Bill Nelson

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I am proud to come to the floor of the Senate and join in solemn tribute to the millions of American men and women who have protected our freedom over the long history of our Republic. Every American knows it is part of our national character to pay tribute to the service of those who have worn the uniform of our Armed Forces to defend our way of life. As a nation, we have dedicated this day to reflect upon the service and sacrifice of the many generations of Americans who have delivered and preserved for us a nation free and strong. This Veterans Day is even more solemn and thoughtful for all Americans for we are a nation at war. Americans are fully aware that hundreds of thousands of their neighbors, son and daughters, husbands and wives, fathers and mothers are in harms way around the globe. Americans are fully aware that over four hundred service members have lost and continue to risk their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan while over 2,400 more have been wounded or injured. All Americans share the pain and sense of loss for those killed and those suffering from wounds. And Americans recognize and are ready for the many sacrifices that lie ahead. We are a resolute people determined to defend our liberty and bring peace and justice to a dangerous world. This determination is evident throughout our Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard. I saw it myself when I visited soldiers of the Florida National Guard's 124th Infantry in Baghdad last summer. They are tough, well- trained, devoted citizen soldiers demonstrating their professionalism every day on the dangerous streets of a city that still quakes with war. These great soldiers are worthy of their legacy; they are worthy of our admiration and gratitude. We must be worthy of them and keep the Nation's promises to them-our promise to attend to their welfare and the welfare of their families. As Abraham Lincoln instructed us, ours is an obligation to, ``to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and for his orphan.'' Too often we fall short on this care. We must meet this obligation with the same sense of determination and honor as our veterans' service is always rendered. We have underfunded our veterans health care system and the backlog of claims remains unacceptably high. This is not right. We have partially eliminated the disabled veterans tax, or Concurrent Receipt, but only for one-third of those entitled to both their retired pay and disability compensation. We have created among our retired veterans the ``haves'' and ``have-nots'' and this is simply not right. They are all worthy and deserve to have what they have been promised now without delay. We have done nothing to improve our systems for caring for the survivors of veterans or retirees, especially those that were 100 percent disabled. The Department of Defense Survivor Benefits Plan remains uncorrected for offsets based on benefits from Social Security and Dependency and Indemnity Compensation--reductions in income in amounts and at times that widows often can least afford. We, the Congress, must keep trying to do the right thing by these our greatest Americans. The Nation continues to be truly blessed that our youth, our future generations, take inspiration from the devotion and sacrifice of those who have answered the Nation's call to arms in the past and those who defend us around a very dangerous world today. Today we are reminded of where we have been as a nation, and upon whose sacrifice we have become what we are. Let us rededicate ourselves to freedom and justice and peace--and the sacrifice of those men and women whose service will deliver and preserve them for America and our friends around the world. For this we are a stronger people, a stronger nation, and a stronger community. Let us pray for the safety of our men and women in uniform past and present, and let us pray for the comfort of their loved ones.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, in the minute I have remaining, I wish to say that, of course, the junior Senator from Florida was sad to hear the announcement of the senior Senator from Florida announcing his retirement. Senator Bob Graham is one of the most distinguished public servants who has ever come out of the State of Florida: a two-term Governor, a former State legislator, and now a many-term Senator who has given great leadership to our State. I will have more to say about this later, but I am proud to stand to thank my friend for his years and years--a lifetime--of public service for the United States and the people of Florida. I thank the Chair.