Don Nickles

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Senators Kohl, Mack, Allard, Feingold, DeWine and Faircloth, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minutes. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment. We have debated this issue before, but I will make a couple comments because maybe some of my colleagues are not aware of what this amendment has. This amendment has $150 million of a new tax, and unlike any other tax that we passed that I am aware of, this allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct a survey. And from that survey, she is going to raise--she being Secretary Shalala at this point--is going to raise $150 million. I find that incredible. If the Senator wants to raise the cigarette tax, raise the cigarette tax; say we are going to have an excise of so many cents per pack, and that is fine, that is legitimate. But to say we are going to have a survey that basically is going to be deemed to be accurate and give the Secretary of Health and Human Services the power and authority to raise that tax is absurd. It is terrible tax policy. Then it is to enforce, what? The FDA regs. The FDA regs, some people are acting like they are sacrosanct, like they are good. FDA regs dealing with ID check, which I heard my colleague bragging about, have the Federal Government involved in enforcing ID checks up to age 27. It is illegal to smoke up to age 18, but we are going to have the Federal Government setting up an enforcement mechanism to find out if people 26 years old are buying cigarettes. And if they don't check an ID--if you have a convenience store or something and you don't ask what their age is when they are 26 years old, you are in violation of the regulation, and you can be fined up to $10,000. That is the FDA reg that he is wanting to give FDA more power to enforce. Do we really want to give the Federal Government enforcement powers to be checking the IDs of young adults up to age 26, and if you do not comply, you can be fined up to $10,000? I think that is absurd. Equally as bad is to give the Secretary of Health and Human Services taxing authority, to be able to raise $150 million. I think they are two of the worst pieces of policy I have seen. We have debated tobacco at length. I am willing to do some things to discourage tobacco consumption. All this would do would be to encourage bureaucracy at FDA. I urge my colleagues to support the point of order by the Senator from New Mexico. I yield the floor.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Jeffords) is necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma has brought to my attention concerns relating to the Food Distribution Program for Indian Reservation (FDPIR) program administered by the Department of Agriculture. Specifically, USDA regulations prohibit Oklahoma Indian tribes distributing commodity goods under FDPIR to tribal members in population area that exceed 10,000 persons. I have been made aware this prohibition does not exist in other states. As a result, Oklahoma tribes are placed in a different category from tribes administering FDPIR commodity programs. To address the concerns raised by the Choctaw Nation, I would request the Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with the appropriate Oklahoma state agencies, review the current regulations with respect to the FDPIR program in Oklahoma and take any necessary regulatory action to ensure tribal members receive adequate commodity services from the most appropriate provider.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from New York (Mr. D'Amato) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Frist) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) would each vote ``yes.''

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent. I further announce that if present and voting, the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) would vote ``yes.''

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Reserving the right to object, and I will not object. I would like to modify the Senator's request, that following his additional 10 minutes, I have 10 minutes to respond.

Mr. NICKLES. Please continue. I will make the statement afterwards.

Mr. NICKLES. I would like to rebut some of the things the Senator said.

Mr. NICKLES. Will the Senator yield? I appreciate----

Mr. NICKLES. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. NICKLES. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. NICKLES. I thank my colleague. (The remarks of Mr. Graham pertaining to the introduction of S. 2278 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'') Mr. GORTON addressed the Chair.

