Don Nickles

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Will the Senator yield for just a moment?

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) is absent because of illness.

Mr. NICKLES. Yes. Mr. President, I just want to thank both my friend and colleague from Massachusetts, as well as from Arizona, for accepting this modification. The modification did a couple of things. One, as I stated prior to the vote, we didn't want to pass an expansion that would basically take the means testing off of the child care development block grant, nor did we want to change the allocation or the ratio of the State match. We have corrected that. I thank my friends and my colleagues for doing that. I have no objection to the unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) is absent because of illness.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from New Hampshire (Mr. Gregg) is necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) is absent because of illness.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) is absent because of illness.

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) is absent because of illness.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, today I rise, along with Senators Lott, Coats, Inhofe, Helms, Murkowski, Grams of Minnesota, Faircloth, Bond, Enzi, Sessions, Hagel, and Coverdell to introduce the Lethal Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 1998. This legislation will clarify that physicians entrusted by the federal government with the authority to prescribe and dispense controlled substances may not abuse that authority by using them in assisted suicides. It also strongly reaffirms that physicians should use federally controlled substances for the legitimate medical purpose of relieving pain and discomfort. Last year, Congress passed the Assisted Suicide Funding Restriction Act of 1997 without a dissenting vote in the Senate and by an overwhelming margin of 398-16 in the House. The President signed the bill, saying it ``will allow the Federal Government to speak with a clear voice in opposing these practices,'' and warning that ``to endorse assisted suicide would set us on a disturbing and perhaps dangerous path.'' The distribution of narcotics and other dangerous drugs is prohibited by federal law under the Controlled Substances Act. Under this law physicians may get a special federal license from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), called a DEA registration, that allows them to prescribe these federally controlled drugs for ``legitimate medical purposes.'' This was confirmed last November in a letter by Thomas Constantine, Administrator of the DEA, who concluded that ``delivering, dispensing or prescribing a controlled substance with the intent of assisting a suicide would not be under any current definition a legitimate medical purpose.'' It is important to understand that while physicians receive their license to practice medicine from state medical boards, they receive this separate DEA registration to prescribe controlled substances from the federal DEA. Each time a doctor orders a controlled substance they must fill our a form in triplicate and one copy goes to the DEA. Physicians must be prepared to explain to DEA officials their use of these drugs, and they lose their registration and even risk criminal penalties if they prescribe such drugs for any reason but ``Legitimate medical purposes.'' On June 5, Attorney General Janet Reno issued a decision which overturned the DEA ruling. According to the Attorney General, the Controlled Substances Act does not restrict the use of federally controlled dangerous drugs for the purpose of assisted suicide. It is for this reason I am introducing this legislation. I have long been a strong advocate of states' rights and the limited role of the federal government, so let me make clear what this legislation does. It simply clarifies that the dispensing of controlled substances for the purpose of assisted suicide is prohibited under longstanding federal law, the Controlled Substance Act. This is not the first time the federal government has acted to ensure that federally regulated drugs are not used for purposes that violate federal law. The current Administration is committed to enforcing federal prohibitions on the use of marijuana, despite state referenda that seeks to legitimize such use for what some see as medicinal use. By the same token, one state's referendum rescinding local criminal penalties for assisting a suicide does not magically transform a lethal act into a legitimate medical practice within the meaning of federal law. Congress cannot remain silent now. Congress acted with one voice to ensure that no federal program, facility or employee is involved in assisted suicide. Enactment of the Lethal Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 1998 will ensure that federal authorization to prescribe DEA-regulated drugs does not include the authority to prescribe such drugs to cause a patient's death. I urge my colleagues to support and swiftly enact this urgently needed legislation. Mr President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, today I rise, along with Senators Lott, Coats, Inhofe, Helms, Murkowski, Grams of Minnesota, Faircloth, Bond, Enzi, Sessions, Hagel, and Coverdell to introduce the Lethal Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 1998. This legislation will clarify that physicians entrusted by the federal government with the authority to prescribe and dispense controlled substances may not abuse that authority by using them in assisted suicides. It also strongly reaffirms that physicians should use federally controlled substances for the legitimate medical purpose of relieving pain and discomfort. Last year, Congress passed the Assisted Suicide Funding Restriction Act of 1997 without a dissenting vote in the Senate and by an overwhelming margin of 398-16 in the House. The President signed the bill, saying it ``will allow the Federal Government to speak with a clear voice in opposing these practices,'' and warning that ``to endorse assisted suicide would set us on a disturbing and perhaps dangerous path.'' The distribution of narcotics and other dangerous drugs is prohibited by federal law under the Controlled Substances Act. Under this law physicians may get a special federal license from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), called a DEA registration, that allows them to prescribe these federally controlled drugs for ``legitimate medical purposes.'' This was confirmed last November in a letter by Thomas Constantine, Administrator of the DEA, who concluded that ``delivering, dispensing or prescribing a controlled substance with the intent of assisting a suicide would not be under any current definition a legitimate medical purpose.'' It is important to understand that while physicians receive their license to practice medicine from state medical boards, they receive this separate DEA registration to prescribe controlled substances from the federal DEA. Each time a doctor orders a controlled substance they must fill our a form in triplicate and one copy goes to the DEA. Physicians must be prepared to explain to DEA officials their use of these drugs, and they lose their registration and even risk criminal penalties if they prescribe such drugs for any reason but ``Legitimate medical purposes.'' On June 5, Attorney General Janet Reno issued a decision which overturned the DEA ruling. According to the Attorney General, the Controlled Substances Act does not restrict the use of federally controlled dangerous drugs for the purpose of assisted suicide. It is for this reason I am introducing this legislation. I have long been a strong advocate of states' rights and the limited role of the federal government, so let me make clear what this legislation does. It simply clarifies that the dispensing of controlled substances for the purpose of assisted suicide is prohibited under longstanding federal law, the Controlled Substance Act. This is not the first time the federal government has acted to ensure that federally regulated drugs are not used for purposes that violate federal law. The current Administration is committed to enforcing federal prohibitions on the use of marijuana, despite state referenda that seeks to legitimize such use for what some see as medicinal use. By the same token, one state's referendum rescinding local criminal penalties for assisting a suicide does not magically transform a lethal act into a legitimate medical practice within the meaning of federal law. Congress cannot remain silent now. Congress acted with one voice to ensure that no federal program, facility or employee is involved in assisted suicide. Enactment of the Lethal Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 1998 will ensure that federal authorization to prescribe DEA-regulated drugs does not include the authority to prescribe such drugs to cause a patient's death. I urge my colleagues to support and swiftly enact this urgently needed legislation. Mr President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvannia (Mr. Specter), is absent because of illness.

