Sam Brownback

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, be authorized to hold an executive business meeting during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 7, 1998, at 10:00 a.m., off the floor in the Mansfield room S-207, of the Capitol Building.

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Aviation Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Thursday, May 7, 1998, at 2:15 pm on Aviation Repair Station.

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Housing Opportunity and Community Development of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 7, 1998, to conduct a hearing on issues relating to the implementation of the Department of Housing and Urban Development's ``HUD 2020 Management Reform Plan''.

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Subcommittee on International Economic Policy, Export and Trade Promotion of the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 7, 1998, at 10 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. to hold hearings.

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on National Parks, Historic Preservation, and Recreation of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be granted permission to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 7, for purposes of conducting a subcommittee hearing which is scheduled to begin at 2:00 p.m. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on titles VI, VII, VIII and XI of S. 1693, the Vision 2020 National Parks Restoration Act.

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Labor and Human Resources be authorized to meet for a hearing on ``Teacher Education'' during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 7, 1998, at 10:00 a.m.

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, be authorized to hold an executive business meeting during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 7, 1998, at 10:00 a.m., in room 226 of the Senate Dirksen Office Building.

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 7, 1998 to hold closed mark-up on the FY99 Intelligence Authorization.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. I am afraid, Mr. President, my speech is far more pedestrian. It is about taxes. When you think of it in the context next to motherhood, it pales substantially, yet it is the business of this body. The bill we are on today is about taxes, and it is about reforming the IRS. I think the chairman of the Finance Committee has done extraordinary work on bringing this topic to the floor, and I am going to support it. I think it is an important measure to us and for the Republic. I rise to speak for a few minutes on the need not only to reform the Internal Revenue Service but to change the way our Government is financed. During consideration of the budget resolution, just a short month ago, the Senate voted not only for the need to make some basic changes in the IRS but also the need to sunset the Tax Code. It is a sad and easily recognizable fact that big government advocates have socially engineered our culture into the ground through the use--and abuse, I might add--of the power to tax. To save our culture, we must at once not only recognize and support those entities in the culture that help us, but also remove the ability of Government to discriminate against institutions that help us, as well. For instance, the marriage penalty; we have a tax on being married. If you are married, you get taxed more than if you just live together. That is wrong. That is harmful to society. It is harmful to the culture and needs to be removed. We promote, also, gambling in the Tax Code. In short, we must cut back on Government's micromanagement of our lives, and particularly those areas that create vice and hinder and hurt our Republic and our Nation and our culture. This is a Tax Code that we have today that will go down in history as one of the most onerous burdens ever placed on the American people. I am convinced that we cannot have another American century with this Tax Code. It is antifamily. It is antigrowth. It cannot be saved. It must be scrapped. But in the meantime, we must try to correct for some of the well documented cases of abuses that were given life by this Tax Code and were brought to light by the Senate Finance Committee. The IRS needs to be reformed as much as the code that has given it unprecedented power needs to be put to rest. Americans demand reform of our Tax Code as well as the agency charged with enforcing it. We have promised that reform. Now, during the course of this bill, we must begin to deliver on that promise to the American people. I believe we need to stay focused on where the problem really lies. In order to make this point, I have a horror story from Kansas--not that everybody doesn't have one from their home State, actually many of them coming forward--that involves an older couple--the husband is nearly 70 years old--running a small business from their home. In the mid-1980s, they were selected for an IRS audit that focused heavily on home office deductions and related expenses and resulted in the assessment of additional taxes, penalties, and interest. The constituents have made payments on the back taxes, but in so doing, they limited their ability to make their current estimated tax payments. So the IRS said, ``Stop making your back tax payments and let's get caught up on your current estimated taxes.'' The constituents told them they would do that. But they were told, as well, that the IRS would put a hold on the collection of their back taxes until they were caught up on their current estimated taxes. The IRS said, ``OK, we will put a hold on collecting your back taxes. You get caught up