Alfonse D’Amato

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I thank the Senator.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I am pleased to have the opportunity to join with the distinguished ranking member and the senior Senator from New York, the ranking member on Finance and the chairman of Finance, the distinguished Senator from Delaware, in opposing the McCain amendment. Let me say that the rhetoric is rather fascinating, the rhetoric that is used in support of this amendment, that we are paying for something that we are not getting. The fact of the matter is that it totally ignores the reality that teaching hospitals that administer to the poorest of the poor, that provide training for our Nation's doctors, that provide medical services to those who would otherwise in many cases find it difficult to get those services, will actually be saving the taxpayer money as a result of the legislation that has been enacted, a legislation which the amendment that we are now discussing would strike down. The fact is the Congressional Budget Office as recently as this morning has scored the McCain proposal as one that would cost the Treasury $350 million. So it is rather disingenuous to say that we are paying for something, in the rhetoric which is used, to suggest that ``Government rationing of medical training, ultimately the rationing of health care, smacks of socialism, not democracy'' does not recognize the problem that exists. It costs approximately $100,000 a year. That is what the Government is paying, for every resident who is employed at the various hospitals throughout the country. There is a recognition that there is an oversupply. So the Congress, with the administration, developed a format whereby over a period of time, hospitals would reduce the number of doctors and would actually be then saving the Government $350 million. Now, if we want to continue business as usual, want to continue subsidizing the oversupply, then we strike this amendment. That is what the Senator would be doing. What he would be doing is absolutely in contravention of what good planning and what good medical practice and what is in the best interests of the taxpayer--allow this amount to gradually go down in the number of doctors who are being trained. Now, I understand the Senator from Arizona has asked for the ability to debate this measure later in a fuller context and would like an hour equally divided. At that point in time I hope the chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Domenici, would raise a point of order against the amendment pursuant to section 302(f) of the Budget Act because that point of order, in my opinion, lies, it is proper, and would request a ruling of the Chair. I am not going to do that. I hope we would have the chairman of the Budget Committee review this as to whether or not technologically this would cost the taxpayers $350 million and there is no offset provided. Now, do we really want to say we want to knock out a program that will reduce the number of doctors and save the taxpayers of this country close to half a billion dollars? That is what the McCain amendment would do, as well-intentioned as it might be. And believe me, I do not question the Senator's intentions. I think he has a legitimate point. Are we paying for something that we are not getting? I think the fact is we are going to be reducing the supply and we will be saving $350 million but we are doing it in an orderly manner. We are allowing those who are on the battlefield, those who are providing services for the neediest of the needy, for those who do not have adequate health insurance, those people who would otherwise not receive the kinds of medical services and high quality, they are in our inner core cities throughout our Nation because those are the hospitals in most cases that will be affected, the great institutions in our metropolitan communities throughout this country. It makes no sense, it seems to me, to knock out a program that will deprive us of the opportunity of seeing an orderly downsizing, and, yes, save taxpayers money at the same time. I join in opposition to this amendment and I commend the chairman of the Finance Committee from Delaware and my distinguished colleague from New York, Senator Moynihan. I yield the floor.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I have heard the Senator from New Mexico, and I agree with him. I also think that the Senator from Arizona does us a great service by saying, look, this may not be the methodology, the best method of paying for the training of our doctors, but, having said that, that is the system that exists. The legislation that the Senator's amendment would affect is designed, maybe imperfectly, to begin to reduce those expenditures, those moneys that come out of the Treasury. Let me say this to you: It is not fair to say that we are paying for doctors that are not going to be in training and, indeed, again, the proposal that the administration has put forth and that the committee has expanded that goes beyond New York and now nationwide, those dollars will be used to provide adjustment assistance, because as these hospitals downsize, they are going to have to hire additional staff doctors, nurse practitioners, physician assistants and other personnel to replace the residents who now treat Medicare patients. So this is a canard to simply say we are giving you money not to train doctors. It is transition and, in the fullness of time, will save the taxpayers, depending upon who is doing the scoring, as much as $350 million. You can't knock a program on one hand and say you are paying all this money and we should reduce it, and when you come up with a methodology to reduce it then say, ``Oh, no, that's not the right methodology.'' Show us a way in which you do that and don't throw the teaching hospitals into chaos. This is the manner that I would suggest, as imperfect as it may be, that the committee came up with. For those reasons, I hope that we will refrain from piling on and supporting the McCain amendment which does not help the situation.

Mr. D'AMATO. May I make an inquiry?

Mr. D'AMATO. Did the Senator raise the point of order?

Mr. D'AMATO. Yes.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for his generosity. I think I have made our point, but the Senator couldn't be more gracious in providing us that opportunity. Again, I do hope we can find a better way to fund this, because I don't think people know that the Federal Government put so much money into teacher training. If there is a better way to fund it and finance it, I think we should look for that.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I thank the Chair.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, might I ask that we have an additional--up to 15 minutes in morning business to be able to speak on this issue, because I know there are colleagues, my colleague from New Jersey and colleague from California, who would like to speak to this.

