Member of Congress
Ted Stevens
- Role
- Former Senator
- State
- AK
- Party
- Republican
Speeches
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 19971996-07-17
Mr. STEVENS
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, before the vote starts, I ask unanimous consent that the time on the Ford amendment be limited to 30 minutes equally divided. I have this agreement with the Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Unanimous-Consent Agreement
Mr. STEVENS. These are two amendments worked out with the Senators from Louisiana. They have combined their amendments. This is an amendment that has been on the list all day. It has been modified. I ask unanimous consent the Breaux amendment to the McCain amendment be adopted and the McCain amendment be adopted. I yield to my friend from Hawaii.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, we have two amendments. One is in the first degree and one is the second degree.
Mr. STEVENS. I send to the desk an amendment numbered 4443, as modified, pertaining to the Joint Readiness Training Center in Fort Polk, LA, and ask to set aside the pending amendment.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 19971996-07-17
Mr. STEVENS
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to yield, as in morning business, to the Senator from Indiana for such time--how much time would the Senator wish? Five minutes.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. This deals with using funds within appropriations to initiate engineering and manufacturing development of an airborne mine countermeasure system. I urge the adoption of the amendment.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk a modification of the amendment No. 4575, and ask it be considered immediately.
THE NATIONAL GAMBLING IMPACT STUDY COMMISSION ACT1996-07-17
Mr. STEVENS
Mr. STEVENS. The request was granted, Mr. President. We had committed to Senator Faircloth first, if the Senator does not mind.
Mr. STEVENS. Let me ask this. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Faircloth be recognized for 12 minutes, Senator Simon for 2 minutes, and Senator Kennedy for 3 minutes as though in morning business so that we can get that out of the way. Then we will go back to the bill.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the Senator from North Carolina has been very patient with us this afternoon. He repeatedly sought the floor. We have urged him to delay. I now ask that, in morning business, he be recognized so that he may make his statement for 12 minutes.
Mr. STEVENS. The Senator is correct. We have been in contact with the Department of Justice [DOJ] and have been advised informally the DOJ would not object to enforcing a subpoena issued by the commission. In fact, they have been operating under the assumption that they would be called upon to enforce such a subpoena. There are many other Government bodies which use DOJ to enforce subpoenas and they are fully staffed to handle such requests.
Mr. STEVENS. The Clinton administration states that it supports legislation creating a commission to study the effects of gambling, but has stopped short of endorsing any specific bill. The Department of Justice has stated that the substitute addresses many of the agency's concerns, and have asked that their views be included in the Record. Mr. President, at this point, I ask unanimous consent that the Justice Department letter outlining the administration views on the bill be printed in the Record.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I rise today to support S. 704 as amended by the Governmental Affairs Committee. The bill establishes a national commission to study the social and economic impact of legalized gambling in the United States. S. 704 was originally introduced on April 6, 1995, by Senator Paul Simon and Senator Richard Lugar. Currently, there are 25 Senate cosponsors of this legislation. On November 2, 1995, the Governmental Affairs Committee held a hearing on S. 704. At that time, concerns were raised about the adequacy of the funding levels and the scope of the original bill. On May 14, 1996, the Governmental Affairs Committee approved a substitute which was drafted in consultation with the sponsors of the Senate and House bills and the representatives of various groups. This bill, as reported by the committee, attempts to address a wide range of concerns, including balancing the needs of the commission to get access to information and protecting the rights of individuals to their personal privacy. S. 704 as amended creates a nine-member commission--three appointed by President, three by the Speaker of the House, and three by the Senate majority leader. The commission has 2 years to conduct the study and issue a report, which may include findings and recommendations, to the President, the Congress, the Governors, and native American tribal governments. Under this bill, the commission will utilize the expertise of the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations and the National Research Council. This will avoid duplicating work already done by the Government, reduce the cost of the commission, and ensure that the States are not left out of the process. The bill specifies a number of topics that the commission will study, encompassing many aspects of gambling and its effects, including problem gambling and gambling on the Internet. It authorizes ``such sums as may be necessary''--the original bill introduced in the Senate only provided $250,000 for the commission. Funding for the commission would be subject to appropriations. The commission will terminate after completing its 2-year study. The most recent Federal study of the effects of gambling was published 20 years ago--the 1976 Commission on the Review of the National Policy Toward Gambling. At that time, that study cost $3 million--which would be the equivalent of $8.1 million today. In 1976, only two States--Nevada and New Jersey--had legalized gambling. Currently, 48 States have some form of legalized gambling, and since 1988, 21 States have legalized casino gambling. There has been rapid growth recently in the gambling industry--it is now a $40 billion industry which includes casinos, riverboats, Indian reservations, State and interstate lotteries, and electronic gambling. Despite the growth in this industry, not much current objective data exists on the impact of legalized gambling in the United States. Other concerns that the committee addressed include: specifying the areas to be studied; problem gambling; electronic gambling--such as gambling on the Internet; requiring the report to be issued to Governors and native American tribes so that they could make use of the information; and providing a clear definition of gambling. The House version introduced by Representative Frank Wolf on January 11, 1995, was passed by the House of Representatives on March 5, 1996, after some modifications by the House Judiciary Committee. Unlike the House bill, the original Senate bill did not include subpoena power. The House bill allowed the commission to subpoena both individuals and documents. The Congressional Research Service has indicated that based on a review of commissions created in recent years, it is unusual to grant broad subpoena power to this type of commission. However, recognizing the short period of time in which the commission has to complete its work and the need to be able to obtain relevant information, S. 704 as amended grants the commission the power to subpoena documents. In order to protect the privacy of individuals, however, information gathered by the commission must be kept confidential. The bill provides criminal penalties under section 1905 of title 18 of the United States Code for the unauthorized disclosure of any confidential personal or business information. Any information obtained by the commission--whether voluntarily provided or provided under subpoena--may not be disclosed to any person in any manner, except to authorized commission employees; upon court order, or when released by the commission in aggregate or summary form that does not directly or indirectly disclose the identity of any person or business. In addition, individuals falsifying information to the commission are subject to criminal penalties under section 1001 of title 18 of the United States Code. The commission may serve a subpoena throughout the United States, and may go to a U.S. district court to enforce it. All subpoenas must comply with the requirements for subpoenas under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The commission is required to notify the U.S. Attorney General at least 10 days in advance of issuing a subpoena. This will allow the Attorney General time to raise objection if the subpoena is going to interfere with an ongoing criminal investigation. The Congressional Budget Office projects S. 704 as amended will cost $5 million, roughly equal to their revised estimate for the House version, H.R. 497. CBO also projects that the costs to State, local, and tribal governments for complying with information-gathering requests will be minimal. Mr. President, at this point I ask unanimous consent that the CBO's letter on this bill be printed in the Record.
Mr. STEVENS. The Senator is correct on all counts. This legislation fully protects the privacy rights of American citizens.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 19971996-07-17
Mr. STEVENS
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I yield to the leader.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. STEVENS. Yes.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I believe it is in order now for us to proceed with the recorded vote. Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this is money earmarked within existing funds as was previously ordered by the authorization bill, and we believe it is in order.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment for the Senator from Utah, [Mr. Bennett].
Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment, as I understand it, is cosponsored by Senator Kerrey and Senator McCain, two of our Members who should know more about this subject than anyone else. I am pleased to support it, but I point out it is limited. It is limited to the authorization. I do not think it ought to be expanded beyond the scope as defined in the original authorization. I urge the adoption of the amendment.