THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
Sponsor:
Summary:
All articles in Senate section
THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
(Senate - March 20, 1997)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages
S2654-S2706]
THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to
improve the pay system used for Federal firefighters. This bill has
three broad purposes: First, to improve pay equality with municipal and
other public section firefighters; second, to enhance recruitment and
retention of firefighters in order to maintain the highest quality
Federal fire service; and third, to encourage Federal firefighters to
pursue career advancement and training opportunities.
Fire protection is clearly a major concern at Federal facilities and
on Federal lands throughout the Nation. From fighting wildland fires in
our national parks and forests to protecting military families from
fires in their base housing, Federal firefighters play a vital role in
preserving lives and property. One only needs to recall the terrible
tragedies in Colorado two summers ago to understand the vital
importance of our Federal firefighters.
The Department of Agriculture, the Coast Guard, the Department of
Commerce, the Department of Defense, the General Services
Administration, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of
Veterans Affairs are among the Federal agencies which rely on Federal
fire fighters to protect their vast holdings of land and structures.
Just like their municipal counterparts, these firefighters are the
first line of defense against threats to life and property.
Mr. President, the current system used to pay our Federal
firefighters is at best confusing and at worst unfair. These men and
women work longer hours than any other public sector firefighters--yet
are paid substantially less. The current pay system, which consists of
three tiers, is overly complex and, more importantly, is hurting
Federal efforts to attract and retain top-quality employees.
Currently, most Federal firefighters work an average 72-hour week
under exceptionally demanding conditions. The typical workweek consists
of a one-day-off schedule which results in three 24-hours shifts during
the remainder of each week. Despite this unusual schedule, firefighters
are paid under a modified version of the same General Schedule pay
system used for full-time, 40-hour-per-week Federal workers.
The result of the pay modification is that Federal firefighters make
less per hour than any other Federal employee at their same grade
level. For example: a firefighter who is a GS-5, Step 5 makes $7.21 per
hour while other employees at the same grade and step earn $10.34 per
hour. Some have tried to justify this by noting that part of a
firefighter's day is downtime. However, I must note that all
firefighters have substantial duties beyond those at the site of a
fire. Adding to this discrepancy is the fact that the average municipal
firefighter makes $12.87 per hour.
Mr. President, this has caused the Federal fire service to become a
training ground for young men and women who then leave for higher pay
elsewhere in the public sector. Continually training new employees is,
as my colleagues know, very expensive for any employer.
The Office of Personnel Management is well aware of these problems.
In fact, section 102 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of
1990 [FEPCA], title V of Public Law 101-509, authorizes the
establishment of special pay systems for certain Federal occupations.
The origin of this provision was a recognition that the current pay
classification system did not account for the unique and distinctive
employment conditions of Federal protective occupations including the
Federal fire service.
In May 1991, I wrote to OPM urging the establishment of a separate
pay scale for firefighters under the authority provided for in FEPCA.
Subsequently, OPM established an Advisory Committee on Law Enforcement
and Protective Occupations consisting of agency personnel and
representatives from Federal fire and law enforcement organizations.
Beginning in August of 1991, representatives from the Federal fire
community began working with OPM and other administration officials to
identify and address the problems of paying Federal firefighters under
the General Schedule. The committee completed its work in June of 1992
and in December of that year issued a staff report setting forth
recommendations to correct the most serious problems with the current
pay system.
Mr. President, I regret that since the release of the OPM
recommendations, there has been no effort to implement any of the
proposals of the advisory task force. In fact, OPM has communicated
quite clearly that it has no plans to pursue any solution to the
serious pay deficiencies that have been so widely identified and
acknowledged.
[[Page
S2655]]
It would not be necessary to introduce this legislation today had OPM
taken the corrective action that, in my view, is so clearly warranted.
However, I have determined that legislation appears to be the only
vehicle to achieve the necessary changes in the pay system for Federal
firefighters.
Mr. President, the Firefighter Pay Fairness Act would improve Federal
firefighter pay in several important and straightforward ways. Perhaps
most importantly, the bill draws from existing provisions in title V to
calculate a true hourly rate for firefighters. This would alleviate the
current problem of firefighters being paid considerably less than other
General Schedule employees at the same GS level. It would also account
for the varying length in the tour of duty for Federal firefighters
stationed at different locations.
In addition, the bill would use this hourly rate to ensure that
firefighters receive true time and one-half overtime for hours worked
over 106 in a bi-weekly pay period. This is designed to correct the
problem, under the current system, where the overtime rate is
calculated based on an hourly rate considerably less than base pay.
The Firefighter Pay Fairness Act would also extend these pay
provisions to so-called wildland firefighters when they are engaged in
firefighting duties. Currently, wildland firefighters are often not
compensated for all the time spent responding to a fire event. This
legislation would ensure that these protectors of our parks and forests
would be paid fairly for ensuring the safety of these invaluable
national resources.
It also ensures that firefighters promoted to supervisory positions
would be paid at a rate of pay at least equal to what they received
before the promotion. This would address a situation, under the current
pay system, which discourages employees from accepting promotions
because of the significant loss of pay which often accompanies a move
to a supervisory position.
Similarly, the bill would encourage employees to get the necessary
training in hazardous materials, emergency medicine, and other critical
areas by ensuring they do not receive a pay cut while engaged in these
training activities.
Mr. President, this legislation is based upon a bill I authorized in
the 103d Congress. A bipartisan group of more than 150 Members
cosponsored the measure in the Senate and the House last year. The
legislation I am introducing today reflects several modifications that
were suggested to the bill following substantial discussions with
various Members. However, it is identical to the so-called compromise
measure that has been discussed with the authorizing as well as the
appropriations committees in previous years and received widespread
support.
To reduce initial costs and allow oversight of the effectiveness of
the legislation, the bill I am introducing today would implement the
new pay system and other provisions beginning October 1, 1997. However,
the new rate of pay would be phased in over a 4-year period ending
October 1, 2002.
Mr. President, I consulted many of the affected groups in developing
my legislation. I am very pleased that this bill has been endorsed by
the American Federation of Government Employees, the International
Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Fire
Fighters, the National Association of Government Employees, and the
National Federation of Federal Employees.
As I have said before, Mr. President, fairness is the key word. There
is no reason why Federal firefighters should be paid dramatically less
that their municipal counterparts. As a cochairman of the Congressional
Fire Services Caucus, I want to urge all members of the caucus and,
indeed, all Members of the Senate to join in cosponsoring this
important piece of legislation.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself and Mr. Gorton):
S. 493. A bill to amend section 1029 of title 18, United States Code,
with respect to cellular telephone cloning paraphernalia; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
the cellular telephone protection act
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Cellular Telephone
Protection Act, which would improve the ability of law enforcement to
investigate and prosecute individuals engaged in the activity of
cloning cellular phones. Law enforcement officials and wireless
carriers support the bill as an important tool to stem this kind of
telecommunications fraud.
Cell phones are manufactured with an embedded electronic serial
number [ESN], which is transmitted to gain access to the
telecommunications network. Those involved in cloning cell phones sit
in parked cars outside of airports or along busy roadways to harvest
ESN's from legitimate cell phone users and, in a process known as
cloning, use software and equipment to insert the stolen numbers into
other cell phones, the clones. A single ESN can be implanted into
several cloned phones. The cloned phones charge to the account of the
lawful, unsuspecting user. Cellular phone carriers must absorb these
losses, which, according to the Cellular Telecommunication Industry
Association, amounted to about $650 million in 1995, up from $480
million in 1994. The cellular industry is expanding by about 40 percent
a year; efforts to combat fraud are imperative to ensure the integrity
of our communications network.
Cloning is more than an inconvenience to the 36 million Americans who
currently use cellular phone services, and an expense to wireless
communication companies who pay for the fraudulent calls. According to
the Secret Service, which is the primary Federal agency responsible for
investigating telecommunications fraud, cloning abets organized
criminal enterprises that use cellular telephones as their preferred
method of communication. Cloned phones are extremely popular among drug
traffickers and gang members, who oftentimes employ several cloned
phones to evade detection by law enforcement. When not selling cloned
phones to drug dealers and ruthless street gangs, cloners set up
corner-side calling shops where individuals pay a nominal fee to call
anywhere in the world on a replicated phone, or simply purchase the
illegal phone for a flat amount.
The cellular telephone protection bill clarifies that there is no
lawful purpose to posses, produce or sell hardware, known as copycat
boxes, or software used for cloning a cellular phone or its ESN. Such
equipment and software are easy to obtainn--advertisements hawking
cloning equipment appear in computer magazines and on the Internet.
There is no legitimate purpose for cloning software and equipment, save
for law enforcement and telecommunication service providers using it to
improve fraud detection. The bill strikes at the heart of the cloning
paraphernalia market by eliminating the requirement for prosecutors to
prove that the person selling copycat boxes or cloning software
programs intended to defraud. The bill retains an exception for law
enforcement to possess otherwise unlawful cloning software, and adds a
similar exception for telecommunications service providers.
Moreover, the Cellular Phone Protection Act expands the definition of
``scanning receivers,'' equipment which, unlike cloning software and
devices, does have legitimate uses if not used to scan frequencies
assigned to wireless communications. The bill clarifies that the
definition of scanning receivers encompasses devices that can be used
to intercept ESN's even if they are not capable of receiving the voice
channel. As mentioned above, criminals harvest ESN's by employing
scanners near busy thoroughfares. The revised definition of scanning
receiver will ensure that these devices are unlawful when used with an
intent to defraud just like scanners that intercept voice.
Finally, the bill increases penalties for those engaged in cloning. A
new paradigm is needed for penalizing cloning offenses. Currently,
penalties for cloning crimes are based on the monetary loss a carrier
suffers, not the potential loss. First-time offenders oftentimes do not
face any jail time, which makes these cases unattractive for
prosecution. Carriers and law enforcement are forced to choose between
keeping the cloner on the telecommunications network to rack up high
losses to ensure jail time, or stemming the losses sooner only to have
the cloner back on the streets in days. The penalty scheme should be
revised to
[[Page
S2656]]
track another indicator of cloning fraud--the number of electronic
serial numbers stolen.
Cloning offenses are serious crimes, and the penalties should reflect
this. We know that cloned phones are used to facilitate other crimes--
particularly drug trafficking. Additionally, cloning offenses are
serious economic crimes in themselves that threaten the integrity of
the public communications network. In August, two individuals in New
York were arrested for allegedly possessing 80,000 electronic serial
numbers. Each of the 80,000 ESN's could be implanted into several
cloned phones. I look forward to working with the U.S. Sentencing
Commission to achieve a more appropriate sentencing structure for
cloning fraud.
The cellular phone protection initiative will help to reduce
telecommunications fraud. In the process, other criminal activity will
be made more difficult to conduct--cloned phones, now a staple of
criminal syndicates, would not be so readily available. I urge my
colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 493
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Cellular Telephone
Protection Act''.
SEC. 2. FRAUD AND RELATED ACTIVITY IN CONNECTION WITH
COUNTERFEIT ACCESS DEVICES.
(a) Unlawful Acts.--Section 1029(a) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (7), by striking ``use of'' and inserting
``access to'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (9) as paragraph (10); and
(3) by striking paragraph (8) and inserting the following:
``(8) knowingly and with intent to defraud uses, produces,
traffics in, has control or custody of, or possesses a
scanning receiver;
``(9) knowingly uses, produces, traffics in, has control or
custody of, or possesses hardware or software that may be
used for--
``(A) modifying or copying an electronic serial number; or
``(B) altering or modifying a telecommunications instrument
so that the instrument may be used to obtain unauthorized
access to telecommunications services; or''.
(b) Penalties.--Section 1029(c) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Penalties.--The punishment for an offense under
subsection (a) or (b)(1) is--
``(1) in the case of an offense that does not occur after a
conviction for another offense under subsection (a) or
(b)(1), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under
subsection (a) or (b)(1), a fine under this title or twice
the value obtained by the offense, whichever is greater,
imprisonment for not more than 15 years, or both; and
``(2) in the case of an offense that occurs after a
conviction for another offense under subsection (a) or
(b)(1), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under
subsection (a) or (b)(1), a fine under this title or twice
the value obtained by the offense, whichever is greater,
imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both.''.
(c) Definition of Scanning Receiver.--Section 1029(e)(8) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``or any electronic
serial number, mobile identification number, personal
identification number, or other identifier of any
telecommunications service, equipment, or instrument''.
(d) Exception for Certain Telecommunications Services
Providers.--Section 1029 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Exception for Certain Telecommunications Services
Providers.--
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection, the term
`telecommunications carrier' has the same meaning as in
section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153).
``(2) Permissible activities.--This section does not
prohibit any telecommunications carrier, or an officer,
agent, or employee of, or a person under contract with a
telecommunications carrier, engaged in protecting any
property or legal right of the telecommunications carrier,
from sending through the mail, sending or carrying in
interstate or foreign commerce, having control or custody of,
or possessing, manufacturing, assembling, or producing any
otherwise unlawful--
``(A) device-making equipment, scanning receiver, or access
device; or
``(B) hardware or software used for--
``(i) modifying or altering an electronic serial number; or
``(ii) altering or modifying a telecommunications
instrument so that the instrument may be used to obtain
unauthorized access to telecommunications services.''.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. Abraham, and Mr. Reid):
S. 494. A bill to combat the overutilization of prison health care
services and control rising prisoner health care costs; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
The Federal Prison Health Care Copayment Act
Mr. KYL. Mr. President. I introduce the Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act, which would require Federal prisoners to pay a nominal
fee when they initiate a visit for medical attention. The fee would be
deposited in the Federal Crime Victims' Fund. Each time a prisoner pays
to heal himself, he will be paying to heal a victim.
Most working, law-abiding Americans are required to pay a copayment
fee when they seek medical care. It is time to impose this requirement
on Federal prisoners.
To date, at least 20 States--including my home State of Arizona--have
implemented statewide prisoner health care copayment programs. In
addition to Arizona, the following States have enacted this reform:
California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Oklahoma, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, Hew
Hampshire, New Jersey, Utah, Virginia, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.
Several other States are expected to soon institute a copayment system,
including, Alaska, Connecticut, Maine, Montana, Michigan, North
Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, and Wyoming.
Moreover, according to the National Sheriffs' Association, at least
25 States--some of which have not adopted medical copayment reform on a
statewide basis--have jail systems that impose a copayment.
In June, the National Commission on Correctional Health Care held a
conference that examined the statewide fee-for-service programs. At the
conference, Dr. Ron Waldron of the Federal Bureau of Prisons provided a
survey of some of the States that have adopted inmate medical copayment
programs and concluded that ``Inmate user fees programs appear to
reduce utilization, and do generate modest revenues.''
Dr. Waldron reported that prison copayment laws resulted in the
reduction of medical utilization of: between 16 and 29 percent in
Florida; between 30 and 50 percent in Kansas; 40 percent in Maryland;
50 percent in Nevada; and between 10 and 18 percent in Oklahoma. Terry
Stewart, director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, notes that,
``Over the life of the [Arizona copayment] program, there has been an
overall reduction of about 31 percent in the number of requests for
health care services. This strongly suggests that inmates are being
more discreet about, and giving more considered thought to, their need
for medical attention.'' I will have his letter placed in the
Congressional Record.
Reducing frivolous medical visits saves taxpayers money. A December
28, 1996, New York Post editorial, ``Toward Healthier Prison Budgets,''
which I will also include in the Record, reported that the copayment
law in New Jersey allowed the State to cut its prison health care
budget by $17 million.
As to generating revenue, Dr. Waldron reported that California
collects about $60,000 per month in prisoner-copayment fees. In my home
State of Arizona, the State has collected about $400,000 since the
inception of the program in October 1994.
Not only are inmate copayment plans working well on the statewide
level, they are achieving success in jail systems across the United
States. In the January-February edition of Sheriff, the National
Sheriffs' Association President reported that copayment plans--which,
as mentioned above, are operational in jail systems in at least 25
States--have: First, discouraged overuse of service; and second, freed
health care staff to provide better care to inmates who truly need
medical attention. Yavapai County sheriff, G.C. ``Buck'' Buchanan, in a
letter that I will include in the Record, writes: ``Prior to the
institution of [copayment reform], many inmates in custody were taking
advantage of the health care which, or course, must be provided to
them. This could be construed as frivolous requests if you will, and
took up the valuable time of our health care providers * * *. Since
this policy has been in effect, we have realized a reduction in inmate
requests for medical services between 45 to 50 percent.''
[[Page
S2657]]
The success of the prison and jail fee-for-service initiatives should
come as no surprise. Common sense says that inmates will be less likely
to seek unnecessary medical attention if they are required to pick up
part of the tab.
I believe that Congress should follow the lead of the States and
provide the Federal Bureau of Prisons with the authority to charge
Federal inmates a nominal fee for elective health care visits. The
Federal system is particularly ripe for reform. According to the 1996
Corrections Yearbook, the system spends more per inmate on health care
than any State except Vermont. Federal inmate health care totaled $327
million in fiscal year 1996, up from $138 million in fiscal year 1990.
Average cost per inmate has increased over 60 percent during this
period, from $2,204 to $3,549.
The Prisoner Health Care Copayment Act provides that the Director of
the Bureau of Prisons shall assess and collect a fee of not less than
$3 and not more than $5 for each qualified health care visit. The term
``qualified health care visit'' does not include any health care visit
that is: Conducted during the intake process; an annual examination;
initiated by the health care staff of the Bureau of Prisons; the direct
result of a referral made by a prison official; or an emergency visit.
Prisoners who are pregnant or determined to be seriously mentally ill
are exempted from the copayment requirement altogether. No prisoner
shall be denied treatment on the basis of insolvency.
