Richard Lugar

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. The gentleman is correct. Section 1107 conditionally authorizes the Secretary to depart from current practice and use recourse loans to administer the Sugar Program. Section 1107(d)(2) conditions the use of recourse loans on the requirement that the Secretary provide nonrecourse loans in the event that the tariff rate quota for imports of sugar into the United States is established at, or increased to, a level in excess of 1.5 million short tons of sugar in any year. It is the clear intent of the conferees that if the subsection (d) conditional authorization for the use of recourse loans to administer the Sugar Program, or the restrictive conditions on the use of such authority in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (d), is removed from the bill, the Secretary of Agriculture shall continue to administer the Sugar Program through the use of nonrecourse loans authorized under subsections (a) and (b). medicaid payments to indian health service facilities

Mr LUGAR

Mr LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask that the following article be printed in the Record. The article follows: [[Page S 17188]] [From the Associated Press, Sept. 12, 1995] Governor Says He's Worried State May Be Too Dependent on Gambling Sioux City, IA.--South Dakota Gov. Bill Janklow said he is worried his state might be getting hooked on gambling revenue. Janklow said South Dakota has been saturated with gambling. State government is heavily dependent on gambling revenue, with video lottery proceeds accounting for between 15 percent and 17 percent of the general fund budget, Janklow said. If the economy slows down and people have to limit spending, gambling will be one of the first expenses people cut out, Janklow said. The resulting drop in state revenue would ``hit us right between the eyes,'' Janklow said. Gambling revenue should have been treated as ``one-time money'' and not intended to continue each year, Janklow told a meeting of the Sioux City Downtown Rotary club Monday. But changing the state's reliance on gambling revenue will be difficult, Janklow said. Tax revenues in South Dakota grew at three times the rate of inflation in the nine years before he took office for a third time this year, Janklow said. If taxes grow at about the same rate as income, people grumble, but do not revolt, Janklow said. ``That's what we had (last year), a revolt,'' Janklow said. Voters defeated a ballot measure that would have slashed property taxes by one-third. A property tax cut plan proposed by Janklow and passed by the Legislature promises homeowners and farmers a 20-percent tax cut. South Dakota's economy will have to grow to offset money lost to the property tax cut, Janklow said. A few state lawmakers have said a state income tax is the best way to ease South Dakota's financial straits. Janklow said the state's voters will never agree to that. ``Working people are always going to vote no (on an income tax) because they know the government is not going to be honest,'' Janklow said.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask that the following article be printed in the Record. The article follows: [From the Tampa Tribune, Aug. 27, 1995] Global Casinos Pose Virtual Mess; Lawmakers Say Electronic Gambling Difficult To Regulate (By Ron Bartlett) So you're sitting at home, somewhere in Florida, and you've got the itch to go casino gambling? No problem. Chances are by early next year, no matter where you live in the state, such an opportunity will be at your fingertips. Through a personal computer, you'll be able to glide down the hallways of a glittering casino, passing rooms filled with roulette wheels and slot machines. Once you pick a game, you'll be able to plunk down a bet and take on other gamblers from across the globe. But this won't be for play. This will be for real, cold, hard cash. Didn't state voters resoundingly reject casinos in 1994 for the third time? Sure they did. But savvy entrepreneurs are using electronics to introduce new forms of gambling that are likely to be widely available in Florida and throughout the United States in the coming months. In a rapidly developing market, offshore companies based mostly in the Caribbean are beginning to offer ``virtual reality'' casinos and sports book operations on the Internet, the worldwide network of computers. From your easy chair in Tampa, it soon will be possible to place real bets through your personal computer at virtual casinos in places such as Antigua and St. Martin. Some of these games will come with sophisticated graphics and video that will give players at home the feeling that they are inside a major casino. While the first such virtual casino isn't yet operating, predictions are that hundreds could be up and running within the next year. Meanwhile, the Coeur d'Alene Indian tribe in Idaho plans to offer a national lottery by year's end that some experts say ultimately could offer weekly jackpots up to $200 million. The tribe wants to set up toll-free 1-800 lines that players would use to dial in numbers and give their credit card information. And Floridians who want to bet on sporting events already can call Connecticut or New York, which offer national telephone wagering. The expansion of electronic gambling is not only creating new outlets for players but also bringing wagering directly into the home, which gaming entrepreneurs view as the new frontier. In Florida and other states, the trend is worrying law enforcement officials, regulators and lawmakers. On one level, there are concerns that electronic gambling will hurt business at existing state lotteries, pari-mutuel facilities, bingo halls and Indian gaming facilities. On another, there are fears it will be difficult, if not impossible, to regulate offshore casinos operating on the Internet, that consumers won't be adequately protected, and that the new opportunities could increase gambling addiction and all its dangers. Earlier this month, the chairman of the Florida House Regulated Industries Committee asked state Attorney General Bob Butterworth to investigate what, if anything, the state can do to stop Floridians from betting on the emerging virtual casinos or from calling other states to wager on sports events. State Rep. Steven Geller, a Hallandale Democrat, said his request wasn't a moral stance against gambling, rather, he wants to protect the state's struggling horse and dog tracks and jai alai frontons, which generate jobs and taxes. ``If you have access to a virtual casino and play blackjack, how do you know that the casino in Antigua is run honestly?'' Geller asked. ``How do you know that the roulette wheel isn't rigged?'' Butterworth hasn't responded to Geller's inquiry. But with the Internet gambling in particular, he says, any regulatory answers rest in Washington, not Tallahassee. ``How do you stop it from coming into states that don't want it?'' Butterworth said. ``How do you tax it in states that do want it? I don't know how you do that without the federal government taking the lead.'' Some members of Congress are grumbling about online gambling. The Justice Department has declared it illegal in the United States, saying it will act on violators. But to date, the full extent and scope of the federal response--if any--remains to be seen. Under federal law, it's a crime for anyone in the gambling business to use an interstate or international telephone line to transmit information assisting in the placing of bets. But it's not illegal to make a bet, as long as you're not in the gambling business. The Coeur d'Alene tribe would have callers place bets to its operations in Idaho. I. Nelson Rose, a Whittier College law professor and gambling expert, believes Americans running offshore virtual casinos could face seizure of their assets under federal racketeering statutes. But foreign nationals operating the facilities are likely beyond Uncle Sam's reach, and players are usually hard to trace and aren't prosecuted. ``Because it's so new, people don't really know how to respond to it,'' said Jeff Frentzen, who follows developments on the Internet for the magazine PC Week. ``In some corners, it's viewed as a threat. ``It reminds me of what was going on earlier this year with the Internet pornography issue. It's a global system, and it's really hard to control.'' One company on the Internet is Sports International Ltd., which says it has 25 to 30 people working at its computer operation on St. John's, Antigua. It does marketing and software development at an office outside Philadelphia. The publicly held company, which says it handled $48 million in its first year, has been taking bets on sports events on the Internet since February. During the first quarter of 1996, it expects to offer ``Global Casino,'' in which players at home will be given software that will make it seem as though they're really inside a gambling hall. The way the online operations are typically set up is this: Players either send money or use a credit card to establish a prepaid account on the island where the game is administered. They use that money to gamble. Their winnings are either rolled back into their account, or wired to them. That way, all the gambling takes place outside the U.S. Jeffrey Erb, a Sports International official, said players are responsible for paying taxes on their earnings. He said the company has a simple incentive for maintaining integrity: Any customer who felt cheated could instantly put the word out to millions of Internet users. At this stage, the phenomenon of Internet gambling is so new and so rapidly evolving that no one really knows what its ultimate impact on the gaming industry will be. Roger Gros, the Atlantic City-based editor of two industry publications, Casino Journal and Casino Player, said