Mr. NICKLES. I will respond to a couple of comments made by my colleague and friend from Massachusetts. One, he is absolutely, totally, completely wrong on many of the statements that he made, particularly in saying the Republican leadership wouldn't allow this bill to come to the floor, allow a debate to happen on the floor of the Senate on health care. As the Senator should be aware, we have already made a couple of offers that we would try to accommodate some type of time agreement to bring up this issue this month. We are still working on it. My colleague was absolutely incorrect when he said the Republicans were insisting that, if we win, we can still put this bill back on the calendar. That wasn't our request. That wasn't our statement. It is not our last request. I am reading the unanimous consent request given on June 25 or 26 which said votes held on final passage--if read the third time, the Senate votes on passage of the bill without any intervening action or debate. The Senate will request a conference with the House, the chair will be authorized to appoint conferees, and the Senate-House care bill will be placed on the calendar. I make those points. We are willing to have debate on the bill. We are willing to consider different options--both the House and the Senate, the proposal by my friend and colleague from Massachusetts, as well as the substitute that I am working on with some of our other colleagues. We will have a debate on the floor. We are willing to work out a time agreement to where we will have it this month. We don't intend to spend 2 months on this bill or even 1 month on this bill, but we are willing to have a debate on health care legislation. It goes under the title of Patients' Bill of Rights. I happen to think that is a very good title. I might also mention that the President's Commission on Health Care Quality came up with a lot of recommendations. They have several things that they recommend be included in all health care plans, but they said they should be included voluntarily. I might mention that the bill that our colleague from Massachusetts is promoting mandates; it doesn't have voluntary compliance. It mandates a lot of things that aren't included in the President's Commission--many things. And many of those things have a lot of cost. We have asked the Congressional Budget Office to give us cost estimates of Senator Kennedy's bill, the Patients' Bill of Rights, and we don't have that. I hope we can get it before we commence debate. We have stated, and I just want to repeat to all of our colleagues, we are willing to discuss this issue. We are willing to have time on the Democrats' alternative. I might mention, the Democrats' alternative, I believe, to my knowledge, no Republican in the Senate has cosponsored, nor should they, because I think it is a bad bill. I think it definitely would increase consumer cost, drive up the cost of health care insurance, the cost of health care, period, and the net result would be, fewer people would have health care. I don't think that is a result that we want to have. I am willing to say that I am willing to work to try to come up with a package that we can support. I see my friend and colleague from Florida. Maybe we can come up with a bipartisan package. I am willing to do that. I know the Senator from Florida has met with other Senators in a bipartisan way to see if we can come up with items that will make sense, that will not have dramatic increases in consumer cost, in health care cost, but try to see if we can't work out some things to help cover some of the problems that have arisen with managed care. I am willing to do that. I am not one who says we don't need any legislation whatever. Some people have taken that position. That is not this Senator's position. I am willing to try to legislate responsibly in health care. I don't want to do something we will find out will do damage, like how significant health care cost increases affect our consumers. I don't think they are asking for increased health care costs. I don't think that would be helpful. So I will repeat to my colleague from Massachusetts and other Senators on the floor--and I know, because I have talked to the majority leader day in and day out--we are working on trying to come up with an arrangement where we will have adequate time, but not an unlimited amount of time, to consider health care legislation--maybe under the guise of the Patients' Bill of Rights--and to allow a couple different alternatives. My colleague from Massachusetts has an alternative; he has a proposal. Some of us are working on a different proposal. There may be some of those things in common. But certainly there will be very significant differences--big differences, philosophically, in cost, in premium increases, and so we need to discuss those. We need to have an adequate time to discuss those and to consider the different alternatives and then to have a vote. We expect to do so. We don't expect to change the rules of the Senate. We don't expect to guarantee that one side or the other side will have a victory in the process, but we have stated--and, again, as assistant majority leader, I am telling our colleagues on the Democrat side of the aisle that we are willing to try to work out an arrangement, and we will have adequate time to discuss this issue on the floor this month. I think that is fair enough. The majority leader has been fair. What we are not willing to do is stop the Senate from doing any work. So, yes, we are going to pass IRS reform and we are going to pass it tomorrow. I think it is a giant step in the right direction. Yes, we are going to take up higher education reform, and we need to do that. It is very important to colleges, universities, and students all across the country. That needs to happen. Yes, we need to pass appropriations bills. I think it was very unfortunate that the minority leader of the Senate introduced the Patients' Bill of Rights on the VA-HUD bill, the veterans and housing appropriations bill. It doesn't belong there. He knows that. We have already indicated a willingness and a commitment to bring up the so- called Patients' Bill of Rights this month. Someone might say, wait a minute, you have not passed the tobacco bill. We spent 4 weeks on the tobacco bill. They didn't win. I believe they are not going to win on the Patients' Bill of Rights. Senator Kennedy said, ``We are going to bring up minimum wage.'' They have that right. But they don't have a right to have their agenda totally dominate the Senate. The Senate needs to do its work. We will consider some of their issues and some of ours, like IRS reform. We are going to take that up, and, hopefully, we will pass that tomorrow. So I mention to all of our colleagues that I want them to be aware of the fact that we are trying to be fair, we will be fair, and we will consider this issue. We will have different alternatives--I think significantly different alternatives. I believe the alternative that the Republicans will be offering will be in stark contrast to the Democrats'. Maybe some things will be in common. We are going to offer greater choice and opportunity and competition. Hopefully, that will help change buyer behavior and get health care costs down, instead of the increases that would be achieved by Senator Kennedy's proposal. So there will be differences. But that is fine, that is good, that is legitimate. We will have that debate, and we will have adequate time for that. But it can't consume 2 months. It will probably consume 2 or 3 days. The Senate needs to decide what it wants to do. I expect that we will. So I make that commitment to our colleagues. This is going to be a busy month. We need to pass a lot of appropriations bills. We have a couple appropriations bills we are working on right now that, unfortunately, people have tried to load up with bills that are extraneous, like the tobacco amendment on the agriculture appropriations bill or the Patients' Bill of Rights on the VA-HUD bill. That is not acceptable. It is not going anywhere. It may be good for political posturing, but it is not going to help pass their legislation. We have committed to bring up the legislation in due time this month, have adequate debate and consideration of a couple of different alternatives, and go from there. So I make that commitment to our colleagues. I think we should lower the rhetoric and the volume it has had and see if we can't work together in a bipartisan way to make some positive improvements in health care legislation. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Florida. I know he had a unanimous consent request to speak. I didn't mean to delay him. I apologize for interjecting, but I did think it was important to respond to the Senator from Massachusetts for his comments. I appreciate the accommodation. I yield the floor. Mr. GRAHAM addressed the Chair.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent.