[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 24 (Monday, February 10, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2120-S2123]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BREAUX (for himself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Bond, Mr. 
        Burns, Ms. Collins, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Kohl, Ms. Landrieu, Mrs. 
        Lincoln, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Santorum, 
        Mr. Smith, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Miller, and Ms. Stabenow):
  S. 333. A bill to promote elder justice, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, I rise to introduce S. 333, the Elder 
Justice Act. Despite the rapid aging of America, few pressing social 
issues have been as systematically ignored as elder abuse, neglect, and 
exploitation.
  This abuse of our seniors takes many forms. It can be physical, 
sexual, psychological, or financial. The perpetrator may be a stranger, 
an acquaintance, a paid caregiver, a corporation and, far too often, a 
spouse or another family member. Elder abuse happens everywhere--in 
poor, middle-class and upper income households; in cities, suburbs, and 
rural areas. It knows no demographic or geographic boundaries.
  The cost of such abuse and neglect is high by any measure. The price 
of this abuse is paid in needless human suffering, inflated health care 
costs, depleted public resources, and the loss of one of our greatest 
national assets--the wisdom and experience of our elders.
  With scientific advances and the graying of millions of baby boomers, 
this year the number of elderly on the planet passed the number of 
children for the first time. Although we have made great strides in 
promoting independence, productivity, and quality of life, old age 
still brings inadequate health care, isolation, impoverishment, abuse, 
and neglect for far too many Americans.
  Studies conclude that elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation are 
widely under reported and these abuses significantly shorten the lives 
of older victims. A single episode of mistreatment can tip over an 
otherwise independent, productive life, triggering a downward spiral 
that can result in depression, serious illness, and even death.
  Too many of our frailest citizens suffer needlessly and cannot simply 
move away from the abuse. Frequently, they cannot express their wishes 
or suffering. And, even if they can, often they do not, fearing 
retaliation.
  Congress has passed comprehensive bills to address the ugly truth of 
two other types of abuse--child abuse and crimes against women. These 
bills placed these two issues into the national consciousness and 
addressed the issues at a national level.
  The law created new Federal infrastructure and funding--focusing 
resources, creating accountability, and changing how we think about and 
treat abuse of women and children. And most

[[Page S2121]]

jurisdictions now have established coordinated social service-public 
heath-law enforcement approaches to confront these abuses.
  But despite dozens of congressional hearings over the past two 
decades on the devastating effects of elder abuse, neglect and 
exploitation, interest in the subject has waxed and waned, and, to 
date, no Federal law has been enacted to address this issue in a 
comprehensive manner. In these hearings, elder abuse was called a 
``disgrace'' and a ``burgeoning national scandal.'' Indeed, we found no 
single Federal employee working full time on elder abuse in the entire 
Federal Government.
  The time has come for Congress to provide seniors a set of 
fundamental protections. That is why, along with Senators Hatch, 
Baucus, Collins, Smith of Oregon, Lincoln, Bond, Nelson of Florida, 
Burns, Rockefeller, Santorum, Landrieu, Jeffords, Harkin, Miller, 
Stabenow, and Kohl, I am introducing a bill, the Elder Justice Act, the 
first comprehensive Federal effort to address elder abuse in the United 
States.
  Our bill will elevate elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation to the 
national stage in a lasting way. We want to ensure Federal leadership 
to provide resources for services, prevention, and enforcement efforts 
to those on the front lines.
  A crime is a crime whoever the victim and wherever it occurs. 
Crimes against seniors must be elevated to the level of child abuse and 
crimes against women.