The act also gives the Director of the Bureau of Prisons the
authority to set by regulation a reasonable fee, not to exceed $5, for
prescriptions, emergency visits, and juvenile visits. And the
legislation permits the Director to charge an inmate's account for
medical treatment for injuries an inmate inflicts on himself or others.
As I mentioned above, all fees will be deposited in the Federal Crime
Victims' Fund.
Before I conclude, I would like to thank the Arizona Department of
Corrections for its assistance in helping me draft this reform.
Additionally, I appreciate the assistance that Sheriff Buchanan and his
office provided me.
I look forward to working with the Department of Justice, the Bureau
of Prisons, and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to implement
a fee-for-medical-services program--a sensible and overdue reform--for
Federal prisoners.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 494
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act''.
SEC. 2. PRISONER COPAYMENTS FOR HEALTH CARE SERVICES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 303 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 4048. Prisoner copayments for health care services
``(a) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `account' means the trust fund account (or
institutional equivalent) of a prisoner;
``(2) the term `Director' means the Director of the Bureau
of Prisons;
``(3) the term `health care provider' means any person and
who is licensed or certified under State law to provide
health care services who is operating within the scope of
such license;
``(4) the term `health care visit' means any visit by a
prisoner to an institutional or noninstitutional health care
provider, if the visit is made at the request of the
prisoner;
``(5) the term `prisoner' means any person subject to
incarceration, detention, or admission to any facility who is
accused of, convicted of, sentenced for, or adjudicated
delinquent for, violations of criminal law or the terms and
conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or
diversionary program; and
``(6) the term `qualified health care visit' means any
health care visit except a health care visit
``(A) that--
``(i) is conducted during the incarceration intake process;
``(ii) is an annual examination;
``(iii) is determined by the health care provider to be an
emergency visit;
``(iv) is an immunization;
``(v) is initiated by the health care staff of the Bureau
of Prisons; or
``(vi) is the direct result of a referral made by a prison
official; or
``(B) by a prisoner who is--
``(i) less than 18 years of age;
``(ii) pregnant; or
``(iii) determined by the appropriate official of the
Bureau of Prisons to be seriously mentally ill, or
permanently disabled.
``(b) Copayments For Health Care Services.--The Director
shall assess and collect a fee in accordance with this
section--
``(1) in an amount equal to not less than $3 and not more
than $5, for each qualified health care visit;
``(2) in an amount not to exceed $5, which shall be
established by the Director by regulation, for--
``(A) each prescription medication provided to the prisoner
by a health care provider; and
``(B) each health care visit described in subparagraph
(A)(iii) or (B)(i) of subsection (a)(6); and
``(3) in an amount established by the Director by
regulation, for each health care visit occurring as a result
of an injury inflicted on a prisoner by another prisoner.
``(c) Responsibility for Payment.--Each fee assessed under
subsection (b) shall be collected by the Director from the
account of--
``(1) the prisoner making the health care visit or
receiving the prescription medication; or
``(2) in the case of a health care visit described in
subsection (b)(3), the prisoner who is determined by the
Director to have inflicted the injury.
``(d) Timing.--Each fee assessed under this section shall
be collected from the appropriate account under subsection
(c)--
``(1) on the date on which the qualified health care visit
occurs; or
``(2) in the case of a prisoner whose account balance is
determined by the Director to be insufficient for collection
of the fee in accordance with paragraph (1), in accordance
with an installment payment plan, which shall be established
by the Director by regulation.
``(e) No Refusal of Treatment for Financial Reasons.--
Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit any
refusal of treatment to a prisoner on the basis that--
``(1) account of the prisoner is insolvent; or
``(2) the prisoner is otherwise unable to pay a fee
assessed under this section in accordance with subsection
(d)(1).
``(f) Use of Amounts.--Any amounts collected by the
Director under this section shall be deposited in the Crime
Victims' Fund established under section 1402 of the Victims
of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601).
``(g) Reports to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of the Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act and annually thereafter, the Director shall
submit to Congress a report, which shall include--
``(1) a description of the amounts collected under this
section during the preceding 12-month period; and
``(2) an analysis of the effects of the implementation of
this section, if any, on the nature and extent of health care
visits by prisoners.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
303 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``4048. Prisoner copayments for health care services.''.
____
Arizona Department of Corrections,
Phoenix, AZ, March 7, 1997.
Hon. Jon Kyl,
U.S. Senate, Senate Hart Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Inmate Health Care--Fee for Service
Dear Senator Kyl: On October 15, 1994, the Arizona
Department of Corrections began its fee for service program
for inmate health care. The program was intended to reduce
inmate abuse of the health care delivery system, to place on
the inmate some responsibility for his/her own health care,
and to offset the increasing costs of inmate health care.
This program has proven itself effective in accomplishing the
purposes intended.
There has been a noticeable decrease in the number of
requests for health care services. For example, upon
implementation of the program, and depending upon the
facility, we experienced an initial reduction of between 40%
and 60% in the number health care requests. Over the life of
the program, there has been an overall reduction of about 31%
in the number of requests for health care services. This
strongly suggests that inmates are being more discreet about,
and giving more considered thought to, their need for medical
attention.
The program has also proven a great benefit to Arizona's
taxpayers. From October 15, 1994 through December 31, 1996,
the Arizona Department of Corrections has collected
$392,843.59 for health care services provided to its inmates.
This money is returned to Arizona's general fund, where it
can be utilized to fund other State programs. This means that
fewer taxpayer dollars are required to fund State programs.
In light of the results achieved by this program in
Arizona, I highly recommend that similar programs be adopted
by prison and jail systems nationwide, and I support and
greatly appreciate your efforts to this end.
Sincerely,
Terry L. Stewart,
Director.
[[Page
S2658]]
____
Yavapai County Sheriff's Office,
Prescott, AZ, March 4, 1997.
Senator Jon Kyl,
2240 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Kyl: As you have requested, a copy of the
current Yavapai County Sheriff's Office Detention Services
Procedure Manual with respect to Inmate Health Care Co-
Payment policy, has been attached. This policy is sanctioned
under Arizona Revised Statute 31-151 and has been in
existence since November 1995.
Prior to the institution of this policy, many inmates in
custody were taking advantage of the health care which, of
course, must be provided to them. This could be construed as
frivolous requests if you will, and took up the valuable time
of our health care providers. Time was not being utilized to
full potential including any request for psychological
analysis and treatment.
Since this policy has been in effect, we have realized a
reduction in inmate requests for medical services between 45%
to 50%. Consequently, when an inmate is given the choice of
how to best spend his money, the preference is not for
unnecessary medical care. Those in custody have nothing
better to do than take advantage of the system for just a
change in the daily routine. This has ceased. There is no
denial of medical services, it just becomes a matter of
priority for the inmate.
Over the past eleven months, in the special account in
which the co-payment fee is retained, approximately $3500.00
has been placed into deposit. Although this is not a large
amount of revenue, the savings which have been noticed are
that of a reduction in staff time and an increase in the
quality of care the physician provides for this service
delivery. One could only imagine the magnitude of budget
savings if a program such as this were initiated on the
federal inmate population.
In Yavapai County this policy has proven to be a success
and it is through this success that you have my full support
in this proposed legislation.
In matters of mutual concern I remain,
G.C. ``Buck'' Buchanan,
Yavapai County Sheriff.
____
[From the New York Post, Dec. 28, 1996]
Toward Healthier Prison Budgets
Since April, New Jersey has experienced a 60 percent drop
in the number of prison inmates seeking medical attention.
Have prisoners suddenly begun pursuing a healthier lifestyle?
Perhaps--but we prefer to think it has something to do with
the fact that inmates must now ante up $5 every time they
demand to see a doctor.
New Jersey prison officials are extremely pleased with the
new system. The fee deters prisoners with vague or minor
complaints or whose primary motivation appears to be simply,
to get out of their cells for a few hours.
Result: The state has been able to cut its prison health-
care budget by $17 million. Fewer inmates being escorted to
and from the infirmary also enhances security within prison
walls.
Predictably, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
isn't pleased. It claims the $5 fee--equal to about two days'
prison wages--is preventing some chronically ill inmates from
seeking proper care. Naturally, a lawsuit has been filed. In
May, a judge ruled in favor of the prison system (the
decision is being appealed).
Charging prisoners a fee for medical services, however, is
nothing new, nor is it unique to New Jersey. Prisons and
jails in at least 18 states now charge for health care, up
from just nine in 1995. New Jersey has allowed such fees
since 1995. In fact, the Bergen County jail charges inmates
$10 per doctor visit.
State prison officials dismiss the ACLU's concerns as
``highly speculative.'' Inmates diagnosed with chronic
illnesses, the officials point out, are not charged for all
visits. One diabetic inmate, interviewed by The New York
Times, complained that the fee was a ``burden'' because it
meant he could no longer buy ``toothpaste and stuff.'' He
admitted, however, that he'd had to pay only ``three or four
times'' since April 1.
This isn't exactly Black Hole of Calcutta stuff. New Jersey
appears to be making good use of a sound prison-management
technique.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. Lott, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Mack, Mr.
Coverdell, Mr. Helms, Mr. Shelby, and Mrs. Hutchison):
S. 495. A bill to provide criminal and civil penalties for the
unlawful acquisition, transfer, or use of any chemical weapon or
biological weapon, and to reduce the threat of acts of terrorism or
armed aggression involving the use of any such weapon against the
United States, its citizens, or Armed Forces, or those of any allied
country, and for other purposes.
the chemical and biological weapons threat reduction act of 1997
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 495
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Chemical
and Biological Weapons Threat Reduction Act of 1997''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Policy.
Sec. 4. Definitions.
TITLE I--PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR
BY UNITED STATES NATIONALS ABROAD
Subtitle A--Criminal Penalties
Sec. 101. Criminal provisions.
Subtitle B--Civil Penalties
Sec. 111. Designation of lead agency.
Sec. 112. Prohibitions on chemical and biological weapons-related
activities.
Sec. 113. Civil penalties.
Sec. 114. Regulatory authority; application of other laws.
Subtitle C--Other Penalties
Sec. 121. Revocations of export privileges.
Sec. 122. Suspension of patent rights.
TITLE II--FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DEFENSE-RELATED PROVISIONS
Sec. 201. Sanctions for use of chemical or biological weapons.
Sec. 202. Continuation and enhancement of multilateral control regimes.
Sec. 203. Criteria for United States assistance to Russia.
Sec. 204. Report on the state of chemical and biological weapons
proliferation.
Sec. 205. International conference to strengthen the 1925 Geneva
Protocol.
Sec. 206. Restriction on use of funds for the Organization for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
Sec. 207. Enhancements to robust chemical and biological defenses.
Sec. 208. Negative security assurances.
Sec. 209. Riot control agents.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that--
(1) the United States eliminated its stockpile of
biological weapons pursuant to the 1972 Biological Weapons
Convention and has pledged to destroy its entire inventory of
chemical weapons by 2004, independent of the Chemical Weapons
Convention entering into force;
(2) the use of chemical or biological weapons in
contravention of international law is abhorrent and should
trigger immediate and effective sanctions;
(3) United Nations Security Council Resolution 620, adopted
on August 26, 1988, states the intention of the Security
Council to consider immediately ``appropriate and effective''
sanctions against any nation using chemical and biological
weapons in violation of international law;
(4) the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade recognizes
that national security concerns may serve as legitimate
grounds for limiting trade; title XXI of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade states that ``nothing in this
Agreement shall be construed . . . to prevent any contracting
party from taking any action which it considers necessary for
the protection of its essential security interests. . .'';
(5) on September 30, 1993, the President declared by
Executive Order No. 12868 a national emergency to deal with
``the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national
security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States''
posed by the proliferation of nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons, and of the means for delivering such
weapons;
(6) Russia has not implemented the 1990 United States-
Russian Bilateral Agreement on Destruction and Non-Production
of Chemical Weapons and on Measures to Facilitate the
Multilateral Convention on Banning Chemical Weapons, known as
the ``BDA'', nor has the United States and Russia resolved,
to the satisfaction of the United States, the outstanding
compliance issues under the Memorandum of Understanding
Between the United States of America and the Government of
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Regarding a Bilateral
Verification Experiment and Data Exchange Related To
Prohibition on Chemical Weapons, known as the ``1989 Wyoming
MOU'';
(7) the Intelligence Community has stated that a number of
countries, among them China, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North
Korea, Syria, and Russia, possess chemical and biological
weapons and the means to deliver them;
(8) four countries in the Middle East--Iran, Iraq, Libya,
and Syria--have, as a national policy, supported
international terrorism;
(9) chemical and biological weapons have been used by
states in the past for intimidation and military aggression,
most recently during the Iran-Iraq war and by Iraq against
its Kurdish minority;
(10) the grave new threat of chemical and biological
terrorism has been demonstrated by the 1995 nerve gas attack
on the Tokyo subway by the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo;
(11) the urgent need to improve domestic preparedness to
protect against chemical and
[[Page
S2659]]
biological threats was underscored by enactment of the 1997
Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act;
(12) the Department of Defense, in light of growing
chemical and biological threats in regions of key concern,
including Northeast Asia, and the Middle East, has stated
that United States forces must be properly trained and
equipped for all missions, including those in which opponents
might threaten use of chemical or biological weapons; and
(13) Australia Group controls on the exports of chemical
and biological agents, and related equipment, and the Missile
Technology Control Regime, together provide an indispensable
foundation for international and national efforts to curb the
spread of chemical and biological weapons, and their delivery
means.
SEC. 3. POLICY.
It should be the policy of the United States to take all
appropriate measures to--
(1) prevent and deter the threat or use of chemical and
biological weapons against the citizens, Armed Forces, and
territory of the United States and its allies, and to protect
against, and manage the consequences of, such use should it
occur;
(2) discourage the proliferation of chemical and biological
weapons, their means of delivery, and related equipment,
material, and technology;
(3) prohibit within the United States the development,
production, acquisition, stockpiling, and transfer to third
parties of chemical or biological weapons, their precursors
and related technology; and
(4) impose unilateral sanctions, and seek immediately
international sanctions, against any nation using chemical
and biological weapons in violation of international law.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Australia group.--The term ``Australia Group'' refers
to the informal forum of countries, formed in 1984 and
chaired by Australia, whose goal is to discourage and impede
chemical and biological weapons proliferation by harmonizing
national export controls on precursor chemicals for chemical
weapons, biological weapons pathogens, and dual-use
equipment, sharing information on target countries, and
seeking other ways to curb the use of chemical weapons and
biological weapons.
(2) Biological weapon.--The term ``biological weapon''
means the following, together or separately:
(A) Any micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses, fungi,
rickettsiae or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious substance,
or any naturally occurring, bio-engineered or synthesized
component of any such micro-organism, pathogen, or infectious
substance, whatever its origin or method of production,
capable of causing--
(i) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a
human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
(ii) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or
materials of any kind; or
(iii) deleterious alteration of the environment.
(B) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of those
biological weapons specified in subparagraph (A), which would
be released as a result of the employment of such munition or
device.
(C) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in
connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
(D) Any living organism specifically designed to carry a
biological weapon specified in subparagraph (A) to a host.
(3) Chemical weapon.--The term ``chemical weapon'' means
the following, together or separately:
(A) Any of the following chemical agents: tabun, Sarin,
Soman, GF, VX, sulfur mustard, nitrogen mustard, phosgene
oxime, lewisite, phenyldichloroarsine, ethyldi- chloroarsine,
methyldichloroarsine, phosgene, diphosgene, hydrogen cyanide,
cyanogen chloride, and arsine.
(B) Any of the 54 chemicals other than a riot control agent
that is controlled by the Australia Group as of the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(C) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of a
chemical weapon specified in subparagraph (A) or (B), which
would be released as a result of the employment of such
munition or device.
(D) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in
connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
(4) Knowingly.--The term ``knowingly'' is used within the
meaning of ``knows'' as that term is defined in section 104
of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-
2) and includes situations in which a person has reason to
know.
(5) National of the united states.--The term ``national of
the United States'' has the same meaning given such term in
section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)).
(6) Person.--The term ``person'' means any individual,
corporation, partnership, firm, association, or other legal
entity.
(7) Purpose not prohibited under this act.--The term
``purpose not prohibited under this Act'' means--
(A) any industrial, agricultural, research, medical,
pharmaceutical, or other peaceful purpose;
(B) any protective purpose, namely any purpose directly
related to protection against a chemical or biological
weapon;
(C) any military purpose that is not connected with the use
of a chemical or biological weapon or that is not dependent
on the use of the toxic properties of the chemical or
biological weapon to cause death or other harm; or
(D) any law enforcement purpose, including any domestic
riot control purpose.
(8) Riot control agent.--The term ``riot control agent''
means any substance, including diphenylchloroarsine,
diphenyl- cyanoarsine, adamsite, chloroacetophenone,
chloropicrin, bromobenzyl cyanide, 0-chlorobenzylidene
malononitrile, or 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate, that is designed
or used to produce rapidly in humans any nonlethal sensory
irritation or disabling physical effect that disappears
within a short time following termination of exposure.
(9) United states.--The term ``United States'' means the
several States of the United States, the District of
Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions
of the United States and includes all places under the
jurisdiction or control of the United States, including--
(A) any of the places within the provisions of section
101(41) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49
U.S.C. App. sec. 1301(41));
(B) any public aircraft or civil aircraft of the United
States, as such terms are defined in sections 101 (36) and
(18) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49
U.S.C. App. secs. 1301(36) and 1301(18)); and
(C) any vessel of the United States, as such term is
defined in section 3(b) of the Maritime Drug Enforcement Act,
as amended (46 U.S.C., App. sec. 1903(b)).
TITLE I--PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR
BY UNITED STATES NATIONALS ABROAD
Subtitle A--Criminal Penalties
SEC. 101. CRIMINAL PROVISIONS.
(a) In General.--Part I of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after chapter 11A the following new
chapter:
``CHAPTER 11B--CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS
``Sec.
``229. Penalties and prohibitions with respect to chemical and
biological weapons.
``229A. Seizure, forfeiture, and destruction.
``229B. Other prohibitions.
``229C. Injunctions.
``229D. Requests for military assistance to enforce prohibition in
certain emergencies.
``229E. Definitions.
``Sec. 229. Penalties and prohibitions with respect to
chemical and biological weapons
``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (c),
whoever knowingly develops, produces, otherwise acquires,
receives from any person located outside the territory of the
United States, stockpiles, retains, directly or indirectly
transfers, uses, owns, or possesses any chemical weapon or
any biological weapon, or knowingly assists, encourages or
induces, in any way, any person to do so, or attempt or
conspire to do so, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for life or any term of years or both, unless--
``(1) the chemical weapon or biological weapon is intended
for a purpose not prohibited under this Act;
``(2) the types and quantities of chemical weapons or
biological weapons are strictly limited to those that can be
justified for such purposes; and
``(3) the amount of such chemical weapons or biological
weapons per person at any given time does not exceed a
quantity that under the circumstances is inconsistent with
the purposes not prohibited under this Act.
``(b) Death Penalty.--Any person who knowingly uses
chemical or biological weapons in violation of subsection (a)
and by whose action the death of another person is the result
shall be punished by death or imprisoned for life.
``(c) Exclusion.--
``(1) In general.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the
retention, ownership, or possession of a chemical weapon or a
biological weapon by an agency of the United States or a
person described in paragraph (2) pending destruction of the
weapon.
``(2) Covered persons.--A person referred to in paragraph
(1) is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or
any other person if the person is authorized by the head of
an agency of the United States to retain, own, or possess the
chemical or biological weapon.
``(d) Jurisdiction.--Conduct prohibited by subsection (a)
is within the jurisdiction of the United States if the
prohibited conduct--
``(1) takes place in the United States; or
``(2) takes place outside of the United States and is
committed by a national of the United States.
``(e) Reimbursement of Costs.--The court shall order any
person convicted of an offense under this section to
reimburse the United States for any expenses incurred by the
United States incident to the seizure, storage, handling,
transportation, and destruction or other disposition of any
property that was seized in connection with an investigation
of the commission of the offense by that person. A person
ordered to reimburse the United States for expenses
[[Page
S2660]]
under this subsection shall be jointly and severally liable
for such expenses with each other person, if any, who is
ordered under this subsection to reimburse the United States
for the same expenses.
``Sec. 229A. Seizure, forfeiture, and destruction
``(a) Seizure.--
``(1) Seizures on warrants.--The Attorney General may
request the issuance, in the same manner as provided for a
search warrant, of a warrant authorizing the seizure of any
chemical weapon or any biological weapon that is of a type or
quantity that, under the circumstances, is inconsistent with
the purposes not prohibited under this Act.
``(2) Warrantless seizures.--In exigent circumstances,
seizure and destruction of any such chemical weapon or
biological weapon described in paragraph (1) may be made by
the Attorney General upon probable cause without the
necessity for a warrant.
``(b) Procedure for Forfeiture and Destruction.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (a)(2),
property seized pursuant to subsection (a) shall be forfeited
to the United States after notice to potential claimants and
an opportunity for a hearing.
``(2) Burden of persuasion.--At such a hearing, the United
States shall bear the burden of persuasion by a preponderance
of the evidence.
``(3) Procedures.--The provisions of chapter 46 of this
title relating to civil forfeitures shall apply to a seizure
or forfeiture under this section except to the extent (if
any) that such provisions are inconsistent with this section.
``(4) Destruction or other disposition.--The Attorney
General shall provide for the destruction or other
appropriate disposition of any chemical or biological weapon
seized and forfeited pursuant to this section.
``(c) Other Seizure, Forfeiture, and Destruction.--
``(1) Seizures on warrant.--The Attorney General may
request the issuance, in the same manner as provided for a
search warrant, of a warrant authorizing the seizure of any
chemical weapon or biological weapon that exists by reason of
conduct prohibited under section 229 of this title.
``(2) Warrantless seizures.--In exigent circumstances,
seizure and destruction of any such chemical weapon or
biological weapon described in paragraph (1) may be made by
the Attorney General upon probable cause without the
necessity for a warrant.
``(3) Forfeiture and destruction.--Property seized pursuant
to this subsection shall be summarily forfeited (within the
meaning of section 609(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930) to the
United States and destroyed.
``(d) Assistance.--The Attorney General may request the
head of any agency of the United States to assist in the
handling, storage, transportation, or destruction of property
seized under this section.
``(e) Owner or Possessor Liability.--The owner or possessor
of any property seized under this section shall be jointly
and severally liable to the United States in an action for
money damages for any expenses incurred by the United States
incident to the seizure, including any expenses relating to
the handling, storage, transportation, destruction or other
disposition of the seized property.
``Sec. 229B. Other prohibitions
``(a) In General.--Whoever knowingly uses riot control
agents as an act of terrorism, or knowingly assists any
person to do so, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for a term of not more than 10 years, or both.
``(b) Jurisdiction.--Conduct prohibited by this section is
within the jurisdiction of the United States if the
prohibited conduct--
``(1) takes place in the United States; or
``(2) takes place outside of the United States and is
committed by a national of the United States.
``Sec. 229C. Injunctions
``The United States may obtain in a civil action an
injunction against--
``(1) the conduct prohibited under section 229 of this
title; or
``(2) the preparation or solicitation to engage in conduct
prohibited under section 229 of this title.
``Sec. 229D. Requests for military assistance to enforce
prohibition in certain emergencies
``The Attorney General may request the Secretary of Defense
to provide assistance under section 382 of title 10 in
support of Department of Justice activities relating to the
enforcement of section 229 of this title in an emergency
situation involving a biological weapon or chemical weapon.
The authority to make such a request may be exercised by
another official of the Department of Justice in accordance
with section 382(f)(2) of title 10.
``Sec. 229E. Definitions
``In this chapter:
``(1) Australia group.--The term `Australia Group' refers
to the informal forum of countries, formed in 1984 and
chaired by Australia, whose goal is to discourage and impede
chemical and biological weapons proliferation by harmonizing
national export controls on precursor chemicals for chemical
weapons, biological weapons pathogens, and dual-use
equipment, sharing information on target countries, and
seeking other ways to curb the use of chemical and biological
weapons.
``(2) Biological weapon.--The term `biological weapon'
means the following, together or separately:
``(A) Any micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses,
fungi, rickettsiae or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious
substance, or any naturally occurring, bio-engineered or
synthesized component of any such micro-organism, pathogen,
or infectious substance, whatever its origin or method of
production, capable of causing--
``(i) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a
human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
``(ii) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies,
or materials of any kind; or
``(iii) deleterious alteration of the environment.
``(B) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of those
biological weapons specified in subparagraph (A), which would
be released as a result of the employment of such munition or
device.
``(C) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly
in connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
``(D) Any living organism specifically designed to carry a
biological weapon specified in subparagraph (A) to a host.
``(3) Chemical weapon.--The term `chemical weapon' means
the following, together or separately:
``(A) Any of the following chemical agents: tabun, Sarin,
Soman, GF, VX, sulfur mustard, nitrogen mustard, phosgene
oxime, lewisite, phenyldichloroarsine, ethyldichloroarsine,
methyldichloroarsine, phosgene, diphosgene, hydrogen cyanide,
cyanogen chloride, and arsine.
``(B) Any of the 54 chemicals, other than a riot control
agent, controlled by the Australia Group as of the date of
the enactment of this Act.
``(C) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of a
chemical weapon specified in subparagraph (A) or (B), which
would be released as a result of the employment of such
munition or device.
``(D) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly
in connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
``(4) Knowingly.--The term `knowingly' is used within the
meaning of `knows' as that term is defined in section 104 of
the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-2)
and includes situations in which a person has reason to know.
``(5) National of the united states.--The term `national of
the United States' has the same meaning given such term in
section 101(
Major Actions:
All articles in Senate section
THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
(Senate - March 20, 1997)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages
S2654-S2706]
THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to
improve the pay system used for Federal firefighters. This bill has
three broad purposes: First, to improve pay equality with municipal and
other public section firefighters; second, to enhance recruitment and
retention of firefighters in order to maintain the highest quality
Federal fire service; and third, to encourage Federal firefighters to
pursue career advancement and training opportunities.
Fire protection is clearly a major concern at Federal facilities and
on Federal lands throughout the Nation. From fighting wildland fires in
our national parks and forests to protecting military families from
fires in their base housing, Federal firefighters play a vital role in
preserving lives and property. One only needs to recall the terrible
tragedies in Colorado two summers ago to understand the vital
importance of our Federal firefighters.
The Department of Agriculture, the Coast Guard, the Department of
Commerce, the Department of Defense, the General Services
Administration, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of
Veterans Affairs are among the Federal agencies which rely on Federal
fire fighters to protect their vast holdings of land and structures.
Just like their municipal counterparts, these firefighters are the
first line of defense against threats to life and property.
Mr. President, the current system used to pay our Federal
firefighters is at best confusing and at worst unfair. These men and
women work longer hours than any other public sector firefighters--yet
are paid substantially less. The current pay system, which consists of
three tiers, is overly complex and, more importantly, is hurting
Federal efforts to attract and retain top-quality employees.
Currently, most Federal firefighters work an average 72-hour week
under exceptionally demanding conditions. The typical workweek consists
of a one-day-off schedule which results in three 24-hours shifts during
the remainder of each week. Despite this unusual schedule, firefighters
are paid under a modified version of the same General Schedule pay
system used for full-time, 40-hour-per-week Federal workers.
The result of the pay modification is that Federal firefighters make
less per hour than any other Federal employee at their same grade
level. For example: a firefighter who is a GS-5, Step 5 makes $7.21 per
hour while other employees at the same grade and step earn $10.34 per
hour. Some have tried to justify this by noting that part of a
firefighter's day is downtime. However, I must note that all
firefighters have substantial duties beyond those at the site of a
fire. Adding to this discrepancy is the fact that the average municipal
firefighter makes $12.87 per hour.
Mr. President, this has caused the Federal fire service to become a
training ground for young men and women who then leave for higher pay
elsewhere in the public sector. Continually training new employees is,
as my colleagues know, very expensive for any employer.
The Office of Personnel Management is well aware of these problems.
In fact, section 102 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of
1990 [FEPCA], title V of Public Law 101-509, authorizes the
establishment of special pay systems for certain Federal occupations.
The origin of this provision was a recognition that the current pay
classification system did not account for the unique and distinctive
employment conditions of Federal protective occupations including the
Federal fire service.
In May 1991, I wrote to OPM urging the establishment of a separate
pay scale for firefighters under the authority provided for in FEPCA.
Subsequently, OPM established an Advisory Committee on Law Enforcement
and Protective Occupations consisting of agency personnel and
representatives from Federal fire and law enforcement organizations.
Beginning in August of 1991, representatives from the Federal fire
community began working with OPM and other administration officials to
identify and address the problems of paying Federal firefighters under
the General Schedule. The committee completed its work in June of 1992
and in December of that year issued a staff report setting forth
recommendations to correct the most serious problems with the current
pay system.
Mr. President, I regret that since the release of the OPM
recommendations, there has been no effort to implement any of the
proposals of the advisory task force. In fact, OPM has communicated
quite clearly that it has no plans to pursue any solution to the
serious pay deficiencies that have been so widely identified and
acknowledged.
[[Page
S2655]]
It would not be necessary to introduce this legislation today had OPM
taken the corrective action that, in my view, is so clearly warranted.
However, I have determined that legislation appears to be the only
vehicle to achieve the necessary changes in the pay system for Federal
firefighters.
Mr. President, the Firefighter Pay Fairness Act would improve Federal
firefighter pay in several important and straightforward ways. Perhaps
most importantly, the bill draws from existing provisions in title V to
calculate a true hourly rate for firefighters. This would alleviate the
current problem of firefighters being paid considerably less than other
General Schedule employees at the same GS level. It would also account
for the varying length in the tour of duty for Federal firefighters
stationed at different locations.
In addition, the bill would use this hourly rate to ensure that
firefighters receive true time and one-half overtime for hours worked
over 106 in a bi-weekly pay period. This is designed to correct the
problem, under the current system, where the overtime rate is
calculated based on an hourly rate considerably less than base pay.
The Firefighter Pay Fairness Act would also extend these pay
provisions to so-called wildland firefighters when they are engaged in
firefighting duties. Currently, wildland firefighters are often not
compensated for all the time spent responding to a fire event. This
legislation would ensure that these protectors of our parks and forests
would be paid fairly for ensuring the safety of these invaluable
national resources.
It also ensures that firefighters promoted to supervisory positions
would be paid at a rate of pay at least equal to what they received
before the promotion. This would address a situation, under the current
pay system, which discourages employees from accepting promotions
because of the significant loss of pay which often accompanies a move
to a supervisory position.
Similarly, the bill would encourage employees to get the necessary
training in hazardous materials, emergency medicine, and other critical
areas by ensuring they do not receive a pay cut while engaged in these
training activities.
Mr. President, this legislation is based upon a bill I authorized in
the 103d Congress. A bipartisan group of more than 150 Members
cosponsored the measure in the Senate and the House last year. The
legislation I am introducing today reflects several modifications that
were suggested to the bill following substantial discussions with
various Members. However, it is identical to the so-called compromise
measure that has been discussed with the authorizing as well as the
appropriations committees in previous years and received widespread
support.
To reduce initial costs and allow oversight of the effectiveness of
the legislation, the bill I am introducing today would implement the
new pay system and other provisions beginning October 1, 1997. However,
the new rate of pay would be phased in over a 4-year period ending
October 1, 2002.
Mr. President, I consulted many of the affected groups in developing
my legislation. I am very pleased that this bill has been endorsed by
the American Federation of Government Employees, the International
Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Fire
Fighters, the National Association of Government Employees, and the
National Federation of Federal Employees.
As I have said before, Mr. President, fairness is the key word. There
is no reason why Federal firefighters should be paid dramatically less
that their municipal counterparts. As a cochairman of the Congressional
Fire Services Caucus, I want to urge all members of the caucus and,
indeed, all Members of the Senate to join in cosponsoring this
important piece of legislation.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself and Mr. Gorton):
S. 493. A bill to amend section 1029 of title 18, United States Code,
with respect to cellular telephone cloning paraphernalia; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
the cellular telephone protection act
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Cellular Telephone
Protection Act, which would improve the ability of law enforcement to
investigate and prosecute individuals engaged in the activity of
cloning cellular phones. Law enforcement officials and wireless
carriers support the bill as an important tool to stem this kind of
telecommunications fraud.
Cell phones are manufactured with an embedded electronic serial
number [ESN], which is transmitted to gain access to the
telecommunications network. Those involved in cloning cell phones sit
in parked cars outside of airports or along busy roadways to harvest
ESN's from legitimate cell phone users and, in a process known as
cloning, use software and equipment to insert the stolen numbers into
other cell phones, the clones. A single ESN can be implanted into
several cloned phones. The cloned phones charge to the account of the
lawful, unsuspecting user. Cellular phone carriers must absorb these
losses, which, according to the Cellular Telecommunication Industry
Association, amounted to about $650 million in 1995, up from $480
million in 1994. The cellular industry is expanding by about 40 percent
a year; efforts to combat fraud are imperative to ensure the integrity
of our communications network.
Cloning is more than an inconvenience to the 36 million Americans who
currently use cellular phone services, and an expense to wireless
communication companies who pay for the fraudulent calls. According to
the Secret Service, which is the primary Federal agency responsible for
investigating telecommunications fraud, cloning abets organized
criminal enterprises that use cellular telephones as their preferred
method of communication. Cloned phones are extremely popular among drug
traffickers and gang members, who oftentimes employ several cloned
phones to evade detection by law enforcement. When not selling cloned
phones to drug dealers and ruthless street gangs, cloners set up
corner-side calling shops where individuals pay a nominal fee to call
anywhere in the world on a replicated phone, or simply purchase the
illegal phone for a flat amount.
The cellular telephone protection bill clarifies that there is no
lawful purpose to posses, produce or sell hardware, known as copycat
boxes, or software used for cloning a cellular phone or its ESN. Such
equipment and software are easy to obtainn--advertisements hawking
cloning equipment appear in computer magazines and on the Internet.
There is no legitimate purpose for cloning software and equipment, save
for law enforcement and telecommunication service providers using it to
improve fraud detection. The bill strikes at the heart of the cloning
paraphernalia market by eliminating the requirement for prosecutors to
prove that the person selling copycat boxes or cloning software
programs intended to defraud. The bill retains an exception for law
enforcement to possess otherwise unlawful cloning software, and adds a
similar exception for telecommunications service providers.
Moreover, the Cellular Phone Protection Act expands the definition of
``scanning receivers,'' equipment which, unlike cloning software and
devices, does have legitimate uses if not used to scan frequencies
assigned to wireless communications. The bill clarifies that the
definition of scanning receivers encompasses devices that can be used
to intercept ESN's even if they are not capable of receiving the voice
channel. As mentioned above, criminals harvest ESN's by employing
scanners near busy thoroughfares. The revised definition of scanning
receiver will ensure that these devices are unlawful when used with an
intent to defraud just like scanners that intercept voice.
Finally, the bill increases penalties for those engaged in cloning. A
new paradigm is needed for penalizing cloning offenses. Currently,
penalties for cloning crimes are based on the monetary loss a carrier
suffers, not the potential loss. First-time offenders oftentimes do not
face any jail time, which makes these cases unattractive for
prosecution. Carriers and law enforcement are forced to choose between
keeping the cloner on the telecommunications network to rack up high
losses to ensure jail time, or stemming the losses sooner only to have
the cloner back on the streets in days. The penalty scheme should be
revised to
[[Page
S2656]]
track another indicator of cloning fraud--the number of electronic
serial numbers stolen.
Cloning offenses are serious crimes, and the penalties should reflect
this. We know that cloned phones are used to facilitate other crimes--
particularly drug trafficking. Additionally, cloning offenses are
serious economic crimes in themselves that threaten the integrity of
the public communications network. In August, two individuals in New
York were arrested for allegedly possessing 80,000 electronic serial
numbers. Each of the 80,000 ESN's could be implanted into several
cloned phones. I look forward to working with the U.S. Sentencing
Commission to achieve a more appropriate sentencing structure for
cloning fraud.
The cellular phone protection initiative will help to reduce
telecommunications fraud. In the process, other criminal activity will
be made more difficult to conduct--cloned phones, now a staple of
criminal syndicates, would not be so readily available. I urge my
colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 493
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Cellular Telephone
Protection Act''.
SEC. 2. FRAUD AND RELATED ACTIVITY IN CONNECTION WITH
COUNTERFEIT ACCESS DEVICES.
(a) Unlawful Acts.--Section 1029(a) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (7), by striking ``use of'' and inserting
``access to'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (9) as paragraph (10); and
(3) by striking paragraph (8) and inserting the following:
``(8) knowingly and with intent to defraud uses, produces,
traffics in, has control or custody of, or possesses a
scanning receiver;
``(9) knowingly uses, produces, traffics in, has control or
custody of, or possesses hardware or software that may be
used for--
``(A) modifying or copying an electronic serial number; or
``(B) altering or modifying a telecommunications instrument
so that the instrument may be used to obtain unauthorized
access to telecommunications services; or''.
(b) Penalties.--Section 1029(c) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Penalties.--The punishment for an offense under
subsection (a) or (b)(1) is--
``(1) in the case of an offense that does not occur after a
conviction for another offense under subsection (a) or
(b)(1), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under
subsection (a) or (b)(1), a fine under this title or twice
the value obtained by the offense, whichever is greater,
imprisonment for not more than 15 years, or both; and
``(2) in the case of an offense that occurs after a
conviction for another offense under subsection (a) or
(b)(1), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under
subsection (a) or (b)(1), a fine under this title or twice
the value obtained by the offense, whichever is greater,
imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both.''.
(c) Definition of Scanning Receiver.--Section 1029(e)(8) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``or any electronic
serial number, mobile identification number, personal
identification number, or other identifier of any
telecommunications service, equipment, or instrument''.
(d) Exception for Certain Telecommunications Services
Providers.--Section 1029 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Exception for Certain Telecommunications Services
Providers.--
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection, the term
`telecommunications carrier' has the same meaning as in
section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153).
``(2) Permissible activities.--This section does not
prohibit any telecommunications carrier, or an officer,
agent, or employee of, or a person under contract with a
telecommunications carrier, engaged in protecting any
property or legal right of the telecommunications carrier,
from sending through the mail, sending or carrying in
interstate or foreign commerce, having control or custody of,
or possessing, manufacturing, assembling, or producing any
otherwise unlawful--
``(A) device-making equipment, scanning receiver, or access
device; or
``(B) hardware or software used for--
``(i) modifying or altering an electronic serial number; or
``(ii) altering or modifying a telecommunications
instrument so that the instrument may be used to obtain
unauthorized access to telecommunications services.''.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. Abraham, and Mr. Reid):
S. 494. A bill to combat the overutilization of prison health care
services and control rising prisoner health care costs; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
The Federal Prison Health Care Copayment Act
Mr. KYL. Mr. President. I introduce the Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act, which would require Federal prisoners to pay a nominal
fee when they initiate a visit for medical attention. The fee would be
deposited in the Federal Crime Victims' Fund. Each time a prisoner pays
to heal himself, he will be paying to heal a victim.
Most working, law-abiding Americans are required to pay a copayment
fee when they seek medical care. It is time to impose this requirement
on Federal prisoners.
To date, at least 20 States--including my home State of Arizona--have
implemented statewide prisoner health care copayment programs. In
addition to Arizona, the following States have enacted this reform:
California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Oklahoma, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, Hew
Hampshire, New Jersey, Utah, Virginia, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.
Several other States are expected to soon institute a copayment system,
including, Alaska, Connecticut, Maine, Montana, Michigan, North
Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, and Wyoming.
Moreover, according to the National Sheriffs' Association, at least
25 States--some of which have not adopted medical copayment reform on a
statewide basis--have jail systems that impose a copayment.
In June, the National Commission on Correctional Health Care held a
conference that examined the statewide fee-for-service programs. At the
conference, Dr. Ron Waldron of the Federal Bureau of Prisons provided a
survey of some of the States that have adopted inmate medical copayment
programs and concluded that ``Inmate user fees programs appear to
reduce utilization, and do generate modest revenues.''
Dr. Waldron reported that prison copayment laws resulted in the
reduction of medical utilization of: between 16 and 29 percent in
Florida; between 30 and 50 percent in Kansas; 40 percent in Maryland;
50 percent in Nevada; and between 10 and 18 percent in Oklahoma. Terry
Stewart, director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, notes that,
``Over the life of the [Arizona copayment] program, there has been an
overall reduction of about 31 percent in the number of requests for
health care services. This strongly suggests that inmates are being
more discreet about, and giving more considered thought to, their need
for medical attention.'' I will have his letter placed in the
Congressional Record.
Reducing frivolous medical visits saves taxpayers money. A December
28, 1996, New York Post editorial, ``Toward Healthier Prison Budgets,''
which I will also include in the Record, reported that the copayment
law in New Jersey allowed the State to cut its prison health care
budget by $17 million.
As to generating revenue, Dr. Waldron reported that California
collects about $60,000 per month in prisoner-copayment fees. In my home
State of Arizona, the State has collected about $400,000 since the
inception of the program in October 1994.
Not only are inmate copayment plans working well on the statewide
level, they are achieving success in jail systems across the United
States. In the January-February edition of Sheriff, the National
Sheriffs' Association President reported that copayment plans--which,
as mentioned above, are operational in jail systems in at least 25
States--have: First, discouraged overuse of service; and second, freed
health care staff to provide better care to inmates who truly need
medical attention. Yavapai County sheriff, G.C. ``Buck'' Buchanan, in a
letter that I will include in the Record, writes: ``Prior to the
institution of [copayment reform], many inmates in custody were taking
advantage of the health care which, or course, must be provided to
them. This could be construed as frivolous requests if you will, and
took up the valuable time of our health care providers * * *. Since
this policy has been in effect, we have realized a reduction in inmate
requests for medical services between 45 to 50 percent.''
[[Page
S2657]]
The success of the prison and jail fee-for-service initiatives should
come as no surprise. Common sense says that inmates will be less likely
to seek unnecessary medical attention if they are required to pick up
part of the tab.
I believe that Congress should follow the lead of the States and
provide the Federal Bureau of Prisons with the authority to charge
Federal inmates a nominal fee for elective health care visits. The
Federal system is particularly ripe for reform. According to the 1996
Corrections Yearbook, the system spends more per inmate on health care
than any State except Vermont. Federal inmate health care totaled $327
million in fiscal year 1996, up from $138 million in fiscal year 1990.
Average cost per inmate has increased over 60 percent during this
period, from $2,204 to $3,549.
The Prisoner Health Care Copayment Act provides that the Director of
the Bureau of Prisons shall assess and collect a fee of not less than
$3 and not more than $5 for each qualified health care visit. The term
``qualified health care visit'' does not include any health care visit
that is: Conducted during the intake process; an annual examination;
initiated by the health care staff of the Bureau of Prisons; the direct
result of a referral made by a prison official; or an emergency visit.
Prisoners who are pregnant or determined to be seriously mentally ill
are exempted from the copayment requirement altogether. No prisoner
shall be denied treatment on the basis of insolvency.
The act also gives the Director of the Bureau of Prisons the
authority to set by regulation a reasonable fee, not to exceed $5, for
prescriptions, emergency visits, and juvenile visits. And the
legislation permits the Director to charge an inmate's account for
medical treatment for injuries an inmate inflicts on himself or others.
As I mentioned above, all fees will be deposited in the Federal Crime
Victims' Fund.
Before I conclude, I would like to thank the Arizona Department of
Corrections for its assistance in helping me draft this reform.
Additionally, I appreciate the assistance that Sheriff Buchanan and his
office provided me.
I look forward to working with the Department of Justice, the Bureau
of Prisons, and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to implement
a fee-for-medical-services program--a sensible and overdue reform--for
Federal prisoners.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 494
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act''.
SEC. 2. PRISONER COPAYMENTS FOR HEALTH CARE SERVICES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 303 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 4048. Prisoner copayments for health care services
``(a) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `account' means the trust fund account (or
institutional equivalent) of a prisoner;
``(2) the term `Director' means the Director of the Bureau
of Prisons;
``(3) the term `health care provider' means any person and
who is licensed or certified under State law to provide
health care services who is operating within the scope of
such license;
``(4) the term `health care visit' means any visit by a
prisoner to an institutional or noninstitutional health care
provider, if the visit is made at the request of the
prisoner;
``(5) the term `prisoner' means any person subject to
incarceration, detention, or admission to any facility who is
accused of, convicted of, sentenced for, or adjudicated
delinquent for, violations of criminal law or the terms and
conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or
diversionary program; and
``(6) the term `qualified health care visit' means any
health care visit except a health care visit
``(A) that--
``(i) is conducted during the incarceration intake process;
``(ii) is an annual examination;
``(iii) is determined by the health care provider to be an
emergency visit;
``(iv) is an immunization;
``(v) is initiated by the health care staff of the Bureau
of Prisons; or
``(vi) is the direct result of a referral made by a prison
official; or
``(B) by a prisoner who is--
``(i) less than 18 years of age;
``(ii) pregnant; or
``(iii) determined by the appropriate official of the
Bureau of Prisons to be seriously mentally ill, or
permanently disabled.
``(b) Copayments For Health Care Services.--The Director
shall assess and collect a fee in accordance with this
section--
``(1) in an amount equal to not less than $3 and not more
than $5, for each qualified health care visit;
``(2) in an amount not to exceed $5, which shall be
established by the Director by regulation, for--
``(A) each prescription medication provided to the prisoner
by a health care provider; and
``(B) each health care visit described in subparagraph
(A)(iii) or (B)(i) of subsection (a)(6); and
``(3) in an amount established by the Director by
regulation, for each health care visit occurring as a result
of an injury inflicted on a prisoner by another prisoner.
``(c) Responsibility for Payment.--Each fee assessed under
subsection (b) shall be collected by the Director from the
account of--
``(1) the prisoner making the health care visit or
receiving the prescription medication; or
``(2) in the case of a health care visit described in
subsection (b)(3), the prisoner who is determined by the
Director to have inflicted the injury.
``(d) Timing.--Each fee assessed under this section shall
be collected from the appropriate account under subsection
(c)--
``(1) on the date on which the qualified health care visit
occurs; or
``(2) in the case of a prisoner whose account balance is
determined by the Director to be insufficient for collection
of the fee in accordance with paragraph (1), in accordance
with an installment payment plan, which shall be established
by the Director by regulation.
``(e) No Refusal of Treatment for Financial Reasons.--
Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit any
refusal of treatment to a prisoner on the basis that--
``(1) account of the prisoner is insolvent; or
``(2) the prisoner is otherwise unable to pay a fee
assessed under this section in accordance with subsection
(d)(1).
``(f) Use of Amounts.--Any amounts collected by the
Director under this section shall be deposited in the Crime
Victims' Fund established under section 1402 of the Victims
of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601).
``(g) Reports to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of the Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act and annually thereafter, the Director shall
submit to Congress a report, which shall include--
``(1) a description of the amounts collected under this
section during the preceding 12-month period; and
``(2) an analysis of the effects of the implementation of
this section, if any, on the nature and extent of health care
visits by prisoners.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
303 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``4048. Prisoner copayments for health care services.''.
____
Arizona Department of Corrections,
Phoenix, AZ, March 7, 1997.
Hon. Jon Kyl,
U.S. Senate, Senate Hart Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Inmate Health Care--Fee for Service
Dear Senator Kyl: On October 15, 1994, the Arizona
Department of Corrections began its fee for service program
for inmate health care. The program was intended to reduce
inmate abuse of the health care delivery system, to place on
the inmate some responsibility for his/her own health care,
and to offset the increasing costs of inmate health care.
This program has proven itself effective in accomplishing the
purposes intended.
There has been a noticeable decrease in the number of
requests for health care services. For example, upon
implementation of the program, and depending upon the
facility, we experienced an initial reduction of between 40%
and 60% in the number health care requests. Over the life of
the program, there has been an overall reduction of about 31%
in the number of requests for health care services. This
strongly suggests that inmates are being more discreet about,
and giving more considered thought to, their need for medical
attention.
The program has also proven a great benefit to Arizona's
taxpayers. From October 15, 1994 through December 31, 1996,
the Arizona Department of Corrections has collected
$392,843.59 for health care services provided to its inmates.
This money is returned to Arizona's general fund, where it
can be utilized to fund other State programs. This means that
fewer taxpayer dollars are required to fund State programs.
In light of the results achieved by this program in
Arizona, I highly recommend that similar programs be adopted
by prison and jail systems nationwide, and I support and
greatly appreciate your efforts to this end.
Sincerely,
Terry L. Stewart,
Director.
[[Page
S2658]]
____
Yavapai County Sheriff's Office,
Prescott, AZ, March 4, 1997.
Senator Jon Kyl,
2240 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Kyl: As you have requested, a copy of the
current Yavapai County Sheriff's Office Detention Services
Procedure Manual with respect to Inmate Health Care Co-
Payment policy, has been attached. This policy is sanctioned
under Arizona Revised Statute 31-151 and has been in
existence since November 1995.
Prior to the institution of this policy, many inmates in
custody were taking advantage of the health care which, of
course, must be provided to them. This could be construed as
frivolous requests if you will, and took up the valuable time
of our health care providers. Time was not being utilized to
full potential including any request for psychological
analysis and treatment.
Since this policy has been in effect, we have realized a
reduction in inmate requests for medical services between 45%
to 50%. Consequently, when an inmate is given the choice of
how to best spend his money, the preference is not for
unnecessary medical care. Those in custody have nothing
better to do than take advantage of the system for just a
change in the daily routine. This has ceased. There is no
denial of medical services, it just becomes a matter of
priority for the inmate.
Over the past eleven months, in the special account in
which the co-payment fee is retained, approximately $3500.00
has been placed into deposit. Although this is not a large
amount of revenue, the savings which have been noticed are
that of a reduction in staff time and an increase in the
quality of care the physician provides for this service
delivery. One could only imagine the magnitude of budget
savings if a program such as this were initiated on the
federal inmate population.
In Yavapai County this policy has proven to be a success
and it is through this success that you have my full support
in this proposed legislation.
In matters of mutual concern I remain,
G.C. ``Buck'' Buchanan,
Yavapai County Sheriff.
____
[From the New York Post, Dec. 28, 1996]
Toward Healthier Prison Budgets
Since April, New Jersey has experienced a 60 percent drop
in the number of prison inmates seeking medical attention.
Have prisoners suddenly begun pursuing a healthier lifestyle?
Perhaps--but we prefer to think it has something to do with
the fact that inmates must now ante up $5 every time they
demand to see a doctor.
New Jersey prison officials are extremely pleased with the
new system. The fee deters prisoners with vague or minor
complaints or whose primary motivation appears to be simply,
to get out of their cells for a few hours.
Result: The state has been able to cut its prison health-
care budget by $17 million. Fewer inmates being escorted to
and from the infirmary also enhances security within prison
walls.
Predictably, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
isn't pleased. It claims the $5 fee--equal to about two days'
prison wages--is preventing some chronically ill inmates from
seeking proper care. Naturally, a lawsuit has been filed. In
May, a judge ruled in favor of the prison system (the
decision is being appealed).
Charging prisoners a fee for medical services, however, is
nothing new, nor is it unique to New Jersey. Prisons and
jails in at least 18 states now charge for health care, up
from just nine in 1995. New Jersey has allowed such fees
since 1995. In fact, the Bergen County jail charges inmates
$10 per doctor visit.
State prison officials dismiss the ACLU's concerns as
``highly speculative.'' Inmates diagnosed with chronic
illnesses, the officials point out, are not charged for all
visits. One diabetic inmate, interviewed by The New York
Times, complained that the fee was a ``burden'' because it
meant he could no longer buy ``toothpaste and stuff.'' He
admitted, however, that he'd had to pay only ``three or four
times'' since April 1.
This isn't exactly Black Hole of Calcutta stuff. New Jersey
appears to be making good use of a sound prison-management
technique.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. Lott, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Mack, Mr.
Coverdell, Mr. Helms, Mr. Shelby, and Mrs. Hutchison):
S. 495. A bill to provide criminal and civil penalties for the
unlawful acquisition, transfer, or use of any chemical weapon or
biological weapon, and to reduce the threat of acts of terrorism or
armed aggression involving the use of any such weapon against the
United States, its citizens, or Armed Forces, or those of any allied
country, and for other purposes.
the chemical and biological weapons threat reduction act of 1997
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 495
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Chemical
and Biological Weapons Threat Reduction Act of 1997''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Policy.
Sec. 4. Definitions.
TITLE I--PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR
BY UNITED STATES NATIONALS ABROAD
Subtitle A--Criminal Penalties
Sec. 101. Criminal provisions.
Subtitle B--Civil Penalties
Sec. 111. Designation of lead agency.