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, most companies are required to adopt rules to ensure the proper disposal of a consumer's private financial records. I learned last year, before comprehensive privacy regulations took effect, that some companies do not have protocols in place outlining the proper way to dispose of private consumer information when it is no longer needed. Last year, thousands of files containing sensitive customer records were discarded in a dumpster. If the wrong person came across these files, he or she would have had everything necessary to commit numerous crimes, including identity theft. Since this incident, the company has acted to correct its privacy policies and the Federal Trade Commission issued its safeguards rule. The rule applies to credit reporting agencies and financial institutions that maintain consumer records and also contains guidance for businesses, which includes the storage and proper disposal of records. Although check-cashing businesses, ATM operators, real estate appraisers, and even couriers are covered by the safeguards rule, rental property companies that assess the creditworthiness of tenants and businesses that maintain consumer accounts, such as cell phone companies and utilities, are not covered by the rule. Improper disposal of a credit report could compromise driver's license information, Social Security numbers, employment history and even bank account numbers. My amendment will close the loophole and further protect credit information by requiring the Federal Trade Commission to issue regulations regarding the proper disposal of consumer credit information.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise to support the amendment of the Senator from California and to point out that I think the committee has done a very good job on the underlying bill. They address the question of medical privacy in the bill where a big holding company might have a subsidiary company, such as an insurance company, and an individual, when they get a life insurance policy, will have to get a doctor's examination, so that in the bosom of that health insurance company would be medical records. That health insurance company may be owned by a bank. What the underlying bill does is protect against someone having their personally identifiable medical information shared throughout that holding company and shared with those who would want to market that personally identifiable medical information. However, the underlying bill does not protect on the personally identifiable financial information, so that one part of a holding company could have personally identifiable financial information such as how much you take out of your ATM, what kind of purchases you make on your credit card, what time of day or what time of the week you go and make deposits in your ATM or take out from your ATM. Those things that are personally identifiable ought to be private unless the individual consumer says they are willing to have that information shared among the holding companies. That is one of the things the amendment of the Senator from California addresses which, if we are going to take privacy seriously, we need to address. That is why I support the amendment of the Senator from California. I yield the floor.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, how much time remains?

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, I wish to follow the comments of the Senator from North Dakota about jobs going overseas and point out another vulnerability we have as a result of dependence overseas, and that is our dependence on foreign oil. Today, we are importing over half of our daily consumption of oil. That is moving toward 60 percent of our daily consumption of oil that is coming from foreign shores. As a result, not only does that put us in a precarious economic position, but it puts us in a precarious defense position. Look at the difference in how we would be able to operate in the Middle East, in the Persian Gulf region, if we did not have the delivery of that oil. Look at the potential strike of a terrorist taking down a supertanker in the 19-mile-wide Strait of Hormuz and what that would do to the world economy if that oil could not flow out to the industrialized world. Yet what do we do about an energy policy here? The Senator from North Dakota and I tried to do a simple little thing such as get increased mileage for SUVs phased in over the next decade, and we only got some votes--in the thirties out of 100 Senators--to do that. When we try to look down the road at alternative ways, where is most of our energy consumed? It is consumed in the transportation sector. In transportation, where is most of our energy consumed in this country? It is in our personal vehicles. Today, we have vehicles made by Honda and Toyota that are getting in excess of 50 miles per gallon; they are called hybrid vehicles. It is a computer that runs between an electric motor and a gasoline engine, and they get over 50 miles per gallon. They cannot make enough of these for the demand of the American consumer. Yet we do not have a lot of these hybrid cars that are offered to the public. What are we doing for the future? We could wean ourselves from dependence on foreign oil if we started a crash course to develop a hydrogen engine that was cheap enough and efficient enough for the American people. Years ago, in the early sixties, when this Nation made up its mind, after the President declared we were going to develop the technology and the American ingenuity to go to the Moon and return safely within that decade, don't you think that with that kind of perseverance and will, we could have ended up with an engine that would have been an alternative to oil and we would have started to wean ourselves from our dependence on this foreign oil that leaves this country all the more vulnerable defensewise? Indeed, we could, but it takes leadership. It takes the will of the American people to say there is going to be a different way. I have discussed this issue in terms of defense. I have discussed this issue in terms of economic vitality as well as defensewise, and certainly environmentally it would make a significant difference as well.