Kit Bond

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order following the remarks of the Senator from North Dakota.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, July 7. I further ask that when the Senate reconvenes on Tuesday, immediately following the prayer, the routine requests through the morning hour be granted.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself and Senator Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I ask it be considered en bloc as it amends the bill in two places.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, this amendment responds to the critical requirement of enhancing antiterrorist activities at the Federal Emergency Management Agency. In our budget hearings with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Senator Mikulski and I raised the question of whether this country is ready to respond and take all appropriate actions to deal with the threat of terrorist activities in our country. The administration has submitted a budget amendment on June 8 to increase spending in several agencies for antiterrorism activities, including $11 million more than the original budget request for FEMA's emergency planning and assistance. With this amendment we will meet the request. The bill as reported by the committee adds $3 million above the initial request for such activities, and this amendment now pending before the Senate would add another $8 million, for a total of $11 million in this key area. These funds are to be used for such critical activities as planning at the Federal, State, and local level for the unique aspect of terrorist-related incidents. I note this is part of a larger proposal for $249 million to strengthen our ability to defend against and respond to terrorist incidents involving the use of biological or chemical weapons. I wholeheartedly support this effort. I think it is vitally important and I think this is a vital first step. In a recent self-assessment by the States, they rated themselves as being unprepared in this critical area. The funds we are adding today should go a long way in helping State and local governments prepare for these instances that we hope they never have to face. But, as in all emergency management agencies' activities, we have to be prepared for things that could happen that we hope never happen. With this amendment, FEMA funding would total almost $18 million. The FEMA program, as I said, complements a broader initiative involving the Department of Defense, Department of Justice, and the Department of Health and Human Services. That effort includes building a civilian stockpile of antidotes to respond to any large-scale attack, improving the public health surveillance system, and providing special equipment to first responders. We have already included in this bill assistance for first responders in dealing with a problem that is particularly acute in my State of Missouri, and that is the explosion of methamphetamine clandestine labs in our State. We have recognized in this bill the need to prepare first responders--emergency personnel, firefighters, police--when they go into a methamphetamine lab. These are very dangerous facilities that can blow up with any kind of heat or light, or even the discharge of a gun. So we recognize that the people who do the vitally important work responding to emergencies, whether they are firefighters or police or sheriffs units, the first responders as they are often called, need to be prepared. In this amendment, we are going to provide additional assistance to the people who will come on the scenes first. These are very frightening issues. The terrorism issue--we have already experienced domestic acts of terrorism in Oklahoma City and at the World Trade Center, so we know they can occur. We need to be prepared. We need to make our country as safe as possible. It is all too easy to ship weapons of mass destruction, be they explosives or chemical or biological weapons, even in a suitcase. This risk is not acceptable, and I strongly support the amendment as an important first step towards dealing with these problems. Our country has to be prepared to protect its citizens from the dangers of a hostile world. Unfortunately, the constant threat we face from rogue states makes it vital that Congress provide the funding for FEMA to use towards counterterrorism measures on a local level. Our amendment gives FEMA the funding it needs to enhance the training of emergency personnel in the event that a terrorist attack occurs. Madam President, I urge adoption of the amendment and I yield the floor to my colleague.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I think that some of our colleagues may wish to add statements. I know we have had a number of colleagues express an interest in this. I ask unanimous consent that they be allowed to be listed as cosponsors and add statements to the Record by the close of business today.

Mr. BOND. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I send a managers' amendment to the desk on behalf of myself and Senator Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration and ask unanimous consent that it be considered en bloc.

Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I understand that H.R. 2431 has arrived from the House and is at the desk. I now ask for its first reading.