Sec. 112. Prohibitions on chemical and biological weapons-related
activities.
Sec. 113. Civil penalties.
Sec. 114. Regulatory authority; application of other laws.
Subtitle C--Other Penalties
Sec. 121. Revocations of export privileges.
Sec. 122. Suspension of patent rights.
TITLE II--FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DEFENSE-RELATED PROVISIONS
Sec. 201. Sanctions for use of chemical or biological weapons.
Sec. 202. Continuation and enhancement of multilateral control regimes.
Sec. 203. Criteria for United States assistance to Russia.
Sec. 204. Report on the state of chemical and biological weapons
proliferation.
Sec. 205. International conference to strengthen the 1925 Geneva
Protocol.
Sec. 206. Restriction on use of funds for the Organization for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
Sec. 207. Enhancements to robust chemical and biological defenses.
Sec. 208. Negative security assurances.
Sec. 209. Riot control agents.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that--
(1) the United States eliminated its stockpile of
biological weapons pursuant to the 1972 Biological Weapons
Convention and has pledged to destroy its entire inventory of
chemical weapons by 2004, independent of the Chemical Weapons
Convention entering into force;
(2) the use of chemical or biological weapons in
contravention of international law is abhorrent and should
trigger immediate and effective sanctions;
(3) United Nations Security Council Resolution 620, adopted
on August 26, 1988, states the intention of the Security
Council to consider immediately ``appropriate and effective''
sanctions against any nation using chemical and biological
weapons in violation of international law;
(4) the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade recognizes
that national security concerns may serve as legitimate
grounds for limiting trade; title XXI of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade states that ``nothing in this
Agreement shall be construed . . . to prevent any contracting
party from taking any action which it considers necessary for
the protection of its essential security interests. . .'';
(5) on September 30, 1993, the President declared by
Executive Order No. 12868 a national emergency to deal with
``the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national
security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States''
posed by the proliferation of nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons, and of the means for delivering such
weapons;
(6) Russia has not implemented the 1990 United States-
Russian Bilateral Agreement on Destruction and Non-Production
of Chemical Weapons and on Measures to Facilitate the
Multilateral Convention on Banning Chemical Weapons, known as
the ``BDA'', nor has the United States and Russia resolved,
to the satisfaction of the United States, the outstanding
compliance issues under the Memorandum of Understanding
Between the United States of America and the Government of
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Regarding a Bilateral
Verification Experiment and Data Exchange Related To
Prohibition on Chemical Weapons, known as the ``1989 Wyoming
MOU'';
(7) the Intelligence Community has stated that a number of
countries, among them China, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North
Korea, Syria, and Russia, possess chemical and biological
weapons and the means to deliver them;
(8) four countries in the Middle East--Iran, Iraq, Libya,
and Syria--have, as a national policy, supported
international terrorism;
(9) chemical and biological weapons have been used by
states in the past for intimidation and military aggression,
most recently during the Iran-Iraq war and by Iraq against
its Kurdish minority;
(10) the grave new threat of chemical and biological
terrorism has been demonstrated by the 1995 nerve gas attack
on the Tokyo subway by the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo;
(11) the urgent need to improve domestic preparedness to
protect against chemical and
[[Page
S2659]]
biological threats was underscored by enactment of the 1997
Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act;
(12) the Department of Defense, in light of growing
chemical and biological threats in regions of key concern,
including Northeast Asia, and the Middle East, has stated
that United States forces must be properly trained and
equipped for all missions, including those in which opponents
might threaten use of chemical or biological weapons; and
(13) Australia Group controls on the exports of chemical
and biological agents, and related equipment, and the Missile
Technology Control Regime, together provide an indispensable
foundation for international and national efforts to curb the
spread of chemical and biological weapons, and their delivery
means.
SEC. 3. POLICY.
It should be the policy of the United States to take all
appropriate measures to--
(1) prevent and deter the threat or use of chemical and
biological weapons against the citizens, Armed Forces, and
territory of the United States and its allies, and to protect
against, and manage the consequences of, such use should it
occur;
(2) discourage the proliferation of chemical and biological
weapons, their means of delivery, and related equipment,
material, and technology;
(3) prohibit within the United States the development,
production, acquisition, stockpiling, and transfer to third
parties of chemical or biological weapons, their precursors
and related technology; and
(4) impose unilateral sanctions, and seek immediately
international sanctions, against any nation using chemical
and biological weapons in violation of international law.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Australia group.--The term ``Australia Group'' refers
to the informal forum of countries, formed in 1984 and
chaired by Australia, whose goal is to discourage and impede
chemical and biological weapons proliferation by harmonizing
national export controls on precursor chemicals for chemical
weapons, biological weapons pathogens, and dual-use
equipment, sharing information on target countries, and
seeking other ways to curb the use of chemical weapons and
biological weapons.
(2) Biological weapon.--The term ``biological weapon''
means the following, together or separately:
(A) Any micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses, fungi,
rickettsiae or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious substance,
or any naturally occurring, bio-engineered or synthesized
component of any such micro-organism, pathogen, or infectious
substance, whatever its origin or method of production,
capable of causing--
(i) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a
human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
(ii) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or
materials of any kind; or
(iii) deleterious alteration of the environment.
(B) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of those
biological weapons specified in subparagraph (A), which would
be released as a result of the employment of such munition or
device.
(C) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in
connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
(D) Any living organism specifically designed to carry a
biological weapon specified in subparagraph (A) to a host.
(3) Chemical weapon.--The term ``chemical weapon'' means
the following, together or separately:
(A) Any of the following chemical agents: tabun, Sarin,
Soman, GF, VX, sulfur mustard, nitrogen mustard, phosgene
oxime, lewisite, phenyldichloroarsine, ethyldi- chloroarsine,
methyldichloroarsine, phosgene, diphosgene, hydrogen cyanide,
cyanogen chloride, and arsine.
(B) Any of the 54 chemicals other than a riot control agent
that is controlled by the Australia Group as of the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(C) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of a
chemical weapon specified in subparagraph (A) or (B), which
would be released as a result of the employment of such
munition or device.
(D) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in
connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
(4) Knowingly.--The term ``knowingly'' is used within the
meaning of ``knows'' as that term is defined in section 104
of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-
2) and includes situations in which a person has reason to
know.
(5) National of the united states.--The term ``national of
the United States'' has the same meaning given such term in
section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)).
(6) Person.--The term ``person'' means any individual,
corporation, partnership, firm, association, or other legal
entity.
(7) Purpose not prohibited under this act.--The term
``purpose not prohibited under this Act'' means--
(A) any industrial, agricultural, research, medical,
pharmaceutical, or other peaceful purpose;
(B) any protective purpose, namely any purpose directly
related to protection against a chemical or biological
weapon;
(C) any military purpose that is not connected with the use
of a chemical or biological weapon or that is not dependent
on the use of the toxic properties of the chemical or
biological weapon to cause death or other harm; or
(D) any law enforcement purpose, including any domestic
riot control purpose.
(8) Riot control agent.--The term ``riot control agent''
means any substance, including diphenylchloroarsine,
diphenyl- cyanoarsine, adamsite, chloroacetophenone,
chloropicrin, bromobenzyl cyanide, 0-chlorobenzylidene
malononitrile, or 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate, that is designed
or used to produce rapidly in humans any nonlethal sensory
irritation or disabling physical effect that disappears
within a short time following termination of exposure.
(9) United states.--The term ``United States'' means the
several States of the United States, the District of
Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions
of the United States and includes all places under the
jurisdiction or control of the United States, including--
(A) any of the places within the provisions of section
101(41) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49
U.S.C. App. sec. 1301(41));
(B) any public aircraft or civil aircraft of the United
States, as such terms are defined in sections 101 (36) and
(18) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49
U.S.C. App. secs. 1301(36) and 1301(18)); and
(C) any vessel of the United States, as such term is
defined in section 3(b) of the Maritime Drug Enforcement Act,
as amended (46 U.S.C., App. sec. 1903(b)).
TITLE I--PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR
BY UNITED STATES NATIONALS ABROAD
Subtitle A--Criminal Penalties
SEC. 101. CRIMINAL PROVISIONS.
(a) In General.--Part I of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after chapter 11A the following new
chapter:
``CHAPTER 11B--CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS
``Sec.
``229. Penalties and prohibitions with respect to chemical and
biological weapons.
``229A. Seizure, forfeiture, and destruction.
``229B. Other prohibitions.
``229C. Injunctions.
``229D. Requests for military assistance to enforce prohibition in
certain emergencies.
``229E. Definitions.
``Sec. 229. Penalties and prohibitions with respect to
chemical and biological weapons
``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (c),
whoever knowingly develops, produces, otherwise acquires,
receives from any person located outside the territory of the
United States, stockpiles, retains, directly or indirectly
transfers, uses, owns, or possesses any chemical weapon or
any biological weapon, or knowingly assists, encourages or
induces, in any way, any person to do so, or attempt or
conspire to do so, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for life or any term of years or both, unless--
``(1) the chemical weapon or biological weapon is intended
for a purpose not prohibited under this Act;
``(2) the types and quantities of chemical weapons or
biological weapons are strictly limited to those that can be
justified for such purposes; and
``(3) the amount of such chemical weapons or biological
weapons per person at any given time does not exceed a
quantity that under the circumstances is inconsistent with
the purposes not prohibited under this Act.
``(b) Death Penalty.--Any person who knowingly uses
chemical or biological weapons in violation of subsection (a)
and by whose action the death of another person is the result
shall be punished by death or imprisoned for life.
``(c) Exclusion.--
``(1) In general.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the
retention, ownership, or possession of a chemical weapon or a
biological weapon by an agency of the United States or a
person described in paragraph (2) pending destruction of the
weapon.
``(2) Covered persons.--A person referred to in paragraph
(1) is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or
any other person if the person is authorized by the head of
an agency of the United States to retain, own, or possess the
chemical or biological weapon.
``(d) Jurisdiction.--Conduct prohibited by subsection (a)
is within the jurisdiction of the United States if the
prohibited conduct--
``(1) takes place in the United States; or
``(2) takes place outside of the United States and is
committed by a national of the United States.
``(e) Reimbursement of Costs.--The court shall order any
person convicted of an offense under this section to
reimburse the United States for any expenses incurred by the
United States incident to the seizure, storage, handling,
transportation, and destruction or other disposition of any
property that was seized in connection with an investigation
of the commission of the offense by that person. A person
ordered to reimburse the United States for expenses
[[Page
S2660]]
under this subsection shall be jointly and severally liable
for such expenses with each other person, if any, who is
ordered under this subsection to reimburse the United States
for the same expenses.
``Sec. 229A. Seizure, forfeiture, and destruction
``(a) Seizure.--
``(1) Seizures on warrants.--The Attorney General may
request the issuance, in the same manner as provided for a
search warrant, of a warrant authorizing the seizure of any
chemical weapon or any biological weapon that is of a type or
quantity that, under the circumstances, is inconsistent with
the purposes not prohibited under this Act.
``(2) Warrantless seizures.--In exigent circumstances,
seizure and destruction of any such chemical weapon or
biological weapon described in paragraph (1) may be made by
the Attorney General upon probable cause without the
necessity for a warrant.
``(b) Procedure for Forfeiture and Destruction.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (a)(2),
property seized pursuant to subsection (a) shall be forfeited
to the United States after notice to potential claimants and
an opportunity for a hearing.
``(2) Burden of persuasion.--At such a hearing, the United
States shall bear the burden of persuasion by a preponderance
of the evidence.
``(3) Procedures.--The provisions of chapter 46 of this
title relating to civil forfeitures shall apply to a seizure
or forfeiture under this section except to the extent (if
any) that such provisions are inconsistent with this section.
``(4) Destruction or other disposition.--The Attorney
General shall provide for the destruction or other
appropriate disposition of any chemical or biological weapon
seized and forfeited pursuant to this section.
``(c) Other Seizure, Forfeiture, and Destruction.--
``(1) Seizures on warrant.--The Attorney General may
request the issuance, in the same manner as provided for a
search warrant, of a warrant authorizing the seizure of any
chemical weapon or biological weapon that exists by reason of
conduct prohibited under section 229 of this title.
``(2) Warrantless seizures.--In exigent circumstances,
seizure and destruction of any such chemical weapon or
biological weapon described in paragraph (1) may be made by
the Attorney General upon probable cause without the
necessity for a warrant.
``(3) Forfeiture and destruction.--Property seized pursuant
to this subsection shall be summarily forfeited (within the
meaning of section 609(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930) to the
United States and destroyed.
``(d) Assistance.--The Attorney General may request the
head of any agency of the United States to assist in the
handling, storage, transportation, or destruction of property
seized under this section.
``(e) Owner or Possessor Liability.--The owner or possessor
of any property seized under this section shall be jointly
and severally liable to the United States in an action for
money damages for any expenses incurred by the United States
incident to the seizure, including any expenses relating to
the handling, storage, transportation, destruction or other
disposition of the seized property.
``Sec. 229B. Other prohibitions
``(a) In General.--Whoever knowingly uses riot control
agents as an act of terrorism, or knowingly assists any
person to do so, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for a term of not more than 10 years, or both.
``(b) Jurisdiction.--Conduct prohibited by this section is
within the jurisdiction of the United States if the
prohibited conduct--
``(1) takes place in the United States; or
``(2) takes place outside of the United States and is
committed by a national of the United States.
``Sec. 229C. Injunctions
``The United States may obtain in a civil action an
injunction against--
``(1) the conduct prohibited under section 229 of this
title; or
``(2) the preparation or solicitation to engage in conduct
prohibited under section 229 of this title.
``Sec. 229D. Requests for military assistance to enforce
prohibition in certain emergencies
``The Attorney General may request the Secretary of Defense
to provide assistance under section 382 of title 10 in
support of Department of Justice activities relating to the
enforcement of section 229 of this title in an emergency
situation involving a biological weapon or chemical weapon.
The authority to make such a request may be exercised by
another official of the Department of Justice in accordance
with section 382(f)(2) of title 10.
``Sec. 229E. Definitions
``In this chapter:
``(1) Australia group.--The term `Australia Group' refers
to the informal forum of countries, formed in 1984 and
chaired by Australia, whose goal is to discourage and impede
chemical and biological weapons proliferation by harmonizing
national export controls on precursor chemicals for chemical
weapons, biological weapons pathogens, and dual-use
equipment, sharing information on target countries, and
seeking other ways to curb the use of chemical and biological
weapons.
``(2) Biological weapon.--The term `biological weapon'
means the following, together or separately:
``(A) Any micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses,
fungi, rickettsiae or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious
substance, or any naturally occurring, bio-engineered or
synthesized component of any such micro-organism, pathogen,
or infectious substance, whatever its origin or method of
production, capable of causing--
``(i) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a
human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
``(ii) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies,
or materials of any kind; or
``(iii) deleterious alteration of the environment.
``(B) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of those
biological weapons specified in subparagraph (A), which would
be released as a result of the employment of such munition or
device.
``(C) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly
in connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
``(D) Any living organism specifically designed to carry a
biological weapon specified in subparagraph (A) to a host.
``(3) Chemical weapon.--The term `chemical weapon' means
the following, together or separately:
``(A) Any of the following chemical agents: tabun, Sarin,
Soman, GF, VX, sulfur mustard, nitrogen mustard, phosgene
oxime, lewisite, phenyldichloroarsine, ethyldichloroarsine,
methyldichloroarsine, phosgene, diphosgene, hydrogen cyanide,
cyanogen chloride, and arsine.
``(B) Any of the 54 chemicals, other than a riot control
agent, controlled by the Australia Group as of the date of
the enactment of this Act.
``(C) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of a
chemical weapon specified in subparagraph (A) or (B), which
would be released as a result of the employment of such
munition or device.
``(D) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly
in connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
``(4) Knowingly.--The term `knowingly' is used within the
meaning of `knows' as that term is defined in section 104 of
the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-2)
and includes situations in which a person has reason to know.
``(5) National of the united states.--The term `national of
the United States' has the same meaning given such term in
se
Amendments:
Cosponsors:
THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
Sponsor:
Summary:
All articles in Senate section
THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
(Senate - March 20, 1997)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages
S2654-S2706]
THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to
improve the pay system used for Federal firefighters. This bill has
three broad purposes: First, to improve pay equality with municipal and
other public section firefighters; second, to enhance recruitment and
retention of firefighters in order to maintain the highest quality
Federal fire service; and third, to encourage Federal firefighters to
pursue career advancement and training opportunities.
Fire protection is clearly a major concern at Federal facilities and
on Federal lands throughout the Nation. From fighting wildland fires in
our national parks and forests to protecting military families from
fires in their base housing, Federal firefighters play a vital role in
preserving lives and property. One only needs to recall the terrible
tragedies in Colorado two summers ago to understand the vital
importance of our Federal firefighters.
The Department of Agriculture, the Coast Guard, the Department of
Commerce, the Department of Defense, the General Services
Administration, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of
Veterans Affairs are among the Federal agencies which rely on Federal
fire fighters to protect their vast holdings of land and structures.
Just like their municipal counterparts, these firefighters are the
first line of defense against threats to life and property.
Mr. President, the current system used to pay our Federal
firefighters is at best confusing and at worst unfair. These men and
women work longer hours than any other public sector firefighters--yet
are paid substantially less. The current pay system, which consists of
three tiers, is overly complex and, more importantly, is hurting
Federal efforts to attract and retain top-quality employees.
Currently, most Federal firefighters work an average 72-hour week
under exceptionally demanding conditions. The typical workweek consists
of a one-day-off schedule which results in three 24-hours shifts during
the remainder of each week. Despite this unusual schedule, firefighters
are paid under a modified version of the same General Schedule pay
system used for full-time, 40-hour-per-week Federal workers.