that in recent months, he has heard about a half-dozen announcements for virtual casinos. But more are coming; within a year, he expects hundreds. Still, he doesn't think they'll fundamentally alter the casino landscape. At least not now. ``It's just going to be a little sidelight for people who want to gamble and know how to use the Internet,'' he said. ``But I don't think it's going to be a major factor in the gambling industry.'' While Butterworth is still trying to determine whether he can do anything to halt electronic gambling on the Internet, he and other attorneys general from around the country already have taken a strong stand to stop the Coeur d`Alene tribe's proposed national lottery. In March, Butterworth sent a letter to all telephone companies in Florida, warning that use of their phone lines for carrying gambling information across state lines would violate both state and federal laws. Meanwhile, the National Association of Attorneys General passed a resolution urging the National Indian Gaming Commission and U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno to take action to prevent the ``illegal'' lottery. A bill introduced in Congress would effectively kill the planned lottery by amending current law to require that all players be physically present at the game. The tribe wants to run its weekly game where state lotteries already exist--that's 36 states and the District of Columbia, a huge potential market that far exceeds any other lottery. The tribe contends it has received all the government approvals it needs and says its detractors are just afraid of competition. Indeed, that fear is high in Florida. Officials say the Indian lottery could severely hurt ticket sales for the Florida Lottery, and cut into the more than $800 million it raises for public schools each year. Butterworth vows to go to court the moment the tribe's lottery is up and running. Yet another form of electronic gambling that is now being offered by lotteries in five states, including California and New York, is keno. But it's doubtful it will appear in Florida, at least in the near future. Under keno, players select up to 20 of 80 numbers, and then watch randomly selected numbers flash on a screen. How much they win depends on how many of their numbers appear. The games are run every five minutes, and terminals are being installed in restaurants, bars, bowling alleys and convenience stores. Florida Lottery Secretary Marcia Mann said her staff hasn't studied keno for possible introduction and doesn't intent to. ``Knowing our governor like I do, I think he would see that as too much of a proliferation of gambling and too much like casinos,'' she said. Gov. Lawton Chiles has generally been a staunch opponent of gambling.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask that the following article be printed in the Record. The article follows: [From Reuters News Service, Oct. 3, 1995] Liechtenstein-Based Lottery Rolls Out on Internet London.--A new international lottery, licensed by the government of the tiny European principality of Liechtenstein, was launched via the Internet Tuesday. InterLotto will give the world's 50 million Internet users the opportunity every week to win a jackpot of at least $1 million by dialling up a new World Wide Web page on the Internet computer network. ``It is the first government-licensed lottery on the Internet,'' David Vanrenen, chairman of the International Lottery in Liechtenstein Foundation, told a news conference. The launch in London, headquarters of the computer services firm Micro Media Services Ltd, which provides the hardware and technology for InterLotto, came on the heels of controversy over Britain's National Lottery. The opposition Labor Party Monday criticized the National Lottery for making profits and there have been jibes that the lottery funds elitist causes. [[Page S 17041]] Interlotto officials said players could nominate charities to receive awards. At least five percent of InterLotto revenues will go to charity initially with 65 percent going in prize money and the rest going toward paying costs. ``Every time you book a ticket, you enter a nomination for a charity,'' Vanrenen said. The foundation, authorized and controlled by the Liechtenstein government, is operating InterLotto. Liechtenstein, a tax-free country of 30,000 residents wedged between Switzerland and Austria, will not receive any money from the lottery which is non-profit-making. The government will select charities to receive donations. Ticket purchasers will then vote to decide which of the selected groups receive funds. Organizers hope to sell one million tickets a week by the end of the year. The British National Lottery donates 28 percent of its revenues to good causes and charities. Like most other government-run lotteries in Europe, the British lottery pays out 50 percent of revenues in prize money.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask that the following article be printed in the Record. The article follows: [From the Wall Street Journal May 10, 1995] New On-Line Casinos May Thwart U.S. Laws (By William M. Bulkeley) Two companies are setting up on-line betting emporiums in Caribbean countries to skirt U.S. laws that bar interstate gambling from home. The cyberspace casinos, which will be available on the internet, won't have Paul Anka, scantily clad showgirls or cigar smoke. But they will offer a chance to win or lose money from the comfort of the bettor's own keyboard, using credit cards or money predeposited with the house. The Justice Department says cyberspace casinos are illegal. But the companies' offshore venues may protect them. And authorities will have a tough time detecting who's actually betting because many other people will be playing the same games for free. Internet gambling could be immensely popular, ``If regulatory obstacles were put aside, gambling would be huge on the Internet,'' says Adam Schoenfeld, an analyst with Jupiter Communications, a New York market researcher. Jason Ader, an analyst with Smith Barney, says legalized on-line betting could be a $10 billion-a-year industry. Antigambling activists fear that addicted gamblers and children using credit cards will bankrupt themselves from their PCs. Rachel Volberg, president of Gemini Research. Roaring Spring, Pa., who studies problem gambling, says the young, affluent males who populate the Internet are people ``we know from research are probably most likely to develop difficulties related to gambling.'' Nonetheless, Warren B. Eugene, a 34-year-old Canadian, says he will open the Internet Online Offshore Electronic Casino this month using computers in the tax haven of the Turks and Caicos islands, Mr. Eugene, who says his business experience is in video games, already has a page on the Internet's World Wide Web where bettors can play blackjack with play money. ``This can be a trillion-dollar world-wide business,'' he says. Mr. Eugene predicts there will someday be a virtual Strip with dozens of different casinos offering different games, different odds and varying amenities such as direct deposit of winnings in offshore accounts and the acceptance of virtual checks. He's offering to sell the casino software he has developed to other would-be gambling tycoons for $250,000 and a 15% cut of the profits. Meanwhile, Kerry Rogers, a 38-year-old Las Vegas computer expert, is working on WagerNet, a sports betting service that plans to locate its computers in Belize. WagerNet is awaiting enabling legislation there, but Mr. Rogers is optimistic. ``This is a way for a country to make revenues off of gambling,'' he says. Imagine the millions of dollars bet world-wide on the WorldCup'' in soccer. WagerNet is designed as a kind of gambler's Nasdaq, matching people who bet on sporting events rather than setting a line and taking bets. A bettor, who must deposit $1,000, will put a proposition on the computer, and other bettors can take the bet if they want. WagerNet will charge a 2.5% transaction fee (far less than the 10% vigorish that Mr. Rogers says current sports books get), and it may bar U.S. gamblers if the legal risk is too great. The planned betting parlors face huge obstacles in gaining consumer confidence. After all, if a bettor wins big, the cyberspace casino may disappear. And bettors will have little assurance that unregulated electronic roulette wheels aren't rigged. U.S. laws prohibit people in the gambling business from transmitting by wire any wager information ``in interstate or foreign commerce. ``Violations are punishable by two years in prison and possible forfeiture of assets under organized crime statutes. Some states, such as California, have laws prohibiting individuals from placing bets by wire. Mr. Eugene says that as Canadian citizen whose business is in a foreign country, he isn't subject to U.S. laws, even if his biggest market turns out to be U.S. gamblers. After he starts the real casino, he promises to keep taking play-money bets so that U.S. wiretappers won't be able to tell which players are actually gambling. I. Nelson Rose, a gambling law expert and law professor at Whittier School of Law in Los Angeles, says he gets several calls a week from people investigating the legal status of on-line gambling. He says Mr. Eugene's theory may be right: ``If you are a foreign national sitting in a foreign country, there's a question whether the U.S. law would apply to you.'' He adds that ``there may be a way to do it on an Indian reservation'' as well. Mr. Eugene styles himself as the Bugsy Siegel of cyberspace, harking back to the mobster who helped build Las Vegas into a gambling mecca. And his Electronic Casino is like the early Las Vegas casinos--a big flashy sign fronting a tiny drab facility. The casino's main screen, known as a home page in Internet parlance, is an enticing graphic display of a pirate chest full of booty. For now, only the blackjack game is operating. Mr. Eugene says he is negotiating with an accounting firm to certify the legitimacy of his games and his bankroll. He says he has a $1.5 million line of credit with a bank in St. Maarten, a Dutch island in the Caribbean, but he declines to name the bank. Mr. Eugene adds that casino authorities in St. Maarten ``have the right to review our books. It's a new area. They said `until you violate it. we like you. We trust you.' '' If nothing else, Mr. Eugene's Internet Casino plan shows how easily small operators can establish themselves in cyberspace. After he issued a news release in March, he received publicity from newspapers and TV stations in the U.S., England and Canada. ``I became a multinational overnight,'' he says. Already, he adds, some 2,000 people have preregistered their interest in gambling at the Internet Casino. Mr. Eugene says players will be able to wire funds to individual offshore bank accounts that the casino will establish or send cash through such companies as First Virtual Holdings Inc., of Arlington, Va., one of several companies trying to set up a secure payment system for the Internet. [[Page S 17005]] First Virtual lets people establish credit-card accounts and use personal code numbers to perform transactions that are confirmed by messages back and forth to the owner's computer. One advantage of First Virtual is that it permits very small transactions, so Internet Casino will be able to operate even nickel slot machines. ``Internet gambling is a very important, very interesting experiment,'' says Thomas Feegel, vice president, marketing, at First Virtual.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask that the attached article be printed in the Record. The article follows: [From the Wall Street Journal, Aug. 16, 1995] Feeling Lucky: Electronics Is Bringing Gambling Into Homes, Restaurants and Planes (By William M. Bulkeley) Think you can avoid gambling? Don't bet on it. Gambling once involved clandestine dealing with unsavory bookmakers, or trips to the horse track or Las Vegas. But electronics is making it ubiquitous. Innovators are using technology to extend the frontiers of gambling--often to the frustration of regulators. On-line casinos and sports books are springing up on the Internet. With central computers in Caribbean tax havens, and play-money bets mingled with real wagers, sponsors think they can evade U.S. laws barring gambling by wire. ``Gamble from home in comfort on a Sunday morning in your PJs,'' suggests a page on the Internet On-line Offshore Casinos, one of the on- line betting parlors. Get bored flying? This fall, British Airways will experiment with a seat-back electronic system that can be used for gambling on flights outside the U.S. Betting limits, naturally, will be higher in first class. charge it By the end of the year, the Coeur d'Alene Indian tribe in Idaho plans to run a national lottery with weekly $50 million jackpots that will allow players to use credit cards and dial in their number picks over toll-free 800-lines. Graff Pay- Per-View Inc., a publicly held New York-based movie and adult-television programmer, is working on a system to let people participate--by phone or computer--in high stakes bingo games on Indian reservations. It says regulators have approved the idea of ``proxy'' bingo from home, so long as the game is actually played on a reservation. Graff says it has also acquired a company that does television broadcasts of race-track action ``to facilitate Graff's initiative to bring wagering into the home.'' Connecticut and New York recently started permitting telephone betting on horse races from all over the country. The horse-racing industry has been able to transmit gambling information across state lines for years. Experts say electronic technology will accelerate increases in gambling revenues, which have been climbing for years; John Malone, president of cable-television giant Tele- Communications Inc. has called gambling one of the ``killer applications'' for interactive networks that might justify the cost of building the information highway. Risky Business But there will be losers, too. Expanded electronic gambling means tougher competition for existing lotteries casinos, riverboats, racetracks, Indian gambling parlors and charity bingo. Some electronic wagering--especially the kind operated by foreigners that relies on telephone lines and high-speed data transmission--is difficult to monitor and may prove impossible to control. There are no assurances that electronic winners will actually see their jackpots. And experts say electronic gaming is far more dangerous than old-style betting to the 1% to 3% of the population prone to gambling addiction. Widely dispersed electronic- betting machines, for example, tempt teenagers already fond of video games. ``Electronics as a vehicle of administration for gambling activities changes the experience to make it more dependence producing, ``says Howard Shaffer, director of the division on addictions at Harvard Medical School. ``As smoking crack cocaine changed the cocaine experience, I think electronics is going to change the way gambling is experienced.'' new outlets Operators, however, like technology because it works. State lotteries, for example, are starting to add electronic keno, a game in which a player selects up to 12 of 80 possible numbers and watches to see if they are flashed on a screen. Games happen every five minutes and tempt captive audiences. ``Keno brought the lottery product to a distribution outlet that was underused--bars, bowling alleys and restaurants. It's helped states realize 30% to 100% revenue growth,'' says a spokesman for Gtech Corp., a fast-growing West Greenwich, R.I., company that runs 70% of the world's on-line lotteries. The New York State Lottery will start using Gtech's keno system at 2,250 outlets next month. Gtech has developed communications systems in outposts from Scotland's Sheltland Islands to the Strait of Magellan in Chile. Bettors can now pick numbers for national lotteries and receive confirmation of their bets via satellite in less than four seconds. Long before places such as Lithuania get reliable national phone service, they will have networks linking urban and rural stores by satellite and microwave to central lottery computers. Salomon Brothers, in a report on the gaming industry, says Americans lost $41.9 billion gambling legally in 1993, with 30% in casinos and the rest in lotteries. Lotteries now exist in states with 89% of the nation's population, so growth is largely based on introducing new games that get people to play more often. Still, saturation isn't imminent. Salomon analyst Bruce Turner says that if Americans gambled at the same rate as Australiians--who spend 2.5% of their disposable income on gaming vs. 0.8 here--the U.S. gambling market would be more than $100 billion. The U.S. is now in a growth phase of a cyclical pattern of gambling expansion and restriction, contends I. Nelson Rose, a Whittier College law professor and gambling expert. Between 1910 and 1930, the only legal gambling in the U.S. was at racetracks in Kentucky and Maryland. Gambling began to spread during the Depression when Nevada relegalized it and many states allowed race tracks. In 1964, New Hampshire approved the first state lottery. Today, there is legal gambling in every state except Utah and Hawaii. The biggest wild card is gambling on the Internet because it is so difficult to regulate and it offers all types of wagering to anyone who has access to a computer. Players either send money into an account from which they then bet, or charge their bets on a credit card. They take it on faith that they will be paid if they win. The Justice Department says such online gambling is illegal in the U.S. The department says it will act when it believes a violation of the law has occurred. virtual casino Sports International Ltd., which already operates an 800- line telephone betting service from its headquarters in Antigua, has opened an on-line sports book on the World Wide Web segment of the Internet. Players can bet a minimum of $10 picking the World Series or Super Bowl winners. Recent on- line odds quote the New York Yankees at 9-to-5 and the division-leading Boston Red Sox at 4-to-1 to win the American League crown. Michael Simone, president of publicly held Sports International, says it plans to develop other games. ``The cost of managing, and operating the proposed virtual casino is almost nonexistent when compared to a live casino,'' he says. Last month, Toronto entrepreneur Warren Eugene began taking blackjack bets via computer, in what he calls the ``Caribbean Casino.'' To play, people must register with E-Cash, a Dutch firm that handles financial transactions on the Internet. Starting with little more than a vision and a colorful Internet home page, Mr. Eugene claims nearly 1,000 people have already deposited money to play. With his computer in the Caribbean tax haven of the Turks and Calcos Islands, he [[Page S 16930]] says he offers a tempting option to gamblers. ``They're going to bet with a bookie. They might as well bet with us and keep the money offshore.'' charges of fraud Since U.S. law bars interstate wire transmission of most gambling information for business, Minnesota Attorney General Hubert H. Humphrey III has already filed suit against Kerry Rogers, one of the principals of WagerNet, of Las Vegas. The company is negotiating with the government of Belize for a license for an on-line sports book. The Minnesota suit accuses Mr. Rogers of consumer fraud by representing that the ``proposed sports bookmaking service is lawful.'' Minnesota has even posted its suit on the World Wide Web. Under racketeering statutes, an American operating an