-financial 
     services; and
       ``(4) given the relatively high percentage of populations 
     living in rural areas of developing countries, and the 
     combined high incidence of poverty in rural areas and growing 
     income inequality between rural and urban markets, 
     microenterprise programs should target both rural and urban 
     poor.''.
       (b) Authorization.--Section 131(b) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 
     2152a(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3)(A)(i), by striking ``entrepreneurs'' 
     and inserting ``clients''; and
       (2) in paragraph (4)(D)--
       (A) in clause (i), by striking ``very small loans'' and 
     inserting ``financial services to poor entrepreneurs''; and
       (B) in clause (ii), by striking ``microfinance'' and 
     inserting ``microenterprise''.
       (c) Monitoring System.--Section 131(c) of such Act (22 
     U.S.C. 2152a(c)) is amended by striking paragraph (4) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(4) adopts the widespread use of proven and effective 
     poverty assessment tools to successfully identify the very 
     poor and ensure that they receive needed microenterprise 
     loans, savings, and assistance.''
       (d) Development and Application of Poverty Measurement 
     Methods.--Section 131 of such Act (22 U.S.C. 2152a) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections 
     (e) and (f), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
       ``(d) Development and Certification of Poverty Measurement 
     Methods; Application of Methods.--
       ``(1) Development and certification.--(A) The Administrator 
     of the United States Agency for International Development, in 
     consultation with microenterprise institutions and other 
     appropriate organizations, shall develop no fewer than two 
     low-cost methods for partner institutions to use to assess 
     the poverty levels of their current or prospective clients. 
     The United States Agency for International Development shall 
     develop poverty indicators that correlate with the 
     circumstances of the very poor.
       ``(B) The Administrator shall field-test the methods 
     developed under subparagraph (A). As part of the testing, 
     institutions and programs may use the methods on a voluntary 
     basis to demonstrate their ability to reach the very poor.
       ``(C) Not later than October 1, 2004, the Administrator 
     shall, from among the low-cost poverty measurement methods 
     developed under subparagraph (A), certify no fewer than two 
     such methods as approved methods for measuring the poverty 
     levels of current

[[Page S9852]]

     or prospective clients of microenterprise institutions for 
     purposes of assistance under this section.
       ``(2) Application.--The Administrator shall require that, 
     with reasonable exceptions, all organizations applying for 
     microenterprise assistance under this Act use one of the 
     certified methods, beginning no later than October 1, 2005, 
     to determine and report the poverty levels of current or 
     prospective clients.''.
       (e) Level of Assistance.--Section 131(e) of such Act, as 
     redesignated by subsection (d), is amended by inserting ``and 
     $175,000,000 for fiscal year 2003 and $200,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 2004'' after ``fiscal years 2001 and 2002''.
       (f) Definitions.--Section 131(f) of such Act, as 
     redesignated by subsection (d), is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(5) Very poor.--The term `very poor' means those 
     individuals--
       ``(A) living in the bottom 50 percent below the poverty 
     line established by the national government of the country in 
     which those individuals live; or
       ``(B) living on less than the equivalent of $1 per day.''.