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I have come to the floor today to speak about important language included in this year's veterans benefits bill that must be included in the final conference report. This language addresses a situation that I feel demands our immediate attention--the protection of our veterans and their benefits from the predatory lending practices of some unscrupulous businesses. Mr. President, over a year ago, a group of disabled veterans in Florida brought to my attention the issue of benefits buy-out schemes that target our most vulnerable disabled veterans. These scams offer to advance to a veteran a lump-sum amount of money for access to the veterans' future disability compensation often at outrageous interest rates of 30 percent or more. I thank the Veterans Affairs Committee and the distinguished chairman, Arlen Specter, and the ranking member, Senator Bob Graham, for their leadership in support of this effort. These Senators and their staffs have worked tirelessly to craft this language in a manner that will stop these scams without adversely affecting a veterans' ability to use credit. I respectfully request that the distinguished ranking member continue this effort and support this language during conference in the interest of our veterans and the protection of their benefits and pensions.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I would like to thank the distinguished ranking member for his efforts and I look forward to the final conference report on the veterans benefits bill. Mr. President, I wish to speak about important language included in this year's veterans benefits bill that must be included in the final conference report. This language addresses a situation that I feel demands our immediate attention--the protection of our veterans and their benefits from the predatory lending practices of some unscrupulous businesses. Over a year ago, a group of disabled veterans in Florida brought to my attention the issue of benefits buy-out schemes that target our most vulnerable disabled veterans. These scams offer to advance to a veteran a lump sum amount of money for access to the veterans' future disability compensation, often at outrageous interest rates of 30 percent or more. In order to avoid Federal laws prohibiting veterans from assigning their benefits to another party, these scams require the veteran to open a joint account from which the lending company automatically withdraws the veterans benefits. We can all agree that a law preventing veterans from assigning their benefits to another individual should also bar this type of an arrangement--where money is directly withdrawn before the veteran can access their benefits or pension. Last May the National Consumer Law Center, NCLC, released a report about financial and commercial scams directed at our military, veterans and their families--this report included an examination of these veterans benefits buy-out schemes. The NCLC concluded that lump sum pension schemes are illegal under a variety of Federal and State truth in lending, usury or consumer laws, and that remedies exist, but require burdensome and costly court action on the part of the veteran. I was not surprised to see that they agree with my findings that the assignment of veterans benefits is indeed illegal under current law. But they also agree that due to a lack of clarity in the law and, therefore, the absence of any enforcement efforts, veterans are left open to unscrupulous exploitation and the loss of their benefits. The analysis and conclusion in the report by the National Consumer Law Center have removed any doubt about the risk to our disabled veterans and the need for congressional action. I want to make it abundantly clear that we are not trying to deny veterans access to normal credit systems: credit cards, personal loans, or home loans. We are trying to ensure that loans made to veterans are not out of the reach of State usury laws, which protect all types of consumers. Greater protection is needed for our most vulnerable veterans--the disabled and the elderly. They are among the most needy and, once ensnared by these schemes, intimidated and threatened with lawsuits. As you know, I introduced similar legislation last year, cosponsored by Senator McCain and others that would tighten our laws and better protect our veterans from these schemes. Although we adopted this legislation in the Senate as part of last year's veterans benefits bill, the House conferees would not agree to include it in the conference report. This year, we must ensure that the conference report includes this language and that we are doing all we can to protect veterans from these unscrupulous and predatory practices. I thank the Veterans Affairs Committee and for Senator Specter's and Senator Graham's leadership in support of this effort. I respectfully request that they continue this effort and fight for this language during conference in the interest of our veterans and their benefits.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, would the Senator from Florida be willing to engage me in a colloquy?