offshore casino might be subject to seizure of his assets, says Mr. Rose, the law professor in California. However, foreign nationals operating offshore casinos are probably beyond the reach of U.S. laws. Individual bettors are hard to track, and are almost never pursued by prosecutors, he says. On-line operators also face a credibility problem. ``In Vegas, you have a gaming commission that comes in and checks the returns. You won't have that in Antigua or Belize,'' says Earl Gilbrech, a Fountain Hills, Ariz., consultant who works with several Caribbean gaming operators. ``Some guy in Idaho isn't going to tell his local newspaper if he wins $22,000. But you'll hear all these people'' complaining on-line when they lose. High Rollers Major casino operators pooh-pooh Intenet gaming, saying they prefer to concentrate on resorts that draw high-rolling sociable gamblers. But British Airways thinks electronic gambling can draw goodtime tourists away from rivals. The company says it plans to spend as much as $130 million to put interactive screens on seat backs in 85 long-haul planes if a trial--planned for one Boeing 747 on routes around the world--works out. Screens will let fliers choose from more than 100 movies, play Nintendo games or play blackjack and roulette. Bets will be charged on credit cards. The Federal Aviation Administration doesn't allow gaming on flights that begin or end in the U.S., so if the airline installs the devices widely, it will turn off gaming functions on U.S. flights. Some localities have tougher rules: Under laws prohibiting gaming devices, North Carolina could try to stop even the gambling-disarmed planes from landing, says one British Airways lawyer. One big caveat is whether the technology works. In 1993, Northwest Airlines tried a system called WorldLink that included video games and a shopping channel. But it pulled the system in 1994 because at any given time about 10% of the screens didn't work, infuriating passengers. Invading the Home Technology's biggest impact may be in bringing betting into the home--the place International Gaming and Wagering Business, a trade publication, calls ``gaming's new frontier.'' The planned National Indian Lottery would let players pick numbers by phone 24-hours a day, seven days a week. Players would have to preregister with a credit card and get a personal identification number to play. When the Coeur d'Alene tribe announced its plans last winter it got approval from Idaho and from the National Indian Gaming Commission, but drew a firestorm of opposition from other states. Some have threatened to prosecute phone companies under gambling statutes if they let customers reach the lottery's 800 number. The tribe dismisses the challenges as ``fear of competition'' and expects to start its lottery by year's end. Ponies in the Living Room The horse-racing industry is embracing technology as its best shot at survival. For years, simulcasting of out-of- state races has let gamblers at tracks place bets during the long intervals between post-times. Several states now permit bettors to establish accounts with a track and then place bets from home while watching races on TV. IWN Corp., a partially owned subsidiary of NTN Communications Inc., Carlsbad, Calif., has been working with California tracks on a personal-computer-based system that could both receive data on horses in races and let players bet. Dan Downs, president of NTN and a former racing-industry executive, says he expects the system will be tested in Connecticut toward the end of this year. This month, Churchill Downs, home of the Kentucky Derby, will start testing a television-based home-wagering system developed by ODS Technologies Inc., Tulsa, Okla. Rather than having to actually go to the track, people will be able to watch races on their television sets and use a five-button remote control to place bets--which will be transmitted over telephone lines--right from their own living room. ``The racing industry is dying,'' says an ODS spokesman. ``We want to bring it right into the home and expose it to a wider customer base.''

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask that the attached article be printed in the Record. The article follows: [From the New York Times, Sept. 7, 1995] Keno Game Ushers in New Era of Gambling in New York (By Ian Fisher) Bill Fox played the numbers in his birthday, his wife's birthday, the birthday of a grandson, and then for good measure, plucked a few random digits from his head. ``Ahhh, it's a shot,'' he said after betting--and losing-- $5 a short time after New York State's new Quick Draw keno game went on line yesterday morning. The little colored balls that bopped around the video screen at the Blarney Stone on Ninth Avenue, and at hundreds of other businesses across the state, bounced New York into a new era of gambling, the most significant expansion in the state lottery's 28-year history. Starting at 10 A.M. yesterday, the state began holding lottery drawings every 5 minutes for 13 hours a day in bars, restaurants, bowling alleys, Offtrack Betting parlors--even a hardware store or two--2,250 by the end of the month, lottery officials project. Gov. Mario M. Cuomo, who pushed for the keno game to help close several budget gaps, used to liken it to bingo. Pataki administration officials say it is simply another lottery game, no different from Pick 10. Critics, though, say that the game's pace makes it more akin to casino-style gambling-- and more prone to pocket-draining abuse. But Mr. Fox and other newly minted keno players were not interested in moralizing. Although the game seemed to get off to a slow start in the morning, as several bars in Manhattan complained that the equipment did not work or was still not installed, those who played early said they liked Quick Draw precisely because of the promise of a quick reward. ``You don't have to wait,'' said Mr. Fox, a 46-year-old plumber who played a few games at his lunch break. ``It's right there in front of you: you are a winner or a loser.'' A small taste of the critics' fears played out at Handyman Hardware and Paint in the Oakwood Shopping Center on Staten Island, where three tables and a dozen chairs became a makeshift keno parlor. ``I came here a half an hour ago to buy milk and diapers,'' said Katherine Petersen, 37, a marine-insurance broker. ``I'm still here. It's addicting.'' ``I play the daily number, but you have to wait until 7:30 to know,'' she said. ``This is quicker--five minutes--it's like being in Atlantic City.'' ``I won a dollar,'' she said. ``I bet $7. I have no more money for the diapers and the milk. But I had fun.'' New York is the eighth state to offer keno, a game that Republicans and Democrats alike had opposed in Albany for years. But it was approved this year with apparent reluctance in the face of a nearly $5 billion deficit, as lawmakers scrambled to find money to prevent increases in college tuition or cuts in welfare and Medicaid. The game is expected to bring in $180 million in its first full year of operation. ``There was a line we were drawing in the sand, and we had to be more open, I should say, to new additional revenue sources,'' said Patricia Lynch, a spokeswoman for Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan Democrat who had been a staunch opponent of keno. ``That's the bottom line.'' Lawmakers, especially Democrats, were also courted aggressively by half a dozen lobbyists hired by the Gtech Corporation of West Greenwich, R.I., which runs the game on behalf of the lottery. The company will be paid 1.525 percent of the sales. Except for the pace and setting, Quick Draw is played like any other keno-style lottery game. A player picks 1 to 10 numbers from a field of 80, filling out a card that is fed into a lottery machine by the bartender or other employee. The player bets $1, $2, $3, $4, $5, or $10 each game and may play a maximum of 20 games or $100 on each card. But players can effectively bet whatever they like by simply filling out more than one card. Every five minutes, a central computer at the lottery's headquarters spits out 20 random numbers, which zip through phone lines and are displayed simultaneously on terminals around the state. Players win according to how many numbers they match and how much they bet: the highest prize for a $1 bet is $100,000, if the player bets on 10 numbers and matches all of them. If the player matches five numbers on that bet, he would be paid $2. Like any other lottery game, players can redeem prizes of up to $600 on site. For larger prizes, they must file a claims form and receive their winnings from the lottery department. The businesses that install keno games receive 6 percent of the total sales, with no extra commission for any winning tickets they sell. That percentage is less than what many establishments earn for food and drinks, but many bars and restaurants [[Page S 16832]] agreed to the game in the hope of attracting customers both to gamble and, they hope, to spend more on food and drink as well. But many bars have turned down Quick Draw, both because of worries it may not pay off financially and because they feel it essentially turns their establishments into betting parlors. ``I think it demeans my restaurant and bar,'' said Don Berger, owner of the Riverrun in TriBeCa. ``It smacks of Atlantic City, honky-tonk and we don't do that, I am not interested in that one bit.'' In Massachusetts, which has run a keno game for a year and a half, a debate has ignited over placing keno terminals in convenience stores--which critics say brings gambling into places where children can watch. In New York, the law was written to exclude most convenience stores by requiring outlets to have a minimum of 2,500 square feet. But the game is being installed in some liquor stores, supermarkets, pharmacies and other outlets that do meet the space requirements. It is too early to know whether any strong opposition to Quick Draw will emerge, but if the experience of other states is any guide, the game will probably be popular among those who play. ``People are going to gamble anyway, if not in New York, then in New Jersey,'' said Geno Gulli, a retired barber, as he placed a losing $2 bet in Keenan's bar on 231st Street and Broadway. The profits to the state, he said, were ``good for the state for a good cause.'' As he spoke, Bert Patel, a candy store owner, basked in the glow of a $10 win. ``I just got my beer money back,'' he said.