     SEC. 4. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than September 30, 2005, the 
     Administrator of the United States Agency for International 
     Development shall submit to Congress a report that documents 
     the process of developing and applying poverty assessment 
     procedures with its partners.
       (b) Reports for Fiscal Year 2006 and Beyond.--Beginning 
     with fiscal year 2006, the Administrator of the United States 
     Agency for International Development shall annually submit to 
     Congress on a timely basis a report that addresses the United 
     States Agency for International Development's compliance with 
     the Microenterprise for Self-Reliance Act of 2000 by 
     documenting--
       (1) the percentage of its resources that were allocated to 
     the very poor (as defined in paragraph (5) of section 131(f) 
     of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 
     2152a(f)(5))) based on the data collected from its partners 
     using the certified methods; and
       (2) the absolute number of the very poor reached.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. JOHNSON (for himself and Mr. Carper):
  S. 3034. A bill to facilitate check truncation by authorizing 
substitute checks, to foster innovation in the check collection system 
without mandating receipt of checks in electronic form, and to improve 
the overall efficiency of the Nation's payments system, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I am proud to sponsor the Check 
Truncation Act, which will be a significant step in improving the 
Nation's check payment system.
  The Act improves America's check payments system by allowing banks to 
exchange checks electronically. Current law requires banks to 
physically present and return original checks, a tedious, antiquated 
and expensive process. This legislation will also reduce infrastructure 
costs for banks, allowing for more flexibility and greater cost savings 
for the consumer.
  In the days following September 11, 2001, when planes across the 
country remained grounded, banks were forced to take drastic steps to 
ensure the shipment of checks from bank to bank. Check payments across 
the country were delayed, which opened up possibilities for processing 
errors and fraud. Electronic payments, on the other hand, continued to 
be processed in a safe and timely fashion during the crisis.
  Processing challenges confront banks in my State of South Dakota 
every winter. Deep snowfalls and vast distances between small-town 
banks and processing centers add significant costs to physical 
transportation of checks. These costs trickle down to consumers, and 
everyone ends up paying the price of our outdated system.
  I am proud to introduce this legislation, which would help to ensure 
the financial stability of our system in the event of another attack, 
and would increase its efficiency day-to-day. It is the right time to 
change our banking laws to give electronic versions of checks the same 
legal validity as paper checks, so America's financial institutions can 
provide customers with faster check clearing and better access to 
liquid funds in both good times and times of crisis.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HUTCHINSON:
  S. 3035. A bill to prohibit the sale of tobacco products through the 
Internet or other indirect means to underage individuals, to ensure the 
collection of all cigarette taxes, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, today I have introduced legislation to 
stop the illegal sales of cigarettes over the Internet, an escalating 
problem which has had a particularly negative effect in my home State 
of Arkansas. While every State in the union has enacted laws 
prohibiting minors from purchasing or possessing tobacco products, this 
law is easily evaded when minors purchase cigarettes over the Internet. 
Disreputable websites flagrantly break the law, even advertising that 
they do not check identification.
  In the first quarter of 2002, the number of Internet site selling 
cigarettes had already increased by over 10 percent from 2001, and the 
number of those based overseas increased almost 20 percent. In addition 
to putting cigarettes in the hands of minors, these websites also fail 
to pay the sales and tobacco taxes many states levy on these products.
  The Government Accounting Office released a study in August 2002 
which reports that by 2005 states will be losing as much as $1.4 
billion annually due to this tax evasion. This is revenue states cannot 
afford to do without. Current federal laws must be updated and 
strengthened to address this growing threat.
  My bill, the Eliminating Profiteering through Illegal Cigarette 
Sales, EPICS Act, addresses both aspects of the problem. It is designed 
to both strengthen domestic security by giving law enforcement agencies 
additional tools they need to choke off this source of terrorist 
income, and to ensure that legitimate Internet sites selling cigarettes 
take significant steps to prevent their orders from falling into the 
hands of our kids.
  The EPICS Act prohibits online sales of cigarettes to minors. It also 
ensures that minors are not able to purchase cigarettes online using a 
false identification by enacting strict identification verification 
requirements.
  In order to assist states enforcement of age requirements and 
collection of taxes, this bill will dramatically strengthen the Jenkins 
Act. This law requires anyone who ships or sells tobacco products over 
state lines other than to licensed dealers to report those sales to the 
state tax administrator. When this is done, states can ensure that 
sales are not being made to minors and that due taxes have been 
collected.
  Currently, there is very little enforcement of the Jenkins Act. This 
bill remedies this by establishing much harsher penalties for those who 
do not comply and by allowing a State's Attorney General to enforce the 
Federal law. Following the recommendation of the GAO, the bill will 
give the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms concurrent authority 
with the Justice Department to enforce the amended Jenkins Act. It also 
updates the law to make it clear that the Jenkins Act reporting 
requirements apply to all sales by Internet, mail and phone.
  Additionally, this bill will improve current laws to prohibit the 
trafficking in contraband cigarettes. The EPICS Act lowers the number 
of unstamped cigarettes required to trigger the law from 60,000 to 
2,000, adds reporting requirements and allows a State's Attorney 
General and Federal tobacco permit holders to bring causes of action to 
enforce the federal law. With numerous reports of terrorist 
organizations transporting contraband cigarettes across State lines to 
reap profits right here in the U.S., it is especially important that 
this law be effective.
  Terrorists and others who seek to profit by illegal means have 
discovered the goldmine of Internet sales. The number of Internet sites 
selling untaxed cigarettes or selling to minors is increasing almost 
daily. Heightened media coverage has pointed out the problem, but also 
advertised their availability to minors and tax-evaders. I hope my 
colleagues will act quickly to prevent illegal tobacco profits, keep 
cigarettes out of the hands of minors and stop tobacco tax evasion.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the 
legislation be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 3035

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

[[Page S9853]]

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Eliminating Profiteering 
     through Illegal Cigarette Sales Act'' or ``EPICS Act''.

     SEC. 2. UNLAWFUL ACTS REGARDING SALE OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS TO 
                   UNDERAGE INDIVIDUALS.

       (a) In General.--It shall be unlawful for any person who is 
     in the business of selling tobacco products, and who 
     advertises such products through the Internet or any other 
     means, to sell a tobacco product to an individual under the 
     legal age (according to State law) to purchase tobacco 
     products if pursuant to the sale the person mails the product 
     or ships the product by carrier in or affecting interstate 
     commerce.
       (b) Procedures To Protect Against Sales to Underage 
     Individuals.--It shall be unlawful for any person in the 
     business of selling tobacco products to take an order for a 
     tobacco product, other than from a person who is in the 
     business of selling tobacco products, through the mail, or 
     through any telecommunications means (including by telephone, 
     facsimile, or the Internet), if in providing for the sale or 
     delivery of the product pursuant to the order the person 
     mails the product, or ships the product by carrier in or 
     affecting interstate commerce, and the person fails to comply 
     with each of the following procedures:
       (1) Before mailing or shipping the product, the person 
     receives from the individual who places the order the 
     following:
       (A) A copy of a valid government-issued document (whether 
     an operator's permit or otherwise) that provides the name, 
     address, and date of birth of the individual.
       (B) A signed statement in writing from the individual 
     providing a certification of the individual that--
       (i) such document and information correctly identifies the 
     individual and correctly states the address and date of birth 
     of the individual;
       (ii) the individual understands that forging another 
     person's signature to the statement is illegal; and
       (iii) the individual understands that tobacco sales to 
     minors are illegal and that tobacco purchases by minors may 
     be illegal under applicable State law.
       (2) Before mailing or shipping the product, the person--
       (A) verifies the information received from the individual 
     under paragraph (1) against a commercially available 
     database; and
       (B) sends a letter to the individual requesting--
       (i) confirmation of the order; and
       (ii) that the individual reply immediately (to a specified 
     toll-free phone number or e-mail address) if the individual 
     did not submit the order.
       (3) In the case of an order for a product pursuant to an 
     advertisement on the Internet, the person receives payment by 
     credit card or check for the order before mailing or shipping 
     the product.
       (4) Unless the person is identified as a member of the 
     Armed Forces by the document issued by the Department of 
     Defense identifying individuals as members of the Armed 
     Forces, the person provides for the mailing or shipping of 
     the product to the name and address provided on the 
     government-issued document received under paragraph (1).
       (5)(A) The person employs a method of mailing or shipping 
     the product requiring that the individual purchasing the 
     product--
       (i) be the addressee;
       (ii) personally sign for delivery of the package; and
       (iii) if the individual appears to the carrier making the 
     delivery to be under 27 years of age, take delivery of the 
     package only after producing valid, government-issued 
     identification that--
       (I) bears a photograph of the individual;
       (II) indicates that the individual is not under the legal 
     age to purchase cigarettes; and
       (III) indicates that the individual is not younger than the 
     age indicated on the government-issued document received 
     under paragraph (1).
       (B) The bill of lading clearly states the requirements in 
     subparagraph (A) and specifies that Federal law requires 
     compliance with the requirements.
       (6) The person notifies the carrier for the mailing or 
     shipping, in writing, of the age of the addressee as 
     indicated by the government-issued document received under 
     paragraph (1).
       (c) Advertising Through Internet; Prominent Warning 
     Labels.--It shall be unlawful for any person in the business 
     of selling tobacco products to advertise tobacco products for 
     sale through an Internet website to a person other than a 
     person who is in the business of selling tobacco products 
     unless such website contains, on the part of each website 
     page relating to sale of such products that is immediately 
     visible when accessed, prominent and clearly legible warning 
     labels as follows:
       (1) A warning label stating that sales of tobacco products 
     to persons under 18 years of age are illegal in all States 
     except Alabama, Alaska, and Utah, where sales of tobacco 
     products to person under 19 years of age are illegal.
       (2) A warning label described--
       (A) in the case of cigarettes, in subsections (a)(1) and 
     (b)(2) of section 4 of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and 
     Advertising Act (15 U.S.C. 1333); and
       (B) in the case of smokeless tobacco products, in 
     subsections (a)(1) and (b)(1) of section 3 of the Federal 
     Comprehensive Smokeless Tobacco Health Education Act of 1986 
     (15 U.S.C. 4402).
       (d) Advertising Through Internet; Access.--It shall be 
     unlawful for any person in the business of selling tobacco 
     products to advertise such products for sale through an 
     Internet website unless access to the website (other than a 
     nonselling website home page) is provided only to individuals 
     who provide to the person the information described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) of subsection (b)(1) and whose 
     information is verified according to the procedures described 
     in subsection (b)(2).
       (e) Rule of Construction Regarding Common Carriers.--This 
     Act may not be construed as imposing liability upon any 
     common carrier, or officers or employees thereof, when acting 
     within the scope of business of the common carrier.

     SEC. 3. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.

       (a) Civil Enforcement.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     section 2 by the Federal Trade Commission, a violation of a 
     provision of subsection (a) or (b) of such section shall be 
     deemed to be an unfair or deceptive act or practice in or 
     affecting commerce within the meaning of the Federal Trade 
     Commission Act, and the procedures under section 5(b) of such 
     Act shall apply with respect to such a violation.
       (b) Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall promulgate a 
     final rule for carrying out this Act.
       (c) Information Regarding State Laws on Minimum Purchase-
     Age.--The Commission shall post on the Internet site of the 
     Commission information that, by State, provides the minimum 
     age at which it is legal under State law to purchase tobacco 
     products in the State.

     SEC. 4. CRIMINAL PENALTIES.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) First violation.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     any person who violates a provision of subsection (a) or (b) 
     of section 2 shall be fined not more than $1,000.
       (2) Subsequent violations.--In the case of a second or 
     subsequent violation by a person of a provision of subsection 
     (a) or (b) of section 2, the person shall be fined not less 
     than $1,000 and not more than $5,000.
       (3) Rule of construction.--This subsection does not apply 
     to a violation of a provision of subsection (a) or (b) of 
     section 2 if any provision of subsection (b) of this section 
     applies to such violation.
       (b) Knowing Violations.--
       (1) First violation.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     any person who knowingly violates a provision of subsection 
     (a) or (b) of section 2 shall be fined in accordance with 
     title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not more than two 
     years, or both.
       (2) Subsequent violations.--In the case of a second or 
     subsequent knowing violation by a person of a provision of 
     subsection (a) or (b) of section 2, the person shall be fined 
     in accordance with title 18, United States Code, imprisoned 
     not more than five years, or both.

     SEC. 5. FEDERAL CIVIL ACTIONS BY STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL AND 
                   CERTAIN OTHER INDIVIDUALS.