Mr. D'AMATO. The Chair has been gracious in extending morning business time, but I would like to make one observation, if I might, and ask that the time be continued.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, once again, we have seen the ugly, undeniably brutal, horrific actions of terrorism. We have seen the destructive impact of it in Jerusalem so vividly put forth over the TV screens, but it goes well beyond. We are told that 6 people died, over 150 have been injured, and obviously our sympathy goes out to them and to their families and to the people of that region who are held captive by these kinds of terrorist attacks. This is the work of Hamas, the Hamas who are given sanctuary, who operate out of the territories under the direct control of Yasser Arafat. Now, make no mistake about it: The responsibility for this terrorist act and the previous bombings lies with Mr. Arafat. He, Mr. President, has the power to deter these murderers but does nothing. Indeed, he gives them sanctuary. He gives them sustenance. He gives them comfort. Let me illustrate by way of this picture. It is said that a picture is worth a thousand words, and in this case I think even more so. The New York Times, Thursday, August 21, and here we see Mr. Arafat greeted by a leader of the Hamas during a meeting in Gaza: ``Defying Israel, Arafat embraces Islamic militants.'' You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say, on the one hand, that we are the instrumentality of peace, that we want peace, we are working for peace, and on the other hand be embracing the leaders of the terrorist organizations that are sworn to destroy Israel, the Jewish people and any prospects for peace. That is indefensible. And so while there are those who claim that this is an internal security problem for Israel, I believe it is quite clear, given the responsibilities and given the power and given the economic wherewithal that we have provided, the United States, to Yasser Arafat, whose police force has failed, whose security services have, if anything, given sanctuary and protection to Hamas, it is about time we held him accountable for these acts. Instead of providing the security and loaning himself to the peace process, he embraces these murderers as we see so clearly. He coddles them, he provides them with sanctuary. Mr. President, terrorism will not end if this is permitted. I believe, and I have said before--and I see my colleague in the Chamber--that it may come time--and the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Lieberman] has raised this issue--for this country to look very closely at the moneys, the hundreds of millions of dollars annually that we send to Mr. Arafat under the umbrella, the cloak, of peace. When those dollars are not being used to provide the kind of security to bring about a peace process but are aiding and abetting, and, indeed, we have him embracing terrorist leaders, I think we have to at the very least look at whether this should continue. I believe that we have an obligation to speak up and say, we hold you, Mr. Arafat, responsible, and it is time to condemn him publicly for the carnage and the destruction of human life that has taken place today and in the past. Mr. President, I see my friends and colleagues, the Senators from Connecticut and New Jersey, in the Chamber, and I know that they feel strongly about this issue. I yield my remaining time to the Senator from Connecticut and the Senator from New Jersey.

Mr. D'AMATO. No. I have asked that we be permitted to speak on this issue for up to 15 minutes. My colleagues have yet to speak. So use whatever time is necessary.

Mr. D'AMATO. I wonder if my colleague might yield for an observation?