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, thank you. And in 6 short minutes I want to give you my observations of why this is an extremely critical piece of legislation to the future of Planet Earth. I bring back to my mind's eye a picture that is embedded in my memory, looking out the window of our spacecraft 17 years ago back at Planet Earth. It is such a beautiful creation, suspended in the middle of nothing. It is a blue and white ball--blue from the oceans and white from the clouds--suspended in the middle of this black backdrop of space that goes on and on for billions of light years--an airless vacuum. And there, suspended in the midst of it is life. It is our home. When you look at the rim of the Earth from space, you see a thin little film, and that is the atmosphere that sustains all of life. From space, the Earth looks so beautiful and yet it looks so fragile. From that experience of 17 years ago, it made me want to be all the more a better steward of this planet, particularly when, with the naked eye, from that altitude I could actually see, for example, coming across South America--with the color contrast--the destruction of the rain forest in the upper Amazon region and, from the same window of the spacecraft, see the results of that destruction. Looking to the east, to the mouth of the Amazon River, I could see the silt that discolored the waters of the Atlantic for hundreds of miles. I give you that backdrop purely as an intro to tell you that when we face a major change in climate, it is going to have devastating effects on the very delicate ecological balance that we have on this Earth. Clearly, one of the places that would be most devastated would be my own State of Florida, which has more coastline than any other State. The rising of the temperatures would cause the rising of the oceans. The scientific community, that has been fairly unanimous on this-- despite what you hear in this debate, that there is this disagreement in the scientific community--it is overwhelming in the scientific community that what is going to happen is that the oceans are going to rise. Can you imagine what that is going to do to a place such as my State of Florida, where most of the development in the State is along the coastline? With the rise of the temperatures, that means the storms are going to be more ferocious and frequent. Florida is this land we know as paradise, that is a peninsula that sticks down in the middle of something we know as ``Hurricane Highway.'' The storms are going to become more ferocious and frequent, and the plagues are going to be more intense. If that is not enough for passing this legislation and blunting the critics of this legislation--you would think that argument would stand on its own, but there is even more. And I must say, I was delighted, in the hearing we had in our Commerce Committee on this issue, to see, for the first time, some American insurance companies step up and say this is going to be a problem. In the past, European companies have stepped up. But now subsidiaries of those companies, doing business in America, are acknowledging the same thing, that it will have devastating effects upon our business climate here in this country. For example, the reinsurance company, Swiss Re--this is their quote from our Commerce Committee hearing: Swiss Re believes the best way to lessen potential loss is through sound public policy, utilizing market mechanisms which strike the right balance between environmental precaution and societal policy objectives. Because the person testifying for Swiss Re said, ``Climate change driven natural disasters are forecasted to cost the world's financial centers as much as $150 billion per year over the next 10 years,'' that should be sufficient reason for us to stop putting our heads in the sand and saying global warming is not a problem. We know it is a problem environmentally. Now we have to recognize that it is going to be a major problem with regard to American business and all of the investments we have, particularly since so much of our urbanized area is along the coast of the United States. So, Mr. President, I wanted, as one voice, who strongly supports the McCain-Lieberman legislation, to speak in favor of it.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to urge passage of a resolution sponsored by Senator Graham and myself commending the Florida Marlins for winning the 2003 World Series. In their 10th anniversary season the Marlins have once again reached the pinnacle of baseball. They provided us with a magical season many in Florida and elsewhere won't soon forget. They started the season with little fanfare and low expectations, and they struggled at first with a losing record. And just when things seemed as if they couldn't get any worse, they lost their manager. For many the Marlins' early misfortunes signaled another losing season. But on May 23, the team began a magical run that culminated in a World Series title over the storied New York Yankees. During this remarkable stretch, they compiled the best record in baseball, earned a wild-card playoff spot, upset the heavily favored San Francisco Giants in the Division series, shocked the Chicago Cubs by rebounding from a three-games-to- one deficit to win the National League Championship and became the first opposing team to capture a World Series title in Yankee Stadium in 22 years. During their season, and especially the playoffs, the Marlins confidently believed in their abilities and their play made believers out of many all along the way. If nothing else, their season illustrates for everyone a lesson we all should heed--never give up. We offer congratulations to all members of the Florida Marlins organization and to their fans in South Florida.