Mr. BOND. I now ask for its second reading and object to my own request.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I understand that H.R. 3150 is also at the desk, and I now ask for its first reading.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise to recognize the Samaritan Center of Jefferson City, on the occasion of the groundbreaking for a new home. More than decade ago, Samaritan Center began as an effort of five Mid-Missouri Catholic churches. Three Protestant churches joined the cause and Samaritan Center has operated ever since as an interfaith agency. Virtually all of its resources are devoted directly to service delivery, as the center's single paid employee, an operations manager, is assisted by more than 150 volunteers each month. Respectful, loving service is delivered with firm supervision, and anyone who knows the center pays tribute to the practical assistance they provide. For example, during the historic Flood of 1993, which wiped out the life stake of so many Missouri farmers, the center not only donated food, clothing, diapers and utility assistance to make it through the winter; they also came through with help to get the crop in when spring arrived. Many folks got back on their feet thanks to this helping hand, and those who saw what it meant to these families will never forget it. I am one who marvels at how far the center can stretch its help. I have visited and left with my faith in people renewed. The computer is donated, the employees unpaid, the furniture castoffs--but the service is sterling and as varied as the need. This groundbreaking is another step toward meeting a new challenge the Samaritan Center is taking on. The current quarters are bursting at the seams, and new space must be found to continue to help the families they serve (which number more than 400 each month for food alone!). Characteristically, the center refuses to reduce service to pay for the new building they hope to place on land donated by supporters. So, in addition to continuing to help people with needs ranging from rent to work uniforms, the center and its friends are not so slowly and very surely piecing together the resources to build a site that meets the needs of Mid-Missouri today. To know the Samaritan Center is to respect and support it. It is my honor to offer this tribute from the United States Senate on the loving service provided by the Center, its volunteer and many supporters.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an amendment on behalf of myself, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Coverdell, and Mr. Faircloth. This vital measure would enhance the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) demonstration provisions currently included in the Department of Defense Authorization bill to evaluate the feasibility of using this effective program to ensure the availability of adequate health care for Medicare-eligible retirees under the military health care system. Specifically, this amendment increases the number of FEHBP sites from two to four and accelerates the implementation of the program from January of 2000 to July of 1999. Mr. President, our nation's military retirees are facing a grave health care crisis. Current trends, such as base closures, the downsizing of military treatment facilities, and the introduction of TRICARE, have all hindered access to health care services for military retirees aged 65 and over. In theory, Medicare-eligible retirees can receive health care services at military treatment facilities on a space available basis; however, active duty and their dependents have priority. Therefore, in reality, space is rarely available--resulting in military retirees being ``locked out'' of the Department of Defense's (DoD) health care delivery system. And because of their considered ``secondary status'', many retirees are forced to travel great distances to receive even the minimum of care. Further, when compared to what other Federal and private sector retirees receive in terms of health care options, it is clear that the current health care choices for military retirees are woefully inadequate and downright inexcusable. This is outrageous. The bottom line is military retirees aged 65 and older do not have time to wait for health care solutions, especially when our nation is losing 30,000 world War II veterans each month. It is high time that the federal government lives up to its promise of providing health care to those who honorably served our country. Although this amendment is not everything I wanted, it is a step in the right direction. I am pleased that the Armed Services Committee was able to address this problem, but I remain concerned that the DoD Authorization bill caps total funding for all the various demonstration projects at $60 million a year, of which only a portion would be available for the FEHBP demonstration. Mr. President, I understand the budgetary constraints that the Committee faces; however, this does not excuse us from our moral obligation to provide those military retirees who faithfully and selflessly served our country in times of war and in times of peace the health care they deserve. Our country must live up to the promise of providing military retirees more dependable, consistent, and affordable care while simultaneously applying equitable standards of health care for all federal retirees. Make no doubt about it--this battle has just begun. I look forward to working with my colleagues in conference in securing increased funding and sites for this purpose--as represented in the House's DoD Authorization bill. And again, I thank the distinguished Chairmen, Senator Thurmond, and Senator Kempthorne, for their efforts.