       (a) Injunctive Relief.--A State, through its State attorney 
     general, on behalf of residents of the State, or any person 
     who holds a permit under section 5712 of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986, may bring in an appropriate district court of 
     the United States a civil action to restrain violations by a 
     person of any provision of subsection (a) or (b) of section 
     2, including obtaining a preliminary or permanent injunction 
     or other order against the person.
       (b) Coordination With Commission.--Before bringing a civil 
     action under subsection (a), a State attorney general or any 
     such person shall provide to the Federal Trade Commission 
     written notice of the intent of the State attorney general or 
     such person to bring the action.
       (c) Federal Jurisdiction.--
       (1) In general.--The district courts of the United States 
     shall have jurisdiction over any civil action under 
     subsection (a).
       (2) Venue.--A civil action under subsection (a) may be 
     brought only in accordance with section 1391 of title 28, 
     United States Code, or in the district in which the recipient 
     of the tobacco products resides or is found.
       (d) Requirements for Injunctions and Orders.--
       (1) In general.--In any civil action under subsection (a), 
     upon a proper showing by the State attorney general or person 
     bringing the action involved, the court may issue a 
     preliminary or permanent injunction or other order to 
     restrain a violation of a provision of subsection (a) or (b) 
     of section 2.
       (2) Notice.--No preliminary injunction or permanent 
     injunction or other order may be issued under paragraph (1) 
     without notice to the adverse party and an opportunity for a 
     hearing.
       (3) Form and scope of order.--Any preliminary or permanent 
     injunction or other order entered in a civil action under 
     subsection (a) shall--
       (A) set forth the reasons for the issuance of the order;
       (B) be specific in its terms;
       (C) describe in reasonable detail, and not by reference to 
     the complaint or other document, the act or acts sought to be 
     restrained; and
       (D) be binding upon--
       (i) the parties to the action and the officers, agents, 
     employees, and attorneys of those parties; and

[[Page S9854]]

       (ii) persons in active concert or participation with the 
     parties to the action who receive actual notice of the order 
     by personal service or otherwise.
       (e) Additional Remedies.--
       (1) In general.--A remedy under subsection (a) is in 
     addition to any other remedies provided by law.
       (2) State court proceedings.--Nothing in this section may 
     be construed to prohibit an authorized State official from 
     proceeding in State court on the basis of an alleged 
     violation of any State law.

     SEC. 6. COLLECTION OF STATE CIGARETTE TAXES.