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, yesterday on the Senate floor, I voiced my concerns about the Bush administration's weak environmental record and the need to further debate those concerns. I also shared my belief that Governor Leavitt is an able public servant who will likely be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. In follow up to those remarks and following the vitiation of the cloture vote, I spoke with Governor Leavitt and explained my views on the direction of environmental policy under this President and the need for him to emerge as champion for the environment in an administration that lacks one. I informed him that, having made my objections known, I would vote in favor of his nomination in the hopes that we could forge a strong working relationship to reach suitable resolutions to the many environmental problems, including Superfund issues, that plague my State of Florida and the Nation.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. It is my pleasure, of course. This is what sharpens ideas, when you can throw ideas out and have them discussed in the marketplace of public discussion. I respond to my friend by saying, of course, he has heard of the sites that are known as orphan sites. These are toxic waste sites that do not have a financially responsible party that you can go to in order to get the money to clean it up. Therefore, the whole idea of the 1980 Superfund law was to provide a source of funding for these orphan sites so that you can get them cleaned up, so that the community as a whole can be protected from a health standpoint. I cited just one site in Florida which was west of Orlando. I can cite another. For example, in Pensacola we have what is known as ``Mount Dioxin.'' It is a former wood-treating plant. The site of that old plant is so toxic that an entire neighborhood subdivision located next to it had to be evacuated. It is deserted; it is fenced off. Only now are we having to go back and appropriate additional moneys to get to the health department as they do an outreach to try to find the people who used to live in that neighborhood, to get them to come in for their health checks. Believe it or not, in the flatlands of Florida--in this case, Pensacola--this turgid, infested soil called Mount Dioxin is exactly that. They have it piled up to the tune of about 40 feet high, with a tarpaulin strung over it, trying to contain all of this toxic waste. My goodness, can you imagine a major hurricane coming up the mouth of Pensacola Bay, straight for the city of Pensacola, and start tearing up Mount Dioxin, spreading that all over the city and Escambia County? Then you have another health hazard on your hands. I don't want to wait, as the Acting Administrator of the EPA has done EPA's best in telling me next year they are going to come up with a plan to take down Mount Dioxin, to grade it to ground level, and try to figure out how they are going to dispose of it. It is another hurricane season we are going to have to go through. If we had a source of funding, EPA could so quickly and so much more efficiently go on about the task of cleaning up that site. As you can see, I feel pretty strongly about this. I tried to register this with Governor Leavitt a few minutes ago in my conversation with him on the telephone. I tried to register it with him a couple months ago in my direct face-to-face conversation with him. But he is shackled because of the policy requirements of the White House; that is, that they not fund this trust fund with the original Superfund fee.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I will continue to yield to my friend. I want to respond to him.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I thank the Senator from Oklahoma. He is my friend, and he knows I love him. We can engage in this kind of dialogue with a smile on our faces because we are personal friends. But I have a significant difference of opinion with the Senator from Oklahoma. This Administration has not devoted the resources necessary to clean up the many orphaned sites in Florida that depend upon the now almost bankrupt Superfund trust fund. In each one of these cases I have indicated, two in Escambia County, one west of Orlando--I could take you through the other orphan sites in the State of Florida--the only source of revenue we will have to clean up these sites is the American taxpayer, unless we reimpose the fee that was part of the deal that was struck in 1980 with the oil companies. I would just say in response to my good friend that if the administration is requesting additional general revenue, then I say hooray for the administration. But, that is not going to solve the problem of hundreds of these sites around the country. You have to have that source of revenue, particularly with the dire financial condition this country is facing, where this country is going into bankruptcy by our deficit financing each year to the tune of a half trillion dollars. We are just not going to be able to get the funds to clean up these sites that are so personal to the communities in which they are located.