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, today is the 100th anniversary of the Hospital Corps of the United States Navy. On June 17,1898, President McKinley established the Hospital Corps which has recorded an illustrious history of service to the nation. The men and women who serve and have served as corpsmen have honored the nation, the Navy and themselves. They have upheld the highest traditions of service to the nation. As a group, corpsmen have been the most highly decorated men and women who have served in our nation's military. Every day they put their lives at risk in the course of performing one of our highest callings as human beings, the preservation and protection of life. Individually, during the course of their 100 year history, 1962 corpsmen have paid the ultimate price while administering to their wounded comrades on the battlefield. Twenty-seven times, their actions were so extraordinary that the individual was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. There is a little known fact about a widely hailed piece of American history. On February 23, 1945, six young men raised our national colors on top of Mount Suribachi on the island of Iwo Jima. A world renowned photograph was taken and this photograph became a symbol of the self- sacrifice and devotion to duty of the United States Marine Corps and our nation's military in general. What is little known is that the second young man from the base of the flagpole, was a U.S. Navy corpsman. Only days before, that young man, Pharmacist Mate Second Class John Bradley, during the assault of Iwo Jima, pulled a young Marine to safety and bandaged his wounds while braving severe machine gun and mortar fire from a determined enemy. For his actions, Pharmacist Mate Bradley was awarded the Navy Cross. This extraordinary individual as with his other compatriots in that photo is even more extraordinary because of his anonymity. They were there for the photo by chance, they became the symbol we so readily recognize by a twist of fate. But they carried out their duties as thousands of other young Americans had done before them and since, in the most terrible of circumstances. Corpsmen have been the protective blanket our soldiers, sailors, and Marines have relied upon in their times of greatest distress. They have been there for them to heal their wounds, to fend off the battlefield's angels of death, and sometimes to comfort them as life ebbed away. Corpsmen are representative of the best of our ideals. It is in that spirit I call upon my colleagues and all Americans to remember their significant contribution to our nation and celebrate this day in recognition of their service.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill which will improve assistive and universally designed technology research and development and increase access to this technology for all Americans with disabilities. Assistive and universally designed technology provides a disabled individual the means to function better in the workplace or the home. Assistive and universally designed technology is technology that aids the millions of Americans with physical or mental disabilities. For example, assistive technology can mean a computer that can be used by an individual with Cerebral Palsy, a hearing aid for an aging individual or enhanced voice recognition for someone with Multiple Sclerosis, while universally designed technology can mean closed captioning for the deaf or for patrons in crowded restaurants and accessability ramps for individuals in wheelchairs or mothers with strollers. A year ago my office was approached by a small business owner and Missouri's United Cerebral Palsy asking for support for testing of a breakthrough in Voice Recognition technology. During my search to find an appropriate place for funding for this voice recognition technology, my staff and I became familiar with the overall government efforts in this area. There are many significant problems in the federal government's efforts in assistive technology research and development. My finding's were validated by a recent report from the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine, ``Enabling America: Assessing the Role of Rehabilitation Science and Engineering,'' which stressed that the federal government's efforts in this area are lacking awareness, funding, and coordination. My distinguished colleague in the House, Congresswoman Connie Morella, Chairwoman of the House Science's Subcommittee on Technology, joins me today in introducing the Assistive and Universally Designed Technology Improvement Act for Individuals with Disabilities. The Act provides federally supported incentives in all areas of assistive and universally designed technology, including need identification, research and development, product evaluation, technology transfer, and commercialization. These incentives achieve the goal of improving the quality, functional capability, distribution, and affordability of this essential technology. This legislation does several things. First, the bill includes an improved peer review process at the National Institute on Disability Research and Rehabilitation (NIDRR) at the Department of Education. This provision requires standing peer review panels and clarifies the evaluation of applications for funding of assistive and universally designed technology. These improvements provide more assistive