Max Baucus

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Let me ask another question. What happens if a person who is injured is not wearing a helmet and the physician then has a hard time determining the degree to which the injury the person suffers is attributable to not wearing a helmet, and then other injuries that would otherwise occur. Let us say it is a neck injury; let us say this person is thrown from the bike, for example, and falls on the pavement. It is partly a head injury; it is partly a shoulder injury; there may be another injury. So is the doctor then supposed to write out a form as to what percent of the cost is attributable to the head injury and what percent of the cost is attributable to the other injuries that occur?

Mr. BAUCUS. Let us ask the next question. Let us say there is a superficial head injury, a cut, but the person goes into shock, and the hospital bills are very extensive but there appears to be just a superficial scrape to the head. Now, which portion of the hospital bills would be paid and which portions not?

Mr. BAUCUS. But it is true that, if this amendment were to pass, the hospitals, nurses, doctors, and other health care providers involved with this patient would have to go through a lot of hurdles in determining what portions of the injuries are attributable to not wearing a helmet. This [[Page S 8756]] will require a lot of paperwork to document all this. Is that not correct?

Mr. BAUCUS. Let us think about the additional paperwork required to meet the demands of this amendment. Paperwork for hospitals, doctors, and nurses. Has the Senator made an assessment of how much more paperwork this would cause?

Mr. BAUCUS. I agree with that. As I read this amendment, it would apply to injuries that might occur due to lack of a helmet whether the motorcyclist was riding on the interstate highway or on private property. I ask the Senator from Texas, there are a lot of wide open spaces in Texas, a lot of ranches. Would this apply to someone on a ranch in Texas who is out on his place trying to chase down a stray steer, not on any road? He falls off his bike on his own place and gets a head injury. Would this amendment apply to that person as well?

Mr. BAUCUS. That is how I read it.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 1461 (Purpose: To modify the authorization for a demonstration project in Minnesota)

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this is a feasibility study which I think merits our consideration and approval. I urge its adoption.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 1460

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this is an amendment relating to surface transportation projects in the State of Hawaii. We have examined this amendment and agree to its adoption.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 1459 (Purpose: To make an amendment relating to surface transportation projects in the State of Hawaii)

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 1458 (Purpose: To make an amendment relating to the operating costs of the Boston-to-Portland rail corridor)

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 1457 (Purpose: To maintain eligibility under the congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program for areas that received funding during fiscal year 1994 and are nonattainment areas that have been redesignated as maintenance areas)

Mr. BAUCUS. The Senator is correct. This is offered on behalf of Senator Boxer dealing with future obligations. I urge its adoption.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, it has been cleared. I urge its adoption.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I also suggest to my good colleague that that request be subject to the usual parameters of the previous agreement, that is, the parameters of order No. 114, essentially that the following amendments be the only first-degree amendments in order and subject to relevant second degree, et cetera--the same parameters that are contained in order 114 of today.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, might I inquire of the Senators from Alaska if there is some other provision we could incorporate in this agreement to accommodate them? They are protected. They now have an opportunity to offer an amendment. There is no time agreement. I wonder if there is anything else we might consider at this point that the Senators would like to suggest that we could possibly incorporate in this agreement so that we can accommodate the Senator's interest.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Just a second. We cannot do that on this bill. We cannot provide that amendment on this bill because that is a revenue measure, and it will be blue-slipped by the House of Representatives. That is, they will just not consider it, because as a revenue bill, it did not originate in the House. When we get to reconciliation, we then have an opportunity to include this provision in reconciliation, which I think is the way to solve the Amtrak problem. The deficit in Amtrak is about $1 billion a year. We have to make a lot of changes in Amtrak, spruce it up, and make it more efficient and so forth. But here is a way to provide $600 million a year without increasing taxes, and because Amtrak is so important to our country--it is vitally important throughout America. There are only two or three States that do not have Amtrak service, but the rest do. I suggest that the better way to handle this whole problem is to pursue the alternative I am suggesting, which solves the Amtrak problem, rather than the amendment before us which I think will cause a lot of headaches and heartaches and will not even begin to solve the problems that we have to deal with regarding Amtrak. I yield to the Senator from Delaware.