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I will be happy to yield to the Senator. Let me finish. As you can see, I am really into this, and I want to get this picture painted. I will be glad to get into the questions of the policy, but let me complete my statement, if I may. So it flowed down into this creek that flowed into Lake Apopka. The estimate of the number of alligators in Lake Apopka today is not 4,000, but 400. Some of those alligators they have captured they find are mutated. Now did that come from this witches brew? I am not sure scientifically we can actually say that, but it is potentially a cause of environmental damage. For the people who live around that toxic waste dump site, there have been health problems cited for years. We cannot clean it up because we do not have any money. That is what we get back to: the money. When I was in the House of Representatives, in 1980, we enacted the Superfund law and we said: We are going to provide a fund for these hundreds of toxic waste dumps all over the country that cannot be cleaned up because the owner of the dump has now gone bankrupt or has left town and there is no one financially responsible to clean up the dump. The trust fund would be there so when we did not have a financially responsible party that could pay for cleaning up the toxic waste site, we would have a fund to which we could go. The fund has dwindled and the taxpayer has to pay more and more of the costs of cleaning up orphan Superfund sites. Congress-requested studies of the future needs of the program indicate that this Administration has not allocated the resources necessary to meet the needs of the Superfund sites and communities throughout the country. In the 1990s, the Superfund fee on petroleum, chemical feedstocks and corporate income lapsed. As a result, the only place we have now to go to replenish the fund is the general revenues of the U.S. Government. You realize how difficult that is to get the money required to address the many orphaned hazardous waste sites across the country, particularly when we are running deficits to the tune of a half a trillion dollars a year; that is, paying $500 billion more than we have coming in tax revenue so we have to go out and borrow the difference. Therefore, the funding of any program is more difficult. It is that policy difference that I have with this administration and the White House. That is why I came to the floor to register my concern as we debate the nomination of Governor Leavitt as the new EPA Administrator. It has nothing to do with him as a person. I think he is a very fine person. It has nothing to do with the person-to-person meeting I had with him, asking him about setting forth his ideas on the Superfund trust fund I have just discussed. Of course, he can't contradict the White House. He cannot contradict the Vice President and the President who have already set their policy that they do not want to fill the trust fund, that they want to do it by general revenue appropriations. I think that is a serious mistake. I had asked Governor Leavitt about a number of other issues affecting my State of Florida and I appreciate the response I received from the Acting Administrator as directed by Gov. Leavitt: EPA is moving the right way on arsenic-treated wood also called CCA, chromium copper arsenate, with regard to residential uses and playground uses. I told Gov. Leavitt about two of the toxic waste sites in Pensacola. I told him about a concern with a phosphate plant and the health conditions people are reporting in East Hillsborough County. They have responded to all of those. But with regard to the main concern of the policy difference on the trust fund, I must register my protest. Would the Senator from Oklahoma, who is my dear friend and who takes the opposite side on this issue, like to engage in some conversation on this? I would be pleased to yield.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I want to address the issue of the question of cutting off the filibuster with the motion for cloture which we will be voting on in a couple of hours. I announce that I think the debate should continue, and I want to state why. I want the manager to know and to hear this directly. I have just spoken to Governor Leavitt by telephone. He is in his home State. I told him of my policy concerns. First of all, I clearly have indicated to him I have the utmost personal respect for him as a public servant, as someone who looks at the best interests of his people. I think he has served with distinction. I think the votes are probably here for the motion for cloture to prevail and for him to be confirmed. But there are certain policy questions that ought to be addressed before the Senate that I think are very important. I am registering my frustration with these policies that are not being enacted; and in particular is the question of funding for the Superfund. What is the Superfund? When I was in the House of Representatives, in 1980, we passed the Superfund law. It was a recognition that all over America are these toxic waste dumps. The most notorious, and one of the first, was the Love Canal. Because of toxic waste invading the environment, often people are the victims, people who happen to live in the area. We happen to have today 51 of these toxic waste dumps in my State of Florida. In Florida, the health hazard and the environmental hazard is compounded because it is a State with very low elevation and a high water table. These toxic waste dumps that need to be cleaned up are allowed to continue to fester and invade particularly the source of drinking water in a place such as the State of Florida. For example, there is a site about 10 miles west of Orlando--and this is a true statement--where a company used to brew DDT in a kind of witches brew, the byproduct of which they used for some chemical reason. The problem was, when they brewed this DDT, they let it overflow into a natural crevice in the ground. Lo and behold, what did that crevice turn out to be? It turned out to be a sinkhole. And what does the sinkhole do? It goes down into the ground. And what does that do in a State such as Florida? It goes down into the Floridian aquifer. In addition to spilling over the sides of the sinkhole, it would flow down in the natural contours of the land. And where did that go to? Into a little creek that then flowed into Lake Apopka. We used to have an estimated 4,000 alligators in Lake Apopka.