and universally designed technology products to the marketplace, increase small business involvement in research and development, and assure research and development efforts cover all disability groups including persons with physical and mental disabilities as well as the aging and rural technology users. Second, the legislation augments technology transfer through improving the role of the Interagency Committee on Disability Research (ICDR) by increasing its authority, accountability and ability to coordinate. Provisions are included for increased usage of the Federal labs to improve coordination with all Federal agencies involved in assistive and universally designed technology research and development and for providing public and private sector partnerships for assistive and universally designed technology research and development. Third, to increase the market for assistive technology, the bill clarifies Title III of the Tech Act for the Microloan program. This microloan program assists disabled persons in obtaining assistive and universally designed technology. Fourth, funds are authorized for the Interagency Committee on Disability Research to hire staff and for operating costs associated with issuing surveys and reports. Additionally, $10 million in funds are authorized for the National Institute on Disability Research and Rehabilitation to provide for assistive and universally designed technology research and development. Finally, to increase access to assistive and universally designed technology, tax incentives are included to provide businesses a tax credit for the development of assistive technology, to expand the architectural and transportation barrier removal deduction to include communication barriers, and to expand the work opportunity credit to include expenses incurred in the acquisition of technology to facilitate the employment of any individual with a disability. These tax incentives and micro loans will assist individuals with disabilities to obtain assistive and universally designed technology in order to improve their quality of life, to secure and maintain employment, and to assist small businesses in complying with Americans with Disabilities Act requirements, which in effect, results in lessened financial burdens on society. As technology increasingly plays a role in the lives of all persons in the United States, in the conduct of business, in the functioning of government, in the fostering of communication, in the transforming of employment, and in the provision of education, it also greatly impacts the lives of the more than 50 million individuals with disabilities in the United States. An agenda, including support for universal design, represents the only effective means for guaranteeing the benefits of technology to all persons in the United States, regardless of disability or age, in addition to assuring for United States industry the continued growth in markets that will warrant continued high levels of innovation and research. This legislation has the support of many organizations, including: The Missouri Assistive Technology Advisory Council, the United Cerebral Palsy Association, the Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America, the National Easter Seal Society, and the Association of Tech Act Projects. The bill also has broad bipartisan and bicameral support. My colleagues, Senator Jeffords, Senator Harkin, Senator Grassley, and Congresswoman Connie Morella have been very helpful in my efforts to improve the role of the federal government in assistive and universally designed technology. Let me conclude by taking special note of the help of the National and Missouri United Cerebral Palsy, as well as the Missouri Assistive Technology Project, the Federal Laboratory Consortium, and the numerous assistive and universally designed technology and disability community advocate organizations, for their assistance in developing and advocating this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill, the amendment I submit today, and letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill which will improve assistive and universally designed technology research and development and increase access to this technology for all Americans with disabilities. Assistive and universally designed technology provides a disabled individual the means to function better in the workplace or the home. Assistive and universally designed technology is technology that aids the millions of Americans with physical or mental disabilities. For example, assistive technology can mean a computer that can be used by an individual with Cerebral Palsy, a hearing aid for an aging individual or enhanced voice recognition for someone with Multiple Sclerosis, while universally designed technology can mean closed captioning for the deaf or for patrons in crowded restaurants and accessability ramps for individuals in wheelchairs or mothers with strollers. A year ago my office was approached by a small business owner and Missouri's United Cerebral Palsy asking for support for testing of a breakthrough in Voice Recognition technology. During my search to find an appropriate place for funding for this voice recognition technology, my staff and I became familiar with the overall government efforts in this area. There are many significant problems in the federal government's efforts in assistive technology research and development. My finding's were validated by a recent report from the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine, ``Enabling America: Assessing