on the estimated current taxes.'' However, the IRS failed to inform the constituents that interest on the back taxes would continue to accrue. Now, the outstanding principal balance my constituents owed was $18,000. However, when the penalty and accrued interest are added, the amount balloons to $46,000--from an $18,000 back tax to $46,000 in interest and penalties. My constituents have offered to pay $18,000. They believe that they might be able to come up with that with loans from friends and relatives. However, the IRS cites the constituents' equity in their home as a source of income that could be used to settle the entire debt, but they need to sell their home or otherwise refinance in order to be able to get the equity to pay off this bad tax debt. Unfortunately, because of the situation with the IRS, the IRS has put a lien on their home. And, in fact, in this era of declining interest rates, my constituents have been forced to pay over 10 percent interest rates because the lien precludes them from refinancing at lower rates, possibly as low as 7 percent. Therefore, again, my constituents are making very high house payments, which squeezes their budget even tighter, which limits their ability to pay their back taxes and interest due to the IRS or the current estimated taxes due to the IRS. If my constituents were to sell their home, their age would likely preclude them from generating enough income to purchase another home. The IRS has even garnished their Social Security retirement income. Social Security benefits comprise the bulk of their income. They are still trying to reach a settlement with the IRS. In trying as hard as they can to make this payment, they are getting squeezed and boxed in by this IRS and by this code. This is just another horrible example of the IRS in the Catch-22 situation that is forced upon many Americans. It must be put to a stop. This cannot continue. The underlying problem, though, along with the IRS enforcement, is the Tax Code. Not only does our Tax Code undermine the basic building blocks of our society, the family, it also punishes good investment decisions and distorts the labor market as well as our rates of national savings are distorted by this Tax Code. It manipulates behavior by adding an incentive to do one thing while punishing those who would do something else. A quick look at some of the inadequacies in our code should make the case for reform clear. For example, if you are a gambler, you can deduct your gambling losses against your winnings. But if you are a homeowner and you happen to make a bad home investment, and the value of your home declines, you have no recourse in the Tax Code because you cannot claim a deduction for the capital loss. Now the question really is--think about this--should we allow for a bad game of blackjack to be deducted but not a bad home investment which you were building a family around? Does this make sense to anybody? I don't think so. The code is full of these inconsistencies, like the one I just mentioned. Sure, we can try to fix the problems within our Tax Code, and we should, but the fact of the matter is, our Tax Code is riddled with these inconsistencies. It is micromanagement to the greatest degree, which leads to the conclusion that we cannot reform this code. We have to sunset it and go to one that is simpler, better, and fairer. We must move to a tax system where individuals are not punished for getting married, for saving for their children's education, or for other investments, where the national rate of savings is not distorted by these unintended consequences. This current Tax Code doesn't make sense. It is unintelligible. It has 10 million words and it has to be gotten rid of. We should go to a tax system that does not discriminate against the components of growth in our economy or the family. Some will disagree. But this is the precise issue upon which we must focus our debate. We must decide where we want the tax to be imposed; and further, we must understand what effect the imposition of the tax will have on the health of the economy. We need to go to a progrowth, profamily taxation system. Mr. President, we are soon going to have a debate on replacing this Tax Code. I have spoken with the majority leader and he agrees with the need to bring this up during the Treasury-Postal debate. We will have a full debate about replacing and sunsetting this Tax Code and going to one that is simpler, fairer, and better. It is time to have this debate. We voted previously in the Senate on a sense-of-the-Senate resolution to sunset this Tax Code by the end of the year 2001 and start the great national debate now about what we should replace this riddled code with. That is what we should do-- figure out what we are going to replace it with and set the time line that by this date we will have a new code. It may take 15 years to implement it. We are going to have to do some phasing in doing it. But it is time to start the great debate on this. Reform is important. Reforming the IRS is critical. The next step is reforming the IRS code, the law. We will vote on sunsetting it and start this great national debate of going to a different system so that we can have another American century, an unlimited America. We can't with this code. We can and we must do better. With that, I yield the floor. Mr. GRAMS addressed the Chair.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. What a stirring speech from the Senator from West Virginia on such a fitting time and occasion, on Mother's Day. I just did my note to my mother this morning for Mother's Day. I sent a poem-- not orally delivered; I think orally is much better than in writing. As you reflect and talk of the essence of motherhood, it seems it is the essence of love you are talking about. It reminds me of what we are called to do. We are called to love--to love our Lord, our God, with all our heart, mind, soul, and flesh, and to love our neighbor as ourselves. Mothers seem to exemplify that perhaps better than anybody does. How fitting, on National Day of Prayer, when we are praying for our Nation, why not add a prayer for your mother, too, and pray for the mothers of the country who rock the cradle, who lead us in many places, in many facets. I can see my own wife, today, with our three children, leading them and leading us and leading our family--that central unit of the Republic, the family. I am very touched by the Senator's speech.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Thank you very much. Mr. President, I am delighted to be able to work with the distinguished Senator from Kansas, who is presiding today, and also the distinguished Senator from Indiana, who has put forth this new alliance. It is a cadre of members who are putting forth these points that we think have not been sufficiently debated nor brought forward in the overall debate in America about what we should do about the crying issues of poverty that has so hit and harmed our Nation in so many places, both urban and rural. More than 30 years after the United States first declared the War on Poverty, most signs point to failure. The United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars--by some accounts we have spent nearly $4 trillion--to fight poverty only to find poverty in America has grown more widespread, more entrenched, and more pathological. The solution is not to expand more Government but rather to go a different way, and to say, ``Look, we have tried that route. We have spent nearly $4 trillion trying that route. We have tried every program you possibly can with that route. Maybe there is another way that we should be going.'' This is what the Renewal Alliance, this program, is about--about rewarding self-help and not Government help. It is about encouraging charity rather than encouraging Government. It is about encouraging volunteerism rather than putting more people on the taxpayer rolls to solve problems that we have failed to be able to solve. Family breakdown, crime, poor education performance, and a lack of opportunity in the inner cities, and many other areas, including many rural areas, are now national problems. But many of the solutions are to be found on a local level and not in Washington, through personal contacts that people can make between individuals and the dedicated involvement of families, churches, schools, and neighborhood associations. These small groups, not big Government, but rather small groups, often referred to as the ``little platoons'' in a civil society, can often accomplish what no Government program could dream of or ever been able to do. They have the soft hearts and the willing hands to be able to reach out and touch people directly in a community where they are in there with the families working with them. Last December, I had the chance to visit several of these small, private charities in my home State of Kansas. To me, they are living proof of the amazing effectiveness of small, local charities that lead with heart, that lead with love. Mr. President, in this very body, in this very room, as you enter into the main doorway coming in here, there is a sign above the door mantle which reads ``In God We Trust.'' As I visited these small charities in Kansas, I was reminded at that time and was thinking about how many people say that versus how many people do that. These are charities, which ``In God We Trust'' they live every day. I visited Good Samaritan Clinic in Wichita, which serves around 300 patients a month from Wichita's poorest neighborhood. This tiny clinic operates on less than a shoestring budget. With the exception of a fax machine and one piece of furniture, everything in the clinic is donated. The clinic's staff, a dedicated and accomplished group of doctors, are mostly volunteers. They are reaching out and touching people, and helping and healing people with their skills and with their hearts. I visited the Topeka Rescue Mission and the Union Rescue Mission of Wichita, both of which serve thousands of people each year. These missions are not merely assigning people to bunks, but they challenge them personally and spiritually, and they are challenged to change their hearts and their souls along with helping them out in their lives. I visited the Crisis Pregnancy Outreach Program in Topeka and a maternity home in Wichita and saw firsthand the love and personal attention devoted to each woman who passes through those doors. Contrast that with the large Government solution that we have tried for the past 30 years that gets millions of people flowing through the door but constantly keeps them flowing back out the door and never really changes things in a person's life, continues to hand them something but doesn't put arms around them and hug them, doesn't put arms around them and give them heart and soul and say, ``Here is my phone number; call anytime.'' It is not that we don't have a lot of good and dedicated servants; we do, but they are limited in what they can do. This is a mission for them. They must not see the number of people who are walking through; they must see a soul at a time. They must see another and another, to reach out and touch and help them. We need to encourage these groups and not discourage them. As the past 35 years of our history has shown, the Federal Government is limited in its capacity to solve the problems of poverty and pathology, But it can eliminate perverse incentives that reward irresponsibility and fuel the flight of capital from the inner cities, and it can encourage entrepreneurialism, charitable giving and investment in the inner cities and its inhabitants, investment in the inhabitants of those areas and rural areas as well. It can do these things and it should. And through the renewal alliance REAL Life legislation, it will. That is why I am delighted to be associated with the Senator from Indiana in this package that we have put forward. It is a different way. It is a way that people every day are proving can and is working, and we need to encourage it and lift it up and move it forward. I am delighted to be a part of this legislation.