  It is clear in confronting child abuse and violence against women 
that the best methods of prevention is two-pronged--through both law 
enforcement and social services. With offices in the Departments of 
Health and Human Services and Justice, this legislation ensures a 
combined public health-law enforcement coordination at all levels. In 
addition, because elder abuse and neglect have been virtually absent 
from the national research agenda, this bill establishes research 
centers of excellence, and funds research projects to fuel future 
legislation.
  These measures lay the foundation to address, in a meaningful and 
lasting way, a devastating and growing problem that has been invisible 
for far too long. We can no longer neglect these difficult issues 
afflicting frail and elderly victims.
  This effort takes numerous steps to prevent and treat elder abuse:
  It improves prevention and intervention by funding projects to make 
older Americans safer in their homes, facilities, and neighborhoods, to 
enhance long-term care staffing and to stop financial fraud before the 
money goes out the door.
  It enhances detection by creating forensic centers and developing 
expertise to enhance detection of the problem.
  It bolsters treatment by funding efforts to find better ways to 
mitigate the devastating consequences of elder mistreatment.
  It increases collaboration by requiring ongoing coordination at the 
federal level, among Federal, State, local and private entities, law 
enforcement, long-term care facilities, consumer advocates and 
families.
  It aids prosecution by assisting law enforcement and prosecutors to 
ensure that those who abuse our Nation's frail elderly will be held 
accountable, wherever the crime occurs and whoever the victim.
  It helps consumers by creating a resource center for family 
caregivers and those trying to make decisions about different types of 
long-term care providers.
  The importance of defending our right to live free of suffering from 
abuse and neglect does not diminish with age. If we can unlock the 
mysteries of science to live longer, what do we gain if we fail to 
ensure Americans live longer with dignity?
  More and more of us will enjoy longer life in relative health, but 
with this gift comes the responsibility to prevent the needless 
suffering too often borne by our frailest citizens.
  I appreciate the work of my fellow members and a wide array of groups 
on behalf of elder justice and look forward to continued support from 
both sides of the aisle and in both houses to make elder justice a 
reality for those Americans who need it most.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU:
  S. 334. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide 
eligibility for astronauts for Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance; to 
the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, our Nation continues to mourn the 
terrible tragedy that we all experienced on Saturday with the explosion 
of the Space Shuttle Columbia. The loss of these seven brave men and 
women proved that space flight is still dangerous. Unfortunately, I 
come to the floor today to call my colleagues' attention to another 
tragedy, one which Congress can and should correct.
  After the 1986 Challenger explosion, a terrible oversight on the part 
of our government came to light. We learned that NASA astronauts, with 
the exception of those in the military, often cannot get life 
insurance. Their jobs are too high-risk for them to be able to easily 
obtain private insurance. And, up until now, the government has not 
provided any type of safety net for these men and women, who risk their 
lives every day to advance our Nation's space program.
  Fortunately, a private fund, the Space Shuttle Children's Trust Fund, 
was formed to fill this breach. The fund paid an estimated $1.2 million 
to the families of the astronauts killed in the Challenger explosion. I 
would like to take a moment to commend Mr. Delbert Smith, a Washington, 
DC attorney and chairman of the fund, as well as all of the other men 
and women who stepped forward to help the families of these national 
heroes. It is selfless individuals like Mr. Smith and his colleagues 
that make America the greatest nation in the world.
  Despite the sacrifice of these individuals, the fact is that the 
government should have taken care of the families of these astronauts. 
Just as we take care of our veterans, we should ensure that our 
astronauts do not have to worry about the financial survival of their 
families if the unthinkable happens. And while there will always be a 
place for organizations like the Space Shuttle Children's Trust Fund, 
Congress has a responsibility to take care of the brave men and women 
in our human space flight program.
  Unfortunately, it pains me to say that this is one lesson we did not 
learn from the Challenger disaster. After the Columbia explosion, I was 
shocked to learn that there is still no provision for the Federal 
Government to ensure that the families of astronauts are taken care of 
in these tragic circumstances.
  We all pray that we will never have to suffer through another tragedy 
like the Challenger and Columbia explosions. But it is the 
responsibility of Congress to ensure that we are prepared in case it 
does happen again. Therefore, today I am introducing a bill that would 
allow astronauts to participate in the Servicemember's Group Life 
Insurance program. As my colleagues know, this is the insurance program 
that is set up for our men and women in the military. With relatively 
low payments, service members are eligible to up to $250,000 in life 
insurance. I believe that astronauts should also be eligible for this 
program, and that is why I am proposing this legislation.
  In closing, something like this should have been done in 1986, 
following the Challenger disaster. Unfortunately, 17 years later, 
Congress still has not acted to fix this problem. I say to my 
colleagues, we must not let even one more astronaut put his or her life 
at risk until we have ensured that the government will be there to 
provide for their children and their families. I hope my colleagues 
will join me in supporting this measure, and I hope we can get it 
approved quickly. I thank the chair.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI:
  S. 336. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to expand 
reimbursement for travel expenses of covered beneficiaries for 
specialty care in order to cover specialized dental care; to the 
Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to offer legislation 
entitled the ``Military Family Access to Dental Care Act.'' This 
legislation, while limited in its scope, will have a profound effect on 
the lives of our military service members and their families 
particularly those serving our country at remote rural bases.