the Role of Rehabilitation Science and Engineering,'' which stressed that the federal government's efforts in this area are lacking awareness, funding, and coordination. My distinguished colleague in the House, Congresswoman Connie Morella, Chairwoman of the House Science's Subcommittee on Technology, joins me today in introducing the Assistive and Universally Designed Technology Improvement Act for Individuals with Disabilities. The Act provides federally supported incentives in all areas of assistive and universally designed technology, including need identification, research and development, product evaluation, technology transfer, and commercialization. These incentives achieve the goal of improving the quality, functional capability, distribution, and affordability of this essential technology. This legislation does several things. First, the bill includes an improved peer review process at the National Institute on Disability Research and Rehabilitation (NIDRR) at the Department of Education. This provision requires standing peer review panels and clarifies the evaluation of applications for funding of assistive and universally designed technology. These improvements provide more assistive and universally designed technology products to the marketplace, increase small business involvement in research and development, and assure research and development efforts cover all disability groups including persons with physical and mental disabilities as well as the aging and rural technology users. Second, the legislation augments technology transfer through improving the role of the Interagency Committee on Disability Research (ICDR) by increasing its authority, accountability and ability to coordinate. Provisions are included for increased usage of the Federal labs to improve coordination with all Federal agencies involved in assistive and universally designed technology research and development and for providing public and private sector partnerships for assistive and universally designed technology research and development. Third, to increase the market for assistive technology, the bill clarifies Title III of the Tech Act for the Microloan program. This microloan program assists disabled persons in obtaining assistive and universally designed technology. Fourth, funds are authorized for the Interagency Committee on Disability Research to hire staff and for operating costs associated with issuing surveys and reports. Additionally, $10 million in funds are authorized for the National Institute on Disability Research and Rehabilitation to provide for assistive and universally designed technology research and development. Finally, to increase access to assistive and universally designed technology, tax incentives are included to provide businesses a tax credit for the development of assistive technology, to expand the architectural and transportation barrier removal deduction to include communication barriers, and to expand the work opportunity credit to include expenses incurred in the acquisition of technology to facilitate the employment of any individual with a disability. These tax incentives and micro loans will assist individuals with disabilities to obtain assistive and universally designed technology in order to improve their quality of life, to secure and maintain employment, and to assist small businesses in complying with Americans with Disabilities Act requirements, which in effect, results in lessened financial burdens on society. As technology increasingly plays a role in the lives of all persons in the United States, in the conduct of business, in the functioning of government, in the fostering of communication, in the transforming of employment, and in the provision of education, it also greatly impacts the lives of the more than 50 million individuals with disabilities in the United States. An agenda, including support for universal design, represents the only effective means for guaranteeing the benefits of technology to all persons in the United States, regardless of disability or age, in addition to assuring for United States industry the continued growth in markets that will warrant continued high levels of innovation and research. This legislation has the support of many organizations, including: The Missouri Assistive Technology Advisory Council, the United Cerebral Palsy Association, the Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America, the National Easter Seal Society, and the Association of Tech Act Projects. The bill also has broad bipartisan and bicameral support. My colleagues, Senator Jeffords, Senator Harkin, Senator Grassley, and Congresswoman Connie Morella have been very helpful in my efforts to improve the role of the federal government in assistive and universally designed technology. Let me conclude by taking special note of the help of the National and Missouri United Cerebral Palsy, as well as the Missouri Assistive Technology Project, the Federal Laboratory Consortium, and the numerous assistive and universally designed technology and disability community advocate organizations, for their assistance in developing and advocating this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill, the amendment I submit today, and letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, we are getting into the tobacco wars again today. I know we have made some progress. I have seen in the last week several amendments adopted which I think are very important. As a long- time advocate of assuring full deductibility for health insurance for the