[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.
____________________