[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 150 (Thursday, October 23, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13135-S13148]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. CAMPBELL:
S. 1776. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, relating to
responsibility for intermodal equipment compliance with commercial
motor vehicle safety requirements, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Intermodal
Equipment Safety and Responsibility Act of 2003. This bill is a
companion bill to language originally brought to the floor of the House
of Representatives by my good friend from South Carolina,
Representative Henry Brown.
Every day, literally hundreds of unsafe intermodal chassis carrying
containers leave U.S. ports and travel on our public roads and
highways, endangering not only the drivers of these vehicles but also
the general public which shares the road with them. This bill will go a
long way to ensure that only safe, roadworthy chassis are released for
use and remove this often deadly threat to highway safety.
This legislation places responsibility for equipment safety and
compliance with Federal and State regulations squarely where it
belongs--with those who own or control the equipment. Under current
law, the brunt of responsibility for equipment safety and compliance is
placed on port drivers. The trucking companies and commerical drivers
that service the ports do not own chassis, but are obligated by
terminal operators to use the chassis provided to transport intermodal
containers to and from the ports. This bill would require equipment
controllers to inspect and repair intermodal equipment to meet all
safety regulations prior to offering it for interchange, and to certify
and document that such inspections have been performed. In addition, it
gives the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration the authority to
enter a port facility to review the inspection process and assure
compliance.
This Act also requires that citations issued for violations related
to the defective condition of an intermodal chassis that is not owned
by that motor carrier or driver, will not affect the motor carrier's
overall safety rating or the motor carrier's driving record.
The objective of this legislation is simple: to ensure that equipment
controllers perform regular maintenance on intermodal equipment and
give truckers safe and roadworthy equipment in compliance with current
USDOT safety regulations. Professional truck drivers are not
professional mechanics, nor should they be. Unfortunately, too many
equipment controllers do not perform the required systematic inspection
and maintenance, and truck drivers are expected to find not only
visible defects, but also safety defects that are not visible.
I am joined by the Colorado Motor Carriers Association, the
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, International Longshoreman's
Association, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, the
American Trucking Association and the Truckload Carriers Association
who all worked together diligently to reach a consensus of support for
this legislation.
The traveling American public deserves to be confident that the roads
they share with truckers are safe. I urge my colleagues to support this
bill and ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in
the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1776
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Intermodal Equipment Safety
and Responsibility Act of 2003''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Promoting safety on United States highways is a
national priority. The Secretary of Transportation has
promulgated
[[Page S13136]]
the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations to further this
purpose. The systematic maintenance, repair, and inspection
of equipment traveling on public highways in interstate
commerce are an integral part of this safety regime.
(2) Intermodal transportation plays a significant role in
expanding the United States economy, which depends heavily
upon the ability to transport goods by various modes of
transportation.
(3) Although motor carriers and their drivers often receive
trailers, chassis, containers, and other items of intermodal
equipment to be transported in interstate commerce, they do
not possess the requisite level of control or authority over
this intermodal equipment to perform the systematic
maintenance, repair, and inspection necessary to ensure
compliance with the applicable Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations and to ensure the safety of United States
highways.
(4) As a result of roadside inspections, motor carriers and
their drivers are cited and fined for violations of the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations attributable to
intermodal equipment that they do not have the opportunity to
systematically maintain. These violations negatively affect
the safety records of motor carriers.
SEC. 3. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this Act is to ensure that only those
parties that control intermodal equipment transported on
public highways in the United States (and thus have the
opportunity and authority to systematically maintain, repair,
and inspect the intermodal equipment) have legal
responsibility for the safety of that equipment as it travels
in interstate commerce.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
Section 5901 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(9) `motor carrier' includes--
``(A) a motor private carrier, as defined in section 13102
of this title; and
``(B) an agent of a motor carrier.
``(10) `intermodal equipment'--
``(A) means equipment that is commonly used in the
intermodal transportation of freight over public highways as
an instrumentality of foreign or interstate commerce; and
``(B) includes a trailer, chassis, container, and any
device associated with a trailer, chassis, or container.
``(11) `equipment interchange agreement', with respect to
intermodal equipment, means a written document that--
``(A) is executed by a controller of the equipment, or its
agent, and a motor carrier; and
``(B) establishes the responsibilities and liabilities of
both parties as they relate to the interchange of the
equipment.
``(12) `controller', with respect to intermodal equipment,
means any party that has any legal right, title, or interest
in the equipment, except that a motor carrier--
``(A) is not a controller of the equipment solely because
it provides or arranges for any part of the intermodal
transportation of the equipment; and
``(B) may not be considered a controller of the equipment
if authority for systematic maintenance and repairs of the
equipment has not been delegated to the motor carrier.
``(13) `interchange', with respect to intermodal equipment,
means the act of providing the equipment to a motor carrier
for the purpose of transporting the equipment for loading or
unloading by any party or repositioning the equipment for the
benefit of the equipment controller, except that such term
does not mean the leasing of the equipment to a motor carrier
for use in the motor carrier's over-the-road freight hauling
operations.
``(14) `applicable safety regulations' means the
regulations applicable to controllers of intermodal equipment
under section 5909 of this title.''.
SEC. 5. JURISDICTION OVER EQUIPMENT CONTROLLERS.
Chapter 59 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 5909. Jurisdiction over equipment controller
``The authority of the Secretary of Transportation to
prescribe regulations on commercial motor vehicle safety
under section 31136 of this title shall apply to controllers
of intermodal equipment that is interchanged or to be
interchanged.''.
SEC. 6. EQUIPMENT CONTROLLER RESPONSIBILITY.
(a) In General.--Chapter 59 of title 49, United States
Code, as amended by section 5, is further amended by adding
at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 5910. Equipment inspection, repair, and maintenance
``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any provision of an
equipment interchange agreement, a controller of intermodal
equipment that is interchanged or to be interchanged--
``(1) shall be responsible and held liable for the
systematic inspection, maintenance, and repair of the
equipment;
``(2) shall, each time prior to offering a motor carrier
the equipment for interchange, inspect the equipment and
provide such maintenance on, and make such repairs to, the
equipment to ensure that such equipment complies with all
applicable safety regulations at all times; and
``(3) shall not offer intermodal equipment to a motor
carrier unless such equipment has been inspected and repaired
as necessary to comply with such regulations.
``(b) Reimbursement.--
``(1) In general.--In the event that a repair of
interchanged intermodal equipment is necessary while in a
motor carrier's possession in order to comply with applicable
safety regulations, the controller of the equipment shall
promptly reimburse the motor carrier for the actual expenses
that are incurred by the motor carrier for the necessary
repair, together with compensation for any loss incurred by
the motor carrier by reason of delay in the transportation of
the equipment necessitated by the need for the repair.
``(2) Exception.--The controller of intermodal equipment
shall not be liable to provide reimbursement or compensation
for a repair to a motor carrier under paragraph (1) if the
motor carrier's negligence or willful misconduct caused the
condition requiring the repair.
``(c) Fines.--The Secretary may prescribe fines against
controllers of intermodal equipment for violations of this
section.''.
SEC. 7. SAFETY COMPLIANCE.
(a) In General.--Chapter 59 of title 49, United States
Code, as amended by section 6, is further amended by adding
at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 5911. Compliance with safety regulations
``(a) Liability of Equipment Controller.--Notwithstanding
any provision of an equipment interchange agreement, the
controller of intermodal equipment covered by such agreement
shall be liable for each violation of applicable safety
regulations that is attributable to such equipment and shall
pay any fine, penalty, and damages resulting from such
violation, except that the controller of such equipment shall
not be liable for any such violations that is proximately
caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of a motor
carrier that is not the controller of such equipment.
``(b) Limitation on Liability of Motor Carrier.--A motor
carrier who receives intermodal equipment through interchange
may not be held liable for a violation of applicable safety
regulations that is attributable to such equipment other than
under the circumstances and to the extent provided in
subsection (a).
``(c) Limitation on Effect.--No record or report of a
violation of applicable safety regulations attributable to
interchanged intermodal equipment, whether issued by a
Federal, State, or local law enforcement authority, shall
have any effect on a motor carrier's overall safety rating or
safety status measurement system score, as determined by the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, or on a driving
record of a driver for the motor carrier unless such
violation was proximately caused by the negligence or willful
misconduct of the motor carrier or driver, respectively.
``(d) Procedure for Records Corrections.--The Secretary of
Transportation shall prescribe an expedited procedure to
correct records or reports of violations that under
subsection (c) should not have been adversely affected by a
violation of applicable safety regulations.''.
(b) Time for Prescribing Records Correction Procedures.--
The Secretary shall issue final regulations setting forth the
expedited procedures required by section 5910(d) of title 49,
United States Code, not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 8. AUTHORITY TO INSPECT.
Chapter 59 of title 49, United States Code, as amended by
section 7, is further amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``Sec. 5912. Authority to inspect
``(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Transportation is
authorized to enter any facility of a controller of
intermodal equipment interchanged for use on a public highway
in order to inspect the equipment to determine whether the
equipment complies with the applicable regulations.
``(b) Inspection Program.--The Secretary shall establish
and implement with appropriate staffing an inspection and
audit program at facilities of controllers of intermodal
equipment in order to make determinations under subsection
(a). Inspection of equipment and maintenance records for such
equipment at such facility shall take place not less
frequently than once every 3 months.
``(c) Non-Complying Equipment.--Any intermodal equipment
that is determined under this section as failing to comply
with applicable safety regulations shall be placed out of
service and may not be used on a public highway until the
repairs necessary to bring such equipment into compliance
have been completed. Repairs of equipment placed out of
service shall be documented in the maintenance records for
such equipment.''.
SEC. 9. PROHIBITION ON RETALIATION.
Chapter 59 of title 49, United States Code, as amended by
section 8, is further amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``Sec. 5913. Penalties for retaliation
``(a) Retaliation Prohibited.--A controller of intermodal
equipment may not take any action to threaten, coerce,
discipline, discriminate, or otherwise retaliate against a
motor carrier in response to a request made by the motor
carrier for maintenance or repair of equipment intended for
interchange in order to comply with the applicable safety
regulations.
[[Page S13137]]
``(b) Failure To Timely Provide Safe Equipment Deemed To Be
Retaliation.--Upon receiving a motor carrier's request for
maintenance or repair of intermodal equipment to be picked up
by the motor carrier in an interchange of equipment, the
controller of intermodal equipment shall be considered to
have retaliated against the motor carrier for the purposes of
this section if the controller of intermodal equipment fails
to provide the motor carrier with the equipment in a
condition compliant with the applicable safety regulations
within 60 minutes after the motor carrier arrives to pick up
the equipment at the place where the equipment is to be
picked up.
``(c) Penalty.--A controller of intermodal equipment that
violates subsection (a) shall be liable to the United States
Government for a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for each
violation.''.