The result of the pay modification is that Federal firefighters make
less per hour than any other Federal employee at their same grade
level. For example: a firefighter who is a GS-5, Step 5 makes $7.21 per
hour while other employees at the same grade and step earn $10.34 per
hour. Some have tried to justify this by noting that part of a
firefighter's day is downtime. However, I must note that all
firefighters have substantial duties beyond those at the site of a
fire. Adding to this discrepancy is the fact that the average municipal
firefighter makes $12.87 per hour.
Mr. President, this has caused the Federal fire service to become a
training ground for young men and women who then leave for higher pay
elsewhere in the public sector. Continually training new employees is,
as my colleagues know, very expensive for any employer.
The Office of Personnel Management is well aware of these problems.
In fact, section 102 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of
1990 [FEPCA], title V of Public Law 101-509, authorizes the
establishment of special pay systems for certain Federal occupations.
The origin of this provision was a recognition that the current pay
classification system did not account for the unique and distinctive
employment conditions of Federal protective occupations including the
Federal fire service.
In May 1991, I wrote to OPM urging the establishment of a separate
pay scale for firefighters under the authority provided for in FEPCA.
Subsequently, OPM established an Advisory Committee on Law Enforcement
and Protective Occupations consisting of agency personnel and
representatives from Federal fire and law enforcement organizations.
Beginning in August of 1991, representatives from the Federal fire
community began working with OPM and other administration officials to
identify and address the problems of paying Federal firefighters under
the General Schedule. The committee completed its work in June of 1992
and in December of that year issued a staff report setting forth
recommendations to correct the most serious problems with the current
pay system.
Mr. President, I regret that since the release of the OPM
recommendations, there has been no effort to implement any of the
proposals of the advisory task force. In fact, OPM has communicated
quite clearly that it has no plans to pursue any solution to the
serious pay deficiencies that have been so widely identified and
acknowledged.
[[Page
S2655]]
It would not be necessary to introduce this legislation today had OPM
taken the corrective action that, in my view, is so clearly warranted.
However, I have determined that legislation appears to be the only
vehicle to achieve the necessary changes in the pay system for Federal
firefighters.
Mr. President, the Firefighter Pay Fairness Act would improve Federal
firefighter pay in several important and straightforward ways. Perhaps
most importantly, the bill draws from existing provisions in title V to
calculate a true hourly rate for firefighters. This would alleviate the
current problem of firefighters being paid considerably less than other
General Schedule employees at the same GS level. It would also account
for the varying length in the tour of duty for Federal firefighters
stationed at different locations.
In addition, the bill would use this hourly rate to ensure that
firefighters receive true time and one-half overtime for hours worked
over 106 in a bi-weekly pay period. This is designed to correct the
problem, under the current system, where the overtime rate is
calculated based on an hourly rate considerably less than base pay.
The Firefighter Pay Fairness Act would also extend these pay
provisions to so-called wildland firefighters when they are engaged in
firefighting duties. Currently, wildland firefighters are often not
compensated for all the time spent responding to a fire event. This
legislation would ensure that these protectors of our parks and forests
would be paid fairly for ensuring the safety of these invaluable
national resources.
It also ensures that firefighters promoted to supervisory positions
would be paid at a rate of pay at least equal to what they received
before the promotion. This would address a situation, under the current
pay system, which discourages employees from accepting promotions
because of the significant loss of pay which often accompanies a move
to a supervisory position.
Similarly, the bill would encourage employees to get the necessary
training in hazardous materials, emergency medicine, and other critical
areas by ensuring they do not receive a pay cut while engaged in these
training activities.
Mr. President, this legislation is based upon a bill I authorized in
the 103d Congress. A bipartisan group of more than 150 Members
cosponsored the measure in the Senate and the House last year. The
legislation I am introducing today reflects several modifications that
were suggested to the bill following substantial discussions with
various Members. However, it is identical to the so-called compromise
measure that has been discussed with the authorizing as well as the
appropriations committees in previous years and received widespread
support.
To reduce initial costs and allow oversight of the effectiveness of
the legislation, the bill I am introducing today would implement the
new pay system and other provisions beginning October 1, 1997. However,
the new rate of pay would be phased in over a 4-year period ending
October 1, 2002.
Mr. President, I consulted many of the affected groups in developing
my legislation. I am very pleased that this bill has been endorsed by
the American Federation of Government Employees, the International
Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Fire
Fighters, the National Association of Government Employees, and the
National Federation of Federal Employees.
As I have said before, Mr. President, fairness is the key word. There
is no reason why Federal firefighters should be paid dramatically less
that their municipal counterparts. As a cochairman of the Congressional
Fire Services Caucus, I want to urge all members of the caucus and,
indeed, all Members of the Senate to join in cosponsoring this
important piece of legislation.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself and Mr. Gorton):
S. 493. A bill to amend section 1029 of title 18, United States Code,
with respect to cellular telephone cloning paraphernalia; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
the cellular telephone protection act
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Cellular Telephone
Protection Act, which would improve the ability of law enforcement to
investigate and prosecute individuals engaged in the activity of
cloning cellular phones. Law enforcement officials and wireless
carriers support the bill as an important tool to stem this kind of
telecommunications fraud.
Cell phones are manufactured with an embedded electronic serial
number [ESN], which is transmitted to gain access to the
telecommunications network. Those involved in cloning cell phones sit
in parked cars outside of airports or along busy roadways to harvest
ESN's from legitimate cell phone users and, in a process known as
cloning, use software and equipment to insert the stolen numbers into
other cell phones, the clones. A single ESN can be implanted into
several cloned phones. The cloned phones charge to the account of the
lawful, unsuspecting user. Cellular phone carriers must absorb these
losses, which, according to the Cellular Telecommunication Industry
Association, amounted to about $650 million in 1995, up from $480
million in 1994. The cellular industry is expanding by about 40 percent
a year; efforts to combat fraud are imperative to ensure the integrity
of our communications network.
Cloning is more than an inconvenience to the 36 million Americans who
currently use cellular phone services, and an expense to wireless
communication companies who pay for the fraudulent calls. According to
the Secret Service, which is the primary Federal agency responsible for
investigating telecommunications fraud, cloning abets organized
criminal enterprises that use cellular telephones as their preferred
method of communication. Cloned phones are extremely popular among drug
traffickers and gang members, who oftentimes employ several cloned
phones to evade detection by law enforcement. When not selling cloned
phones to drug dealers and ruthless street gangs, cloners set up
corner-side calling shops where individuals pay a nominal fee to call
anywhere in the world on a replicated phone, or simply purchase the
illegal phone for a flat amount.
The cellular telephone protection bill clarifies that there is no
lawful purpose to posses, produce or sell hardware, known as copycat
boxes, or software used for cloning a cellular phone or its ESN. Such
equipment and software are easy to obtainn--advertisements hawking
cloning equipment appear in computer magazines and on the Internet.
There is no legitimate purpose for cloning software and equipment, save
for law enforcement and telecommunication service providers using it to
improve fraud detection. The bill strikes at the heart of the cloning
paraphernalia market by eliminating the requirement for prosecutors to
prove that the person selling copycat boxes or cloning software
programs intended to defraud. The bill retains an exception for law
enforcement to possess otherwise unlawful cloning software, and adds a
similar exception for telecommunications service providers.
Moreover, the Cellular Phone Protection Act expands the definition of
``scanning receivers,'' equipment which, unlike cloning software and
devices, does have legitimate uses if not used to scan frequencies
assigned to wireless communications. The bill clarifies that the
definition of scanning receivers encompasses devices that can be used
to intercept ESN's even if they are not capable of receiving the voice
channel. As mentioned above, criminals harvest ESN's by employing
scanners near busy thoroughfares. The revised definition of scanning
receiver will ensure that these devices are unlawful when used with an
intent to defraud just like scanners that intercept voice.
Finally, the bill increases penalties for those engaged in cloning. A
new paradigm is needed for penalizing cloning offenses. Currently,
penalties for cloning crimes are based on the monetary loss a carrier
suffers, not the potential loss. First-time offenders oftentimes do not
face any jail time, which makes these cases unattractive for
prosecution. Carriers and law enforcement are forced to choose between
keeping the cloner on the telecommunications network to rack up high
losses to ensure jail time, or stemming the losses sooner only to have
the cloner back on the streets in days. The penalty scheme should be
revised to
[[Page
S2656]]
track another indicator of cloning fraud--the number of electronic
serial numbers stolen.
Cloning offenses are serious crimes, and the penalties should reflect
this. We know that cloned phones are used to facilitate other crimes--
particularly drug trafficking. Additionally, cloning offenses are
serious economic crimes in themselves that threaten the integrity of
the public communications network. In August, two individuals in New
York were arrested for allegedly possessing 80,000 electronic serial
numbers. Each of the 80,000 ESN's could be implanted into several
cloned phones. I look forward to working with the U.S. Sentencing
Commission to achieve a more appropriate sentencing structure for
cloning fraud.
The cellular phone protection initiative will help to reduce
telecommunications fraud. In the process, other criminal activity will
be made more difficult to conduct--cloned phones, now a staple of
criminal syndicates, would not be so readily available. I urge my
colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 493
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Cellular Telephone
Protection Act''.
SEC. 2. FRAUD AND RELATED ACTIVITY IN CONNECTION WITH
COUNTERFEIT ACCESS DEVICES.
(a) Unlawful Acts.--Section 1029(a) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (7), by striking ``use of'' and inserting
``access to'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (9) as paragraph (10); and
(3) by striking paragraph (8) and inserting the following:
``(8) knowingly and with intent to defraud uses, produces,
traffics in, has control or custody of, or possesses a
scanning receiver;
``(9) knowingly uses, produces, traffics in, has control or
custody of, or possesses hardware or software that may be
used for--
``(A) modifying or copying an electronic serial number; or
``(B) altering or modifying a telecommunications instrument
so that the instrument may be used to obtain unauthorized
access to telecommunications services; or''.
(b) Penalties.--Section 1029(c) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Penalties.--The punishment for an offense under
subsection (a) or (b)(1) is--
``(1) in the case of an offense that does not occur after a
conviction for another offense under subsection (a) or
(b)(1), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under
subsection (a) or (b)(1), a fine under this title or twice
the value obtained by the offense, whichever is greater,
imprisonment for not more than 15 years, or both; and
``(2) in the case of an offense that occurs after a
conviction for another offense under subsection (a) or
(b)(1), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under
subsection (a) or (b)(1), a fine under this title or twice
the value obtained by the offense, whichever is greater,
imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both.''.
(c) Definition of Scanning Receiver.--Section 1029(e)(8) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``or any electronic
serial number, mobile identification number, personal
identification number, or other identifier of any
telecommunications service, equipment, or instrument''.
(d) Exception for Certain Telecommunications Services
Providers.--Section 1029 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Exception for Certain Telecommunications Services
Providers.--
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection, the term
`telecommunications carrier' has the same meaning as in
section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153).
``(2) Permissible activities.--This section does not
prohibit any telecommunications carrier, or an officer,
agent, or employee of, or a person under contract with a
telecommunications carrier, engaged in protecting any
property or legal right of the telecommunications carrier,
from sending through the mail, sending or carrying in
interstate or foreign commerce, having control or custody of,
or possessing, manufacturing, assembling, or producing any
otherwise unlawful--
``(A) device-making equipment, scanning receiver, or access
device; or
``(B) hardware or software used for--
``(i) modifying or altering an electronic serial number; or
``(ii) altering or modifying a telecommunications
instrument so that the instrument may be used to obtain
unauthorized access to telecommunications services.''.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. Abraham, and Mr. Reid):
S. 494. A bill to combat the overutilization of prison health care
services and control rising prisoner health care costs; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
The Federal Prison Health Care Copayment Act
Mr. KYL. Mr. President. I introduce the Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act, which would require Federal prisoners to pay a nominal
fee when they initiate a visit for medical attention. The fee would be
deposited in the Federal Crime Victims' Fund. Each time a prisoner pays
to heal himself, he will be paying to heal a victim.
Most working, law-abiding Americans are required to pay a copayment
fee when they seek medical care. It is time to impose this requirement
on Federal prisoners.
To date, at least 20 States--including my home State of Arizona--have
implemented statewide prisoner health care copayment programs. In
addition to Arizona, the following States have enacted this reform:
California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Oklahoma, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, Hew
Hampshire, New Jersey, Utah, Virginia, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.
Several other States are expected to soon institute a copayment system,
including, Alaska, Connecticut, Maine, Montana, Michigan, North
Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, and Wyoming.
Moreover, according to the National Sheriffs' Association, at least
25 States--some of which have not adopted medical copayment reform on a
statewide basis--have jail systems that impose a copayment.
In June, the National Commission on Correctional Health Care held a
conference that examined the statewide fee-for-service programs. At the
conference, Dr. Ron Waldron of the Federal Bureau of Prisons provided a
survey of some of the States that have adopted inmate medical copayment
programs and concluded that ``Inmate user fees programs appear to
reduce utilization, and do generate modest revenues.''
Dr. Waldron reported that prison copayment laws resulted in the
reduction of medical utilization of: between 16 and 29 percent in
Florida; between 30 and 50 percent in Kansas; 40 percent in Maryland;
50 percent in Nevada; and between 10 and 18 percent in Oklahoma. Terry
Stewart, director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, notes that,
``Over the life of the [Arizona copayment] program, there has been an
overall reduction of about 31 percent in the number of requests for
health care services. This strongly suggests that inmates are being
more discreet about, and giving more considered thought to, their need
for medical attention.'' I will have his letter placed in the
Congressional Record.
Reducing frivolous medical visits saves taxpayers money. A December
28, 1996, New York Post editorial, ``Toward Healthier Prison Budgets,''
which I will also include in the Record, reported that the copayment
law in New Jersey allowed the State to cut its prison health care
budget by $17 million.
As to generating revenue, Dr. Waldron reported that California
collects about $60,000 per month in prisoner-copayment fees. In my home
State of Arizona, the State has collected about $400,000 since the
inception of the program in October 1994.
Not only are inmate copayment plans working well on the statewide
level, they are achieving success in jail systems across the United
States. In the January-February edition of Sheriff, the National
Sheriffs' Association President reported that copayment plans--which,
as mentioned above, are operational in jail systems in at least 25
States--have: First, discouraged overuse of service; and second, freed
health care staff to provide better care to inmates who truly need
medical attention. Yavapai County sheriff, G.C. ``Buck'' Buchanan, in a
letter that I will include in the Record, writes: ``Prior to the
institution of [copayment reform], many inmates in custody were taking
advantage of the health care which, or course, must be provided to
them. This could be construed as frivolous requests if you will, and
took up the valuable time of our health care providers * * *. Since
this policy has been in effect, we have realized a reduction in inmate
requests for medical services between 45 to 50 percent.''
[[Page
S2657]]
The success of the prison and jail fee-for-service initiatives should
come as no surprise. Common sense says that inmates will be less likely
to seek unnecessary medical attention if they are required to pick up
part of the tab.
I believe that Congress should follow the lead of the States and
provide the Federal Bureau of Prisons with the authority to charge
Federal inmates a nominal fee for elective health care visits. The
Federal system is particularly ripe for reform. According to the 1996
Corrections Yearbook, the system spends more per inmate on health care
than any State except Vermont. Federal inmate health care totaled $327
million in fiscal year 1996, up from $138 million in fiscal year 1990.
Average cost per inmate has increased over 60 percent during this
period, from $2,204 to $3,549.
The Prisoner Health Care Copayment Act provides that the Director of
the Bureau of Prisons shall assess and collect a fee of not less than
$3 and not more than $5 for each qualified health care visit. The term
``qualified health care visit'' does not include any health care visit
that is: Conducted during the intake process; an annual examination;
initiated by the health care staff of the Bureau of Prisons; the direct
result of a referral made by a prison official; or an emergency visit.
Prisoners who are pregnant or determined to be seriously mentally ill
are exempted from the copayment requirement altogether. No prisoner
shall be denied treatment on the basis of insolvency.
The act also gives the Director of the Bureau of Prisons the
authority to set by regulation a reasonable fee, not to exceed $5, for
prescriptions, emergency visits, and juvenile visits. And the
legislation permits the Director to charge an inmate's account for
medical treatment for injuries an inmate inflicts on himself or others.
As I mentioned above, all fees will be deposited in the Federal Crime
Victims' Fund.
Before I conclude, I would like to thank the Arizona Department of
Corrections for its assistance in helping me draft this reform.
Additionally, I appreciate the assistance that Sheriff Buchanan and his
office provided me.
I look forward to working with the Department of Justice, the Bureau
of Prisons, and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to implement
a fee-for-medical-services program--a sensible and overdue reform--for
Federal prisoners.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 494
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act''.
SEC. 2. PRISONER COPAYMENTS FOR HEALTH CARE SERVICES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 303 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 4048. Prisoner copayments for health care services
``(a) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `account' means the trust fund account (or
institutional equivalent) of a prisoner;
``(2) the term `Director' means the Director of the Bureau
of Prisons;
``(3) the term `health care provider' means any person and
who is licensed or certified under State law to provide
health care services who is operating within the scope of
such license;
``(4) the term `health care visit' means any visit by a
prisoner to an institutional or noninstitutional health care
provider, if the visit is made at the request of the
prisoner;
``(5) the term `prisoner' means any person subject to
incarceration, detention, or admission to any facility who is
accused of, convicted of, sentenced for, or adjudicated
delinquent for, violations of criminal law or the terms and
conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or
diversionary program; and
``(6) the term `qualified health care visit' means any
health care visit except a health care visit
``(A) that--
``(i) is conducted during the incarceration intake process;
``(ii) is an annual examination;
``(iii) is determined by the health care provider to be an
emergency visit;
``(iv) is an immunization;
``(v) is initiated by the health care staff of the Bureau
of Prisons; or
``(vi) is the direct result of a referral made by a prison
official; or
``(B) by a prisoner who is--
``(i) less than 18 years of age;
``(ii) pregnant; or
``(iii) determined by the appropriate official of the
Bureau of Prisons to be seriously mentally ill, or
permanently disabled.