       (a) Definitions.--Section 1 of the Act of October 19, 1949 
     (15 U.S.C. 375), is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``and other legal 
     entities'' after ``individuals'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (3);
       (3) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (7) as 
     paragraphs (3) through (6), respectively; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(7) The term `delivery sale' means any sale of cigarettes 
     to a consumer (other than a sale to a consumer for purposes 
     of resale) if--
       ``(A) the consumer submits the order for such sale by means 
     of a telephone or other method of voice transmission, the 
     mails, or the Internet or other online service; or
       ``(B) the cigarettes are delivered by use of the mails or 
     other delivery service.
       ``(8) The term `sale to a consumer for purposes of resale' 
     does not include a sale of cigarettes to a natural person who 
     does not conduct business as a distributor or retailer of 
     cigarettes in the jurisdiction in which such person 
     resides.''.
       (b) Reports to State Tobacco Tax Administrators.--Section 2 
     of that Act (15 U.S.C. 376) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``or transfers'' and inserting ``, 
     transfers, or ships''; and
       (B) by striking ``to other than a distributor licensed by 
     or located in such State,''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking ``(1)''; and
       (B) by striking ``, and (2)'' and all that follows and 
     inserting a period.
       (c) Requirements for Delivery Sales.--That Act is further 
     amended by inserting after section 2 the following new 
     section:
       ``Sec. 2A. (a) Each person making a delivery sale into a 
     State shall comply with--
       ``(1) the shipping requirements set forth in subsection 
     (b); and
       ``(2) all laws of the State generally applicable to sales 
     of cigarettes that occur entirely within the State, including 
     laws imposing--
       ``(A) excise taxes;
       ``(B) sales taxes;
       ``(C) licensing and tax-stamping requirements; and
       ``(D) escrow or other payment obligations.
       ``(b)(1) Each person who takes a delivery sale order shall 
     include on the bill of lading included with the shipping 
     package containing cigarettes sold pursuant to such order a 
     clear and conspicuous statement providing as follows: 
     `CIGARETTES: FEDERAL LAW REQUIRES THE PAYMENT OF ALL 
     APPLICABLE EXCISE AND SALES TAXES, AND COMPLIANCE WITH 
     APPLICABLE LICENSING, TAX-STAMPING, AND ESCROW PAYMENT 
     OBLIGATIONS'.
       ``(2) Any shipping package described in paragraph (1) that 
     is not labeled in accordance with that paragraph shall be 
     treated as nonmailable matter under section 3001 of title 39, 
     United States Code.
       ``(c) Each State shall have the authority to require any 
     person making a delivery sale of cigarettes into such State 
     to collect or pay the taxes referred to in subsection (a)(2) 
     and to comply with any other requirements described in that 
     subsection.''.
       (d) Penalties.--Section 3 of that Act (15 U.S.C. 377) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``Sec. 3. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), whoever 
     violates a provision of section 2 or 2A shall be fined not 
     more than $1,000, imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, 
     in the case of the first violation, and fined not more than 
     $5,000, imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, in the 
     case of any subsequent violation.
       ``(b) Whoever knowingly violates a provision of section 2 
     or 2A shall be fined in accordance with title 18, United 
     States Code, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.''.
       (e) Injunctions.--Section 4 of that Act (15 U.S.C. 378) is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``The United States 
     district courts''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
       ``(b)(1) A State, through its attorney general, or any 
     person who holds a permit under section 5712 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986, may bring an action in the United 
     States district courts to prevent and restrain violations of 
     this Act by any person (or by any person controlling such 
     person).
       ``(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to 
     prohibit an authorized State official from proceeding in 
     State court on the basis of an alleged violation of State 
     law.
       ``(c) The Secretary of the Treasury shall administer the 
     provisions of this Act, and shall have concurrent authority 
     with the Attorney General to enforce the provisions of this 
     Act.''.

     SEC. 7. TREATMENT OF CIGARETTES AS NONMAILABLE MATTER.

       Section 1716 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (k); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (i) the following new 
     subsection (j):
       ``(j) All cigarettes (as that term is defined in section 
     2341(1) of this title) are nonmailable and shall not be 
     deposited in or carried through the mails.''.

     SEC. 8. PENAL PROVISIONS REGARDING TRAFFICKING IN CONTRABAND 
                   CIGARETTES.

       (a) Threshold Quantity for Treatment as Contraband.--(1) 
     Section 2341(2) of title 18, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``60,000 cigarettes'' and inserting ``2,000 
     cigarettes''.
       (2) Section 2342(b) of that title is amended by striking 
     ``60,000'' and inserting ``2,000''.
       (3) Section 2343 of that title is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``60,000'' and inserting 
     ``2,000''; and
       (B) in subsection (b), by striking ``60,000'' and inserting 
     ``2,000''.
       (b) Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Inspection.--Section 2343 
     of that title, as amended by subsection (a)(3) of this 
     section, is further amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``only--'' and inserting ``such information as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate for purposes of enforcement of this 
     chapter, including--''; and
       (B) in the flush matter following paragraph (3), by 
     striking the second sentence;
       (2) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c);
       (3) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
     subsection (b):
       ``(b) Any person who engages in a delivery sale, and who 
     ships, sells, distributes, or receives any quantity in excess 
     of 10,000 cigarettes within a single month, shall submit to 
     the Secretary, pursuant to rules or regulations prescribed by 
     the Secretary, a report that sets forth the following:
       ``(1) The person's beginning and ending inventory of 
     cigarettes (in total) for such month.
       ``(2) The total quantity of cigarettes that the person 
     received within such month from each other person (itemized 
     by name and address).
       ``(3) The total quantity of cigarettes that the person 
     distributed within such month to each person (itemized by 
     name and address) other than a retail purchaser.''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) In this section, the term `delivery sale' means any 
     sale of cigarettes to a consumer (other than a sale to a 
     consumer for purposes of resale) if--
       ``(1) the consumer submits the order for such sale by means 
     of a telephone or other method of voice transmission, the 
     mails, or the Internet or other online service; or
       ``(2) the cigarettes are delivered by use of the mails or 
     other delivery service.''.
       (c) Disposal of Forfeited Cigarettes.--Section 2344(c) of 
     that title is amended by striking ``seizure and forfeiture,'' 
     and all that follows and inserting ``seizure and forfeiture, 
     and any cigarettes so seized and forfeited shall be destroyed 
     and not resold.''.
       (d) Enforcement.--Section 2346 of that title is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``The Secretary''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(b) A State, through its attorney general, or any person 
     who holds a permit under section 5712 of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986, may bring an action in the United States 
     district courts to prevent and restrain violations of this 
     chapter by any person (or by any person controlling such 
     person).''.
       (e) Conforming and Clerical Amendments.--(1) The section 
     heading for section 2343 of that title is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``Sec. 2343. Recordkeeping, reporting, and inspection''.