SEC. 10. DELEGATION OF MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY.
Chapter 59 of title 49, United States Code, as amended by
section 9, is further amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``Sec. 5914. Maintenance responsibility
``A controller of intermodal equipment may not delegate its
responsibility to systematically maintain and repair
equipment intended for interchange to a motor carrier or
motor carrier agent in an equipment interchange agreement.''.
SEC. 11. COMPATIBILITY OF STATE LAWS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 59 of title 49, United States
Code, as amended by section 10, is further amended by adding
at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 5915. Compatibility of State laws
``(a) Preemption Generally.--Except as provided in
subsection (b) or as otherwise authorized by Federal law, a
law, regulation, order, or other requirement of a State or
political subdivision of a State, or of a tribal
organization, is preempted if compliance with such law,
regulation, order, or other requirement would preclude
compliance with a requirement imposed under this chapter.
``(b) Certain Rules Not Preempted.--A law, regulation,
order, or other requirement of a State or political
subdivision of a State, or of a tribal organization, shall
not be preempted under subsection (a) if such law,
regulation, order, or other requirement is more stringent
than, but otherwise compatible with, a requirement under this
chapter.
``(c) Tribal Organization Defined.--In this section, the
term `tribal organization' has the meaning given such term in
section (4)(l) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(l)).''.
SEC. 12. REPEAL OF OBSOLETE PROVISION.
Section 5907 of title 49, United States Code, is repealed.
SEC. 13, CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.
The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is
amended--
(1) by striking the item relating to section 5907; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``5909. Jurisdiction over equipment controller.
``5910. Equipment inspection, repair, and maintenance.
``5911. Compliance with safety regulations.
``5912. Authority to inspect.
``5913. Penalties for retaliation.
``5914. Maintenance responsibility.
``5915. Compatibility of State laws.''.
SEC. 14. IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
(a) Regulations.--The Secretary of Transportation, after
notice and opportunity for comment, shall issue regulations
implementing the provisions of this Act. The regulations
shall be issued as part of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations of the Department of Transportation. The
implementing regulations shall include--
(1) a requirement to identify controllers of intermodal
equipment that is interchanged or intended for interchange in
intermodal transportation;
(2) a requirement to match such equipment readily to its
controller through a unique identifying number;
(3) a requirement to ensure that each controller of
intermodal equipment maintains a system of maintenance and
repair records for such equipment;
(4) a requirement to evaluate the compliance of controllers
of intermodal equipment with the applicable Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations;
(5) a provision that prohibits controllers of intermodal
equipment that fail to attain satisfactory compliance with
such regulations from authorizing the placement of equipment
on public highways;
(6) a requirement for the Secretary to consider the effect
that adequate maintenance facilities may have on safety
condition of equipment;
(7) a process by which motor carriers and agents of motor
carriers may anonymously petition the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration to undertake an investigation of a
noncompliant controller of intermodal equipment;
(8) administrative procedures to resolve disputes arising
under the regulations; and
(9) the inspection and audit program required under section
5912(b) of title 49, United States Code, as added by section
8.
(b) Time for Issuing Regulations.--The regulations required
under subsection (a) shall be developed pursuant to a
rulemaking proceeding initiated not later than 120 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act and shall be issued not
later than one year after such date of enactment.
(c) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section, the
definitions set forth in section 5901 of title 49, United
States Code, as amended by section 4, shall apply.
SEC. 15. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration such sums as may be necessary
for the establishment and implementation of the inspection
program required under section 5912 of title 49, United
States Code, as added by section 8.
SEC. 16. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 of this Act
and the amendments made by such sections shall take effect 30
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
______
By Ms. MURKOWSKI:
S. 1778. A bill to authorize a land conveyance between the United
State and the City of Craig, Alaska, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I introduce along with my
colleague, Senator Stevens, an important bill that will facilitate
Forest Service land management on Prince of Wales Island and help
community expansion and development. The City of Craig is the economic
center of Prince of Wales Island, the third largest island in the
country. The town contains the major retail shopping and service
outlets on the island and island residents drive up to a hundred miles
round trip to come to town for medical services and shopping. Craig
also has the most active and largest commercial fishing harbor and
fleet on the island.
Due to land selection conflicts between the Forest Service and the
State of Alaska in the 1960's, the city of Craig received no municipal
entitlement land. This legislation will help alleviate some of the loss
to the city from the lack of an entitlement.
One of the Forest Service's main administrative facilities, the Craig
Ranger District Station is located in Craig. The Craig Ranger has
management authority over approximately one million acres on Prince of
Wales Island. It is critical that the Forest Service has the tools it
needs to provide good management for that part of the island. One of
these tools is the presence of some Federal land near the Craig Ranger
Station. Right now, there is not any Forest Service land near the
Ranger Station. In an unusual situation for Alaska, the Ranger Station
is an in holding among private, state, and City owned land.
This legislation would provide for a three way conveyance process
which would result in three parcels of land now owned by the City being
conveyed into the National Forest and an in holding owned by a private
entity being acquired by the City.
To use the vernacular, this is one of those situations people like to
describe as ``win-win.'' Providing a recreational opportunity in the
Forest at Craig benefits the public and the city of Craig would obtain
land vital to its future community development plan.
What our legislation does is authorize the Federal Government to
accept conveyance of land from the City of Craig and authorize an
appropriation for land acquisition. The funding would be used by the
city of Craig to purchase the private land at Craig. In return the city
would convey to the Federal Government up to 346 acres of land it now
owns to the Tongass National Forest. This land is highly prized for
local recreation and would provide the Craig Ranger District with a
missing piece of its management scheme by providing a recreation site
within short walking distance of the Ranger Station.
Right now, visitors to the Forest come to the Craig Ranger Station to
orient themselves to the Forest. One of the things they look for is
onsite recreation in the Forest from the Ranger Station. But there is
none. Because of the land conveyance status directly around Craig,
there is no Forest land in that area.
However, the city of Craig owns almost 350 acres of prime
recreational land including a dedicated trail in the immediate vicinity
from the Ranger Station. The Forest should own this land so that it can
integrate the parcel into its land management plans.
The property to be acquired by the city of Craig is a cannery site
dating from the early 1900's which has not been used since the early
1980's. It is prime land for the city to redevelop in
[[Page S13138]]
order to improve its community management plan and to provide economic
stimulus in Craig. The parcel includes both uplands and tidelands and
could be used by Craig to develop a good port and harbor and to provide
first class land for retail merchants and other community services.
Senator Stevens and I strongly support the needs of Craig in
developing its local economy.
The entire island is in transition. In the early 1980's, the city and
Prince of Wales Island were the center of a vibrant timber based
economy that provided thousands of direct and indirect jobs to the
Island. Much of that is now gone as a result of unfortunate Federal
policies which have devastated the timber based economy on Prince of
Wales Island and much of Southeastern Alaska.
According to unemployment data published by the Alaska Department of
Labor, unemployment rates in Craig's census area regularly exceed 20
percent. Their annual rate of unemployment is typically more than twice
the national average.
We must help Craig in its transition to another economy. The city
leaders are dynamic and visionary people who have provided real
leadership on the island. They have worked hard to help maintain the
remaining timber plant at Klawock to provide year round employment to
city and Island residents. They have organized along with their
neighbors, the Prince of Wales Community Advisory Council, an
association of municipalities and Native and non Native communities to
work as a team on island wide projects.
Passage of this legislation is critical to the future of the city of
Craig. It will provide a great management tool to the Forest Service
and increase recreational opportunities for the local and visiting
public.
I urge my colleagues to join me in moving forward on this
legislation. All of the conveyances in the legislation will be subject
to appraisals as required by the Federal Government. The Federal
Government will receive equal value in land from the city. The passage
of this Act is good for the public and for the residents of Craig.
______
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Daschle, Mrs.
Murray, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Cantwell, and Ms.
Stabenow):
S. 1779. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
provide for fairness in the provision of medicare services for Indians;
to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am introducing today the Medicare
Indian Health Fairness Act of 2003 with Senators Inouye, Daschle,
Murray, Dayton, Johnson, Cantwell, and Stabenow. This legislation would
take a number of steps to improve the delivery of health care to Native
Amerians through Medicare and the Indian Health Service, IHS, system.
First and foremost, Indian Health Service and tribal hospitals and
clinics, which provide health care to American Indians on or near
reservations and to Alaska Natives, are currently unable to bill for
all Medicare Part B services. In effect, the Indian Health Service is
subsidizing the Medicare program because those services, which would
otherwise be paid for by Medicare, are instead paid for by IHS, which
is horribly underfunded.
In 2000, IHS hospitals and clinics were made eligible to bill
Medicare for certain Part B services for the first time, including
services delivered by physicians and certain other practitioners, but
those services were limited and denied payment for Part B items and
services, such as the following: Durable medical equipment--this
includes such items as wheelchairs, as well as blood testing strips and
blood monitors for diabetes patients, which is a severe problem among
Native Americans; home and some institutional dialysis supplies and
equipment--since the prevalence of diabetes in American Indians--Alaska
Natives is three times the rate in the general U.S. population, Indian
people experience a high rate of renal disease, including end state
renal disease; cancer screening; pap smears; glaucoma screening; clinic
or hospital-based ambulance services; prosthetic devices; covered
vaccines, including hepatitis B, pneumococcal and influenza
chemotherapy drugs; and clinical laboratory services.
This legislation would simply make these Indian health facilities and
providers eligible for payment for all Part B Medicare-covered items
and services to the same extent that any other provider would be
eligible for payment.
Furthermore, the bill assures that Native Americans should have the
same access to Medicare services as any other American. If IHS
providers are unable to bill for such Medicare services, IHS budget
shortfalls may result in rationing and delays in treatment. For some,
it means going out of the IHS system to get prompt service, as other
providers are able to bill the Medicare program. Native Americans and
IHS providers should not be subject to such barriers to care and
payment. Nor should they be subject to such complexity, as they are
only prohibited from billing and receiving payment for certain Part B
services.
There is absolutely no policy rationale for limiting the payment to
IHS, tribal hospitals and clinics to only certain Medicare Part B
services. I urge the Senate to end this unfortunate disparity.
Fortunately, identical language has been included in S. 1, the
Medicare prescription drug bull that passed the Senate earlier this
month. I offered an amendment with Senator Daschle, amendment No. 973,
on the Senate floor and was pleased that it was accepted by Chairman
Grassley and Ranking Member Baucus accepted it as part of the manager's
amendment prior to final passage of the bill.
In addition to that important provision, the ``Medicare Indian Health
Fairness Act'' includes another provision that was adopted as part of
S. 1 as a Bingaman amendment during the Finance Committee mark-up. This
provision requires Medicare providers to charge no more than Medicare
rates for inpatient hospital services provided to Indians who are
eligible for contract health services from the Indian Health Service,
tribally operated health programs, and urban Indian organizations.