``(b) Copayments For Health Care Services.--The Director
shall assess and collect a fee in accordance with this
section--
``(1) in an amount equal to not less than $3 and not more
than $5, for each qualified health care visit;
``(2) in an amount not to exceed $5, which shall be
established by the Director by regulation, for--
``(A) each prescription medication provided to the prisoner
by a health care provider; and
``(B) each health care visit described in subparagraph
(A)(iii) or (B)(i) of subsection (a)(6); and
``(3) in an amount established by the Director by
regulation, for each health care visit occurring as a result
of an injury inflicted on a prisoner by another prisoner.
``(c) Responsibility for Payment.--Each fee assessed under
subsection (b) shall be collected by the Director from the
account of--
``(1) the prisoner making the health care visit or
receiving the prescription medication; or
``(2) in the case of a health care visit described in
subsection (b)(3), the prisoner who is determined by the
Director to have inflicted the injury.
``(d) Timing.--Each fee assessed under this section shall
be collected from the appropriate account under subsection
(c)--
``(1) on the date on which the qualified health care visit
occurs; or
``(2) in the case of a prisoner whose account balance is
determined by the Director to be insufficient for collection
of the fee in accordance with paragraph (1), in accordance
with an installment payment plan, which shall be established
by the Director by regulation.
``(e) No Refusal of Treatment for Financial Reasons.--
Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit any
refusal of treatment to a prisoner on the basis that--
``(1) account of the prisoner is insolvent; or
``(2) the prisoner is otherwise unable to pay a fee
assessed under this section in accordance with subsection
(d)(1).
``(f) Use of Amounts.--Any amounts collected by the
Director under this section shall be deposited in the Crime
Victims' Fund established under section 1402 of the Victims
of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601).
``(g) Reports to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of the Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act and annually thereafter, the Director shall
submit to Congress a report, which shall include--
``(1) a description of the amounts collected under this
section during the preceding 12-month period; and
``(2) an analysis of the effects of the implementation of
this section, if any, on the nature and extent of health care
visits by prisoners.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
303 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``4048. Prisoner copayments for health care services.''.
____
Arizona Department of Corrections,
Phoenix, AZ, March 7, 1997.
Hon. Jon Kyl,
U.S. Senate, Senate Hart Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Inmate Health Care--Fee for Service
Dear Senator Kyl: On October 15, 1994, the Arizona
Department of Corrections began its fee for service program
for inmate health care. The program was intended to reduce
inmate abuse of the health care delivery system, to place on
the inmate some responsibility for his/her own health care,
and to offset the increasing costs of inmate health care.
This program has proven itself effective in accomplishing the
purposes intended.
There has been a noticeable decrease in the number of
requests for health care services. For example, upon
implementation of the program, and depending upon the
facility, we experienced an initial reduction of between 40%
and 60% in the number health care requests. Over the life of
the program, there has been an overall reduction of about 31%
in the number of requests for health care services. This
strongly suggests that inmates are being more discreet about,
and giving more considered thought to, their need for medical
attention.
The program has also proven a great benefit to Arizona's
taxpayers. From October 15, 1994 through December 31, 1996,
the Arizona Department of Corrections has collected
$392,843.59 for health care services provided to its inmates.
This money is returned to Arizona's general fund, where it
can be utilized to fund other State programs. This means that
fewer taxpayer dollars are required to fund State programs.
In light of the results achieved by this program in
Arizona, I highly recommend that similar programs be adopted
by prison and jail systems nationwide, and I support and
greatly appreciate your efforts to this end.
Sincerely,
Terry L. Stewart,
Director.
[[Page
S2658]]
____
Yavapai County Sheriff's Office,
Prescott, AZ, March 4, 1997.
Senator Jon Kyl,
2240 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Kyl: As you have requested, a copy of the
current Yavapai County Sheriff's Office Detention Services
Procedure Manual with respect to Inmate Health Care Co-
Payment policy, has been attached. This policy is sanctioned
under Arizona Revised Statute 31-151 and has been in
existence since November 1995.
Prior to the institution of this policy, many inmates in
custody were taking advantage of the health care which, of
course, must be provided to them. This could be construed as
frivolous requests if you will, and took up the valuable time
of our health care providers. Time was not being utilized to
full potential including any request for psychological
analysis and treatment.
Since this policy has been in effect, we have realized a
reduction in inmate requests for medical services between 45%
to 50%. Consequently, when an inmate is given the choice of
how to best spend his money, the preference is not for
unnecessary medical care. Those in custody have nothing
better to do than take advantage of the system for just a
change in the daily routine. This has ceased. There is no
denial of medical services, it just becomes a matter of
priority for the inmate.
Over the past eleven months, in the special account in
which the co-payment fee is retained, approximately $3500.00
has been placed into deposit. Although this is not a large
amount of revenue, the savings which have been noticed are
that of a reduction in staff time and an increase in the
quality of care the physician provides for this service
delivery. One could only imagine the magnitude of budget
savings if a program such as this were initiated on the
federal inmate population.
In Yavapai County this policy has proven to be a success
and it is through this success that you have my full support
in this proposed legislation.
In matters of mutual concern I remain,
G.C. ``Buck'' Buchanan,
Yavapai County Sheriff.
____
[From the New York Post, Dec. 28, 1996]
Toward Healthier Prison Budgets
Since April, New Jersey has experienced a 60 percent drop
in the number of prison inmates seeking medical attention.
Have prisoners suddenly begun pursuing a healthier lifestyle?
Perhaps--but we prefer to think it has something to do with
the fact that inmates must now ante up $5 every time they
demand to see a doctor.
New Jersey prison officials are extremely pleased with the
new system. The fee deters prisoners with vague or minor
complaints or whose primary motivation appears to be simply,
to get out of their cells for a few hours.
Result: The state has been able to cut its prison health-
care budget by $17 million. Fewer inmates being escorted to
and from the infirmary also enhances security within prison
walls.
Predictably, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
isn't pleased. It claims the $5 fee--equal to about two days'
prison wages--is preventing some chronically ill inmates from
seeking proper care. Naturally, a lawsuit has been filed. In
May, a judge ruled in favor of the prison system (the
decision is being appealed).
Charging prisoners a fee for medical services, however, is
nothing new, nor is it unique to New Jersey. Prisons and
jails in at least 18 states now charge for health care, up
from just nine in 1995. New Jersey has allowed such fees
since 1995. In fact, the Bergen County jail charges inmates
$10 per doctor visit.
State prison officials dismiss the ACLU's concerns as
``highly speculative.'' Inmates diagnosed with chronic
illnesses, the officials point out, are not charged for all
visits. One diabetic inmate, interviewed by The New York
Times, complained that the fee was a ``burden'' because it
meant he could no longer buy ``toothpaste and stuff.'' He
admitted, however, that he'd had to pay only ``three or four
times'' since April 1.
This isn't exactly Black Hole of Calcutta stuff. New Jersey
appears to be making good use of a sound prison-management
technique.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. Lott, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Mack, Mr.
Coverdell, Mr. Helms, Mr. Shelby, and Mrs. Hutchison):
S. 495. A bill to provide criminal and civil penalties for the
unlawful acquisition, transfer, or use of any chemical weapon or
biological weapon, and to reduce the threat of acts of terrorism or
armed aggression involving the use of any such weapon against the
United States, its citizens, or Armed Forces, or those of any allied
country, and for other purposes.
the chemical and biological weapons threat reduction act of 1997
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 495
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Chemical
and Biological Weapons Threat Reduction Act of 1997''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Policy.
Sec. 4. Definitions.
TITLE I--PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR
BY UNITED STATES NATIONALS ABROAD
Subtitle A--Criminal Penalties
Sec. 101. Criminal provisions.
Subtitle B--Civil Penalties
Sec. 111. Designation of lead agency.
Sec. 112. Prohibitions on chemical and biological weapons-related
activities.
Sec. 113. Civil penalties.
Sec. 114. Regulatory authority; application of other laws.
Subtitle C--Other Penalties
Sec. 121. Revocations of export privileges.
Sec. 122. Suspension of patent rights.
TITLE II--FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DEFENSE-RELATED PROVISIONS
Sec. 201. Sanctions for use of chemical or biological weapons.
Sec. 202. Continuation and enhancement of multilateral control regimes.
Sec. 203. Criteria for United States assistance to Russia.
Sec. 204. Report on the state of chemical and biological weapons
proliferation.
Sec. 205. International conference to strengthen the 1925 Geneva
Protocol.
Sec. 206. Restriction on use of funds for the Organization for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
Sec. 207. Enhancements to robust chemical and biological defenses.
Sec. 208. Negative security assurances.
Sec. 209. Riot control agents.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that--
(1) the United States eliminated its stockpile of
biological weapons pursuant to the 1972 Biological Weapons
Convention and has pledged to destroy its entire inventory of
chemical weapons by 2004, independent of the Chemical Weapons
Convention entering into force;
(2) the use of chemical or biological weapons in
contravention of international law is abhorrent and should
trigger immediate and effective sanctions;
(3) United Nations Security Council Resolution 620, adopted
on August 26, 1988, states the intention of the Security
Council to consider immediately ``appropriate and effective''
sanctions against any nation using chemical and biological
weapons in violation of international law;
(4) the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade recognizes
that national security concerns may serve as legitimate
grounds for limiting trade; title XXI of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade states that ``nothing in this
Agreement shall be construed . . . to prevent any contracting
party from taking any action which it considers necessary for
the protection of its essential security interests. . .'';
(5) on September 30, 1993, the President declared by
Executive Order No. 12868 a national emergency to deal with
``the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national
security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States''
posed by the proliferation of nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons, and of the means for delivering such
weapons;
(6) Russia has not implemented the 1990 United States-
Russian Bilateral Agreement on Destruction and Non-Production
of Chemical Weapons and on Measures to Facilitate the
Multilateral Convention on Banning Chemical Weapons, known as
the ``BDA'', nor has the United States and Russia resolved,
to the satisfaction of the United States, the outstanding
compliance issues under the Memorandum of Understanding
Between the United States of America and the Government of
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Regarding a Bilateral
Verification Experiment and Data Exchange Related To
Prohibition on Chemical Weapons, known as the ``1989 Wyoming
MOU'';
(7) the Intelligence Community has stated that a number of
countries, among them China, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North
Korea, Syria, and Russia, possess chemical and biological
weapons and the means to deliver them;
(8) four countries in the Middle East--Iran, Iraq, Libya,
and Syria--have, as a national policy, supported
international terrorism;
(9) chemical and biological weapons have been used by
states in the past for intimidation and military aggression,
most recently during the Iran-Iraq war and by Iraq against
its Kurdish minority;
(10) the grave new threat of chemical and biological
terrorism has been demonstrated by the 1995 nerve gas attack
on the Tokyo subway by the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo;
(11) the urgent need to improve domestic preparedness to
protect against chemical and
[[Page
S2659]]
biological threats was underscored by enactment of the 1997
Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act;
(12) the Department of Defense, in light of growing
chemical and biological threats in regions of key concern,
including Northeast Asia, and the Middle East, has stated
that United States forces must be properly trained and
equipped for all missions, including those in which opponents
might threaten use of chemical or biological weapons; and
(13) Australia Group controls on the exports of chemical
and biological agents, and related equipment, and the Missile
Technology Control Regime, together provide an indispensable
foundation for international and national efforts to curb the
spread of chemical and biological weapons, and their delivery
means.
SEC. 3. POLICY.
It should be the policy of the United States to take all
appropriate measures to--
(1) prevent and deter the threat or use of chemical and
biological weapons against the citizens, Armed Forces, and
territory of the United States and its allies, and to protect
against, and manage the consequences of, such use should it
occur;
(2) discourage the proliferation of chemical and biological
weapons, their means of delivery, and related equipment,
material, and technology;
(3) prohibit within the United States the development,
production, acquisition, stockpiling, and transfer to third
parties of chemical or biological weapons, their precursors
and related technology; and
(4) impose unilateral sanctions, and seek immediately
international sanctions, against any nation using chemical
and biological weapons in violation of international law.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Australia group.--The term ``Australia Group'' refers
to the informal forum of countries, formed in 1984 and
chaired by Australia, whose goal is to discourage and impede
chemical and biological weapons proliferation by harmonizing
national export controls on precursor chemicals for chemical
weapons, biological weapons pathogens, and dual-use
equipment, sharing information on target countries, and
seeking other ways to curb the use of chemical weapons and
biological weapons.
(2) Biological weapon.--The term ``biological weapon''
means the following, together or separately:
(A) Any micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses, fungi,
rickettsiae or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious substance,
or any naturally occurring, bio-engineered or synthesized
component of any such micro-organism, pathogen, or infectious
substance, whatever its origin or method of production,
capable of causing--
(i) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a
human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
(ii) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or
materials of any kind; or
(iii) deleterious alteration of the environment.
(B) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of those
biological weapons specified in subparagraph (A), which would
be released as a result of the employment of such munition or
device.
(C) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in
connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
(D) Any living organism specifically designed to carry a
biological weapon specified in subparagraph (A) to a host.
(3) Chemical weapon.--The term ``chemical weapon'' means
the following, together or separately:
(A) Any of the following chemical agents: tabun, Sarin,
Soman, GF, VX, sulfur mustard, nitrogen mustard, phosgene
oxime, lewisite, phenyldichloroarsine, ethyldi- chloroarsine,
methyldichloroarsine, phosgene, diphosgene, hydrogen cyanide,
cyanogen chloride, and arsine.
(B) Any of the 54 chemicals other than a riot control agent
that is controlled by the Australia Group as of the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(C) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of a
chemical weapon specified in subparagraph (A) or (B), which
would be released as a result of the employment of such
munition or device.
(D) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in
connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
(4) Knowingly.--The term ``knowingly'' is used within the
meaning of ``knows'' as that term is defined in section 104
of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-
2) and includes situations in which a person has reason to
know.
(5) National of the united states.--The term ``national of
the United States'' has the same meaning given such term in
section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)).
(6) Person.--The term ``person'' means any individual,
corporation, partnership, firm, association, or other legal
entity.
(7) Purpose not prohibited under this act.--The term
``purpose not prohibited under this Act'' means--
(A) any industrial, agricultural, research, medical,
pharmaceutical, or other peaceful purpose;
(B) any protective purpose, namely any purpose directly
related to protection against a chemical or biological
weapon;
(C) any military purpose that is not connected with the use
of a chemical or biological weapon or that is not dependent
on the use of the toxic properties of the chemical or
biological weapon to cause death or other harm; or
(D) any law enforcement purpose, including any domestic
riot control purpose.
(8) Riot control agent.--The term ``riot control agent''
means any substance, including diphenylchloroarsine,
diphenyl- cyanoarsine, adamsite, chloroacetophenone,
chloropicrin, bromobenzyl cyanide, 0-chlorobenzylidene
malononitrile, or 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate, that is designed
or used to produce rapidly in humans any nonlethal sensory
irritation or disabling physical effect that disappears
within a short time following termination of exposure.
(9) United states.--The term ``United States'' means the
several States of the United States, the District of
Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions
of the United States and includes all places under the
jurisdiction or control of the United States, including--
(A) any of the places within the provisions of section
101(41) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49
U.S.C. App. sec. 1301(41));
(B) any public aircraft or civil aircraft of the United
States, as such terms are defined in sections 101 (36) and
(18) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49
U.S.C. App. secs. 1301(36) and 1301(18)); and
(C) any vessel of the United States, as such term is
defined in section 3(b) of the Maritime Drug Enforcement Act,
as amended (46 U.S.C., App. sec. 1903(b)).
TITLE I--PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR
BY UNITED STATES NATIONALS ABROAD
Subtitle A--Criminal Penalties
SEC. 101. CRIMINAL PROVISIONS.
(a) In General.--Part I of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after chapter 11A the following new
chapter:
``CHAPTER 11B--CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS
``Sec.
``229. Penalties and prohibitions with respect to chemical and
biological weapons.
``229A. Seizure, forfeiture, and destruction.
``229B. Other prohibitions.
``229C. Injunctions.
``229D. Requests for military assistance to enforce prohibition in
certain emergencies.
``229E. Definitions.
``Sec. 229. Penalties and prohibitions with respect to
chemical and biological weapons
``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (c),
whoever knowingly develops, produces, otherwise acquires,
receives from any person located outside the territory of the
United States, stockpiles, retains, directly or indirectly
transfers, uses, owns, or possesses any chemical weapon or
any biological weapon, or knowingly assists, encourages or
induces, in any way, any person to do so, or attempt or
conspire to do so, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for life or any term of years or both, unless--
``(1) the chemical weapon or biological weapon is intended
for a purpose not prohibited under this Act;
``(2) the types and quantities of chemical weapons or
biological weapons are strictly limited to those that can be
justified for such purposes; and
``(3) the amount of such chemical weapons or biological
weapons per person at any given time does not exceed a
quantity that under the circumstances is inconsistent with
the purposes not prohibited under this Act.
``(b) Death Penalty.--Any person who knowingly uses
chemical or biological weapons in violation of subsection (a)
and by whose action the death of another person is the result
shall be punished by death or imprisoned for life.
``(c) Exclusion.--
``(1) In general.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the
retention, ownership, or possession of a chemical weapon or a
biological weapon by an agency of the United States or a
person described in paragraph (2) pending destruction of the
weapon.