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask that the attached article be printed in the Record. The article follows: [From the Christian Science Monitor, Feb. 17, 1994] Casino Gambling Surges in United States, Tempting More Teenagers (By David Holmstrom) A new gambling industry survey indicates that casino gambling has grown explosively in the United States. Four years ago, only two states--New Jersey and Nevada-- offered casino-style gambling. Now, 23 states offer the roll of dice and spinning roulette wheels. Another dozen states are considering legislation approving casinos. According to the survey by Harrah's Casinos and the polling firm Yankelovich Partners, the number of ``household'' visits to casinos has almost doubled since 1990. In 1993, the number of visits was 92 million, up from 46 million visits in 1990. (A ``household'' visit, as defined in the survey, averages out to 1\1/2\ persons from the same family.) Spokesman in the industry now define gambling as ``entertainment'' and refer to it as the ``new American pastime'' because the number of people visiting casinos last year outnumbered total attendance at major league baseball games. ``The experience we want guests to have at a casino is enjoyment in an atmosphere that is not intimidating but memorable,'' says Bala Subramanian, corporate director for marketing information and planning for the Memphis-based Promus Company, the parent company of Harrah's. Casino gambling, for years legal only in Nevada, has grown rapidly as states, cities, and Indian tribes have turned to gambling to try to generate economic development and jobs. Dozens of tribal reservations across the US now offer casino gambling, and riverboat casino gambling is legal in six states along the Mississippi. Estimated casino revenue for 1993 is $12.9 billion, up from $8.3 billion in 1990. The Harrah's survey compiled results from a questionnaire developed by Home Testing Institute on Long Island, N.Y., and mailed to 100,000 households. From that mailing, 18,600 casino players were identified. Their responses were then combined with responses from 2,500 adults in an annual national survey of American values and attitudes by Yankelovich Partners. Even though 51 percent of the adults in the survey said casino gambling is ``acceptable for anyone,'' the acceptance percentage declined by 4 percentage points from Harrah's 1992 survey. The 1993 survey attributes this decline to casino referendums in southern states that caused heated public debate about gambling. Critics of gambling say its rapid growth in the US has a dark side, particularly among youngsters and teenagers. ``Kids today have grown up in an atmosphere where gambling is promoted by the state, churches, and synagogues, and the availability of it is everywhere,'' says Tom Cummings, director of the Massachusetts Council on Compulsive Gambling. ``We are getting more and more calls from desperate high schools asking us to put on programs to help kids deal with gambling.'' A council study of the effects of illegal gambling on 3,000 students found that 32 percent of students who do not gamble said they felt their refusal to partake in it was not normal. ``There was tremendous peer pressure on them to gamble,'' Mr. Cummings says. In 1992, some 280,000 teenagers were denied entrance to Atlantic City casinos, and another 29,000 were led out of the casinos. Harrah's Casinos has implemented ``Project 21'' to keep underage gamblers out of casinos by stopping them at the doors or ejecting them once inside. A second program, ``Operation Bet Smart,'' includes posters around casino floors saying: ``Know when to stop before you start.'' Harrah's president, Phil Satre, told the National Press Club in Washington recently: ``Just like car manufacturers build safety devices into new automobiles, responsible casino operators must take action on the issue of problem gambling . . .. We are not in business to capitalize on compulsive behavior. We are in the business to entertain our customers.'' The problem is that gamblers lose money, Cummings says, ``and that is millions and millions of dollars diverted out of the mainstream economy. Somebody has to lose all that money.'' (At the request of Mr. Daschle, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the attached article be printed in the Record. [From the New York Times, Apr. 10, 1995] Gambling Fever (By William Safire) Harpers Ferry, W.Va--At the age of 14. I was standing on a landing in the stairwell at Joan of Arc Junior High School in Manhattan, watching a crap game, when I felt the heavy hand of a teacher on my shoulder. My protest that I didn't even have a bet down was unavailing; four of us, all seniors, were branded as gamblers. The shaming punishment: though permitted to be graduated, I was refused a place at commencement and denied a diploma. That was back when gambling was viewed as wrong: when bookies and numbers racketeers were considered the scum of society; and when a lust for something-for-nothing was looked upon as a weakness of character. Today, state-sponsored gambling is the national pastime. Nearly 100 million casino visitors, video gamblers and sports bettors wager close to a half-trillion dollars--with $40 billion going to the ``house.'' And today, aboriginal Americans are exploiting those of us who followed in neon casinos on their reservations. The tribes are becoming a nation of croupiers, in league with national gambling interests, while pretending ill-gotten profits are used primarily to educate their children. The ``gambling industry''--none of its pious proponents call it the gambling racket--is the source of the greatest sustained, bipartisan political hypocrisy of our time. Liberals, professing a horror of regressive taxation, turn a blind eye to the way state-sponsored gambling redistributes income upward, and how new casino permissions snatch welfare checks to fatten per-share earnings of casino stockholders. Conservatives, ostensibly upholders of public morality, approve government advertising campaigns to entice citizens to gamble in lotteries and play the ponies at off-track betting parlors. Gullible voters were sold this notion: since many people liked to gamble anyway, why not turn gambling's profits to public benefit? But the result is the gambling epidemic, with its associated money laundering by criminals, corruption of public officials and ``cannibalization'' of local economics. Thanks to the public blessing of gambling by government, the moral stigma was removed and the high roller has become a folk hero. The media cannot escape their share of the blame. From the hysterical hype of the Publishers Clearing House to the front-page and primetime publicity given sweeptakes winners (nobody covers the losers), we have glorified the pernicious philosophy of something-for-nothing. Nothing is for nothing. Crime always goes hand-in-hand with gambling. Here in the relatively poor state of West Virginia, a former governor confessed to taking bribes from racetrack operators and a lottery director was jailed for rigging a video lottery contract. Disgusted, church groups recently leaned on legislators to reject riverboat gambling, and the pols suddenly realized that a pro-casino vote could be a loser. Now the media are at last awakening. Gee-Whiz stories touting the craze are out and hard reporting of the spreading addiction is in. The Economist cast into doubt the claim that gambling salvages local economies. USA Today headlined: ``Nation raising `a generation of gamblers,' '' focusing on the ring corrupting schools in suburban Nutley, N.J. The best reporting was in Sports Illustrated's detailed expose of the gambling addiction rampant in the nation's colleges. But television news is still gambling's friend. With young gamblers relying heavily [[Page S 16675]] on the sports ticker that runs at the bottom of CNN's Headline News, that network has a special responsibility to show how the lives of many students are being ruined by the compulsion its ticker helps feed. A ``Gambling is for suckers'' crawl among the scores would do for starters. Will the pols sense the coming voter revulsion at the ``painless'' revenue source that failed? Representative Frank Wolf of Virginia has introduced a bill to establish a ``National Gambling Impact and Policy Commission''; let's see if the casino lobby can buy the votes to avert scrutiny and resigmatizing. The yen to gamble is a personal weakness, but state- sponsored gambling is a banana-republic abomination that undermines national values. My gratitude goes to that tough teacher at Joan of Arc who stopped me before I started.