This allows IHS to maximize its purchase of contract health services,
just as is done by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the
Department of Defense. Since the contract health services, CHS, account
is chronically underfunded, IHS and the tribes seriously ration and
often exhaust those funds before the end of the fiscal year. In fiscal
year 2001 alone, the Indian Health Service had insufficient funding to
provide services for over 100,000 cases that met its medical priority
criteria and denied 22,000 other cases of medically necessary care
which did not meet IHS medical priorities. Therefore, this section of
the bill would enable IHS and tribes to achieve greater economy for the
provision of contract health services.
The Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector
General's Cost-Saver Handbook has annually made this recommendation. As
per its 2003 Red Book or cost-saver handbook reads:
As a federal purchaser of inpatient health care from the
private sector, IHS should receive rates commensurate with
those received by other federal agencies that engage in
similar purchases [such as the VA and DOD].
The Inspector General adds:
If the favorable Medicare rates were legislatively
required, the dollars saved could be applied to the backlog
of patient services that cannot be accommodated in the
Contract Health Services program.
And last, the legislation includes a section intended to bring a
measure of consistency, rationality and efficiency to the Medicare
payment rate for all clinics in the Indian Health Service-supported
health care system. This language creates a uniform payment methodology
that would be available to all IHS and tribal clinics and corrects the
current situation where payment rates differ widely--based not on the
nature of the services a clinic provides, but on whether the facility
is operated by the IHS or operated by a tribe, and whether the clinic
is considered provider-based or free-standing. Since all clinics
provide primary patient care and arrange for secondary, tertiary and
specialty care on a referral basis, there is no rational reason for the
wide disparity in the Medicare payment methodologies for these
facilities.
The legislation would give all Indian clinics the ability to collect
reimbursement from the same IHS-CMS all-inclusive rate. Application of
the same
[[Page S13139]]
all-inclusive rate to all clinics would have the added value of being
efficient and economical to use at the clinic level and would apply the
same payment method in Medicare, by which IHS-funded clinics are
reimbursed, as they receive in Medicaid.
This section of the bill was the only one not included in S. 1, but
the rationale for it makes it an important component of this bill and
something we hope to see passed into law as well.
Although these provisions address a diversity of problems IHS
providers and clinics have with respect to the Medicare program, they
are critical and we should pass all of these provisions either as part
of a conference agreement on S. 1, as part of the ``Indian Health Care
Improvement Act,'' or on their merits through passage of this
freestanding bill.
I would like to thank Senators Inouye, Daschle, Murray, Dayton,
Johnson, Cantwell, and Stabenow for being original cosponsors of this
important legislation. I ask for 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. 1779
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare Indian Health
Fairness Act of 2003''.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF REIMBURSEMENT FOR ALL MEDICARE PART
B SERVICES FURNISHED BY CERTAIN INDIAN
HOSPITALS AND CLINICS.
(a) In General.--Section 1880(e) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1395qq(e)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``for services
described in paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``for all items
and services for which payment may be made under such part'';
(2) by striking paragraph (2); and
(3) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2).
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to items and services furnished on or after the
first day of the sixth month beginning after the date of
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON CHARGES FOR INPATIENT HOSPITAL CONTRACT
HEALTH SERVICES PROVIDED TO INDIANS BY MEDICARE
PARTICIPATING HOSPITALS.
(a) In General.--Section 1866(a)(1) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 1395cc(a)(1)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (R), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (S), by striking the period and
inserting ``, and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(T) in the case of hospitals which furnish inpatient
hospital services for which payment may be made under this
title, to be a participating provider of medical care--
``(i) under the contract health services program funded by
the Indian Health Service and operated by the Indian Health
Service, an Indian tribe, or tribal organization (as those
terms are defined in section 4 of the Indian Health Care
Improvement Act), with respect to items and services that are
covered under such program and furnished to an individual
eligible for such items and services under such program; and
``(ii) under a program funded by the Indian Health Service
and operated by an urban Indian organization with respect to
the purchase of items and services for an eligible urban
Indian (as those terms are defined in such section 4), in
accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary
regarding admission practices, payment methodology, and rates
of payment (including the acceptance of no more than such
payment rate as payment in full for such items and
services).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply as of a date specified by the Secretary of Health
and Human Services (but in no case later than 6 months after
the date of enactment of this Act) to medicare participation
agreements in effect (or entered into) on or after such date.
SEC. 4. EQUAL PAYMENTS FOR CLINICS IN THE INDIAN HEALTH
SERVICE SUPPORTED HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.
(a) In General.--Section 1880 of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1395qq) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new
subsection:
``(f) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
purposes of determining the rate of reimbursement for items
and services under this title, any outpatient or ambulatory
care clinic (whether freestanding or provider-based) operated
by the Indian Health Service, an Indian tribe, a tribal
organization, or an urban Indian organization (as those terms
are defined in section 4 of the Indian Health Care
Improvement Act), shall, upon the election of such clinic, be
reimbursed on the same basis as if such clinic were a
hospital outpatient department of the Indian Health
Service.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to items and services furnished on or after the
first day of the sixth month beginning after the date of
enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Grassley, and Mr.
Harkin):
S. 1780. A bill to amend the Controlled Substances Act to clarify the
definition of anabolic steroids and to provide for research and
education activities relating to steroids and steroid precursors; to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise tonight to introduce, along with my
good friend from Utah, Senator Hatch, the distinguished Chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, the ``Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2003.'' Over
the last several weeks, we have read front-page articles on the
dangerous mix of sports and steroids, including a new ``designer''
steroid tetrahydrogestrinone, known as ``THG.'' Several premier
athletes have allegedly tested positive for THG, and there is a Federal
grand jury investigation into the alleged manufacture and distribution
of this new substance. Our bill would make THG, and several other
similar substances, subject to the Controlled Substances Act. Thus,
these products would no longer be available over the counter. Absent a
prescription from your doctor, you will not be able to buy them
legally.
First, a bit of background on how we got here. Thirteen years ago I
held a number of hearings on the dangers associated with steroid use
and introduced legislation to make steroids Schedule III substances.
After my bill became law, a number of steroid users continued to buy
and use steroids only now they were buying them through a developing
illicit market. Others relied on new products being developed or
rediscovered by scientists, products which may not violate the letter
of the law, but certainly violate the spirit of the law.
These substances, called steroid precursors or pro-steroids, are one
step removed from the substances scheduled in the law: when ingested,
they metabolize into testosterone or other illicit steroids. These are
products which the United States Anti-Doping Agency, the group in
charge of testing Olympic athletes for performance enhancing drugs, has
called ``the functional equivalent of steroids.''
In writing about the lack of testing for steroid precursor use in
professional baseball, Barry Rozner of the Chicago Daily Herald
described the close relationship between steroids and steroid
precursors. He wrote:
There's still no testing for andro (androstenedione)
because technically it's not a steroid. It's a steroid
precursor. Technically a cake mix isn't a cake but as soon as
you pour it in a bowl and stick it in the oven, it's a cake.
You put andro in the body, mix it with the body's chemicals
and let it bake, and it turns into a powerful steroid. If it
walks like a duck and talks like a duck, baseball calls it a
sparrow.
The most well known of the steroid precursors is androstenedione
often called ``andro.'' Most recently Hiram Cruz, a 2001 national judo
champion, was suspended from competition for two years after testing
positive for andro. And it is widely thought that some East German
Olympic athletes used it in the 1970s and 1980s to improve their
performance. But perhaps the substance gained the most notoriety when
professional baseball player Mark McGuire admitted that he used it when
he broke Roger Maris's single season record for home runs. After
McGuire revealed that he had taken andro, sales of the product
quadrupled.
Andro increases both testosterone and estrogen levels in the body.
According to a study published in the Journal of the American Medical
Association ``orally administered adrostenedione increases serum
testosterone and estrogen levels in healthy men, particularly at higher
doses.'' The study further notes that ``long-term administration could
be hazardous, particularly in women or children.'' Another study showed
that even a single 100 milligram dose of andro can yield unhealthy
levels of testosterone in women and can increase estrogen levels by 80
percent. Andro has also been associated with a decrease in HDL the
``good'' cholesterol and elevated levels of estradiol which may
increase women's risk of breast cancer.
[[Page S13140]]
As I will discuss in greater detail later, in addition to the grave
health effects associated with using andro and other steroid
precursors, the physical effects can also be quite serious: women can
develop masculine sex characteristics including changing of the sexual
organs; men can develop feminine sex characteristics including breast
development; and adolescent users can stunt their growth.
The International Olympic Committee, the National Football League and
the National Collegiate Athletics Association have banned andro
and other steroid supplements. Other sports, particularly baseball,
have been criticized for refusing to agree to test players for steroid
precursors. I should note that Major League Baseball has endorsed the
legislation I am introducing today. And at a hearing in the Senate
Commerce Committee last year, Donald Fehr, the Executive Director of
the Major League Baseball Players Association, said that ``it may well
be time for the Federal Government to revisit whether steroid
precursors should also be covered by Schedule III.'' I agree with him.
Interestingly enough, so do the 79 percent of major league baseball
players and nearly 86 percent of baseball fans who, according to
surveys conducted by USA Today last year, support testing for steroids
and performance-enhancing drugs.
The USA Today survey also revealed that 80 percent of fans believe
that steroid use is behind some of the major league records that have
been broken recently. It is understandable, therefore, that some
players may support testing to preserve the integrity of their records.
As Yankees' shortstop Derek Jeter has been quoted as saying:
I don't have a problem with getting tested because I have
nothing to hide. Steroids are a big issue. If anything like a
home run or any injury happens, people say it's steroids.
That's not fair.
In my view, it is time for Congress to act so that we can put an end
to the charade that androstenedione and similar products are any
different from the anabolic steroids that are controlled under current
law.
To be honest I would be less concerned about what professional
athletes are doing to their bodies if their actions did not have such a
profound effect on kids. A study by the Kaiser Family Foundation
revealed that nearly three-quarters of kids say that they look up to
and want to emulate professional athletes. Sadly, more than half of
those kids believe that their sports heroes use steroids and other
performance enhancing drugs to win. That may be why adolescent anabolic
steroid use is at its highest level in the past decade, with 1 million
teens having used them.
As Dr. Bernard Greisemer, a pediatrician and sports medicine
specialist, testified before the Senate last year, many of these
products are marketed to kids who want to be like their favorite sports
hero. Dr. Greisemer said:
[P]rofessional athletes are major role models for our young
athletes; in the clothes they wear, the cars they drive, the
food they eat, and the drugs and dietary supplements they
take. The millions of dollars that are spent by major
corporations in linking their products to a particular
athlete, team, or sporting event, counter any argument that
professional athletes are not affecting the lifestyles of our
young athletes. Use of and media exposure of the use of,
anabolic steroids in professional athletes also directly
affects the interest in, the perception of benefits of, and
the use of these substances.