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) is absent because of illness.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) is absent because of illness.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) is necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) is absent because of illness. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) would vote ``yea.''

Mr. NICKLES. I was going to speak for a few minutes. I feel that I would like to respond to a couple of comments made by the Senator from Arizona.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) is necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter) is absent because of illness.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) and the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Murkowski) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) and the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Murkowski) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) would vote ``nay.''

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. And not the attorneys general and not the Commerce Committee. I will be happy to yield.

Mr. NICKLES. I got on the Finance Committee because I did not like the way our tax system was structured. I want to work with our colleagues from Mississippi and Texas, to take the Tax Code and rewrite it and come up with something that is fair, flat, and simple. This is tobacco bill just the opposite. This is a mess. We could clean this bill up a lot if we went through the conventional process, if we had the Finance Committee mark up this bill on the tax side and call a tax a tax. Instead, we have this unbelievably complicated system, and the look- back is maybe the most complicated. Delegating to the Secretary of the Treasury to take a poll, and then, if they don't meet the targets that we set, we are going to assess them billions of dollars, up to $7 billion or $8 billion, I find to be ludicrous. It doesn't make sense. It is not a good way to legislate. That is the reason that the Commerce Committee doesn't have taxation power, in the Senate. In the Senate, the Finance Committee has the power to raise taxes.

Mr. NICKLES. The Senator is absolutely right.

Mr. NICKLES. No, sir. I could care less----

Mr. NICKLES. Yes.

Mr. NICKLES. I agree totally. And I also tell my colleague and friend from Texas, I wasn't part of the tobacco companies' deal. I am part of the Finance Committee. And I think if we are going to legislate on taxes, we ought to do it right. This is not the right way to tax. I will also tell my colleague from Texas, I have heard people say the tobacco industry is confident they can challenge these look-back assessments and win in court and have it thrown out as unconstitutional. Regardless of the constitutional argument, I say this is a crummy way to tax. I don't want to give the Secretary of the Treasury the authority to conduct a poll and then determine that the poll is accurate, proper, correct for purposes of this act, and be able to make assessments. Under the agreement the tobacco companies agreed to, it was up to $2 billion. Under the bill that came out of the Commerce Committee, it was $3.96 billion. Under the bill the administration wrote and introduced on Monday, it came up to $4.4 billion. And on the amendment we have pending now, it is $7.7 billion, also indexed for inflation. The industry did not sign off on any $7.7 billion look-back.

Mr. NICKLES. No.