Mr. D'AMATO. Do you think that we should consider very seriously going forward with a cutoff of funding to Yasser Arafat and the Palestinians, unless we see some--I am not saying tomorrow or the next day--but unless we see some concerted action? I think we have to begin to let him know. I am wondering what my colleague thinks about that--my colleagues think about that? Because, it seems to me, we say one thing and we do the other. We are permitting, I think, ourselves to look rather foolish in the continued funding, or permitting funding to continue to flow.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I think that this picture and the caption describes it. Here is Yasser Arafat embracing a leader of terrorism, a killer, the leader of Hamas. The caption reads: ``Defying Israel, Arafat embraces Islamic militants.'' It is better titled: ``Defying peace''--defying peace. It is better titled ``Embracing terrorists,'' because that is exactly what he is doing. My colleague from California, I think, described it quite correctly. It is not good enough to speak about peace and yet to give sanctuary, safe haven and tangible, visible support to those who bring about these horrific acts. That is what Mr. Arafat has done. Generally, he has done it under the cloak of speaking in a language and in places and at times where the world does not hear it, but that selected groups hear his words. Here he has done it in the way that the camera has captured him and his words in giving support and comfort to those who bring terror to the streets and to the homes of innocent civilians.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation which will strike a blow against counterfeiters and other criminals who commit cellular telephone fraud and credit card fraud. These criminal activities cost their respective industries hundreds of millions of dollars annually, and these costs are passed down to consumers who use credit cards and cellular telephones. The cellular telephone industry alone loses $650 million each year due to counterfeit or cloned telephone. The credit card industry faces a similar problem. The criminals who perpetrate these frauds use specialized equipment to clone cell phones and credit cards to create phony copies which can be sold on the street or used to rack up thousands of dollars in unauthorized credit card purchases and telephone calls. There is no legitimate reason for an individual to possess this special equipment used to create these phony copies. This equipment is only useful to create counterfeit credit cards and cell phones. Under current law, this equipment is actually returned to the criminal after he serves his sentence. The equipment is frequently used again to commit the same crimes over and over. The Government cannot confiscate the equipment without a separate expensive and time- consuming forfeiture proceeding. Mr. President, it is preposterous that the Government must return the tools used to commit these crimes to criminals, even if they are convicted. These criminals are exploiting a loophole in the Federal forfeiture laws. My bill will close this loophole. My bill would amend title 49 of the United States Code to make this equipment, as well as the counterfeit credit cards and telephones themselves, contraband. This designation would make it a Federal crime to possess these items. My bill would also require that these items must not be returned to the criminals. Mr. President, these crimes take a tremendous toll on consumers whose telephones and credit cards are cloned by this equipment. By the time the consumer discovers that his or her telephone or credit card has been copied, the criminals usually have racked up thousands of dollars in unauthorized charges. This can have a devastating effect on consumers' credit ratings, rendering them unable to purchase a car or home or start a business. These problems can take years to correct. Last Congress, I introduced a similar bill, S. 1380. Unfortunately, the session ended before Congress was able to act. However, this bill is not without precedent. A similar measure was passed last year regarding counterfeit videos and music. These items are now considered contraband under the new law. Industry leaders and law enforcement authorities enthusiastically support this legislation. Mr. President, the Government must stop unwittingly aiding criminals to swindle hundreds of millions of dollars at the expense of consumers and the cellular telephone and credit card industries. My bill would close this outrageous loophole and help law enforcement crack down on these brazen criminals. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation which will strike a blow against counterfeiters and other criminals who commit cellular telephone fraud and credit card fraud. These criminal activities cost their respective industries hundreds of millions of dollars annually, and these costs are passed down to consumers who use credit cards and cellular telephones. The cellular telephone industry alone loses $650 million each year due to counterfeit or cloned telephone. The credit card industry faces a similar problem. The criminals who perpetrate these frauds use specialized equipment to clone cell phones and credit cards to create phony copies which can be sold on the street or used to rack up thousands of dollars in unauthorized credit card purchases and telephone calls. There is no legitimate reason for an individual to possess this special equipment used to create these phony copies. This equipment is only useful to create counterfeit credit cards and cell phones. Under current law, this equipment is actually returned to the criminal after he serves his sentence. The equipment is frequently used again to commit the same crimes over and over. The Government cannot confiscate the equipment without a separate expensive and time- consuming forfeiture proceeding. Mr. President, it is preposterous that the Government must return the tools used to commit these crimes to criminals, even if they are convicted. These criminals are exploiting a loophole in the Federal forfeiture laws. My bill will close this loophole. My bill would amend title 49 of the United States Code to make this equipment, as well as the counterfeit credit cards and telephones themselves, contraband. This designation would make it a Federal crime to possess these items. My bill would also require that these items must not be returned to the criminals. Mr. President, these crimes take a tremendous toll on consumers whose telephones and credit cards are cloned by this equipment. By the time the consumer discovers that his or her telephone or credit card has been copied, the criminals usually have racked up thousands of dollars in unauthorized charges. This can have a devastating effect on consumers' credit ratings, rendering them unable to purchase a car or home or start a business. These problems can take years to correct. Last Congress, I introduced a similar bill, S. 1380. Unfortunately, the session ended before Congress was able to act. However, this bill is not without precedent. A similar measure was passed last year regarding counterfeit videos and music. These items are now considered contraband under the new law. Industry leaders and law enforcement authorities enthusiastically support this legislation. Mr. President, the Government must stop unwittingly aiding criminals to swindle hundreds of millions of dollars at the expense of consumers and the cellular telephone and credit card industries. My bill would close this outrageous loophole and help law enforcement crack down on these brazen criminals. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, let me thank the chairman of this committee, Senator Specter. As I indicated before, this is a most difficult, difficult task, the management of scarce resources for Labor, Health, and Human Services, with the demands from the various communities for additional funding for medical research, the scarceness of resources, and the difficult time in the allocations. His support is greatly welcomed in this area. I am deeply appreciative.

Mr. D'AMATO. I would like to assure the Senator from New Hampshire that my intention is to put this $40 million in to those services that we know are making the lives of our seniors healthier and more independent. Indeed, at the same time this amendment seeks to bring more resources into effective services for the elderly, it also reduces funding from administrative accounts. I share the Senator's interest in both getting needed services to our seniors and in reducing overhead costs.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I have an amendment which I would like to submit on this bill, but I would ask unanimous consent that I might be given an opportunity to speak to up to 10 minutes as if in morning business on a subject of some import dealing with the terrorist action today in Jerusalem.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I thank the Chair and thank my colleagues for their patience. Mr. LIEBERMAN addressed the Chair.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to submit a modification to the amendment which I have offered.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this matter be laid aside and be voted on at 5:30.

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