There are plenty of children and adults who believe that supplements
will make them faster and stronger. That they'll have bigger muscles
and be more like their favorite athlete. That they'll have a
competitive advantage or have what it takes to win. In reality, they
are jeopardizing their health. The ignorance of the consequences of
using these substances is astounding. A study by Blue Cross/Blue Shield
found that 70 percent of kids and half of parents surveyed were unable
to identify even one negative side effect associated with performance-
enhancing drugs. And 80 percent of kids reported that their parents
have never talked to them about the dangers of steroid use. Clearly
there is quite a bit of education to be done about these very dangerous
substances.
Let me go through just a few of the side effects of steroid use. In
both males and females it can lead to increased blood pressure,
increased risk of heart attack and stroke, liver and cardiac
dysfunction, increased libido, aggressiveness and appetite, and acne.
For males, steroid use can lead to breast development, premature
balding, testicular atrophy, decreased sperm count and prostate
enlargement. Females can develop masculine sex characteristics
including increased body hair, facial hair, deepening of the voice,
male pattern baldness and changes to the sex organs. And among
adolescent users, steroid precursor use can lead to stunted growth due
to hardening of cartilage. Many of these side-effects are irreversible.
Quite troubling to me is that some people are taking these substances
unwittingly. It is not unusual for manufacturers of creatine or other
performance enhancing substances to put andro or another precursor into
their product to give them a competitive edge over a competitor's
products.
Clearly these substances are dangerous and they should not be widely
available over the counter. That is why I am joining with Senator Hatch
and Senator Grassley today to introduce the Anabolic Steroid Control
Act of 2003.
My bill does four things. First, it amends the Anabolic Steroid
Control Act of 1990 by adding THG, androstenedione and their chemical
cousins to the list of anabolic steroids controlled under the
Controlled Substances Act and makes it easier for the DEA to add
similar substances to that list in the future. This would prohibit
people from obtaining these substances over the counter without a
prescription in either their pure form or as an additive to another
product.
Second, it directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to review the
Federal sentencing guidelines for crimes involving anabolic steroids
and consider increasing them. Currently, the maximum sentence for
offenses involving anabolic steroids is only 33-41 months for first
time offenders. And to receive the maximum sentence an offender would
have to have between 40,000 and 60,000 units, which is defined as a 10
cc vial or 50 tablets. That means that someone trafficking 300,000
doses faces a maximum of three and a half year behind bars. That does
not seem to be enough of a deterrent and I hope the Sentencing
Commission will consider raising the guidelines for steroid
trafficking.
Third, the bill authorizes $15 million for the Secretary of Health
and Human Services to award grants to public and non-profit entities to
carry out science-based education programs in elementary and secondary
schools to highlight the harmful effects of anabolic steroids.
Preference will be given to programs based on the Athletes Training and
Learning to Avoid Steroids program (ATLAS), the Athletes Targeting
Healthy Exercise and Nutrition Alternatives (ATHENA) program, and other
programs which the National Institute on Drug Abuse has determined to
be effective. ATLAS, which is aimed at male student athletes, has been
named as one of the Department of Education's Exemplary Programs and is
one of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's
Model Programs. ATHENA is ATLAS's companion program designed for female
athletes.
Finally, the bill directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services
to include questions about steroid use in the National Survey on Drug
Use and Health, an annual survey to measure the extent of alcohol, drug
and tobacco use in the United States. The bill authorizes $1 million
for this purpose.
I'm proud to say that the bill has been endorsed by a wide range of
medical, athletic and drug policy organizations including: American
Academy of Family Physicians; American Academy of Pediatrics; American
College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; American College for Sports
Medicine; American Council on Exercise; American Medical Association;
Association of Tennis Professionals; Blue Cross Blue Shield
Association; Boys and Girls Clubs; Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of
America; Consumer Healthcare Products Association; Council for
Responsible Nutrition; The Endocrine Society; The Hormone Foundation;
Little League; Major League Baseball; National Athletic Trainers
Association; The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at
Columbia University; National Collegiate Athletic Association; National
Federation of State High Schools Association;
[[Page S13141]]
National Football League; National High School Athletic Coaches
Association; National Junior College Athletic Association; National
Nutritional Foods Association; Pharmacists Planning Services, Inc.;
United States Anti-Doping Agency; U.S. Olympic Committee; U.S. Biathlon
Association; U.S. Soccer Federation; USA Cycling; USA Luge; USA
Swimming; USA Track and Field and Utah Natural Products Alliance.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and I hope that it
will be enacted into law soon.
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. 1780
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Anabolic Steroid Control Act
of 2003''.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT.
(a) Definitions.--Section 102 of the Controlled Substances
Act (21 U.S.C. 802) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (41)--
(A) by realigning the margin so as to align with paragraph
(40);
(B) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the
following:
``(A) The term `anabolic steroid' means any drug or
hormonal substance, chemically and pharmacologically related
to testosterone (other than estrogens, progestins,
corticosteroids, and dehydroepiandrosterone), and includes--
``(i) androstanediol--
``(I) 3b,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androstane; and
``(II) 3a,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androstane;
``(ii) androstanedione (5a-androstan-3,17-dione);
``(iii) androstenediol--
``(I) 1-androstenediol (3b,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androst-1-ene);
``(II) 1-androstenediol (3a,17b-dihydroxy-5a-androst-1-
ene);
``(III) 4-androstenediol (3b,17b-dihydroxy-androst-4-ene);
and
``(IV) 5-androstenediol (3b,17b-dihydroxy-androst-5-ene);
``(iv) androstenedione--
``(I) 1-androstenedione ([5a]-androst-1-en-3,17-dione);
``(II) 4-androstenedione (androst-4-en-3,17-dione); and
``(III) 5-androstenedione (androst-5-en-3,17-dione);
``(v) bolasterone (7a,17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-
3-one);
``(vi) boldenone (17b-hydroxyandrost-1,4,-diene-3-one);
``(vii) calusterone (7b,17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-
en-3-one);
``(viii) clostebol (4-chloro-17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-
one);
``(ix) dehydrochlormethyltestosterone (4-chloro-17b-
hydroxy-17a-methyl-androst-1,4-dien-3-one);
``(x) 4-dihydrotestosterone (17b-hydroxy-androstan-3-one);
``(xi) drostanolone (17b-hydroxy-2a-methyl-5a-androstan-3-
one);
``(xii) ethylestrenol (17a-ethyl-17b-hydroxyestr-4-ene);
``(xiii) fluoxymesterone (9-fluoro-17a-methyl-11b,17b-
dihydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one);
``(xiv) formebolone (2-formyl-17a-methyl-11a,17b-
dihydroxyandrost-1,4-dien-3-one);
``(xv) furazabol (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyandrostano[2,3-c]-
furazan);
``(xvi) 18a-homo-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one (13b-ethyl-17b-
hydroxygon-4-en-3-one);
``(xvii) 4-hydroxytestosterone (4,17b-dihydroxy-androst-4-
en-3-one);
``(xviii) 4-hydroxy-19-nortestosterone (4,17b-dihydroxy-
estr-4-en-3-one);
``(xix) mestanolone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-5a-androstan-3-
one);
``(xx) mesterolone (1a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-[5a]-androstan-3-
one);
``(xxi) methandienone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-1,4-
dien-3-one);
``(xxii) methandriol (17a-methyl-3b,17b-dihydroxyandrost-5-
ene);
``(xxiii) methenolone (1-methyl-17b-hydroxy-5a-androst-1-
en-3-one);
``(xxiv) methyltestosterone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxyandrost-
4-en-3-one);
``(xxv) mibolerone (7a,17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-
one);
``(xxvi) nandrolone (17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one);
``(xxvii) norandrostenediol--
``(I) 19-nor-4-androstenediol (3b, 17b-dihydroxyestr-4-
ene);
``(II) 19-nor-4-androstenediol (3a, 17b-dihydroxyestr-4-
ene);
``(III) 19-nor-5-androstenediol (3b, 17b-dihydroxyestr-5-
ene); and
``(IV) 19-nor-5-androstenediol (3a, 17b-dihydroxyestr-5-
ene);
``(xxviii) norandrostenedione--
``(I) 19-nor-4-androstenedione (estr-4-en-3,17-dione); and
``(II) 19-nor-5-androstenedione (estr-5-en-3,17-dione;
``(xxix) norbolethone (18a-homo-17b-hydroxypregna-4-en-3-
one);
``(xxx) norclostebol (4-chloro-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one);
``(xxxi) norethandrolone (17a-ethyl-17b-hydroxyestr-4-en-3-
one);
``(xxxii) oxandrolone (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-2-oxa-[5a]-
androstan-3-one);
``(xxxiii) oxymesterone (17a-methyl-4,17b-dihydroxyandrost-
4-en-3-one);
``(xxxiv) oxymetholone (17a-methyl-2-hydroxymethylene-17b-
hydroxy-[5a]-androstan-3-one);
``(xxxv) stanozolol (17a-methyl-17b-hydroxy-[5a]-androst-2-
eno[3,2-c]-pyrazole);
``(xxxvi) stenbolone (17b-hydroxy-2-methyl-[5a]-androst-1-
en-3-one);
``(xxxvii) testolactone (13-hydroxy-3-oxo-13,17-
secoandrosta-1,4-dien-17-oic acid lactone);
``(xxxviii) 1-testosterone (17b-Hydroxy-5a-androst-1-en-3-
one);
``(xxxix) testosterone (17b-hydroxyandrost-4-en-3-one);
``(xl) tetrahydrogestrinone (13b,17a-diethyl-17b-
hydroxygon-4,9,11-trien-3-one);
``(xli) trenbolone (17b-hydroxyestr-4,9,11-trien-3-one);
and
``(xlii) any salt, ester, or ether of a drug or substance
described in this paragraph; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), the Attorney
General may not schedule Androstenedione as a controlled
substance in accordance with this Act until the Attorney
General receives a finding from the Commissioner of Food and
Drugs relating to whether Androstenedione is lawfully
marketed under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21
U.S.C. 321 et seq.).''; and
(2) in paragraph (44), by inserting ``anabolic steroids,''
after ``marihuana,''.
(b) Authority and Criteria for Classification.--Section
201(g) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 811(g)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``substance from a
schedule if such substance'' and inserting ``drug which
contains a controlled substance from the application of
titles II and III of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention
and Control Act (21 U.S.C. 802 et seq.) if such drug''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by adding at the end the following:
``(C) Upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, a compound, mixture, or preparation which
contains any anabolic steroid, which is intended for
administration to a human being or an animal, and which,
because of its concentration, preparation, formulation or
delivery system, does not present any significant potential
for abuse.''.