self-employed, I was delighted that, and the marriage penalty provision, survived a vote in the Chamber, and also what we called the Bond-Kerry amendment directing that some of the money paid out to the States be used at the very essential early stages of a child's development through early childhood development, parent education to make their children better students, better people, to accept responsibility for them, and providing child care to assure that children in elementary school are not left alone without supervision before and after school. These are steps in the right direction. I understand that one of my colleagues, for whom I have great respect, later on today will come to the floor and seek to strike all mandates on States in this bill. Generally, I have taken the position as a former Governor that we should not be mandating what States do with all of the money that is collected by the Federal Government from our State constituents. In this case, however, I think the situation is a little different because we have been asked by the States to come in and legislate. These actions started off as lawsuits, and it came to the point where they believed that a Federal law was necessary to implement the objectives that the States have and that we share, which is to assure discouraging of teenage smoking. I think that once we go down that path of imposing a major legislative solution--and we are going to be the ones who have to take the responsibility for imposing the fees, for setting up the smoking cessation programs and other things--that there is every reason for us to pose responsible legislative provisions which will have to be agreed to by a majority of both Houses. I would mention the fact that there has been some controversy. I regret we were not able to place a limit on the amount of fees the lawyers for the States would receive. It seems to me we missed an essential ingredient here. We are talking about imposing a settlement or directing a distribution of sums that is not really a settlement of a lawsuit. We are developing a major proposal which is going to raise large amounts of money, provide some tax relief, send some money back to the States. I think we have every reason to say how much money that lobbyists, who are essentially the attorneys who brought the suits--the lobbyists pushing this legislation--should be able to achieve. Some of the figures that have been expressed on the floor about $80,000 to $90,000 an hour are unconscionable. And the people of my State--and I believe the people of the United States--are very much concerned about what is going to be done with all this money. I share that concern. I think before this measure passes, or is finally adopted, there ought to be some limitation. Sure, let the people who worked on it get a reasonable return. But there is no reason to give a small group of people, selected by attorneys general, a windfall of literally potentially billions of dollars from our legislative action. The people who are going to have to be paying the higher fees for cigarettes, I think, have a right to ask us not to permit States to go through with the contracts which give essentially judicial contingent-fee-type rewards to people who are, in essence, coming to us, lobbying for us to pass legislation. I think we ought to be able to establish some conditions on some of the money that goes back to the States. I have said that smoking cessation is important. The educational element is important in ensuring young people at least know the message that smoking can be harmful and that they should not start. I think we need to inform them. I think, second, It is right and proper that, as we did last week, we support the concept in the Bond-Kerrey proposal, that funds going back to the States should be utilized for expanding child care, for assuring adequate early childhood development to ensure that every family takes responsibility for its child's behavior. We ought to be talking about parental responsibility, about family responsibility, about adult care- giver responsibility. I will tell you one other thing. There is something that is lacking in this bill, and I intend to offer--I hope it will be tomorrow--an amendment which will deal with one of the areas that this bill, in my view, wrongfully ignores. We are trying to get teenagers to stop smoking. Where is the responsibility on the teenagers themselves? I know teenagers. I happen to have one in my family. Mine is a fine young man. We have these wonderful, bright-eyed, aggressive, intelligent young people here who are working as pages. Yet we are saying we are going to protect them from everybody else--from the sellers, from the tobacco companies--but we are not saying they have to take any responsibility. Young people are old enough to begin taking responsibility. If they drive a car illegally and they get caught, they get sanctioned. If they drive and they are drinking, or if they are using drugs, in my State they can lose their licenses. Young people ought to know they have some limits and some responsibilities. So I am going to offer an amendment to say to the States: If you want to receive money under these block grants, you ought to set up a system for sanctioning teenagers who purchase cigarettes illegally. We are raising the price, we are providing education, but, as one teenager I talked to said: ``Hey, if all they are doing is saying it's bad and the store that sells it to me is going to be in trouble or the people who make it are going to be in trouble but I can walk scot- free--that's