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Thank you very much. Mr. President, I am delighted to be able to work with the distinguished Senator from Kansas, who is presiding today, and also the distinguished Senator from Indiana, who has put forth this new alliance. It is a cadre of members who are putting forth these points that we think have not been sufficiently debated nor brought forward in the overall debate in America about what we should do about the crying issues of poverty that has so hit and harmed our Nation in so many places, both urban and rural. More than 30 years after the United States first declared the War on Poverty, most signs point to failure. The United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars--by some accounts we have spent nearly $4 trillion--to fight poverty only to find poverty in America has grown more widespread, more entrenched, and more pathological. The solution is not to expand more Government but rather to go a different way, and to say, ``Look, we have tried that route. We have spent nearly $4 trillion trying that route. We have tried every program you possibly can with that route. Maybe there is another way that we should be going.'' This is what the Renewal Alliance, this program, is about--about rewarding self-help and not Government help. It is about encouraging charity rather than encouraging Government. It is about encouraging volunteerism rather than putting more people on the taxpayer rolls to solve problems that we have failed to be able to solve. Family breakdown, crime, poor education performance, and a lack of opportunity in the inner cities, and many other areas, including many rural areas, are now national problems. But many of the solutions are to be found on a local level and not in Washington, through personal contacts that people can make between individuals and the dedicated involvement of families, churches, schools, and neighborhood associations. These small groups, not big Government, but rather small groups, often referred to as the ``little platoons'' in a civil society, can often accomplish what no Government program could dream of or ever been able to do. They have the soft hearts and the willing hands to be able to reach out and touch people directly in a community where they are in there with the families working with them. Last December, I had the chance to visit several of these small, private charities in my home State of Kansas. To me, they are living proof of the amazing effectiveness of small, local charities that lead with heart, that lead with love. Mr. President, in this very body, in this very room, as you enter into the main doorway coming in here, there is a sign above the door mantle which reads ``In God We Trust.'' As I visited these small charities in Kansas, I was reminded at that time and was thinking about how many people say that versus how many people do that. These are charities, which ``In God We Trust'' they live every day. I visited Good Samaritan Clinic in Wichita, which serves around 300 patients a month from Wichita's poorest neighborhood. This tiny clinic operates on less than a shoestring budget. With the exception of a fax machine and one piece of furniture, everything in the clinic is donated. The clinic's staff, a dedicated and accomplished group of doctors, are mostly volunteers. They are reaching out and touching people, and helping and healing people with their skills and with their hearts. I visited the Topeka Rescue Mission and the Union Rescue Mission of Wichita, both of which serve thousands of people each year. These missions are not merely assigning people to bunks, but they challenge them personally and spiritually, and they are challenged to change their hearts and their souls along with helping them out in their lives. I visited the Crisis Pregnancy Outreach Program in Topeka and a maternity home in Wichita and saw firsthand the love and personal attention devoted to each woman who passes through those doors. Contrast that with the large Government solution that we have tried for the past 30 years that gets millions of people flowing through the door but constantly keeps them flowing back out the door and never really changes things in a person's life, continues to hand them something but doesn't put arms around them and hug them, doesn't put arms around them and give them heart and soul and say, ``Here is my phone number; call anytime.'' It is not that we don't have a lot of good and dedicated servants; we do, but they are limited in what they can do. This is a mission for them. They must not see the number of people who are walking through; they must see a soul at a time. They must see another and another, to reach out and touch and help them. We need to encourage these groups and not discourage them. As the past 35 years of our history has shown, the Federal Government is limited in its capacity to solve the problems of poverty and pathology, But it can eliminate perverse incentives that reward irresponsibility and fuel the flight of capital from the inner cities, and it can encourage entrepreneurialism, charitable giving and investment in the inner cities and its inhabitants, investment in the inhabitants of those areas and rural areas as well. It can do these things and it should. And through the renewal alliance REAL Life legislation, it will. That is why I am delighted to be associated with the Senator from Indiana in this package that we have put forward. It is a different way. It is a way that people every day are proving can and is working, and we need to encourage it and lift it up and move it forward. I am delighted to be a part of this legislation.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate the 50th Anniversary of independence of Sri Lanka. I believe it is appropriate that we so mark this occasion by offering our congratulations to her excellency, President Kumaratunga and the people of Sri Lanka. In the five decades since Sri Lanka gained its independence from British colonial rule, Sri Lanka has held regular national elections as well as provincial and local government elections. The most recent parliamentary elections were held in August 1994, and the third presidential election was held in November 1994. Sri Lanka has prospered economically since 1977, when it introduced economic liberalization policies which shifted the economy away from state controls, subsidies and public sector involvement to a market- oriented system in which private entrepreneurship flourishes. The U.S. is Sri Lanka's largest trading partner, accounting for 30% of the latter's exports, and over 90 U.S. companies have invested in Sri Lanka, with a heavy concentration in mining and textiles. U.S. official relations with Sri Lanka date back to 1850 when John Black, an American merchant residing in Colombo was appointed the first American commercial agent in Galle. Fifty years later the agency moved to Colombo and became a consulate. It subsequently became an embassy in 1948 after Sri Lanka became independent. The exchange of bilateral visits has played an important role in strengthening the cordial relations between our two nations. Then Secretary of State John Foster Dulles visited Sri Lanka soon after its independence, and since that time members of this body as well as our colleagues in the House have regularly visited this lovely country. Despite its prosperity and commitment to democratic principles, Sri Lanka has been plagued for many years by two domestic insurgencies, one mainly Tamil in the North, and the other mainly Sinhalese, in the South. The result has been the loss of many lives and heavy damage to property. The government has reiterated its commitment to addressing grievances articulated by these groups through dialog and the process of negotiation. Four rounds of unconditional talks with the Tamil Tiger separatists were held following the President's election in November 1994, and a cease fire was subsequently reached. This however, was breached by the separatists after 3\1/2\ months when they resumed their terrorist activity. As a result of these terrorist actions at home, Sri Lanka has placed counter terrorism at the forefront of its foreign policy. Sri Lanka was the Vice Chair of the United Nations Ad hoc Committee on Terrorism and played an important role in the drafting of the Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing, being the first to sign the Convention at United Nations Headquarters on January 12, 1998. I am therefore, Mr. President, pleased to acknowledge this occasion by expressing best wishes to the Government and people of Sri Lanka as they celebrate 50 years of independence. I know that we all look forward to continued cooperation and friendship with the Government and people of Sri Lanka in the years ahead.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I was unable to vote on Senate Concurrent Resolution 90, which acknowledges the historic Northern Ireland Peace Agreement. Had I been present I would have voted in favor of the resolution. I request that the official record so indicate. Mr. President, Ireland has suffered thirty years of turmoil, a tragic set of circumstances which has taken a deep toll on the Irish people. This toll can be measured in the loss of thousands of lives, and the instability which arises from thirty years of constant fighting, and terror. Despite the best efforts of the governments of the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom over the years to find an equitable solution, these, until recently were to no avail. Mr. President, finally I would note that the symbolism of this accord being reached on Good Friday should not escape us. It has been said that Good Friday is the vortex to which all history is drawn, and out of which all history flows, forever transformed. Let us hope that this momentous accord will set Ireland on a course towards peace and prosperity from which there is no turning back.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 218 submitted earlier today by Senators Lott and Daschle.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, April 28. I further ask that on Tuesday, immediately following the prayer, the routine requests through the morning hour be granted and the Senate then begin a period of morning business until 10:45 a.m. with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the following exceptions: Senator Collins for up to 15 minutes; Senator Dorgan for up to 15 minutes; Senator Coats for up to 45 minutes beginning at 10 a.m.. I further ask that at the conclusion of morning business the Senate immediately proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the NATO enlargement treaty, and the Kyl amendment No. 2310 be temporarily set aside.