(c) Anabolic Steroids Control Act.--Section 1903 of the
Anabolic Steroids Control Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-647) is
amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a); and
(2) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections
(a) and (b), respectively.
SEC. 3. SENTENCING COMMISSION GUIDELINES.
The United States Sentencing Commission shall--
(1) review the Federal sentencing guidelines with respect
to offenses involving anabolic steroids;
(2) consider amending the Federal sentencing guidelines to
provide for increased penalties with respect to offenses
involving anabolic steroids in a manner that reflects the
seriousness of such offenses and the need to deter anabolic
steroid use; and
(3) take such other action that the Commission considers
necessary to carry out this section.
SEC. 4. PREVENTION AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services
(referred to in this Act as the ``Secretary'') shall award
grants to public and nonprofit private entities to enable
such entities to carry out science-based education programs
in elementary and secondary schools to highlight the harmful
effects of anabolic steroids.
(b) Eligibility.--
(1) Application.--To be eligible for grants under
subsection (a), an entity shall prepare and submit to the
Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and
containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(2) Preference.--In awarding grants under subsection (a),
the Secretary shall give preference to applicants that intend
to use grant funds to carry out programs based on--
(A) the Athletes Training and Learning to Avoid Steroids
program;
(B) the Athletes Targeting Healthy Exercise and Nutrition
Alternatives program; and
(C) other programs determined to be effective by the
National Institute on Drug Abuse.
(c) Use of Funds.--Amounts received under a grant under
subsection (a) shall be used primarily for education programs
that will directly communicate with teachers, principals,
coaches, as well as elementary and secondary school children
concerning the harmful effects of anabolic steroids.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section, $15,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
SEC. 5. NATIONAL SURVEY ON DRUG USE AND HEALTH.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services
shall ensure that the National Survey on Drug Use and Health
includes questions concerning the use of anabolic steroids.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section, $1,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
[[Page S13142]]
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Biden and
Senator Hatch as a co-sponsor of the Steroid Control Act of 2003. Our
youth need to understand that while the short-term use of steroids may
seem beneficial, the long-term effects on overall health can be
extremely harmful or even fatal. Adults need to be more vigilant in
ensuring young people are not able to obtain these dangerous
substances. The Steroid Control Act is an important step in working
toward that goal.
According to the latest Monitoring the Future Survey, 2.5 percent of
eighth graders, 3.5 percent of tenth graders and 4.0 percent of twelfth
graders used steroids at least once during their lifetime. Teens in
particular seem to believe the myth that steroid abuse, typically at 10
to 100 times what might be prescribed by a doctor, is a quick way to
gain muscle mass with little cost.
But steroid abuse is associated with a range of physical and
emotional problems. According to the National Drug Intelligence Center,
the dangers associated with steroid use include liver tumors and
cancer, jaundice, high blood pressure and increases in cholesterol
levels, kidney tumors, fluid retention, and severe acne. Adolescents in
particular risk prematurely halting their growth because of early
skeletal maturation and acceleration of puberty. The emotional problems
associated with steroid use include dramatic mood swings, including
manic symptoms that can lead to violence called ``roid'' rage,
depression, paranoid jealousy, extreme irritability, delusions, and
impaired judgment.
This Bill makes clarifications to the Steroid Control Act passed in
1990. It will make it easier to add steroid precursors such as
androstenedione, THG, and other similar substances--many of which have
been developed since the Steroid Control Act of 1990 passed in order to
evade the law--to the list of Schedule III anabolic steroids. In
addition, it adds a number of known steroid precursors to the anabolic
steroid list, and removes the requirement that a substance be proven to
promote muscle growth.
The Steroid Control Act also directs the United States Sentencing
Commission to review the Federal sentencing guidelines for crimes
involving anabolic steroids. It provides an opportunity to conduct
prevention programs for young students to educate them on the dangers
of using steroids.
I encourage my colleagues to join us in supporting these important
reforms.
______
By Mr. DORGAN (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Johnson,
Mr. Pryor, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Levin, Mr. Feingold, Mr.
McCain, and Mr. Jeffords):
S. 1781. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to promulgate regulations for the reimportation of
prescription drugs, and for other purposes; read the first time.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Pharmaceutical
Market Access Act of 2003 in the Senate, along with my colleagues,
Senators Snowe, Stabenow, Johnson, Pryor, Dayton, Leahy, Levin,
Feingold, McCain, and Jeffords. This legislation is the Senate
companion to H.R. 2427, which passed the House of Representatives by a
wide, bipartisan 243-186 vote earlier this year.
This bill would give Americans the benefit of the global market in
purchasing FDA-approved medicines. Rather than paying the highest
prices in the world for their prescription drugs, Americans, through
their local pharmacist or drug wholesaler, should be able to access
FDA-approved medicines from Canada and 24 other major industrialized
countries. The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that this
legislation would save taxpayers $40.4 billion, including $4.5 billion
in savings for the Federal Government.
As my colleagues know, the conference committee on Medicare currently
has before it House and Senate bills that include pharmaceutical market
access provisions. My hope is that the Medicare conferees will include
strong drug importation language that will give American consumers
immediate relief from high drug prices. If not, however, I will fight
to have this bill called up separately in the Senate at the earliest
available opportunity.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my legislation be printed in
the Record.
______
By Mr. DASCHLE (for Mr. Kerry):
S. 1782. A bill to provide duty-free treatment for certain tuna; to
the Committee on Finance.
(At the request of Mr. Daschle, the following statement was ordered
to be printed in the Record.)
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that
is designed to eliminate tariffs on certain tuna products imported into
the United States from member nations of the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN).
ASEAN is a force for stability and development in Southeast Asia and
pursuit of cooperative economic policies is critical to the
relationship. The ASEAN nations include countries such as the
Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia that are valuable trading
partners and important friends and allies in the ongoing fight against
world terrorism.
Several of the ASEAN nations import processed tuna imported into the
United States. This includes pouch tuna, which is a relatively new
product that uses an innovative process to vacuum pack tuna into easy
to use and environmentally friendly airtight pouches for commercial and
retail sale. A few creative companies, including Jana Brands, Inc. of
Natick, Massachusetts, pioneered pouch tuna in the United States.
Tuna imported from the ASEAN nations is subject to higher tariffs
upon entry into the United States. A provision was included in the
Trade Act of 2002 that gives duty-free treatment to pouch but not
canned tuna imported from the beneficiary countries of the Andean Trade
Promotion and Drug Eradication Act. I understand that the Andean Pact
preferences are intended to increase production and trade with the
United States in certain products and wean their economies away from
any dependence on the production of crops used to make illegal drugs. I
support the rationale behind the Andean Pact but it is also true that
duty free treatment for pouch tuna imported from Andean countries puts
pouch tuna imported from ASEAN member nations at a competitive
disadvantage.
To restore fair trade and to benefit U.S. consumers and workers, I am
introducing the ``Fair Trade in Pouch Tuna Act of 2003''. This bill
provides limited duty free treatment for tuna packed in airtight
pouches imported from ASEAN nations that meet internationally
recognized labor standards and environmental protections. The
legislation requires that these imports come only from ASEAN nations
that provide and enforce recognized worker rights and environmental
protections.
This legislation is just the first step. I look forward to working
with the many parties that may be interested in this issue to craft a
successful proposal.
______
By Mr. SARBANES (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Warner, and Mr.
Allen):
S. 1783. A bill to provide that transit pass transportation fringe
benefits be made available to all qualified Federal employees in the
National Capital Region; to allow passenger carriers which are owned or
leased by the Government to be used to transport Government employees
between their place of employment and mass transit facilities, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Federal
Employee Commuter Benefits Act of 2003, which is cosponsored by my
colleagues Senators Mikulski, Warner, and Allen. This bill will
guarantee transit benefits to all Federal employees in the National
Capital Area and will remove a restriction that currently forbids
Federal agencies from providing employee shuttles to and from transit
stations. This measure is an important step forward in our efforts to
encourage transit ridership and improve the quality of life for Federal
employees in the Washington, D.C. region and throughout the nation.
All across the Nation, congestion and gridlock are taking their toll
in terms
[[Page S13143]]
of economic loss, environmental impact, and personal frustration.
According to the Texas Transportation Institute, in 2001 Americans in
75 urban areas spent 3.6 billion hours stuck in traffic, with an
estimated cost to the nation of $69.5 billion in lost time and wasted
fuel. In response, Americans are turning to alternative transportation
options in record numbers. The American Public Transportation
Association estimates that Americans now take over 9 billion trips on
transit per year, the highest level in more than 40 years.
Transit benefit programs are playing a vital role in increasing
transit ridership, which benefits both transit users and drivers. In
1998, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century amended the
tax code to allow financial incentives related to commuting costs for
employers and employees. These transit benefits allowed employers to
offer a tax-free financial incentive toward the costs of transit
commuting, starting at $65 per month and raised in 2002 to $100 per
month.
Based upon the findings of the Environmental Protection Agency and
the U.S. Department of Transportation, there are clear improvements to
congestion, energy efficiency, and air quality from transit benefit
programs. According to their findings, an employer with 1,000 employees
that participates in a combination of transit benefits, carpool, and
telecommuting programs can take credit for taking 175 cars off the
road, saving 44,000 gallons of gasoline per year, and cutting global
warming pollution by 420 tons per year on average.
In April 2000, an Executive Order was signed requiring all executive
branch agencies in the National Capital Region to offer transit
benefits to their employees. As a result, Federal employees commuting
to Washington, D.C. from Montgomery, Prince George's, and Frederick
Counties, Maryland, several counties in Northern Virginia, and as far
away as West Virginia, are encouraged to choose transit as their means
to get to work.
According to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and
the U.S. Department of Transportation, by 2001 more than 110,000
employees--approximately one-third of all Federal employees in the
National Capital Region--joined the Federal transit benefit program
created by the Executive Order. These program participants alone have
eliminated an estimated 12,500 single-occupancy vehicles from
Washington, D.C. area roads, helping to reduce congestion and improve
air quality for our region.
The Executive Order, however, is limited. It does not cover the more
than 100,000 Federal employees in the legislative and judicial
branches, and the dozens of independent Federal agencies located in the
Washington, D.C. region. While many of these organizations provide
transit benefits to their employees, the implementation and level of
benefit is up to the discretion of individual offices. As such, many of
these organizations provide limited benefits or do not provide any
benefits at all. Guaranteed transit benefits would give these employees
more choice in their commuting options and provide an additional
incentive to move off our congested roadways and onto public transit.
Of course, such incentives will be ineffective if employees lack
access to transit services. In my own state of Maryland, the United
States Food and Drug Administration planned to use its own resources to
provide a shuttle service for its employees from its new White Oak
facility to an area Metro station. When they investigated providing
this service, FDA officials found that the current law does not allow
Federal agencies to use their own vehicles to shuttle employees to mass
transit stations.
