[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 28, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1677-S1679]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Lieberman, and Mrs. 
        Feinstein):
  S. 226. A bill to prohibit an individual from knowingly opening, 
maintaining, managing controlling, renting, leasing, making available 
for use, or profiting from any place for the purpose of manufacturing, 
distributing, or using any controlled substance, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise today, along with my good friend, 
the senior Senator from Iowa, Senator Grassley, to introduce the 
Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act. This legislation arises out of a 
hearing Senator Grassley and I held in the Senate Caucus on 
International Narcotics Control in December 2001 on the proliferation 
of Ecstasy and other club drugs generally, and the role of some 
promoters of all-night dance parties, known as ``raves'', in 
distributing Ecstasy to young people. Our bill provides Federal 
prosecutors the tools needed to combat the manufacture, distribution or 
use of any controlled substance at any venue whose purpose is to engage 
in illegal narcotics activity. Rather than create a new law, our bill 
merely amends a well-established statute to make clear that anyone who 
knowingly and intentionally uses their property, or allows another 
person to use their property, for the purpose of distributing or 
manufacturing or using illegal drugs can be held accountable, 
regardless of whether the drug use is ongoing or occurs at a single 
event.
  While my legislation is aimed at the defendant's predatory behavior, 
regardless of the type of drug or the particular place in which it is 
being used or distributed, one problem that we are facing currently 
involves so-called ``club drugs'' and raves. According to a report 
which the Partnership for a Drug Free America will release in the near 
future, teens who report attending a rave are seven times more likely 
to have tried Ecstasy than teens who report not attending a rave. I 
find this statistic quite troubling.
  Despite the conventional wisdom that Ecstasy and other club drugs are 
``no big deal,'' a view that even the New York Times Magazine espoused 
in a cover story, these drugs can have serious consequences, and can 
even be fatal. Just last month we got some encouraging news: after 
years of steady increase, Ecstasy use is finally beginning to decrease 
among teens. That said, the rate of use remains unacceptably high and 
we still have quite a bit of work to do to counter the widespread 
misconception that Ecstacy is harmless, fashionable and hip.
  At the Drug Caucus hearing, witnesses testified that rogue rave 
organizers commonly go to great lengths to portray their events as safe 
so that parents will allow their kids to attend. They advertise their 
parties as alcohol-free events and some even hire off-duty police 
officers to patrol outside the venue. But the truth is that some of 
these raves are drug dens where use of Ecstasy and other ``club 
drugs'', such as the date rape drugs Rohypnol, GHB and Ketamine, is 
widespread.
  But even as these promoters work to make parents think that their 
events are safe, they send a different message to kids. Their 
promotional flyers make clear that drugs are an integral part of the 
party by prominently featuring terms associated with drug use, such as 
the letters ``E'' or ``X''--street terms for Ecstasy, or the term 
``rollin''', which refers to an Ecstasy high. They are, in effect, 
promoting Ecstasy along with the rave.
  By doing so, unscrupulous promoters get rich as they exploit and 
endanger kids. Some supplement their profits from the $10 to $50 cover 
charge to enter the club by selling popular Ecstasy paraphernalia such 
as baby pacifiers, glow sticks, or mentholated inhalers. And predatory 
party organizers know that Ecstasy raises the core body temperature and 
makes the user extremely thirsty, so they sell bottles of water for $5 
or $10 apiece. Some even shut off the water faucets so club goers will 
be forced to buy water or pay admission to enter an air-conditioned 
``cool down room.''
  After the death of a 17-year-old girl at a rave party in New Orleans 
in 1998, the Drug Enforcement Administration conducted an assessment of 
rave activity in that city which showed the close relationship between 
these parties and club drug overdoses. In a two year period, 52 raves 
were held at the New Orleans State Palace Theater, during which time 
approximately 400 teenagers overdosed and were treated at local 
emergency rooms. Following ``Operation Rave Review'' which resulted in 
the arrest of several rave promoters and closing the city's largest 
rave, overdoses and emergency room visits dropped by 90 percent and 
Ecstasy overdoses were eliminated.
  State and local governments have begun to take important steps to 
crack down on rave promoters who allow their events to be used as 
havens for illicit drug activity. In Chicago, where Mayor Daley has 
shown great leadership on this issue, it is a criminal offense to 
knowingly maintain a place, such as a rave, where controlled substances 
are used or distributed. Not only the promoter, but also the building 
owner and building manager can be

[[Page S1678]]

charged under Mayor Daley's law. The State of Florida has a similar 
statute making such activity a felony.