       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 114 
     of that title is amended by striking the item relating to 
     section 2343 and inserting the following new item:

``2343. Recordkeeping, reporting, and inspection.''.

     SEC. 9. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
     States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
     Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern 
     Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands.
       (2) State attorney general.--The term ``State attorney 
     general'' means the attorney general or other chief law 
     enforcement officer of a State, or the designee thereof.
       (3) Tobacco product.--The term ``tobacco product'' means 
     any product made or derived from tobacco that is intended for 
     human consumption, including cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, 
     pipe tobacco, and the product known as bidi.

     SEC. 10. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), this 
     Act shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.
       (b) Rulemaking.--The authority of the Federal Trade 
     Commission to commence rulemaking under section 3(b) shall be 
     effective on the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Unlawful Acts.--Section 2 shall apply to sales of 
     tobacco products occurring on or after the effective date of 
     this Act without regard to whether a final rule has been 
     promulgated under section 3(b) as of that date.

[[Page S9855]]

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself, Mr. Warner, Mr. Bayh, Mr. McCain, 
        Mr. McConnell, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Hutchinson, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. 
        Allard, Mr. Helms, and Mr. Miller):
  S.J. Res. 46. A joint resolution to authorize the use of United 
States Armed Forces against Iraq; read the first time.

                              S.J. Res. 46

       Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression 
     against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States 
     forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its 
     people in order to defend the national security of the United 
     States and enforce United Nations Security Council 
     resolutions relating to Iraq;
       Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq 
     entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement 
     pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other 
     things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical 
     weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, 
     and to end its support for international terrorism;
       Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, 
     United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led 
     to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical 
     weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and 
     that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program 
     that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than 
     intelligence reporting had previously indicated;
       Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the 
     cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons 
     inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass 
     destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which 
     finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on 
     October 31, 1998;
       Whereas in 1998 Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing 
     weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United 
     States interests and international peace and security, 
     declared Iraq to be in ``material and unacceptable breach of 
     its international obligations'' and urged the President ``to 
     take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution 
     and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into 
     compliance with its international obligations'' (Public Law 
     105-235);
       Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national 
     security of the United States and international peace and 
     security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material 
     and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, 
     among other things, continuing to possess and develop a 
     significant chemical and biological weapons capability, 
     actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting 
     and harboring terrorist organizations;
       Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the 
     United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in 
     brutal repression of its civilian population thereby 
     threatening international peace and security in the region, 
     by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi 
     citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American 
     serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully 
     seized by Iraq from Kuwait;
       Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its 
     capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction 
     against other nations and its own people;
       Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its 
     continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the 
     United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate 
     former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of 
     occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged 
     in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security 
     Council;
       Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing 
     responsibility for attacks on the United States, its 
     citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred 
     on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
       Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other 
     international terrorist organizations, including 
     organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American 
     citizens;
       Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 
     2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the 
     acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international 
     terrorist organizations;
       Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to 
     use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current 
     Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a 
     surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces 
     or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, 
     and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the 
     United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine 
     to justify action by the United States to defend itself;
       Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 
     authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United 
     Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and subsequent 
     relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain 
     activities that threaten international peace and security, 
     including the development of weapons of mass destruction and 
     refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections 
     in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 
     687, repression of its civilian population in violation of 
     United Nations Security Council Resolution 688, and 
     threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in 
     Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council 
     Resolution 949;
       Whereas Congress in the Authorization of Use of Military 
     Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has 
     authorized the President ``to use United States Armed Forces 
     pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 
     (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council 
     Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, 
     and 677'';
       Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that 
     it ``supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the 
     goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as 
     being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military 
     Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),'' that 
     Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United 
     Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and ``constitutes a 
     continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of 
     the Persian Gulf region,'' and that Congress, ``supports the 
     use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United 
     Nations Security Council Resolution 688'';
       Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) 
     expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy 
     of the United States to support efforts to remove from power 
     the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a 
     democratic government to replace that regime;
       Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the 
     United States to ``work with the United Nations Security 
     Council to meet our common challenge'' posed by Iraq and to 
     ``work for the necessary resolutions,'' while also making 
     clear that ``the Security Council resolutions will be 
     enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be 
     met, or action will be unavoidable'';
       Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the 
     war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international 
     terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of 
     mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under 
     the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council 
     resolutions make clear that it is in the national security 
     interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war 
     on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security 
     Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of 
     force if necessary;
       Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the 
     war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and 
     funding requested by the President to take the necessary 
     actions against international terrorists and terrorist 
     organizations, including those nations, organizations or 
     persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the 
     terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or 
     harbored such persons or organizations;
       Whereas the President and Congress are determined to 
     continue to take all appropriate actions against 
     international terrorists and terrorist organizations, 
     including those nations, organizations or persons who 
     planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks 
     that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons 
     or organizations;
       Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution 
     to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of 
     international terrorism against the United States, as 
     Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization 
     for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and
       Whereas it is in the national security of the United States 
     to restore international peace and security to the Persian 
     Gulf region: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This joint resolution may be cited as the ``Authorization 
     for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq''.

     SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS.

       The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by 
     the President to--
       (1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security 
     Council all relevant Security Council resolutions applicable 
     to Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and
       (2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security 
     Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, 
     evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies 
     with all relevant Security Council resolutions.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

       (a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the 
     Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be 
     necessary and appropriate in order to--
       (1) defend the national security of the United States 
     against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
       (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council 
     Resolutions regarding Iraq.
       (b) Presidential Determination.--In connection with the 
     exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use 
     force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon 
     there after as may be feasible, but not later than 48 hours 
     after exercising such authority, make available to the 
     Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro 
     tempore of the Senate his determination that--

[[Page S9856]]

       (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or 
     other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately 
     protect the national security of the United States against 
     the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to 
     lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security 
     Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
       (2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with 
     the United States and other countries continuing to take the 
     necessary actions against international terrorists and 
     terrorist organizations, including those nations, 
     organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed 
     or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 
     11, 2001.
       (c) War Powers Resolution Requirements.--
       (1) Specific statutory authorization.--Consistent with 
     section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress 
     declares that this section is intended to constitute specific 
     statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of 
     the War Powers Resolution.
       (2) Applicability of other requirements.--Nothing in this 
     resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers 
     Resolution.

     SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

       (a) The President shall, at least once every 60 days, 
     submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this 
     joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the 
     exercise of authority granted in section 2 and the status of 
     planning for efforts that are expected to be required after 
     such actions are completed, including those actions described 
     in section 7 of Public Law 105-338 (the Iraq Liberation Act 
     of 1998).
       (b) To the extent that the submission of any report 
     described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission of 
     any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution 
     otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to 
     the reporting requirements of Public Law 93-148 (the War 
     Powers Resolution), all such reports may be submitted as a 
     single consolidated report to the Congress.
       (c) To the extent that this information required by section 
     3 of Public Law 102-1 is included in the report required by 
     this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the 
     requirements of section 3 of Public Law 102-1.

                          ____________________