The potential impact of this restriction on regional congestion is
not insignificant. By 2005, FDA estimates 1,700 employees will work at
the new White Oak facility, and plans have been made to eventually
house more than 7,000 FDA researchers and administrators at the new
facility. The lack of access from FDA's new campus to a transit station
represents a lost opportunity for reducing congestion, improving our
environment and elevating the quality of life for employees.
This type of lost opportunity occurs across the nation. Nationally,
the Federal Government employs more than 2.6 million civilian workers
at more than 3,000 Federal government office buildings. At Federal
offices throughout the country, transit use is often limited as a
commuting option due to lack of employee access to a transit station or
a bus stop.
The Federal Employee Commuter Benefits Act would address both of
these issues faced by Federal employees. First, the bill would put into
law the Executive Order's requirement that transit pass benefits be
made available to all qualified Federal employees in the National
Capital Region. The bill also extends the requirement beyond executive
branch agencies to include the legislative and judicial branches and
independent agencies, providing guaranteed transit benefits to an
additional 100,000 employees in the Washington, DC region.
Second, the Federal Employee Commuter Benefits Act would remove the
restriction that prohibits a Federal agency from operating a shuttle
service to a public transit facility. With this legislation, any
Federal agency, anywhere in the United States, can choose to provide a
transit shuttle service for their employees. By providing access to
commuting alternatives, Federal agencies will be able to provide a
benefit to their employees that can make getting to work easier, more
affordable, and more employee-friendly. It will also provide an
opportunity to help reduce congestion and improve air quality across
the Nation.
Since 1982, the U.S. population has grown 20 percent, but the time
spent by commuters in traffic has grown 236 percent. Each year, traffic
congestion wastes nine billion gallons of fuel. By encouraging Federal
employees to look to transit and by providing access to transit
stations, we can help reduce congestion, improve the environment, and
promote an improved quality of life.
I am introducing the Federal Employee Commuter Benefits Act because
of the opportunities it will give Federal agencies to support public
transportation, both by providing employee access to transit facilities
across the nation, and by providing transit benefits to Federal
employees in the Washington, D.C. region. Both of these improvements
will aid our efforts to fight congestion and pollution by encouraging
the use of transportation alternatives. This legislation is strongly
supported by Federal employees, transit providers, and local elected
officials, and I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill, along
with their letters of support, be printed in the Record. I encourage my
colleagues to join me in supporting the Federal Employee Commuter
Benefits Act.
There being no objection, the additional material was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
American Federation of Government Employees, Local No.
12, AFL-CIO,
Washington, DC, September 25, 2003.
Hon. Paul Sarbanes,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: The American Federation of
Government Employees (AFGE) Local 12 represents 4,000
employees at the U.S. Department of Labor in the Washington
D.C. metropolitan area.
We appreciate very much all the work you have done on
behalf of Federal employees, in particular your work to
assist our local to have the monthly transit subsidy raised
to $100. Unfortunately, Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao
continues to deny the $100 transit subsidy to the employees
represented by AFGE Local 12. This is why I am writing to you
today.
We respectfully request that you sponsor and introduce in
the Senate a companion bill to H.R. 1151. The purpose of H.R.
1151 is ``To provide that transit pass transportation fringe
benefits be made available to all qualified Federal employees
in the National Capital Region; to allow passenger carriers
which are owned or leased by the Government to be used to
transport Government employees between their place of
employment and mass transit facilities, and for other
purposes.''
H.R. 1151 was introduced by Congressman Jim Moran and is
co-sponsored by Representatives Eleanor Holmes Norton, Albert
Wynn, Chris Van Hollen, Tom Davis, Steny Hoyer, and Frank
Wolf. It has been marked up in the Subcommittee on Civil
Service and Agency Organization of the Government Reform
Committee.
Passage into law of this legislation would not only help
employees at the Department of Labor and employees at any
other Federal agency in this area where management has
decided, for whatever reason, not to offer the tax-free
maximum transit subsidy. It would also benefit the region
generally by giving
[[Page S13144]]
more Federal employees the incentive to use mass transit,
thus helping to lesson traffic congestion and air pollution.
If you would like to discuss this further, please call me.
Thank you very much for your consideration of this serious
matter.
Respectfully yours,
Lawrence C. Drake, Jr.,
President.
____
Washington Metropolitan Area
Transit Authority,
Washington, DC, October 10, 2003.
Hon. Paul Sarbanes,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: I am pleased to offer the Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority's (WMATA) endorsement of
the legislation you are proposing concerning federal employee
commuter benefits. This legislation is very important in
supporting regional efforts to use every feasible technique
to reduce the severe traffic congestion in the National
Capital Region.
The recently released Texas Transportation Institute (TTI)
report on congestion cites the metropolitan Washington region
as the third most congested in the nation, despite intense
transit use by commuters in this area. The TTI report cites a
number of strategies that help to reduce congestion and the
cost of delay to the residents of the region. For the
Washington metropolitan area, the TTI report indicates that
transit services currently save the metropolitan area more
than $1 billion annually in delay costs and almost 42 percent
of current delay time. A report issued by the Surface
Transportation Policy Project (STPP) in 2002 noted that if
TTI calculated person trip delay rather than vehicle delay
and incorporated transit ridership into the equation, then
the Washington metropolitan area congestion ranking would
fall from 4th to 31st.
The TTI report and the STPP analysis demonstrate the
positive affects of transit services on reducing traffic
congestion in the Washington metropolitan area. With our
assault on traffic congestion, it is essential that we
continue to grow transit ridership. It is essential that the
federal government as the region's largest employer,
employing more than 374,000 people in this area, give
employees every incentive to take transit. The tremendously
successful transit benefits program, known in this area as
Metrochek, is currently required to be offered to civilian
and military employees of the Executive Branch and
voluntarily provided by the U.S. House and Senate and several
independent agencies. Since the imposition of Executive Order
13150 on October 1, 2000, the number of federal employees
receiving transit benefits has increased 147 percent, from
57,000 to 141,000 and 47 percent of Metrorail's peak period
riders are federal employees--up from 35 percent in the mid
1980s.
Your proposal will codify the federal employees transit
benefit and expand its eligibility to judicial, legislative
and independent agency employees in the National Capital
Region. While some of these agencies already participate in
the Metrochek program, this legislation ensures that
participation will be uniform across all three branches of
the federal government.
WMATA also supports the proposal to authorize the
establishment of federal agency shuttles to and from mass
transit facilities. While many federal agencies throughout
the region are within walking distance of Metrorail stations,
and other transit facilities, some are not. This legislation
will make transit accessible to many federal workers for whom
transit is not currently a viable alternative because their
work site is not convenient to a Metro station.
Many thanks for your leadership in proposing this
legislation. It is another example in a long list of
initiatives you have sponsored to promote public
transportation in the National Capital Region and the nation.
Sincerely,
Richard A. White,
Chief Executive Officer.
____
Maryland Department of Transportation, the Secretary's
Office,
Hanover, MD, October 10, 2003.
Hon. Paul S. Sarbanes,
U.S. Senate, 309 Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: It has recently been brought to my
attention that you intend to introduce legislation to expand
and strengthen existing transit benefits available to federal
employees. My understanding is that the proposed bill would
accomplish the following: Codify the existing employee
transit benefit which is currently an Executive Order; extend
the eligibility of transit pass benefits to legislative,
judicial branch and independent agency employees in the
National Capital Region (estimated to be over 100,000
employees); and allow government vehicles to be used to
provide shuttle services between federal agency locations and
mass transit facilities.
In the past Governor Ehrlich supported providing transit
benefits to federal employees. The Ehrlich Administration
continues its dedication to reducing congestion and aiding
the environment. According to the recently released Texas
Transportation Institute Study, the Washington area was
ranked third in congestion nationwide, this situation will
worsen unless serious measures are taken. Providing
additional access and an improved ability to utilize public
transportation is the type of sound policy that constitutes
the balanced and comprehensive transportation strategy that
is critically needed in the fight to relieve traffic
congestion.
In our view, your proposed bill deserves and receives our
support as it would expand coverage of a program that has
served the many Maryland citizens residing in the Washington
area who are employed by federal departments to those who
work for the remaining federal governmental entities. If I
may be of additional assistance, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
Robert L. Flanagan,
Secretary.
____
Virginia Railway Express,
Alexandria, VA, October 22, 2003.
Hon.Paul Sarbanes,
Ranking Member Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban
Affairs,
Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: I am writing to you to express my
support for your efforts to offer legislation that would
provide transit pass transportation fringe benefits to all
qualified Federal employees in the National Capital region.
As someone who has always been an advocate for the promotion
of public transportation and the mobility it affords the
citizenry, we are fortunate to have you as the Ranking Member
of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban
Affairs, which oversees mass transit programs.
As you have witnessed, increased federal investment in
transit under TEA 21 has led to dramatic growth in public
transportation ridership, particularly in the National
Capital Region. The Virginia Railway Express is a prime
example of that growth, with ridership increasing by 18% each
year for the past three years, making us one of the fastest
growing commuter railroads in America. Nearly 69% of our
ridership is comprised of federal and/or military employees
working in the region.
Currently, transit benefits are offered to a select core of
federal employees under Executive Order 13150. The benefit is
limited to the executive branch agencies with no requirement
for participation by the legislative and judicial branches.
Such legislation would codify transit benefits to all
eligible federal employees by broadening the scope of
participation to another 100,000 workers, thus providing
greater flexibility and mobility for the federal work force
in the region.
Your legislation is significant not only because it affords
greater options to our federal workforce, but also because
the use of public transit is the only recourse to help
relieve the growing problem of traffic congestion in the
region. For instance, today VRE transports enough people to
remove one lane of traffic off of I-95 and I-66 during peak
rush hours in the morning and evening. Not only does it
reduce car emissions; thus improving air quality, but also
ensures that the federal and private workforce can get to
work in a timely fashion; thus saving millions of dollars for
employers. The passage of this legislation would only
increase these benefits to our region.
In conclusion, let me again thank you for all the support
that you have given to public transportation over the years
and for authoring this much needed legislation. I hope that
with your direct involvement that we will be successful in
seeing this measure signed into law.
Sincerely,
Dale Zehner,
Acting Chief Operating Officer.
____
American Public Transportation
Association,
Washington, DC, October 20, 2003.
Hon. Paul S. Sarbanes,
U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: On behalf of the 1,500 member
organizations of the American Public Transportation
Association (APTA), I write to express strong support for
legislation you are proposing that would expand the use of
transit-related commuter tax benefits in the Washington, D.C.
region. This legislation will help promote the use of public
transportation and thereby support regional efforts to reduce
traffic congestion in the National Capital area. We note that
a recent report by the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI)
cited the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area as the third
most congested in the nation.