Mr. NELSON of Florida

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I have been stunned, as have so many of my colleagues, by how pervasive spam has become in email traffic. We have all experienced the way clogged in-boxes, unwanted solicitations, and unwelcome pornographic material make a session on the computer less productive and less enjoyable. It is one of the top complaints that I receive from my constituents, and I am very pleased to be working with the Senators from Vermont and Utah to impose tough penalties on those who impose this garbage on others. But I am also concerned with a type of spam that goes beyond the mere nuisance variety. It is becoming clearer with each passing month that many criminal enterprises have adopted spam as their method of choice for perpetrating their criminal schemes. Spammers are now frequently perpetrating fraud to cheat people out of their savings, stealing people's identities, or trafficking in child pornography. What spam allows them to do is to conduct these criminal activities on a much broader scale at dramatically reduced costs--they can literally reach millions of people at the push of a button.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I thank the Senator from Vermont for his outstanding leadership on this issue, and for his cooperation in including my amendments in the legislation.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. The Senator from Vermont has provided an excellent example of the problem that we are trying to address. And that is why I have sought, with the help of the Senator from Vermont and the Senator from Utah, to include provisions in this legislation that make clear our intent to treat the use of spam to commit large- scale criminal activity as the organized crime that it is. We do this in two ways: First, by working with the U.S. Sentencing Commission toward enhanced sentences for those who use spam or other unsolicited bulk email to commit fraud, identity theft, obscenity, child pornography, or the sexual exploitation of children. Second, we make the seriousness of our intentions clear by urging prosecutors to use all tools at their disposal to bring down the criminal enterprises that are facilitated by the use of spam. Among other things, we are talking about the RICO statute, which not only comes with some of the stiffest penalties in the criminal code, but also allows for the seizure of the assets of criminal organizations, and for civil suits brought by injured parties. It is tough enforcement like this that will help bring the worst of the spammers to their knees.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, would the Senator from Vermont be willing to engage me in a colloquy?

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I encourage the adoption of this amendment. I am one of the cosponsors along with Senator Hatch and Senator Leahy. Let me state for the Record the essence of part of a colloquy between myself and Senator Leahy. We have all been stunned by how pervasive spam has become in e-mail traffic. We have experienced the way the clogged inboxes, the unwanted solicitations, and the unwelcome pornographic material make a session on the computer less productive and less enjoyable. I detailed earlier in my remarks the innumerable pornographic messages that come into my Senate office computer in my offices back in Florida. It is one of the top complaints I receive from my constituents. I am very pleased to be working with the Senators from Utah and Vermont to impose tough penalties on those who impose this garbage on others. I am always concerned with the type of spam that goes beyond the mere nuisance variety. It is becoming clear with each passing month that many criminal enterprises have adopted spam as their method of choice for perpetrating criminal schemes. Spammers are now frequently perpetrating fraud to cheat people out of their savings, stealing people's identities, or trafficking in child pornography. What spam allows them to do is to conduct these criminal activities on a much broader scale at dramatically reduced costs. They can literally reach millions of people at the push of a button. I have given the example in the old days that someone would use the mail to send out 100 or 150 letters. They would have nefarious schemes such as bilking senior citizens out of money or perpetrating child pornography. Now they do not send out 150 letters to do it. They punch a button and they are sending out 150 million e-mail messages perpetrating their schemes of fleecing senior citizens or perpetrating child pornography. The colloquy I propose with Senator Leahy at his convenience would be to reinforce a ban--which is why I had originally introduced S. 1052-- in the Deceptive Unsolicited Bulk Electronic Mail Act. I introduced that with Senator Pryor. That is why I have sought, with the help of the Senator from Vermont and the Senator from Utah, to include provisions in this legislation that make it clear our intent to treat the use of spam to commit large-scale criminal activity as the organized crime that it is. We do it in two ways. First, by working with the United States Sentencing Commission in the amendment being offered by the