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I further ask that at 10:45 a.m. Senator Harkin be recognized to offer an amendment and that there be 2 hours equally divided for debate on the amendment; further, that the vote on or in relation to the Harkin amendment occur immediately following the vote on the adoption of the State Department reorganization conference report previously ordered to occur at 2:25 p.m.; further, that no amendments be in order to the Harkin amendment prior to the vote.

Mr. BROWNBACK. I further ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess from 12:45 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. to allow the weekly party caucuses to meet.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 10:45 a.m. At 10:45, the Senate will resume consideration of the NATO enlargement treaty, with Senator Harkin being recognized to offer an amendment with 2 hours of debate on the amendment equally divided. When the Senate reconvenes following the weekly party luncheons, there will be 10 minutes equally divided for closing remarks on the State Department reorganization conference report. Following that debate at 2:25 p.m., the Senate will proceed to two back-to-back votes, the first being a rollcall vote on adoption of the State Department conference report, followed immediately by a rollcall vote on or in relation to the Harkin amendment. Members can expect further rollcall votes throughout Tuesday's session on amendments to the NATO treaty, or on any other legislative or executive items that are cleared for action.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. BROWNBACK

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

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader, after consultation with the minority leader, however not before the conclusion of the NATO treaty, may proceed to consideration of Calendar No. 214, S. 1186, the job training partnership legislation. I further ask unanimous consent that total debate be limited to 4 hours as divided on the amendments listed below. I further ask that the only amendments in order be the following: One substitute amendment offered by Senator Jeffords, with 2 hours equally divided; One amendment offered by Senator DeWine, which is the text of Calendar No. 318, S. 1579, the rehabilitation bill, with 30 minutes equally divided; Two amendments by Senator Ashcroft, 10 minutes equally divided on each; One amendment by Senator Lautenberg on service delivery area size with 10 minutes equally divided; One amendment by Senator Domenici on business partnerships with 1 hour equally divided. I further ask consent that no second-degree amendments be in order to the above listed amendments and that following the expiration of time or yielding back of time and disposition of any pending amendments the bill be read a third time and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues Senator Coverdell and Senator Ashcroft in introducing legislation that would prohibit the use of federal funds for any program that gives out hypodermic needles or syringes for use with illegal drugs. Mr. President, last Friday, the Clinton Administration announced their intention to use federal funds to distribute free drug needles. Although they abruptly reversed course this week, they have maintained their intention of encouraging state and local governments and other institutions to distribute drug needles. This is bad policy, bad science, and bad news for our country. A comprehensive study of the needle exchange program in Vancouver, British Columbia--the city with the world's largest needle give-away program--found that drug use, crime, and HIV transmission all increased where drug needles were handed out. This should come as no surprise. One of the primary principles of economics is that you get more of what you subsidize and less of what you tax. You do not discourage drug use by giving out free needles. You cannot reduce disease by encouraging addiction. More than ever before, we need strong leadership in the war on drugs, and a clear message that drugs are wrong, and harmful. Consider the facts: Over the past three years, casual drug us among teens has almost doubled. A survey by the National Institute on Drug Abuse found that the proportion of eighth graders who had tried heroin had doubled between 1991 and 1996. Every year, there are thousands of young people who fall prey to drugs. We need to send the clear message that using drugs is illegal and wrong. Drug use must be stopped, not subsidized. That is why I am proud to stand with Senators Coverdell and Ashcroft in introducing legislation that to prohibit spending taxpayer dollars on drug needle give-aways, and urge my colleagues to expedite passage of this legislation.

Mr. BROWNBACK

Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues Senator Coverdell and Senator Ashcroft in introducing legislation that would prohibit the use of federal funds for any program that gives out hypodermic needles or syringes for use with illegal drugs. Mr. President, last Friday, the Clinton Administration announced their intention to use federal funds to distribute free drug needles. Although they abruptly reversed course this week, they have maintained their intention of encouraging state and local governments and other institutions to distribute drug needles. This is bad policy, bad science, and bad news for our country. A comprehensive study of the needle exchange program in Vancouver, British Columbia--the city with the world's largest needle give-away program--found that drug use, crime, and HIV transmission all increased where drug needles were handed out. This should come as no surprise. One of the primary principles of economics is that you get more of what you subsidize and less of what you tax. You do not discourage drug use by giving out free needles. You cannot reduce disease by encouraging addiction. More than ever before, we need strong leadership in the war on drugs, and a clear message that drugs are wrong, and harmful. Consider the facts: Over the past three years, casual drug us among teens has almost doubled. A survey by the National Institute on Drug Abuse found that the proportion of eighth graders who had tried heroin had doubled between 1991 and 1996. Every year, there are thousands of young people who fall prey to drugs. We need to send the clear message that using drugs is illegal and wrong. Drug use must be stopped, not subsidized. That is why I am proud to stand with Senators Coverdell and Ashcroft in introducing legislation that to prohibit spending taxpayer dollars on drug needle give-aways, and urge my colleagues to expedite passage of this legislation.