As we understand it, your legislation would codify language
currently in an executive order that requires federal
executive branch agencies to offer to their employees transit
benefits equal to employee commuting costs, up to $100 per
month. The legislation would also expand the eligibility of
these benefits to legislative and judicial branch employees
in the National Capital area.
We believe that it is important that the federal government
support the use of public transportation in its efforts to
reduce congestion, minimize auto pollution, and make the best
use of existing public transportation facilities that are
built with a substantial federal investment. APTA has been a
long-time proponent of providing federal tax incentives that
promote public transportation at no less a level than those
provided for parking.
We thank you for your leadership on this issue. If you have
questions, please have your staff contact Rob Healy of APTA's
Government Affairs staff at (202) 496-4811 or e-mail
[email protected]. We look forward to
[[Page S13145]]
working with you to see this important legislation enacted
into law.
Sincerely yours,
William W. Millar,
President.
____
Office of the County Executive,
Rockville, Maryland, October 13, 2003.
Hon. Paul S. Sarbanes,
U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: Thank you for introducing companion
legislation to H.R. 1151, a bill to address federal employee
commuter benefits, including a critical transit provision for
a growing number of federal employees working for the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) at White Oak. This measure will
directly benefit thousands of federal employees in the
region, and indirectly help Montgomery County at reducing
traffic congestion.
It is both timely and critical that this legislation be
adopted now, given the increased challenges the Washington
metropolitan area faces as a result of its recent designation
as a severe air quality non-attainment area. As the region
struggles to find the appropriate combination of actions
necessary to bring air quality into conformity with healthier
standards, this legislation can play a pivotal role.
Montgomery County has been a leader in encouraging
employers to provide transit benefits to their employees.
Through an intensive outreach program coupled with cost-
sharing incentives, the County raises awareness among
employers of the value of such benefits to both employees and
the community. For employers considering these options for
inclusion in their benefits packages, the context in which
they operate is a critical factor in their decision.
The federal government, as the largest single employer in
the region, plays a crucial role in setting that employment
benefits context. It is critical that the federal government
continue to provide transit benefits, and expand application
of these key benefits to the maximum number of employees
possible. By so doing, the federal government establishes the
standard against which many other employers in the region
measure their own benefits--a standard which has benefits for
the people of the Washington region which extend far beyond
those provided to the direct recipients.
By encouraging ridership to support a robust transit system
throughout the region, federal transit benefits help provide
accessibility in our transportation system. This is
particularly true for the FDA consolidation at White Oak. It
is critical that federal employees at FDA-White Oak not only
be encouraged to use transit by providing extended transit
benefits, but be permitted to travel on federal vehicles from
their agency to our local system. Daily shuttle operations
between White Oak and the New Carrollton or Silver Spring
Metro stations will be a positive contribution toward
increasing the security and accessibility of this federal
facility, while also promoting transit ridership, and
addressing air quality objectives in the region.
Again, thank you for your continued efforts to improve the
lives of thousands of Montgomery County residents. Please let
me know if I can do anything to help you in advancing this
important legislation.
Sincerely,
Douglas M. Duncan,
County Executive.
____
Metropolitan Washington
Council of Governments,
Washington, DC, October 21, 2003.
Hon. Paul S. Sarbanes,
U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: On behalf of the National Capital
Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB) at the
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, I would like
to applaud your introduction of new legislation to codify and
expand the existing federal executive branch employee transit
benefit in the National Capital Region and allow government
vehicles to be used to provide shuttle services between
federal agency locations and transit stations.
It is TPB policy to support regional, state, and federal
programs which promote cost-effective strategies to reduce
traffic congestion and improve air quality, including
promoting the use of transit options and financial
incentives. One of the most pressing issues facing the TPB is
the contribution of vehicle emissions to the region's air
quality problems. Expanding the transit benefits to more
federal workers and providing shuttle links will encourage
more transit use, which will help reduce automobile vehicle-
miles traveled and reduce vehicle emissions.
In June of 2000, the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan
Washington Council of Governments (COG) adopted a resolution
to provide COG employees the same transit benefits that
federal executive branch employees receive as a result of
President Clinton's Executive Order of April 2000. It also
strongly urged local governments and public agencies to adopt
or expand similar transit benefit programs. We have estimated
that 50,000 executive branch employees will use transit by
2005 as a result of the current transit benefits. Passage of
this legislation will encourage even more federal workers to
use transit and provide additional support to the region's
efforts to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality.
We greatly appreciate your introduction of this
legislation. Your ongoing dedication to improving public
transit in the Washington region continues to benefit
families and organizations in our region.
Sincerely,
Peter Shapiro,
Chair, National Capital Region,
Transportation Planning Board.
S. 1783
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Employee Commuter
Benefits Act of 2003''.
SEC. 2. TRANSIT PASS TRANSPORTATION FRINGE BENEFITS.
(a) In General.--Effective as of the first day of the next
fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this
Act, each covered agency shall implement a program under
which all qualified Federal employees serving in or under
such agency shall be offered transit pass transportation
fringe benefits, as described in subsection (b).
(b) Benefits Described.--The benefits described in this
subsection are, as of any given date, the transit pass
transportation fringe benefits which, under section 2 of
Executive Order 13150, are then currently required to be
offered by Federal agencies in the National Capital Region.
(c) Definitions.--In this section--
(1) the term ``covered agency'' means any agency, to the
extent of its facilities in the National Capital Region;
(2) the term ``agency'' means any agency (as defined by
7905(a)(2) of title 5, United States Code) not otherwise
covered by section 2 of Executive Order 13150, the United
States Postal Service, the Postal Rate Commission, and the
Smithsonian Institution;
(3) the term ``National Capital Region'' includes the
District of Columbia and every county or other geographic
area covered by section 2 of Executive Order 13150;
(4) the term ``Executive Order 13150'' refers to Executive
Order 13150 (5 U.S.C. 7905 note);
(5) the term ``Federal agency'' is used in the same way as
under section 2 of Executive Order 13150; and
(6) any determination as to whether or not one is a
``qualified Federal employee'' shall be made applying the
same criteria as would apply under section 2 of Executive
Order 13150.
(d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
considered to require that a covered agency--
(1) terminate any program or benefits in existence on the
date of the enactment of this Act, or postpone any plans to
implement (before the effective date referred to in
subsection (a)) any program or benefits permitted or required
under any other provision of law; or
(2) discontinue (on or after the effective date referred to
in subsection (a)) any program or benefits referred to in
paragraph (1), so long as such program or benefits satisfy
the requirements of subsections (a) through (c).
SEC. 3. AUTHORITY TO USE GOVERNMENT VEHICLES TO TRANSPORT
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES BETWEEN THEIR PLACE OF
EMPLOYMENT AND MASS TRANSIT FACILITIES.
(a) In General.--Section 1344 of title 31, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (g) and (h) as subsections
(h) and (i), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following:
``(g)(1) A passenger carrier may be used to transport an
officer or employee of a Federal agency between the officer's
or employee's place of employment and a mass transit facility
(whether or not publicly owned) in accordance with succeeding
provisions of this subsection.
``(2) Notwithstanding section 1343, a Federal agency that
provides transportation services under this subsection
(including by passenger carrier) shall absorb the costs of
such services using any funds available to such agency,
whether by appropriation or otherwise.
``(3) In carrying out this subsection, a Federal agency
shall--
``(A) to the maximum extent practicable, use alternative
fuel vehicles to provide transportation services;
``(B) to the extent consistent with the purposes of this
subsection, provide transportation services in a manner that
does not result in additional gross income for Federal income
tax purposes; and
``(C) coordinate with other Federal agencies to share, and
otherwise avoid duplication of, transportation services
provided under this subsection.
``(4) For purposes of any determination under chapter 81 of
title 5, an individual shall not be considered to be in the
`performance of duty' by virtue of the fact that such
individual is receiving transportation services under this
subsection.
``(5)(A) The Administrator of General Services, after
consultation with the National Capital Planning Commission
and other appropriate agencies, shall prescribe any
regulations necessary to carry out this subsection.
``(B) Transportation services under this subsection shall
be subject neither to the last sentence of subsection (d)(3)
nor to any
[[Page S13146]]
regulations under the last sentence of subsection (e)(1).
``(6) In this subsection, the term `passenger carrier'
means a passenger motor vehicle, aircraft, boat, ship, or
other similar means of transportation that is owned or leased
by the United States Government or the government of the
District of Columbia.''.
(b) Funds for Maintenance, Repair, etc.--Subsection (a) of
section 1344 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(3) For purposes of paragraph (1), the transportation of
an individual between such individual's place of employment
and a mass transit facility pursuant to subsection (g) is
transportation for an official purpose.
(c) Coordination.--The authority to provide transportation
services under section 1344(g) of title 31, United States
Code (as amended by subsection (a)) shall be in addition to
any authority otherwise available to the agency involved.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Kohl, Mr.
Biden, Mr. Kyl, and Mr. Harkin):
S. 1784. A bill to eliminate the safe-harbor exception for certain
packaged pseudoephedrine products used in the manufacture of
methamphetamine; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the
``Methamphetamine Blister Pack Loophole Elimination Act of 2003,''
along with my colleagues Senators Grassley, Kohl, Biden, Kyl and
Harkin.
This is a simple bill, and directly follows recommendations made by
the United States Drug Enforcement Administration in a 2002 study
requested by Congress.
All this legislation does is make it harder for meth dealers to get
the precursor pseudoephedrine products necessary to make this illegal
drug.
Making it harder for meth dealers to make and obtain their drugs is
something beneficial not just to California, but to the entire Nation.
Once predominantly found in the American Southwest, methamphetamine's
presence now stretches from coast to coast.
I'm sorry to say that my home State of California has been referred
to as the ``Colombia of meth production.'' In fact, our State is known
as the ``source country'' for the drug, producing roughly 80 percent of
the Nation's methamphetamine supply.
According to the DEA, 1,847 clandestine meth labs were found in
California in 2001 alone.
In each of these meth labs across the country, those who make
methamphetamine combine a number of precursor drugs, from red
phosphorus, which is difficult to obtain, highly flammable and toxic,
to pseudoephedrine, which can be found in common cold medicine in every
supermarket, pharmacy, and convenience store in America.
Recognizing the easy availability of pseudoephedrine, Congress has
acted several times to make it more difficult for meth dealers to
purchase it in bulk.
First, we placed a 24-gram limit, which represented almost 1000
pills. Then, just a few years ago, we reduced this threshold to just 9
grams--still some 366 30-milligram pills. Anyone buying more than this
amount of pseudoephedrine at one time would be required to give his or
her name and address.