Senators toward enhanced sentences for those who use spam or other unsolicited bulk e-mail to commit fraud, identity theft, obscenity, child pornography, or the sexual exploitation of children. Second, we make the seriousness of our intentions clear in this amendment by urging prosecutors to use all the tools at their disposal, including RICO, to bring down the criminal enterprises that are facilitated by the use of spam. Specifically, we are talking about the RICO statute which not only comes with some of the stiffest penalties in the Criminal Code but it allows for the seizure of assets of criminal organizations, it allows the prosecutors to go after the criminal enterprise, and it allows for civil suits brought by injured parties. It is tough enforcement like this that will help bring the worst of the spammers to their knees.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, I thank Senator Hatch and Senator Leahy for working with me in their capacity as leaders of the Judiciary Committee in attaching some strong penalties on the most egregious kinds of spam. Spam is clearly a nuisance, and it impedes the course of commerce. When you can't even use your computer because it is so cluttered up, that is one thing, but when spam is used for illicit purposes, such as child pornography, then that is another thing. That needs to be dealt with swiftly and severely. By Senator Wyden and Senator Burns working with Senator Hatch and Senator Leahy, we have, as part of their amendment--and I think it is worth reading. This is a part of the amendment they will offer: It is the sense of Congress that spam has become the method of choice for those who distribute pornography and perpetrate fraudulent schemes and also offers fertile ground for deceptive trade practices; And it is the sense of Congress that the Department of Justice should use all existing law enforcement tools to investigate and prosecute those who send bulk commercial e- mail to facilitate the commission of Federal crimes, including the tools contained in-- And it lists several chapters of the United States Code, one relating to fraud and false statements; another relating to obscenity; another relating to the sexual exploitation of children; and another relating to racketeering. By the adoption of this amendment, we will strengthen the penalties and also give a directive to the United States Sentencing Commission, which is the normal course of action, that they shall consider sentencing enhancements for those convicted of other offenses, including offenses involving fraud, identity theft, obscenity, child pornography, and sexual exploitation of children, if those offenses involve the sending of large quantities of unsolicited e-mail. Why is this so egregious? We know what a nuisance it is. One day, I went in my Tampa office to check the e-mail. We had a list of single- spaced e-mail over the last evening filling up--single space, one sheet of paper, all unsolicited. That was bad enough. But to a Senate office, two of them were pornographic. If that is happening to my Tampa Senate office, we can imagine what is happening to the e-mail receipt of every consumer in America on their computer. It has to stop. This is an attempt to stop it. Under the old laws, when we tried to protect against activities such as child pornography or taking advantage of senior citizens by some extortion or deceptive scheme to bilk them out of money, before we had e-mail, the criminal would send out 100, 150 letters to the unsuspecting victims on whom they were preying on child pornography or on fleecing senior citizens of their assets. That was 100, 150 letters. Now with the punch of a button, they can send out 150 million. So we see the insidious ability of a criminal mind to prey upon millions of people by the use of this very new and fantastic tool that we ought to be using for good, not for ill, and that is e-mail. This Senator is very happy that this legislation is being considered, and we are now going to attach some tough penalties to it for these egregious types of activities. I also commend the Senator from Arizona, the chairman of our committee, and the Senator from South Carolina, the ranking member of our committee, for being so vigilant in bringing this legislation to the floor. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. I will be happy to yield.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, I rise to commend the Senators who have brought this legislation forward and say how gracious they have been to me in working to address the seriousness of this issue of spam. Later on, when Senator Leahy comes to the floor, I will have a colloquy with him about some of the provisions that are going to be submitted in the Hatch-Leahy-Nelson amendment. In the meantime, I wanted to commend the Senator from Oregon for his leadership. I commend Senator Conrad Burns from Montana for his leadership. I commend the Senators for how they saw the problem. They saw it years ago, and they have been so persistent. Senator Wyden and Senator Burns kept after it. It is an idea whose time has come simply by virtue of the fact that people can hardly even use their e-mail now it is so cluttered up with unwanted messages.