  And in Modesto, California, police officers are offering ``rave 
training classes'' to parents to educate them about the dangers 
associated with some raves and the club drugs often associated with 
them.
  At the Federal level, there have been four cases in which Federal 
prosecutors have used the so called ``crack house statute'' or other 
Federal charges to go after rogue rave promoters. These cases, in 
Little Rock, AR, Boise, ID, Panama City, FL, and New Orleans, LA, have 
had mixed results, culminating in two wins, a loss and a draw, 
suggesting that there may be a need to tailor this Federal statute more 
precisely to the problem at hand. As a result, last session I proposed 
legislation which would do just that. I am reintroducing it today and I 
am pleased to have Senator Grassley once again as the lead cosponsor. I 
might note that the legislation is also included in the Democratic 
leadership crime bill.
  After I introduced this legislation last year, a great deal of 
misinformation began circulating about it. I want to make the record 
clear. Simply stated, my bill provides technical corrections to an 
existing statute, one which has been on the books for 16 years and is 
well established.
  Critics of my bill have asserted that if the legislation were to 
become law ``there would be no way that someone could hold a concert 
and not be liable'' and that the bill ``holds the owners and the 
promoters responsible for the actions of the patrons.'' That is simply 
untrue. We know that there will always be certain people who will bring 
drugs into musical or other events and use them without the knowledge 
or permission of the promoter or club owner. This is not the type of 
activity that my bill would address. The purpose of my legislation is 
not to prosecute legitimate law-abiding managers of stadiums, arenas, 
performing arts centers, licensed beverage facilities and other venues 
because of incidental drug use at their events. In fact, when crafting 
this legislation, I took steps to ensure that it did not capture such 
cases. My bill would help in the prosecution of rogue promoters who not 
only know that there is drug use at their event but also hold the event 
for the purpose of illegal drug use or distribution. That is quite a 
high bar.
  I ask unanimous consent that a letter from the Coalition of Licensed 
Beverage Associations, COLBA, be printed at the end of my statement. 
COLBA, who initially expressed concerns that my bill would make their 
members liable for the actions of their patrons, has endorsed my 
legislation because they realized that my bill was not aimed at 
responsible party promoters.
  I am confident that the overwhelming majority of promoters are 
decent, law abiding people who are going to discourage drug use, or any 
other illegal activity, at their venues. But there are a few promoters 
out there who are taking steps to profit from drug activity at their 
events. Some of these folks actually distribute drugs themselves or 
have their staff distribute drugs, get kickbacks from drug sales at 
their events, have thinly veiled drug messages on their promotional 
flyers, tell their security to ignore drug use or sales, or send 
patients who need medical attention because of a drug overdose to a 
hospital across town so that people won't link emergency room visits 
with their club. What they are doing is illegal under current law. My 
bill would not change that fact. Let me be clear. Neither current law 
nor my bill seeks to punish a promoter for the behavior of their 
patrons. As I mentioned, the underlying crack house statute has been on 
the books since 1986, and I am unaware of this statute ever being used 
to prosecute a legitimate business.
  The legislation simply amends the current ``crack house statute'' in 
two minor ways. First, it clarifies that Congress intended for the law 
to apply not just to ongoing drug distribution operations, but to 
``single-event'' activities, such as a party where the promoter 
sponsors the event with the purpose of distributing Ecstasy or other 
illegal drugs. After all, a drug dealer can be arrested and prosecuted 
for selling one bag of drugs, and the government need not show that the 
dealer is selling day after day, or to multiple sellers. Likewise, the 
bill clarifies that a ``one-time'' event where the promoter knowingly 
distributes Ecstasy over the course of an evening, for example, 
violates the statute the same as a crack house which is in operation 
over a period of time. Second, the bill makes the law apply to outdoor 
as well as indoor venues, such as where a rogue rave promoter uses a 
field to hold a rave for the purpose of distributing a controlled 
substance. Those are the only changes the bill makes to the crack house 
statute. It does not give the Federal Government sweeping new powers as 
the detractors have asserted.
  Critics of the bill have also claimed that it would provide a 
disincentive for promoters to take steps to protect the public health 
of their patrons including providing water or air conditioned rooms, 
making sure that there is an ambulance on the premises, etc. That is 
not my intention. And to underscore that fact, I plan to remove the 
findings, which is the only place in the bill where these items are 
mentioned, from the bill. Certainly there are legitimate reasons for 
selling water, having a room where people can cool down after dancing, 
or having an ambulance on hand. Clearly, the presence of any of these 
things is not enough to signify that an event is ``for the purpose of'' 
drug use.
  The reason that I introduced this bill was not to ban dancing, kill 
the ``rave scene'' or silence electronic music, all things of which I 
have been accused. Although this legislation grew out of testimony I 
heard at a number of hearings about the problems identified at raves, 
the criminal and civil penalties in the bill would also apply to people 
who promoted any type of event for the purpose of drug use or 
distribution. If rave promoters and sponsors operate such events as 
they are so often advertised as places for people to come dance in a 
safe, drug-free environment then they have nothing to fear from this 
law. In no way is this bill aimed at stifling any type of music or 
expression it is only trying to deter illicit drug use and protect 
kids.
  Last year people criticized the bill's title, the ``RAVE Act'', 
because they thought it was unfairly targeting raves. Although I do not 
believe that I was unfairly targeting anybody, I have changed the title 
to the ``Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act of 2003.''
  In addition to amending the crack house statute, the legislation also 
addresses the low penalties for trafficking gamma hydroxybutyric acid, 
GHB, by directing the United States Sentencing Commission to examine 
the current penalties and consider increasing them to reflect the 
seriousness of offenses involving GHB. Currently, GHB penalties are 
simply too low. In order to get five years for a GHB offense, you have 
to have more than 13 gallons of the drug, equivalent to 100,000 doses 
and a street value of about $1 million. According to the DEA, big-time 
GHB dealers distribute approximately one gallon quantities of the drug, 
the penalty for which is currently only between 15 and 21 months. These 
cases simply aren't being prosecuted at the Federal level because the 
penalties are so low. The Sentencing Commission needs to take a look at 
this problem and consider raising the penalties for this dangerous 
drug.
  But the answer to the problem of drug use at raves is not simply to 
prosecute irresponsible rave promoters and those who distribute drugs. 
There is also a responsibility to raise awareness among parents, 
teachers, students, coaches, religious leaders, etc. about the dangers 
of the drugs used and sold at raves. The DEA is already doing some of 
this through its club drug awareness campaign, where DEA agents are 
holding conferences with local women legislators to get information out 
about the dangers of these substances. The legislation provides funds 
to the DEA to continue this important work. Further, the bill 
authorizes nearly $6 million for the DEA to hire a Demand Reduction 
Coordinator in each state who can work with communities following the 
arrest of a significant local trafficker to reduce the demand for drugs 
through prevention and treatment programs.
  It is the unfortunate truth that some raves are havens for illicit 
drugs. Enacting the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act will help to 
prosecute the promoters who seek to profit from exploiting and 
endangering young lives and

[[Page S1679]]

will take steps to educate youth, parents and other interested adults 
about the dangers of Ecstasy and other club drugs associated with 
raves.
  I hope that my colleagues will join me and support this legislation.

  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                    Coalition of Licensed Beverage


                                                  Association,

                                 Alexandria, VA, October 15, 2002.
     Senator Joe Biden,
     Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, Hart Senate Office 
         Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: The Coalition of Licensed Beverage 
     Associations (COLBA) is a national association representing 
     the interests of private-sector licensed beverage retailers 
     who sell and serve alcohol beverages. COLBA represents both 
     on-premise and off-premise alcohol beverage licensees. It is 
     dedicated to preserving States' rights to ensure legal sales 
     of alcohol to persons of legal-consumption age to maintaining 
     high standards for the retail sale of alcohol.
       Like you, Mr. Chairman, COLBA members have become 
     increasingly concerned with the trafficking and use of the 
     drug Ecstasy. As you know, much of the abuse of Ecstasy and 
     other club drugs happens at all-night dance parties known as 
     ``raves.'' Rave organizers often go to great lengths to 
     portray their events as safe, alcohol-free parties in order 
     to persuade parents to allow their children to attend. Such 
     events tend to reflect negatively on the legitimate licensed 
     beverage industry and its many small businesses.
       COLBA supports state and local government's efforts to 
     crack down on rave promoters who allow their events to be 
     used as havens for illicit drug activity. COLBA also supports 
     your effort to strengthen the current statues to provide law 
     enforcement and prosecutors with the tools necessary to bring 
     a halt to this activity.
       Initially COLBA had concerns about your legislation effort 
     and felt that if it were to become law any concert or special 
     event holder would be held liable for incidental drug use. 
     There was a misconception in the industry that the bill would 
     hold the owners and the promoters of non-rave events 
     responsible for the actions of the patrons.
       However, it is the understanding of COLBA that the purpose 
     of the Rave Act legislation is not to prosecute legitimate 
     law-abiding managers of stadiums, arenas, performing arts 
     centers, licensed beverage facilities and other venues due to 
     incidental drug use at their events. The purpose of the Rave 
     Act is the prosecution of rogue promoters who not only know 
     that there is illegal drug use at their event, but also hold 
     the event for the purpose of illegal drug use or 
     distribution.
       In light of this clarification by your gracious and 
     dedicate staff, the Coalition now understand the intent of 
     your legislative effort and fully supports the passage of the 
     Rave Act. Please feel free to contact me if you need any 
     additional information or if I can be of any further 
     assistance.
           Respectfully,
                                                David S. Germroth.
                                        Washington Representative.

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague 
Senator Biden today in introducing the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation 
Act. This is a continuation of an effort he and I spearheaded last year 
to update our laws so they can continue to be used effectively against 
drug dealers who are pushing drugs on our kids.
  As drug dealers discover new drugs and new methods of pushing their 
poison, we must make sure our legal system is adequately structured to 
react appropriately. I believe this legislation does that.
  Our proposal will modify the existing crack house statute so that its 
jurisdiction over temporary events, such as raves, would be more clear. 
And although this legislation grew out of the problems identified at 
raves, the criminal and civil penalties in the bill would also apply to 
people who promoted any type of event for the purpose of drug use or 
distribution. Illegal drug use in any location should not be tolerated, 
regardless of what cover activity is created to hide the transaction.
  This said, I want to emphasize that our legislation should in no way 
hamper the activities of legitimate event promoters. I realize that 
drugs are not widely available at all raves or other events open to the 
public. And I know that my colleagues Senator Biden is just as aware as 
I am that drug use occurs at events without the knowledge or 
endorsement of the event promoters. This legislation should not affect 
the activities of legitimate event promoters. In no way is our bill 
aimed at stifling any type of music or public expression, it is only 
trying to deter illicit drug use and protect kids.
  The sale of illicit narcotics, whether on a street corner here in 
Washington, D.C., or a warehouse in Des Moines, IA, must be confronted 
and halted wherever possible. One of the new, ``trendy'' illicit 
narcotics is Ecstasy--an especially popular club drug that is all too 
often being sold at all-night dance parties, or raves. Ecstasy is an 
illegal drug that has extremely dangerous side effects.
  In general, Ecstasy raises the heart rate to dangerous levels, and in 
some cases the heart will stop. It also causes severe dehydration, a 
condition that is exacerbated by the high levels of physical exertion 
that happens at raves. Users must constantly drink water in an attempt 
to cool off--a fact that some unscrupulous event promoters take 
advantage of by charging exorbitant fees for bottles of water, after 
cutting off water to drinking fountains and rest room sinks.
  Too often, Ecstasy users collapse and die because their bodies 
overheat. And even those who survive the short-term effects of Ecstasy 
use can look forward to long-term problems such as depression, 
paranoia, and confusion, as scientists have learned that Ecstasy causes 
irreversible changes to the brain.
  Many young people perceive Ecstasy as harmless and it is wrongly 
termed a recreational or ``kid-friendly'' drug. This illegal substance 
does real damage to real lives. Although targeted at teenagers and 
young adults, its use has spread to the middle-aged population and 
rural areas, including my own State of Iowa. Ninety percent of all drug 
treatment and law enforcement experts say that Ecstasy is readily 
accessible in this country. We cannot continue to allow easy access to 
this drug or ignore the consequences of its use.
  That is why I believe it is important that we update the laws that 
have been effectively used to shut down crack houses so they can go 
after temporary events used as a cover to sell drugs. It is important 
to remember that this legislation builds upon an existing statute, with 
existing case law, and therefore existing standards of how it is to be 
implemented. The existing statute has been used to go after landlords 
who ``knowingly and intentionally'' let their property be used for 
illegal narcotics activities. It has not, nor should it be used, to 
take action against every landlord of every property where drug 
activity takes place.
  Similarly, the expansion of authorities created by this legislation 
is designed to target promoters who ``knowingly and intentionally'' 
allow drug use at their events. This is a high standard that should 
protect event promoters from casual application of this statute. 
Clearly, taking steps to reduce or eliminate drug use at an event, such 
as the posting of signs or through zero-tolerance instructions to 
security personnel, are not actions that would be taken by someone who 
would intentionally allow drug use to occur at an event.
  I believe an event promoter does have some responsibility for what 
goes on at an event that they create. Particularly if they knowingly 
create an event for the purpose of buying, using, keeping, or selling 
drugs. While not common, there have been court cases which have been 
able to reach this high standard of proof. Using 21 U.S.C. 856, more 
popularly known as the ``crack house'' statute, law enforcement has 
arrested drug dealers who hosted raves and other dance events as a 
cover to push their product. Four cases have been brought to Federal 
court, with mixed results--mostly because the applicability of current 
law is unclear.
  This legislation is an important step, but a careful one. Our future 
rests with the young people of this great nation and America is at 
risk. Ecstasy has shown itself to be a formidable threat and we must 
confront it on all fronts, not only through law enforcement but 
education and treatment as well. I hope my colleagues will join us in 
supporting this legislation, and help us work towards its quick 
passage.
                                 ______