[[Page S2122]]

  Current law provides reimbursement for military dependents who, when 
referred, must travel at least one-hundred miles to receive specialty 
health care. However, specialty dental care has not been interpreted 
within the scope of this provision. In a rural State like New Mexico, 
this exclusion has a real impact on quality of life.
  For example, a military dependent stationed at Cannon Air Force Base 
in eastern New Mexico is not able to receive periodontic or orthodontic 
care in nearby Clovis these specialties are simply not available. 
Instead, to receive such care, that dependent would have to travel 225 
miles to Albuquerque, 110 miles to Lubbock, Tx, or 104 miles to 
Amarillo often two or three times to alleviate a special dental 
problem. The cost of traveling these long distances can eat away at a 
military family's income and degrade their quality of life.
  The legislation I propose expands the scope of existing law to ensure 
that travel of at least one-hundred miles for referred specialty dental 
care is reimbursable. It is my firm belief that this small but 
practical bill can improve the lives of many military families, 
especially those assigned to bases in the West. What is more, it sends 
a signal to our military personnel and their families that we recognize 
the sacrifices they make for us and want to respond by addressing their 
needs whenever we can. I hope that my colleagues will join me in 
supporting this bill.
  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. 336

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

     SECTION 1. REIMBURSEMENT OF COVERED BENEFICIARIES FOR CERTAIN 
                   TRAVEL EXPENSES RELATING TO SPECIALIZED DENTAL 
                   CARE.

       Section 1074i of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``In any 
     case''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(b) Specialty Care Providers.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a), the term `specialty care provider' includes a dental 
     specialist (including an oral surgeon, orthodontist, 
     prosthodontist, periodontist, endodontist, or pediatric 
     dentist).''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. NELSON of Florida:
  S. 337. A bill to amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
Rodenticide Act and the Solid Waste Disposal Act to prohibit the use of 
arsenic-treated lumber as mulch, compost, or a soil amendment, and to 
prohibit the manufacture of arsenic-treated wood for use as playground 
equipment for children, fences, walkways, or decks or for other 
residential or occupational purposes, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an 
issue I've fought long and hard on--the risk posed to children by 
arsenic-treated wood playground equipment.
  There is now a government study which demonstrates the link between 
wood laced with an arsenic preservative called chromated copper 
arsenate or CCA and an increased risk of lung and bladder cancer.
  Last Friday, the scientists at the Consumer Product Safety Commission 
issued a report that concluded that 2 to 100 children out of 1 million 
will get bladder and lung cancer from their exposure to arsenic-treated 
wood playground equipment.
  This is disturbing.
  Especially since CCA was used to preserve 98 percent of the wood 
produced for residential uses in the United States in 2001.
  Since March of 2001, when media reports emerged about elevated levels 
of arsenic in playground soil and numerous playgrounds in the State of 
Florida closed as a result, I have been pushing the Environmental 
Protection Agency to complete its long-awaited study on the dangers 
posed by this arsenic preservative.
  I am still waiting.
  To spur action on this issue, in the last 2 years, I have filed 
legislation mandating warning labels on all arsenic-treated wood to 
inform consumers that the wood they were purchasing contained a 
carcinogen.
  Further, my past legislation required the EPA to complete its study, 
begun long before the CPSC started its study, regarding the risks posed 
by arsenic-treated wood.
  And, finally, I introduced legislation to ban the residential uses of 
arsenic-treated wood.
  Meanwhile, EPA reached an agreement with the wood preserving industry 
to voluntarily phase out the manufacture of CCA-treated wood for 
residential purposes by December 31, 2003.
  However, a year has passed since EPA reached that agreement and they 
still have not published a final rule in the Federal Register making 
the phase-out permanent, they still have not completed their own risk 
assessment of the dangers posed to children playing on CCA-treated 
equipment and a New York Times article in December 2002, reported that 
the administration may be reconsidering the phaseout.
  For those reasons, today I again introduce legislation to ban the 
manufacture of arsenic-treated wood for residential uses, including use 
as a mulch, to set a date certain for completion of EPA's risk 
assessment and to require the EPA to conduct a public education program 
to inform the public about how they can decrease their risk of 
contracting cancer from CCA-treated wood.
  The legislation also provides for the safe disposal of CCA-treated 
wood to prevent arsenic from contaminating our groundwater.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LAUTENBERG:
  S. 338. A bill to protect the flying public's safety and security by 
requiring that the air traffic control system remain a Government 
function; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Safe and 
Secure Skies Act of 2003, a bill that would protect the safety and 
security of the flying public by requiring that air traffic control 
remain a government function. This legislation is necessary because the 
Bush administration has taken several steps to privatize our Nation's 
air traffic control system.
  On September 11 air traffic controllers across the Nation performed 
heroically, as they guided thousands of aircraft out of the sky. From 
the tower at Newark International Airport, air traffic controllers in 
my State could see the Twin Towers burning as they worked to return 
tens of thousands of Americans to the ground safely.
  Like many public servants on that day, they are heroes. Along with 
police, firefighters, and other emergency personnel, these public 
employees gave 110 percent to secure the safety of the American people.
  In the aftermath of these tragic events, the American people demanded 
one thing in particular of their government: they wanted government 
personnel--not private contract firms--to perform security screening of 
baggage at our Nation's airports. And Congress compiled with this 
request, as we turned the privatized baggage screening system over to 
Federal workers with the new Transportation Security Agency.
  That is why it is so surprising to me that the administration is now 
taking steps to privatize the air traffic control system in this 
country. It makes little sense, especially after September 11. It is 
the opposite of what the public wants.
  The safety and security of the American people should not be the 
responsibility of the lowest bidder. Rather, it is a core 
responsibility of government.
  But the administration is moving rapidly in the opposite direction. 
Already we have seen the jobs of air traffic control specialists--those 
who repair, inspect, and maintain the air traffic control system--
opened up to outsourcing. And the administration just completed a 
``feasibility study'' of privatizing the jobs of flight service station 
controllers--the experts who provide critical weather, safety, and 
security alerts to pilots.
  Next on the agenda for the administration are the air traffic 
controllers, who monitor and guide thousands of aircraft every day over 
the United States.
  The administration has already proposed air traffic controller 
privatization in two of its annual budgets. In

[[Page S2123]]

June 2002, President Bush issued an executive order stripping air 
traffic services of its ``inherently governmental'' status. And in 
December 2002, the administration issued a document designating air 
traffic control a ``commercial'' activity, opening the door to 
contracting out the jobs of air traffic controllers to the lowest 
bidder.

  This change from ``inherently governmental'' to a ``commercial'' 
function is more than a technical change--``inherently governmental'' 
functions can never be privatized, while ``commercial'' functions may 
be outsourced.
  The administration is trying to accomplish its privatization plan 
under the public's radar screen through the Office of Management and 
Budget's A-76 process. We in Congress have the power to stop this 
process and the bill I am introducing today will reverse the 
administration's plan.
  My Safe and Secure Skies Act will return air traffic control 
functions to ``inherently governmental'' status, thus barring any 
privatization action. I do want to note, however, that my legislation 
will not affect the existing FAA ``Contract Tower'' program, which 
involves some small, visual flight rules airports.
  We currently have the best air traffic control system in the world. 
Over 15,000 dedicated Federal air traffic controllers guide more than 2 
million passengers a day home safely. Maintaining and inspecting the 
system are over 11,000 air traffic specialists, and nearly 3,000 flight 
service station controllers provide critical information and alerts to 
pilots. They are expert professionals who perform under pressure every 
day to keep our skies safe.
  I believe our air traffic controllers are almost a wing of the 
military, and they play a major role in homeland security. When 
President Bush gave the State of the Union speech last month, it was 
the flight service station air traffic controllers who sent alerts to 
avoid the expanded ``no-fly'' zone around Washington. And when the 
space shuttle Columbia tragically disintegrated in the skies over 
Texas, it was the air traffic controllers who directed aircraft away 
from the falling debris field.
  These men and women perform a critical government function.
  Some claim that privatization will save money. But when you look at 
other countries' experiments with air traffic control privatization, 
all you see are financial messes and safety hazards. Australia, Canada, 
and Great Britain all have privatized systems that are now in crisis. 
Costs have gone up and safety has gone down.
  Since Great Britain adopted privatization, near misses have increased 
by 50 percent and delays have increased by 20 percent. The British 
Government has already had to bail out the privatized air traffic 
control company twice.
  Privatization of the air traffic control system is bad fiscal policy, 
bad safety policy, bad homeland security policy, and the public doesn't 
want it.
  I therefore ask my colleagues to support my Safe and Secure Skies 
Act, which will declare these critical air traffic control functions to 
be ``inherently governmental'', and therefore not eligible for 
outsourcing.
  The safety of our skies should not be put in the hands of the lowest 
bidder.

                          ____________________