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am pleased to support passage of legislation to encourage regulatory common sense. Senators Pressler, Harkin, and others joined me in introducing the Senate version of the Edible Oil Regulatory Reform At (S. 679) on April 5. I am pleased that the House approved its version of this bill (H.R. 436) on October 10, and urge my colleagues to support Senate passage. This legislation will correct two problems: First, the regulation of edible oils in a manner similar to toxic oils like petroleum, and second, the requirement that Certifications of financial Responsibility [COFR] accompanying vessels carrying edible oils equal those of vessels carrying toxic oils. This bill is similar to legislation which passed Congress last year, but was not given final approval. In response to the Exxon Valdez oil-spill in 1990, Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which requires several Federal agencies to enhance regulatory activities with regard to the shipping and handling of hazardous oils. In 1993, the Transportation Department proposed regulations to guard against oil spills, and require response plans if spills did occur. DOT proposed to treat vegetable oils--that is, salad oils--in the same way as petroleum. Among other things, salad oils would have been officially declared hazardous materials, with all the regulatory requirements and extra costs which that designation entails. This was a classic example of regulatory overreaching. Vegetable oil, of course, is different from petroleum. Vegetable oil processors thought it entirely appropriate that they undertake response plans to guard against major spills. The industry did not argue that they should be example from regulation. The industry argue that regulators should take into account obvious differences--in toxicity, biodegradability, environmental persistence and other factors--between vegetable oils on the one hand, and toxic petroleum oils on the other. Secretary Pena eventually agreed with us and prompted modification of DOT's position. However, he does not have jurisdiction over all agencies with a role in regulating oil spills. More recently, the industry has been working with other agencies which have a role in regulating oils and ensuring adequate financial responsibility in the event of a spill. No one is any longer proposing to call salad dressing or mayonnaise hazardous material, but agencies are requiring that spill response plans for vegetable oils be quite similar to those for petroleum. The most recent problem arose in December, 1994, when Coast Guard regulations subjected vessels carrying vegetable oil to the same standard of liability and financial responsibility as supertankers carrying petroleum. On December 28, 1994, the Coast Guard began requiring the same standard--a $1,200 per gross ton or $10 million of financial responsibility--on vessels carrying vegetable oil and petroleum oil in U.S. waters or calling at U.S. ports. On July 1, similar standards were phased in on barges operating on U.S. navigable waterways. Prior to December 28, a COFR requirement of $150 per gross ton applied to all vessels regardless of the hazardous nature or toxicity of the cargo. The vegetable oil industry does not seek a return to this earlier standard, but seeks regulation under a $600 per gross ton COFR requirement that Coast Guard regulations apply to vessels carrying other commodities. It is worth noting that this new financial responsibility standard for edible oil would be four times the COFR required on toxic petroleum oils prior to December 28, 1994. Application of the most stringent standard to vessels carrying vegetable oil adds to the cost of transporting U.S. vegetable oil to foreign markets. The additional costs of these burdensome regulations are passed back to farmers in reduced prices for commodities. Consumers may also bear a burden in higher food prices. In addition, there have been instances in 1995 where this unjustified additional cost has made U.S. vegetable oil uncompetitive and has resulted in lost exports. H.R. 436 would not exempt vegetable oil shipments from COFR requirements or regulation. It would only apply a more appropriate standard of financial responsibility to vegetable oil, similar to that applied to vessels carrying other commodities. The scientific data collected to date indicate that the animal fats and vegetable oils industry has an excellent spill history justifying differentiation of these edible materials from toxic oils. Specifically, these products account for less than one half of one percent of all oil spills in the U.S. In addition, most spills of these products are less than 1,000 gallons. The industry seeks a separate category for vegetable oils. This is as much because of scientific differences in the oils as it is for economic reasons. There is no reason why non-toxic vegetable oils must be in the same category as toxic oils. Second, the industry seeks response requirements that recognize the different characteristics of animal fats and vegetable oils within this separate category. A separate category without separate response requirements reflecting different toxicity and biodegradability is nothing more than a hollow gesture. The Senate and House of Representatives last year passed virtually identical legislation on different legislative vehicles to ensure that both of these objectives are accomplished. Under H.R. 436, the underlying principles of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 would remain unchanged with the language to require differentiation of animal fats and vegetable oils from other oils. The House approved this language twice last year as part of H.R. 4422 and H.R. 4852. The Senate passed the bill as S. 2559. Since final action on this legislation was not completed in the last Congress, it is before the Senate again. This bill does not tell the Coast Guard or any other agency what it must put into regulations. The legislation simply says that in rulemaking under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, these agencies must differentiate between vegetable oils and animal fats on one hand, and other oils including petroleum on the other. The bill specifies that the agencies should consider differences in the physical, chemical, biological or other properties and the effects on human health and the environment effects of these oils. This bill does not exempt vegetable oils from the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. It is a modest effort to encourage common sense in an area of regulation that has not always been marked by that characteristic. I hope my colleagues will support the legislation.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the attached article be printed in the Congressional Record at the appropriate place. The article follows: [From the Washington Post, Sept. 22, 1995] Social Roulette The spread of legalized gambling is the political issue that has yet to roar, but may do so soon--and should. In a decade, casino gambling has spread from two states to at least 35. Gambling is done on riverboats, on Indian reservations, in well-established downtowns. Native American tribes (including some that have rediscovered their existence for the primary purpose of setting up casinos) are the best publicized entrepreneurs in this field, partly because they can operate free of many regulations. Estimates on how much money is involved here are all over the lot, depending on what sorts of gambling are counted in, but a study by U.S. News & World Report concluded that counting state lotteries and the like, $330 billion was wagered legally in 1992, up 1,800 percent since 1976. Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), along with Sens. Paul Simon (D- Ill.) and Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), thinks the country ought to take a long look as it hurtles toward turning itself into one gigantic open town. They have introduced useful bills to create a national commission that would undertake, as Mr. Wolf puts it, ``an objective, credible and factual study of the effects of gambling'' on communities, including its impact on crime rates, political corruption and family life, and also to examine its economic costs and benefits. Those pushing casinos into communities make large claims about their economic benefits, but the jobs and investment casinos create are rarely stacked up against the jobs lost and the investment and spending forgone in other parts of a local economy. The Commission's study could be of great use to communities pondering whether to wager their futures on roulette, slot machines and blackjack. The Wolf bill wants a report from the commission in three years; the Simon-Lugar bill wants it in half that time. We're inclined to think the quicker the better. The ``gaming industry,'' as it calls itself, is fighting these proposals. One hopes that at next week's House Judiciary Committee hearing on the Wolf bill, gambling's representatives will be asked why they fear a national commission. If all their claims about gambling's beneficial effects are true, a commission would presumably verify them. If critics of gambling are wrong in seeing it as being linked to crime, corruption and social breakdown, the commission would presumably find that out too. Could it be that those with an interest in the spread of gambling fear what a fair study will find? True to form, gambling now has its own trade association, and gambling interests--tribal and others--have stepped up their campaign contributions to both parties. To pick a few examples: Golden Nugget, the well-known Las Vegas casino, gave $230,000 in ``soft money'' to the Republican Party last year; Frank Fertitta Jr., chairman of Station Casinos Inc., also gave $230,000 to the GOP; the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe gave $365,000 to the Democrats in the 1993-94 election cycle and covered its bets with $100,000 to the Republicans in November of 1994. The country is in the presence of a powerful and growing industry and an important social phenomenon. At the least, the federal government should help the country figure out what is going on, which is why what Mr. Wolf, Mr. Lugar and Mr. Simon are doing is so important.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. I would like to proceed in morning business, Mr. President.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with.