As it turns out, this reporting requirement is considered too
burdensome by most retail stores, so instead of keeping track of
purchasers, most retailers simply limit single transaction sales of
pseudoephedrine pills to less than 9 grams. This is an even more
beneficial result than the reporting requirements. Such limits, which
now often go as low as three or even two packages of cold medicine,
make it much harder for meth manufacturers to get this precursor drug.
Instead of simply going to the local WalMart or Costco and clearing the
shelves of thousands of packages at once, they must now buy just a few
packages at a time.
But through all of this, there is one gaping loophole in the law,
that allows any of this product packaged in so-called ``blister-packs''
to avoid these reporting requirements. Only loose pills in bottles face
the 9-gram restrictions in the law.
Blister packs are the most common form of packaging for cold
medicine, as anyone who goes grocery shopping knows. Most people who
buy pseudoephedrine will find it in blister packs, as will most meth
dealers. As a result, the 9-gram limit in the law has become fairly
useless--we limited the sales of pills, so meth dealers simply migrated
to blister packs.
This loophole in the law exists because of previous doubts, by some,
that meth dealers would bother to use blister-packed products. These
foil and plastic containers hold each pill individually, and as a
result it is harder to gather the thousands of pills necessary to
manufacture methamphetamine in bulk.
Those of us from California have known for some time that blister
packs are a problem, because California's Bureau of Narcotic
Enforcement has been finding blister packs at meth lab sites for years.
But to answer the doubts of those not lucky enough to come from my
home state, we authorized DEA to do a study into this issue in 1999.
Well, that study is back, and guess what--DEA has given us clear,
incontrovertible evidence that these blister packs are making up an
increasing percentage of the pseudoephedrine found at lab sites.
In some instances, meth manufacturers use sophisticated, industrial
``deblistering'' machines to quickly extract pills from blister packs.
In others, I have been told, children are employed to sit in the meth
lab and pop out thousands of pills, by hand, into nearby buckets.
According to the report we requested from the DEA, which was released
in March of 2002, blister packaged pseudoephedrine products seized at
clandestine methamphetamine laboratories and other locations, such as
dumpsites, have involved seizures of over a million tablets.
The seizure of so many blister packaged pseudoephedrine products
shows convincingly that blister packaging is not a deterrent to
ordinary, over-the-counter pseudoephedrine use in clandestine
methamphetamine laboratories.
So clearly, what we argued in 1999, and in 1996, is true. Meth
manufacturers are using blister packs, and something must be done to
stop them as best we can.
In order to address this problem, DEA recommended in its report that
the blister pack loophole be closed, and that the current retail sales
limit of 9 grams for bottled pseudoephedrine be extended to blister
packed products as well.
And that, is all that this bill would do.
According to DEA, this is the single best thing we can do to help
them in the fight against methamphetamine.
This legislation will clear up confusion among retailers who may find
it hard to train employees to limit the sales of certain cold medicine
if sold in bottles, but not the same medicine in other packaging.
This legislation will help DEA enforce the retail sales thresholds by
making it harder for sellers to claim ignorance or confusion about the
law.
This legislation might make it less likely that meth dealers will
employ young children to pop pills out of the blister packs, all within
harms reach in meth labs around the country.
This legislation will not negatively impact the ability of
pharmaceutical manufacturers to make legitimate profits.
This legislation will not be a burden on consumers, because the 9
gram limit still represents 366 pills--30 packages of 12 pills, or 15
packages of 24 pills, two of the most common amounts.
It is hard for me to imagine that an average person--or even a large
family--needs to buy more than 366 cold pills at one time. In fact,
many stores throughout the country have already voluntarily limited
pseudoephedrine sales to just a few packages at a time, and there has
been little outcry from consumers unable to purchase more.
This bill is not a panacea for the meth problem in the United
States--far from it. I have been working on various parts of the meth
problem for many years, and I know that this must be a multi-faceted
approach--tougher penalties, money for training, enforcement and clean-
up, restrictions on precursor chemicals, tools for prosecutors, and so
on.
But to fail to enact this legislation is to make it far easier for
meth dealers to continue to easily ply their trade.
I urge my colleagues to look at this bill, join us in supporting it,
and help us to pass it as soon as possible to assist the DEA in the
very uphill battle
[[Page S13147]]
against the illegal and pervasive manufacture and sale of
methamphetamine.
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. 1784
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Methamphetamine Blister Pack
Loophole Elimination Act of 2003''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) methamphetamine is a dangerous drug distributed
throughout the United States;
(2) the manufacture, distribution, and use of
methamphetamine results in increased crime, damage to the
environment, hazardous waste that endangers the public,
expensive cleanup costs often borne by Federal, State, and
local government agencies, and broken families;
(3) Congress has acted many times to limit the availability
of chemicals and equipment used in the manufacturing of
methamphetamine;
(4) pseudoephedrine is 1 of the basic precursor chemicals
used in the manufacture of methamphetamine;
(5) the United States Drug Enforcement Administration has
indicated that methamphetamine manufacturers often obtain
pseudoephedrine from retail and wholesale distributors, in
both bottles and ``blister packs'', and that the use of
pseudoephedrine tablets in blister packs is pervasive in the
illicit production of methamphetamine in both small and large
clandestine methamphetamine laboratories;
(6) while current law establishes a retail sales limit of 9
grams for most pseudoephedrine products, including common
cold medicine, there is no such limit on the sale of blister-
packed pseudoephedrine products;
(7) the 9 gram limit on bottled pseudoephedrine allows an
individual to purchase approximately 366 thirty-milligram
tablets at 1 time, which is more than enough for a typical
consumer in 1 transaction;
(8) the United States Drug Enforcement Administration
recommended in March 2002 that retail distribution of
pseudoephedrine tablets in blister packages should not be
exempt from the 9 gram retail sales limit; and
(9) in recommending legislation to correct the current
disparity in the law between bottled and blister-packed
pseudoephedrine tablets, the United States Drug Enforcement
Administration stated that ``The removal of this difference
would significantly prevent illicit access to this
methamphetamine precursor and would be easier for both the
government and the industry to monitor and would increase
compliance by retailers''.
SEC. 3. ELIMINATION OF BLISTER PACK EXEMPTION.
(a) Regulated Transaction.--Section 102(39)(A)(iv)(I)(aa)
of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.
802(39)(A)(iv)(I)(aa)) is amended by striking ``(except
that'' and all that follows through ``1996)''.
(b) Rule of Law.--To the extent that there exists a
conflict between the amendment made by subsection (a) and
section 401(d) of the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control
Act of 1996 (21 U.S.C. 802 note), the amendment shall
control.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Feinstein
as a cosponsor of the Methamphetamine Blister Pack Loophool Elimination
Act of 2003. This legislation will make it harder for meth cooks to get
an essential ingredient needed to manufacture methamphetamine.
Methamphetamine is a dangerous narcotic and is a serious challenge
facing our country. The manufacture, distribution, and use of
methamphetamine has a lasting and devastating personal effect on our
Nation's families, communities, and our environment.
According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, methamphetamine is
a highly addictive stimulant drug that strongly activates certain
systems in the brain by releasing high levels of the neurotransmitter
dopamine. Some of the short-term effects of using methamphetamine
include: an accelerated heartbeat, elevated blood pressure,
irritability, extreme nervousness, confusion, insomnia, aggression,
tremors, convulsions, and hyperthermia, which can potentially result in
death.
In addition to the effects on the central nervous system and the
cardiovascular system, the prolonged use of methamphetamine also has
many psychological effects. Some of the symptoms resemble those of
schizophrenia and are characterized by anger, panic, paranoia, auditory
and visual hallucinations, and repetitive behavior patterns.
Other long-term effects can result in kidney and lung disorders,
brain damage, liver damage, blood clots, a deficient immune system and
chronic depression.
The threat of methamphetamine is different than that of most other
illegal drugs as it can be easily manufactured from readily available
chemicals and substances. The relative ease of manufacturing and its
highly addictive potential has caused methamphetamine use to
drastically increase throughout the nation. According to the 2002
National Survey on Drug Abuse and Health 5.3 percent of the U.S.
population--over 12 million people--reported trying methamphetamine at
least once in their lifetime.
This is an alarming figure. Given the serious ramifications
surrounding the use of methamphetamine, we need to be vigilant, making
sure that we are doing all that we can to curb this dangerous
statistic.
This bill makes specific clarifications to the Comprehensive
Methamphetamine Act of 1996. While current law establishes a retail
sales limit of 9 grams for most pseudoephedrine products, which is one
of the basic precursor chemicals used in the manufacturing of
methamphetamine, there is no such limit on the sale of ``blister-
packed'' pseudoephedrine products.
The bill we are introducing today follows the recommendation of the
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration that retail distribution of
pseudoephedrine tablets in blister packages should not be exempt from
the 9-gram retail sales limit. This will make it more difficult for
methamphetamine producers to obtain large quantities of the precursor
chemical pseudoephedrine.
As Senator Feinstein well knows, the two largest means of acquiring
precursor chemicals for methamphetamine in California are by mail order
and retail sales. This acquisition is made easier because the meth
cooks are able to exploit the blister pack exemption provision in the
current law. Removing this exemption will not halt meth production but
it will make it more difficult for meth cooks to collect the key
ingredients they need.
This is not the only answer to this problem, but it is an important
step. Law enforcement cannot fix the problem alone. Schools can't do it
alone. The Federal Government can't do it alone. It is important that
we each unite and lead local anti-drug initiatives in our respective
neighborhoods and communities. I encourage my colleagues to join us in
supporting these important reforms. We cannot let this attack on our
Nation's citizens go unchecked.
______
By Mr. KYL:
S.J. Res. 20. A joint resolution expressing the sense of Congress
that the number of years during which the death tax under subtitle B of
the Internal revenue Code of 1986 is repealed should be extended,
pending the permanent repeal of the death tax; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, today I am introducing a Sense of the Senate
resolution that states that Congress should add to the number of years
that repeal of the death tax will last until we archive its permanent
repeal.
The death tax is an unfair, inefficient, economically unsound and,
frankly, immoral tax that should not come back. I have introduced
legislation, S. 13, to repeal it permanently in 2005. Unfortunately,
under current law, it will only be repealed for 1 year, in 2010. The
House of Representatives voted four times in the last 2 years to make
repeal permanent, but because of Senate rules, we need 60 votes to do
this.
And so, I propose a resolution that expresses the sense of the Senate
that we should add 1 or more years to the 1-year repeal that is on the
books. We could do this by moving the repeal date forward, for example,
to 2009 or 2008; or we could extend the repeal through 2011 or 2012.
This would signal to the American people that we will not let this tax
come back.
I plan to follow up this resolution with a concerted effort next year
to in fact add 1 or more years of repeal. We must end this tax on
virtue, work, savings, job creation and the American dream, and we must
end if forever. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in this effort.
[[Page S13148]]
____________________