John Chafee

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. So the term ``truck'' is a term of art, a special term?

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I would like to ask the distinguished sponsor of this amendment if he defines trucks? Is it by weight?

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 20, 1995, at 2 p.m.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 20, 1995, at 11 a.m.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 20, 1995, to conduct a semiannual oversight hearing of the Resolution Trust Corporation.

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I would like to commend the Senator from Ohio because I think he put his finger right on the point. It is not that nobody wants to have more highway deaths. It is not that anybody wants to see more people terribly injured. But the facts are that, if this bill passes, the States will be under tremendous pressure, just as they were in 1976 after 10 years of experience with the mandatory law-- the mandatory law was repealed in 1976--and 27 States repealed the laws they had dealing with mandatory seatbelts and helmets. It follows as night follows day. It is not the intention of the Senator from New Hampshire, but that is what is going to happen as sure as we are standing here. So, therefore, a vote for the amendment of the Senator from New Hampshire, inadvertent though it might be in his judgment, is clearly going to result in increased deaths on motorcycles and in automobiles in our country. The statistics show it. There is no difference between what we are doing here than what took place in the 10-year period from 1966 to 1976. Sometimes, you learn from experience. This is clearly a case where we can learn from experience. I know the Senator feels that in his State--and the Senator from Maine and some other States--they ought to have the privilege to do what they want. But I think we have some responsibilities as Senators. Yes, it is a financial drain on us and our Nation if we do not pass this law. I do not think there is any debate about that; that is, if we do not maintain the laws dealing with seatbelts and motorcycle helmets. We had testimony. Just talk to anybody, to any physician who serves in an emergency room, for example. They all [[Page S 8675]] will tell you that absent seatbelts, accidents are 10 times more grievous. It is the same with helmets. It is so ironic that the motorcyclists will campaign to get rid of mandatory motorcycle helmet use, and yet in their meets, in their sanctioned meets, they will require it. They require the use of a helmet. But for us to impose it--it is all right for them to do it in their meets, but if we say you have to have such a law or you lose some money, obviously an inducement to pass a law, somehow we are infringing on their freedoms. Mr. President, there are various bills that come through here which we all vote on at different times. I suppose so far this year maybe we have had, I do not know, 100 rollcall votes, or something like that. Sometimes we vote on bills, and, ``Oh, well. It could go this way or that way. We don't have much deep feeling about it.'' But I tell you, I have a very deep feeling about this legislation. I think we would be making a terrible mistake if we approved the amendment that we are going to vote on in a few minutes. I know the Senator from Colorado wanted to speak.

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. As a matter of fact, many a marine would be delighted if he could have crawled into his helmet. It somehow had a protective feeling, a helmet. So, there we are, Mr. President. Unless anybody else has anything further to say, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, the Members on this side are in agreement with this amendment and urge its adoption.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, the distinguished Senator from New York and I are here. We are ready to do business. There are 15-plus amendments that are on the agreement for tomorrow. I see no reason why we cannot dispose of some of them now. Some might be agreed to, some might be contested, at least they can be debated. We will not have any votes, but it is a good time to have a discussion. I think it is too bad we are whiling away the day here with no action. As I say, the Senator from New York and I are here and the store is open and looking for customers. So, Mr. President, I hope the call will go out near and wide to come on over and offer your amendments. Mr. MOYNIHAN addressed the Chair.

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

Mr. CHAFEE. No; not for long anyway.

Mr. CHAFEE. I cannot remember any.

Mr. CHAFEE. Although all marines would say they are a combat marine, since there is no such thing as a noncombat marine.

Mr. CHAFEE. That is true.

Mr. CHAFEE. I sure will. I just want to say, I know the Senator from Ohio may be leaving. I am proselytizing him for his vote in connection with that particular measure.

Mr. CHAFEE. Populace States. Oh, a very popular State, but not populace. And Ohio, likewise, has not passed it. But I have urged the passage of that legislation in my State. Certainly, I am going to vote to retain the requirement--it is not a requirement. What it is is a factor in the law, a provision in the law which says States that do not pass that legislation will have to devote a certain amount of their highway funds to education and training for safety purposes--safety in helmets, safety in motorcycles, safety in automobiles. I will be very candid, the States do not like that because it takes some of their highway funds that they would rather spend on highways than on education. You might ask, ``What is the Federal Government doing in this anyway? Isn't this a States rights matter? Why doesn't the Federal Government stay out of this?'' The reason we are in it, and deeply into it, is because we pay Medicaid. There is not a State where we do not pay 50 percent of Medicaid and, in most instances, pay more than that. So if we are paying the piper, we have a right to call the tune. These motorcyclists--I will say more on this tomorrow when the amendment comes up--but these motorcyclists who are laid up in hospitals, grievously injured, many in a coma because they have head injuries because they did not wear a helmet, they are being maintained in these hospitals by Medicaid. They do not have fancy insurance policies. They are being maintained by Medicaid, which you and I and you and you and you and the people in the galleries and elsewhere are paying. They are paying the bill. I think if we are paying the bill, we have a right to require at least that these motorcyclists wear helmets and, to the extent it can be monitored, that the seat belts be used in the vehicles.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I am impressed by the quote from Deuteronomy, and I think that will help our cause greatly. Now, Mr. President, I would like to say to the Senator from Ohio that not [[Page S 8611]] only do I commend him for his efforts in connection with the speed limit, but I also would draw his attention to another safety measure that will probably be attempted to be undermined here tomorrow, and that is the legislation we have which passed in 1991 in connection with the interstate transportation legislation fathered by the distinguished Senator from New York, and that legislation encourages States to pass mandatory seatbelt laws and mandatory motorcycle helmet laws. Every single Senator on this floor, in connection with health, if asked: ``Are you for preventive medicine?'' would say, ``Yes. Sure, certainly I am for preventive medicine.'' But if there ever was preventive medicine of a very dramatic type, it is the mandatory seatbelt laws and the mandatory helmets for motorcyclists. Let us just take the motorcycle helmets. The correlation between the decline of deaths for motorcyclists and the passage of laws dealing with mandatory helmets absolutely exists. That correlation is there. Example: California. California, I suppose, has more motorcyclists per capita than any State in the Nation. And the California Legislature, the General Assembly in California three times had passed mandatory helmet laws, but the Governor, prior to Governor Wilson, a Republican, vetoed that legislation, and the veto was not overridden. Governor Wilson, then a Senator here, sponsored or joined in sponsoring legislation mandating the use of helmets, mandatory helmet laws. He then was elected Governor of California, and as Governor of California, when that legislation mandating motorcycle helmets passed, Governor Wilson signed it, despite the fact that the motorcyclists, some 3,000 or 4,000 strong, circled the capitol in Sacramento protesting. So again Governor--former Senator--Wilson signed the legislation. Now, what has been the result? The result has been a decline in deaths of motorcyclists of 36 percent, from 1 year to the next. It followed the years following that legislation. That is extraordinary. There is no reason it can be ascribed to other than that law. Maryland is the same way. Maryland passed the law--a 20 percent decline. And nearly all the populace States have passed that law--Texas, and Florida. I regret that my State has not passed it. We are certainly not one of the more popular States.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I join in the commendation of the Senator from Ohio with the effort he is going to undertake tomorrow with the Senator from New Jersey in restoring the speed limit, which the committee of jurisdiction eliminated. As you know, Mr. President, the speed limit currently is 55 miles an hour on interstates except 65 miles an hour on rural interstates. I think this has worked well. Anybody who has given any thought to this matter has seen the tremendous destruction of lives and equipment and lost time and horrible injuries that have arisen from speeding and the accidents that result therefrom. Just think of it. In our country, on the highways, 40,000 people a year are killed. That is an astonishing figure. I think the total deaths in Vietnam were something like 57,000, and that is a shocking figure. But that occurred over some 5 years. Every year, 40,000 people are killed. And those are the deaths. I think you can extrapolate something like four times that for the serious injuries; in other words, the people who live but are seriously injured. And so I think this is no time, Mr. President, to change the speed limit. But it was the view of the Committee on Environment and Public Works that we should change it. I congratulate the Senator from Ohio. It is my understanding, am I not correct, that the Senator will be joining with the Senator from New Jersey to restore the speed limit?

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that no amendment dealing with affirmative action be in order during the pendency of S. 440.

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Taxation and IRS Oversight of the Committee on Finance be permitted to meet on Monday, June 19, 1995, beginning at 2 p.m. in room SD-215, to conduct a hearing on S corporation reform and the home office deduction.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Post Office and Civil Service, Committee on Governmental Affairs, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Monday, June 19, 1995, to review Federal pensions.

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I want to assure the Senator from Arkansas we are not closing up right now. If the Senator has nothing further to say, we will go into a quorum call unless the Senator from New York has something to say. The majority leader will be closing up the Senate a little later. He has a statement he wishes to make. In connection with the bill before us, the highway bill, we have done as much of our work as we can do today, so I will be leaving. But the place will remain open until the majority leader comes in, sometime not to long, I guess.