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

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the attached article be printed in the Record. The article follows: [From the Washington Post, Aug. 6, 1995] Casinos Not a Sure Bet, Other States Discover--Analysts Say Area Officials Could Learn From Successes and Failures Elsewhere (By Charles Babington) Anchored on the Mississippi River near downtown New Orleans are two massive, double-decker casino boats with the evocative names Crescent City Queen and Grand Palais. There's nothing grand about them now, however. Both boats closed their doors last month, barely nine weeks after opening amid much hoopla and hope. The closings, forced by lower-than-expected revenue, left 1,800 people jobless and the City of New Orleans jockeying with other creditors to collect $3 million in unpaid taxes and fees. The turn of events has been sobering--even on Bourbon Street--and may give pause to officials in Maryland, Virginia, the District and elsewhere who are contemplating legalizing casinos. Although some southern and midwestern towns are content with their riverboat revenue, others are finding that the reality does not always match the promise. That's especially true in New Orleans, a city that bears watching by the likes of Baltimore and Washington, according to several analysts. Aside from the loss of the two riverboat casinos, New Orleans's ambitious land-based casino has needed only a third of its projected revenue since opening in May. The picture is brighter in the Midwest. One reason, however, is that lawmakers quickly [[Page S 16513]] relaxed regulations that had made casinos politically palatable in the first place. In Davenport, Iowa, a riverboat casino netted $14 million last year after legislators increased its operating hours and dropped a rule that had limited each gambler's loss to $200 a visit. Those changes lured thousands of gamblers from a nearby casino boat in Rock Island, Ill. As a result, more than 200 people lost jobs there, and Rock Island now receives only a fraction of the $4 million in casino tax revenue that it got two years ago. In Missouri, six riverboat casinos poured $79 million into state and local tax coffers last year. Again, looser regulations helped. Slot machines--initially banned in Missouri--were added to the table games. A political cloud is looming, however. Missouri's attorney general alleges that the state House speaker broke the law by accepting thousands of dollars from casino companies and trying to influence licensing decisions. A grand jury is investigating. Against this national backdrop, Maryland is preparing for a legislative decision on casinos this winter, a D.C. group has asked the elections board to place a casino initiative on the District's 1996 ballot, and an industry-backed coalition is still pushing for riverboat casinos in Virginia after three consecutive legislative setbacks. Industry analysis conclude that under the right circumstances, casinos can boost local economies and government coffers, sometimes dramatically. But they say casinos are not a panacea for politicians hoping to revitalize a failing city or finance a state government while cutting taxes. ``Although casinos are spreading to more states, they have limited potential as a source of tax revenue,'' said Steven D. Gold, director of the Center for the Study of the States, in Albany, N.Y. Casinos take some money that otherwise would be spent on state lotteries or taxable goods and services, he said. Moreover, the growing number of casinos nationwide will result in smaller potential for new ones. ``There will never be another Nevada,'' Gold wrote recently. Nor, experts say, will there be another Atlantic City, where a dozen large casinos attract bus loads of betters to an otherwise blighted town. Since 1990, six midwestern and southern states have legalized commercial, non-Indian casinos. (Federally recognized Indian tribes can operate casinos without state approval or tax assessments, and the casinos are highly successful in Connecticut and elsewhere.) The six states are the guinea pigs now being scrutinized by cities and states trying to decide whether casinos are a good public bet. Among the groups conducting inquires are a government-appointed task force in Maryland and the Greater Washington Board of Trade. Casino companies are keen on the Washington area because it would help them crack the untapped mid-Atlantic region. In Maryland, proposals range from a few small casinos, possibly at horse-racing tracks or in mountain counties, to large betting palaces in downtown Baltimore and the Port- America site in Prince George's County, near the Woodrow Wilson Bridge. If Baltimore and the D.C. suburbs are the ultimate targets, several analysis say, then New Orleans might be the most analogous site for scrutiny. Like Baltimore and the District, it is a city with a well established tourist trade but serious problems of crime and middle-class flight. In 1991 and 1992, when Louisiana legislators approved 15 floating casinos throughout the state and one large land- based casino in New Orleans, boosters said gambling would be a sure-fire winner. In the last four months, however, three of New Orlean's five floating casinos have closed, eliminating the jobs of hundreds of people who thought the boats would bring them a better life. Meanwhile, Harrah's temporary land-based casino has earned about $12 million a month, far short of the $33 million that was projected. The company is building a mammoth, permanent casino that officials hope will draw more gamblers when it opens next summer in the heart of the touristy French Quarter. Some critics say the setbacks are the inevitable result of Louisiana's greed and haste in approving casinos, a process that enriched several friends of the high-stakes gambling governor, Edwin Edwards. ``It's the same scam going on worldwide'', said New Orleans lawyer C.B. Forgotson, Jr. Forgotson said casino companies promise the moon without conducting realistic studies of who will come to gamble. Eventually, he said, ``they find out the only people coming to casinos are locals. So then you are cannibalizing your local businesses. . . . The same thing is going to happen in Detroit and Baltimore.'' Other analysts, however, say New Orleans is temporarily suffering from foolish decisions that other states can avoid. ``The root of the problem is that the wrong people were licensed, and they were licensed for political reasons,'' said Larry Pearson, publisher of the New Orleans-based Riverboat Gaming Report. He noted that river boat casinos in other parts of Louisiana are doing well. Only a few states have been willing to try a non-Indian, land-based casino. In Mississippi and the four midwestern states with casinos, the facilities must be on boats, even though some never leave the dock. Many analysis say ``riverboat gambling'' is a political ploy to ease the worries of some voters who associate land- based casinos with Las Vega's tackiness and Atlantic City's grit. ``State legislators think that a little cruise with a paddle wheel somehow makes it not gambling,'' said Brian Ford, a Philadelphia-based casino adviser for the accounting firm Ernst & Young. Some analysts argue that if Washington and Baltimore want casinos, they should build big Vegas-like facilities that could lure tourists and large conventions. ``Scattering some riverboats around the Washington- Baltimore area would be a disaster,'' said Hunter Barrier, director of the Alexandria-based Gaming and Economic Development Institute. Most tourists would ignore such facilities, he said, ``so revenues will come from local residents. And that money would come from restaurants, theaters and other local businesses.'' It is just that scenario that has prompted Maryland's restaurant and thoroughbred racing industries to unite against casinos. They say casinos typically support bettors with cheap food and a fast-paced array of slot machines and card game that make horse races seem poky. ``Casinos would have a devastating impact on our industry,'' said Marcia Harris, of the Restaurant Association of Maryland. Despite opposition to casinos from racing and restaurant interests, politicians in Maryland and elsewhere are tempted for a simple reason. Tax rates on casino earnings are typically about 20 percent, four times the level of Maryland's 5 percent sales tax. If a resident spends $100 in a casino rather than in a clothing store, the store suffers, but the state receives $20 rather than $5. Barrier said most governments that are contemplating casinos focus on three concerns: crime, compulsive gambling and ``product substitution,'' or the losses to non-casino businesses when their customers gamble. ``I've come to the conclusion that crime is not a problem,'' Barrier said, an opinion supported by several studies and interviews with police officials in towns with riverboat casinos. But problem gambling, he said, is ``something that has to be looked at real carefully.'' Problem