worth a try.'' There are some teenagers who, unfortunatley, in their rebellious teen-age ways--and most of us can still recall when we were teenagers and remember those days--will say, ``That's worth a try.'' If we want to discourage teenage smoking, then there need to be some sanctions on the teenagers. I would lay out a string of sanctions and say, for the first offense, either a $50 fine or a day's worth of community service. A $50 fine might be really heavy on one teenager, but for another teenager it might not make any difference. But if that young man has to spend a day picking up trash along the highway as part of a community service sanction imposed on him for purchasing cigarettes illegally, I don't think he is going to want to be out there in broad daylight in the hot, broiling sun, with all his buddies going by honking and waving at him picking up trash on the highway. I would even go so far as to say parents out to get sanctioned, too. We want to hold parents responsible. We want parents to recognize it is not just Government's responsibility, it is their responsibility as parents. Sure, we have all kinds of sanctions on the sellers, mom-and- pop stores that sell a whole range of things, including a legal product, tobacco, saying: You are really going to get it if youi sell to a teenager. But is it fair to have that penalty only on one side? The amendment I am going to offer, and I hope both sides of the aisle will support, will say: States, you have to come up with a graduated system of sanctions so teenagers will know it is not a risk-free endeavor to try to lure a convenience store operator or a grocery store operator to sell you cigarettes that you should not be buying. Some States are moving ahead and they have sanctions, so they would be in compliance. But I think this bill would be sadly lacking if we set out a system of penalties and tried some educational efforts to convince teenagers they should not do what is illegal, and left them without sanctions. So I hope we can adopt, tomorrow, a measure which does impose sanctions on teenagers or encourages States to say they must set up a reasonable graduated system of sanctions for anybody who purchases-- acquires cigarettes illegally. Thus, I would say, when we come to the point about debating whether this bill should have no sanctions or no limitations or restrictions on the States, I think we have gone past that. Once the States came here and asked us to get involved and to set up a scheme to discourage teenage smoking, to raise the price of cigarettes to provide smoking education, provide research, provide health care benefits, we ought to continue down that road and provide the one element which is lacking in the current scheme, and that is strong incentives for States to punish and to impose a reasonable, graduated system of penalties on those who purchase illegally. So I ask my colleagues not to support a removal of all requirements on the States. I ask them--I hope it will be tomorrow when we come forward with our amendment--to support the amendment. My amendment will simply provide incentives for States to impose sanctions on youth who buy or possess tobacco products illegally. We are taking all kinds of steps in the bill to keep cigarettes out of the hands of teens. We are creating new boards and agencies, we are seeking that the tobacco industry limit advertising, we are planning ad campaigns to discourage teens from smoking, we are holding convenience stores accountable for selling cigarettes to teens illegally. About the only people we are not holding responsible are the teens themselves. I ask support for my amendment that will do that. Teen smoking is on the rise at a time when older adults are reducing tobacco consumption. there is more information out there than ever before about the risks of smoking, but teens continue to smoke. Some of that may be rebelliousness. How should we handle that rebellion? Quite simply, by holding teens accountable for their actions. Teens need to know that their actions have consequences. If they purchase tobacco illegally, they should have a penalty to pay--perform community service or kick in with some money to the General Treasury of the entity involved. Mr. President, I ask support for my amendment. If others want to cosponsor the amendment, I welcome having them contact us. We are already working with several Members who are interested. I hope we can get this amendment accepted on both sides. I think it is a responsible and appropriate response to the problem that this measure seeks to address. Mr. President, I yield the floor and, seeing no other Senator present wishing to speak, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the Hannibal Courier-Post on it's 160th Anniversary. Several years ago, a Courier-Post reporter, Gene Hoenes, was quoted as saying, ``People listen to facts announced on the radio and see news on television, but they don't really believe it until they read it in the newspaper.'' From the beginning, this newspaper has provided important information for the people of Hannibal in my home State of Missouri. In the early days, just about anyone who had a cause started a paper, although few survived. Eventually, several of the small and struggling papers merged into what is now the Hannibal Courier-Post, the oldest existing newspaper in Missouri. It is truly impressive that Hannibal Courier-Post is having it's 160th Anniversary. I commend all of the people who have helped to make the Courier-Post succeed throughout it's many years of existence.