gambling is hard to measure, authorities say, and casino supporters note that most Americans already have ample opportunities to bet on lotteries and other ventures. However, a 1994 study of legalized gambling, funded by the Aspen Institute, a D.C. think tank, and the Ford Foundation, concluded: ``There is a direct increase in the numbers of people with pathological gambling problems as a result of increases in legalization.'' As for product substitution, a debate rages. Casino supporters say everyone in a community benefits if casinos hire new workers, attract tourist dollars and contribute to higher tax revenue. There's not much hard data on the subject. In South Dakota, where Indian casinos operate, a 1991 state study found no appreciable drop in overall taxable retail sales. However, there were ``significant declines for selected activities such as clothing stores, recreation services, business services, auto dealers and service stations.'' When casinos open, ``existing vendors lose,'' said Jeff Finkle, executive director of the Washington-based National Council of Urban Economic Development. Nonetheless, he predicts that Maryland and Virginia officials will find it hard to withstand the lure of casino revenue, especially if Pennsylvania, West Virginia or Delaware threaten to strike first. ``Somebody in this area is going to do it,'' Finkle told a Greater Washington Board of Trade task force last week. ``It is inevitable, and when it happens it will hurt D.C.'' unless a revenue-sharing agreement is reached.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation today to establish an Everglades restoration fund. The Everglades restoration fund would be financed by a 2-cent-per-pound assessment on all cane sugar produced in the Everglades agricultural area, Florida. It is estimated that a 2-cents-per-pound assessment would produce revenues of $70 million per year or approximately $350 million over a 5-year period. These funds will be used for land acquisition in the Everglades agricultural area. An Everglades restoration plan has been devised in cooperation with the Corps of Engineers and the South Florida Water Management District. This plan calls for 131,000 acres of land within the southern Everglades agricultural area to be acquired at an estimated cost of $355 million, assuming an acre cost of $2,700 per acre. I believe this plan is fair to Florida sugar producers. Because of the Federal sugar program, sugar prices in Florida are higher than they otherwise would be. The sugar growers in the Everglades agricultural area are also beneficiaries of federally subsidized water projects which created agricultural lands in the Everglades agricultural area and which pump waters in and out of these lands as needed for sugar production. It is reasonable for these beneficiaries to help restore the unique ecosystem that these projects have degraded. I am aware of the fact that the State of Florida has enacted the Everglades Forever Act, which imposes a tax of $25 to $35 per acre over 20 years to raise a total of $322 million to improve water quality. Sugar producers have also agreed to take other steps designed to improve water quality. These steps include compliance with phosphorous discharge standards and the creation of stormwater treatment areas to help filter phosphorous discharges and for other purposes. However, these measures are primarily related to improving water quality in the Everglades. My proposal is designed to restore the ecosystem to a natural condition with regard to water flows. No more important or complex ecosystem in need of restoration exists in our Nation than the Everglades in south Florida. It is a troubled system, on the brink of collapse, largely caused by federally supported drainage construction designed to promote and protect agriculture. This problem is exacerbated by the Federal sugar program. Failure to act will doom the Everglades to accelerated deterioration, a tragic and totally unacceptable fate. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this bill to restore the Everglades and to bring assurances to homeowners in Florida, to bring assurances to those who fear the end of the coral in the Keys, who are disturbed by the algae in the Florida Bay, and who, in fact, appreciate that a fine balance is created here between benefits given to the sugar producers and an assessment that will make all the difference in the restoration of the Everglades. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join Senators Dole, Grassley, and Craig today in introducing the Agricultural Resources Enhancement Act of 1995, which is our blueprint for the conservation title of the new farm bill. This legislation builds on agriculture's environmental successes over the past decade while also adding new flexibility for our farmers and ranchers as they enter the 21st century. In May I advanced several concepts to improve the Conservation Reserve Program, our conservation land retirement initiative. I also introduced the new Environmental Quality Incentives Program, which I am proud to note was included in the budget reconciliation bill approved by the Senate last week. Meanwhile, Senators Dole, Grassley, and Craig developed several concepts for the CRP and for the conservation compliance and swampbuster programs. The bill we are introducing today combines the best of our recommendations into a single strategy that will protect both the environment and the property rights of our Nation's agricultural producers. Our proposal improves the CRP by adding a new water quality emphasis and by targeting the program to the highly erodible land most in need of protection. There is land now in the CRP that can be brought back into production without harming the environment. At the same time, there is also valuable acreage not now in the reserve that deserves long-term protection. This legislation accomplishes both goals. This bill also makes much needed changes to the swampbuster compliance program, including an exemption for frequently cropped farmland. In the conservation compliance program, farmers would gain significant new flexibility to adopt soil-saving techniques. Our goal is to make both programs effective in preserving valuable resources and workable in the field. Finally, our legislation includes unprecedented provisions to improve wildlife habitat on agricultural lands. Frequently cropped wetlands would be eligible for the CRP. Habitat potential will be considered in evaluating offers to enroll land in the CRP and the Wetlands Reserve Program. Expiring water bank acres would be eligible for the WRP. And the Secretary is encouraged to maximize wildlife habitat benefits from all our conservation programs. My cosponsors and I represent a broad range of agricultural interests and have diverse regional backgrounds. As such, I am optimistic the provisions we have included in our bill will be embraced by a majority in the the Agriculture Committee and in the Senate as a whole. I look forward to working with all my colleagues in developing a new farm bill with provisions as meaningful for the environment as those in the landmark farm bill we passed a decade ago. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR

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

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until the hour of 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, November 2; that following the prayer, the Journal of proceedings be deemed approved to date, no resolutions come over under the rule, the call of the calendar be dispensed with, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and there then be a period for the transaction of morning business until 12 noon, with Senators permitted to speak up to 5 minutes each, with the following exceptions: Senator Murkowski is designated for 20 minutes; Senator Bingaman for 20 minutes; Senator Hatch for 15 minutes; Senator Daschle, or his designee, for 30 minutes; Senator Thomas for 30 minutes; Senator McConnell for 10 minutes and Senator Rockefeller for 10 minutes.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, at approximately 12 noon on Thursday, it will be the intention of the majority leader to turn to consideration of S. 1372, regarding the Social Security earnings limit. Also, the majority leader has indicated the Senate may consider the legislative branch appropriations bill during Thursday's session of the Senate.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that H.R. 2492, the legislative branch appropriations bill, be placed on the calendar when received from the House.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to; that the preamble be agreed to; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the resolution appear at the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Senate Resolution 191, submitted earlier today by Senator McCain.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that calendar No. 183, Senate Resolution 168, be indefinitely postponed.