``(2) Covered persons.--A person referred to in paragraph
(1) is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or
any other person if the person is authorized by the head of
an agency of the United States to retain, own, or possess the
chemical or biological weapon.
``(d) Jurisdiction.--Conduct prohibited by subsection (a)
is within the jurisdiction of the United States if the
prohibited conduct--
``(1) takes place in the United States; or
``(2) takes place outside of the United States and is
committed by a national of the United States.
``(e) Reimbursement of Costs.--The court shall order any
person convicted of an offense under this section to
reimburse the United States for any expenses incurred by the
United States incident to the seizure, storage, handling,
transportation, and destruction or other disposition of any
property that was seized in connection with an investigation
of the commission of the offense by that person. A person
ordered to reimburse the United States for expenses
[[Page
S2660]]
under this subsection shall be jointly and severally liable
for such expenses with each other person, if any, who is
ordered under this subsection to reimburse the United States
for the same expenses.
``Sec. 229A. Seizure, forfeiture, and destruction
``(a) Seizure.--
``(1) Seizures on warrants.--The Attorney General may
request the issuance, in the same manner as provided for a
search warrant, of a warrant authorizing the seizure of any
chemical weapon or any biological weapon that is of a type or
quantity that, under the circumstances, is inconsistent with
the purposes not prohibited under this Act.
``(2) Warrantless seizures.--In exigent circumstances,
seizure and destruction of any such chemical weapon or
biological weapon described in paragraph (1) may be made by
the Attorney General upon probable cause without the
necessity for a warrant.
``(b) Procedure for Forfeiture and Destruction.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (a)(2),
property seized pursuant to subsection (a) shall be forfeited
to the United States after notice to potential claimants and
an opportunity for a hearing.
``(2) Burden of persuasion.--At such a hearing, the United
States shall bear the burden of persuasion by a preponderance
of the evidence.
``(3) Procedures.--The provisions of chapter 46 of this
title relating to civil forfeitures shall apply to a seizure
or forfeiture under this section except to the extent (if
any) that such provisions are inconsistent with this section.
``(4) Destruction or other disposition.--The Attorney
General shall provide for the destruction or other
appropriate disposition of any chemical or biological weapon
seized and forfeited pursuant to this section.
``(c) Other Seizure, Forfeiture, and Destruction.--
``(1) Seizures on warrant.--The Attorney General may
request the issuance, in the same manner as provided for a
search warrant, of a warrant authorizing the seizure of any
chemical weapon or biological weapon that exists by reason of
conduct prohibited under section 229 of this title.
``(2) Warrantless seizures.--In exigent circumstances,
seizure and destruction of any such chemical weapon or
biological weapon described in paragraph (1) may be made by
the Attorney General upon probable cause without the
necessity for a warrant.
``(3) Forfeiture and destruction.--Property seized pursuant
to this subsection shall be summarily forfeited (within the
meaning of section 609(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930) to the
United States and destroyed.
``(d) Assistance.--The Attorney General may request the
head of any agency of the United States to assist in the
handling, storage, transportation, or destruction of property
seized under this section.
``(e) Owner or Possessor Liability.--The owner or possessor
of any property seized under this section shall be jointly
and severally liable to the United States in an action for
money damages for any expenses incurred by the United States
incident to the seizure, including any expenses relating to
the handling, storage, transportation, destruction or other
disposition of the seized property.
``Sec. 229B. Other prohibitions
``(a) In General.--Whoever knowingly uses riot control
agents as an act of terrorism, or knowingly assists any
person to do so, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for a term of not more than 10 years, or both.
``(b) Jurisdiction.--Conduct prohibited by this section is
within the jurisdiction of the United States if the
prohibited conduct--
``(1) takes place in the United States; or
``(2) takes place outside of the United States and is
committed by a national of the United States.
``Sec. 229C. Injunctions
``The United States may obtain in a civil action an
injunction against--
``(1) the conduct prohibited under section 229 of this
title; or
``(2) the preparation or solicitation to engage in conduct
prohibited under section 229 of this title.
``Sec. 229D. Requests for military assistance to enforce
prohibition in certain emergencies
``The Attorney General may request the Secretary of Defense
to provide assistance under section 382 of title 10 in
support of Department of Justice activities relating to the
enforcement of section 229 of this title in an emergency
situation involving a biological weapon or chemical weapon.
The authority to make such a request may be exercised by
another official of the Department of Justice in accordance
with section 382(f)(2) of title 10.
``Sec. 229E. Definitions
``In this chapter:
``(1) Australia group.--The term `Australia Group' refers
to the informal forum of countries, formed in 1984 and
chaired by Australia, whose goal is to discourage and impede
chemical and biological weapons proliferation by harmonizing
national export controls on precursor chemicals for chemical
weapons, biological weapons pathogens, and dual-use
equipment, sharing information on target countries, and
seeking other ways to curb the use of chemical and biological
weapons.
``(2) Biological weapon.--The term `biological weapon'
means the following, together or separately:
``(A) Any micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses,
fungi, rickettsiae or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious
substance, or any naturally occurring, bio-engineered or
synthesized component of any such micro-organism, pathogen,
or infectious substance, whatever its origin or method of
production, capable of causing--
``(i) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a
human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
``(ii) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies,
or materials of any kind; or
``(iii) deleterious alteration of the environment.
``(B) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of those
biological weapons specified in subparagraph (A), which would
be released as a result of the employment of such munition or
device.
``(C) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly
in connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
``(D) Any living organism specifically designed to carry a
biological weapon specified in subparagraph (A) to a host.
``(3) Chemical weapon.--The term `chemical weapon' means
the following, together or separately:
``(A) Any of the following chemical agents: tabun, Sarin,
Soman, GF, VX, sulfur mustard, nitrogen mustard, phosgene
oxime, lewisite, phenyldichloroarsine, ethyldichloroarsine,
methyldichloroarsine, phosgene, diphosgene, hydrogen cyanide,
cyanogen chloride, and arsine.
``(B) Any of the 54 chemicals, other than a riot control
agent, controlled by the Australia Group as of the date of
the enactment of this Act.
``(C) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of a
chemical weapon specified in subparagraph (A) or (B), which
would be released as a result of the employment of such
munition or device.
``(D) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly
in connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
``(4) Knowingly.--The term `knowingly' is used within the
meaning of `knows' as that term is defined in section 104 of
the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-2)
and includes situations in which a person has reason to know.
``(5) National of the united states.--The term `national of
the United States' has the same meaning given such term in
section 101(
Major Actions:
All articles in Senate section
THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
(Senate - March 20, 1997)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages
S2654-S2706]
THE FIREFIGHER PAY FAIRNESS ACT
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to
improve the pay system used for Federal firefighters. This bill has
three broad purposes: First, to improve pay equality with municipal and
other public section firefighters; second, to enhance recruitment and
retention of firefighters in order to maintain the highest quality
Federal fire service; and third, to encourage Federal firefighters to
pursue career advancement and training opportunities.
Fire protection is clearly a major concern at Federal facilities and
on Federal lands throughout the Nation. From fighting wildland fires in
our national parks and forests to protecting military families from
fires in their base housing, Federal firefighters play a vital role in
preserving lives and property. One only needs to recall the terrible
tragedies in Colorado two summers ago to understand the vital
importance of our Federal firefighters.
The Department of Agriculture, the Coast Guard, the Department of
Commerce, the Department of Defense, the General Services
Administration, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of
Veterans Affairs are among the Federal agencies which rely on Federal
fire fighters to protect their vast holdings of land and structures.
Just like their municipal counterparts, these firefighters are the
first line of defense against threats to life and property.
Mr. President, the current system used to pay our Federal
firefighters is at best confusing and at worst unfair. These men and
women work longer hours than any other public sector firefighters--yet
are paid substantially less. The current pay system, which consists of
three tiers, is overly complex and, more importantly, is hurting
Federal efforts to attract and retain top-quality employees.
Currently, most Federal firefighters work an average 72-hour week
under exceptionally demanding conditions. The typical workweek consists
of a one-day-off schedule which results in three 24-hours shifts during
the remainder of each week. Despite this unusual schedule, firefighters
are paid under a modified version of the same General Schedule pay
system used for full-time, 40-hour-per-week Federal workers.
The result of the pay modification is that Federal firefighters make
less per hour than any other Federal employee at their same grade
level. For example: a firefighter who is a GS-5, Step 5 makes $7.21 per
hour while other employees at the same grade and step earn $10.34 per
hour. Some have tried to justify this by noting that part of a
firefighter's day is downtime. However, I must note that all
firefighters have substantial duties beyond those at the site of a
fire. Adding to this discrepancy is the fact that the average municipal
firefighter makes $12.87 per hour.
Mr. President, this has caused the Federal fire service to become a
training ground for young men and women who then leave for higher pay
elsewhere in the public sector. Continually training new employees is,
as my colleagues know, very expensive for any employer.
The Office of Personnel Management is well aware of these problems.
In fact, section 102 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of
1990 [FEPCA], title V of Public Law 101-509, authorizes the
establishment of special pay systems for certain Federal occupations.
The origin of this provision was a recognition that the current pay
classification system did not account for the unique and distinctive
employment conditions of Federal protective occupations including the
Federal fire service.
In May 1991, I wrote to OPM urging the establishment of a separate
pay scale for firefighters under the authority provided for in FEPCA.
Subsequently, OPM established an Advisory Committee on Law Enforcement
and Protective Occupations consisting of agency personnel and
representatives from Federal fire and law enforcement organizations.
Beginning in August of 1991, representatives from the Federal fire
community began working with OPM and other administration officials to
identify and address the problems of paying Federal firefighters under
the General Schedule. The committee completed its work in June of 1992
and in December of that year issued a staff report setting forth
recommendations to correct the most serious problems with the current
pay system.
Mr. President, I regret that since the release of the OPM
recommendations, there has been no effort to implement any of the
proposals of the advisory task force. In fact, OPM has communicated
quite clearly that it has no plans to pursue any solution to the
serious pay deficiencies that have been so widely identified and
acknowledged.
[[Page
S2655]]
It would not be necessary to introduce this legislation today had OPM
taken the corrective action that, in my view, is so clearly warranted.
However, I have determined that legislation appears to be the only
vehicle to achieve the necessary changes in the pay system for Federal
firefighters.
Mr. President, the Firefighter Pay Fairness Act would improve Federal
firefighter pay in several important and straightforward ways. Perhaps
most importantly, the bill draws from existing provisions in title V to
calculate a true hourly rate for firefighters. This would alleviate the
current problem of firefighters being paid considerably less than other
General Schedule employees at the same GS level. It would also account
for the varying length in the tour of duty for Federal firefighters
stationed at different locations.
In addition, the bill would use this hourly rate to ensure that
firefighters receive true time and one-half overtime for hours worked
over 106 in a bi-weekly pay period. This is designed to correct the
problem, under the current system, where the overtime rate is
calculated based on an hourly rate considerably less than base pay.
The Firefighter Pay Fairness Act would also extend these pay
provisions to so-called wildland firefighters when they are engaged in
firefighting duties. Currently, wildland firefighters are often not
compensated for all the time spent responding to a fire event. This
legislation would ensure that these protectors of our parks and forests
would be paid fairly for ensuring the safety of these invaluable
national resources.
It also ensures that firefighters promoted to supervisory positions
would be paid at a rate of pay at least equal to what they received
before the promotion. This would address a situation, under the current
pay system, which discourages employees from accepting promotions
because of the significant loss of pay which often accompanies a move
to a supervisory position.
Similarly, the bill would encourage employees to get the necessary
training in hazardous materials, emergency medicine, and other critical
areas by ensuring they do not receive a pay cut while engaged in these
training activities.
Mr. President, this legislation is based upon a bill I authorized in
the 103d Congress. A bipartisan group of more than 150 Members
cosponsored the measure in the Senate and the House last year. The
legislation I am introducing today reflects several modifications that
were suggested to the bill following substantial discussions with
various Members. However, it is identical to the so-called compromise
measure that has been discussed with the authorizing as well as the
appropriations committees in previous years and received widespread
support.
To reduce initial costs and allow oversight of the effectiveness of
the legislation, the bill I am introducing today would implement the
new pay system and other provisions beginning October 1, 1997. However,
the new rate of pay would be phased in over a 4-year period ending
October 1, 2002.
Mr. President, I consulted many of the affected groups in developing
my legislation. I am very pleased that this bill has been endorsed by
the American Federation of Government Employees, the International
Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Fire
Fighters, the National Association of Government Employees, and the
National Federation of Federal Employees.
As I have said before, Mr. President, fairness is the key word. There
is no reason why Federal firefighters should be paid dramatically less
that their municipal counterparts. As a cochairman of the Congressional
Fire Services Caucus, I want to urge all members of the caucus and,
indeed, all Members of the Senate to join in cosponsoring this
important piece of legislation.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself and Mr. Gorton):
S. 493. A bill to amend section 1029 of title 18, United States Code,
with respect to cellular telephone cloning paraphernalia; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
the cellular telephone protection act
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Cellular Telephone
Protection Act, which would improve the ability of law enforcement to
investigate and prosecute individuals engaged in the activity of
cloning cellular phones. Law enforcement officials and wireless
carriers support the bill as an important tool to stem this kind of
telecommunications fraud.
Cell phones are manufactured with an embedded electronic serial
number [ESN], which is transmitted to gain access to the
telecommunications network. Those involved in cloning cell phones sit
in parked cars outside of airports or along busy roadways to harvest
ESN's from legitimate cell phone users and, in a process known as
cloning, use software and equipment to insert the stolen numbers into
other cell phones, the clones. A single ESN can be implanted into
several cloned phones. The cloned phones charge to the account of the
lawful, unsuspecting user. Cellular phone carriers must absorb these
losses, which, according to the Cellular Telecommunication Industry
Association, amounted to about $650 million in 1995, up from $480
million in 1994. The cellular industry is expanding by about 40 percent
a year; efforts to combat fraud are imperative to ensure the integrity
of our communications network.
Cloning is more than an inconvenience to the 36 million Americans who
currently use cellular phone services, and an expense to wireless
communication companies who pay for the fraudulent calls. According to
the Secret Service, which is the primary Federal agency responsible for
investigating telecommunications fraud, cloning abets organized
criminal enterprises that use cellular telephones as their preferred
method of communication. Cloned phones are extremely popular among drug
traffickers and gang members, who oftentimes employ several cloned
phones to evade detection by law enforcement. When not selling cloned
phones to drug dealers and ruthless street gangs, cloners set up
corner-side calling shops where individuals pay a nominal fee to call
anywhere in the world on a replicated phone, or simply purchase the
illegal phone for a flat amount.
The cellular telephone protection bill clarifies that there is no
lawful purpose to posses, produce or sell hardware, known as copycat
boxes, or software used for cloning a cellular phone or its ESN. Such
equipment and software are easy to obtainn--advertisements hawking
cloning equipment appear in computer magazines and on the Internet.
There is no legitimate purpose for cloning software and equipment, save
for law enforcement and telecommunication service providers using it to
improve fraud detection. The bill strikes at the heart of the cloning
paraphernalia market by eliminating the requirement for prosecutors to
prove that the person selling copycat boxes or cloning software
programs intended to defraud. The bill retains an exception for law
enforcement to possess otherwise unlawful cloning software, and adds a
similar exception for telecommunications service providers.
Moreover, the Cellular Phone Protection Act expands the definition of
``scanning receivers,'' equipment which, unlike cloning software and
devices, does have legitimate uses if not used to scan frequencies
assigned to wireless communications. The bill clarifies that the
definition of scanning receivers encompasses devices that can be used
to intercept ESN's even if they are not capable of receiving the voice
channel. As mentioned above, criminals harvest ESN's by employing
scanners near busy thoroughfares. The revised definition of scanning
receiver will ensure that these devices are unlawful when used with an
intent to defraud just like scanners that intercept voice.
Finally, the bill increases penalties for those engaged in cloning. A
new paradigm is needed for penalizing cloning offenses. Currently,
penalties for cloning crimes are based on the monetary loss a carrier
suffers, not the potential loss. First-time offenders oftentimes do not
face any jail time, which makes these cases unattractive for
prosecution. Carriers and law enforcement are forced to choose between
keeping the cloner on the telecommunications network to rack up high
losses to ensure jail time, or stemming the losses sooner only to have
the cloner back on the streets in days. The penalty scheme should be
revised to
[[Page
S2656]]
track another indicator of cloning fraud--the number of electronic
serial numbers stolen.
Cloning offenses are serious crimes, and the penalties should reflect
this. We know that cloned phones are used to facilitate other crimes--
particularly drug trafficking. Additionally, cloning offenses are
serious economic crimes in themselves that threaten the integrity of
the public communications network. In August, two individuals in New
York were arrested for allegedly possessing 80,000 electronic serial
numbers. Each of the 80,000 ESN's could be implanted into several
cloned phones. I look forward to working with the U.S. Sentencing
Commission to achieve a more appropriate sentencing structure for
cloning fraud.
The cellular phone protection initiative will help to reduce
telecommunications fraud. In the process, other criminal activity will
be made more difficult to conduct--cloned phones, now a staple of
criminal syndicates, would not be so readily available. I urge my
colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 493
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Cellular Telephone
Protection Act''.
SEC. 2. FRAUD AND RELATED ACTIVITY IN CONNECTION WITH
COUNTERFEIT ACCESS DEVICES.
(a) Unlawful Acts.--Section 1029(a) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (7), by striking ``use of'' and inserting
``access to'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (9) as paragraph (10); and
(3) by striking paragraph (8) and inserting the following:
``(8) knowingly and with intent to defraud uses, produces,
traffics in, has control or custody of, or possesses a
scanning receiver;
``(9) knowingly uses, produces, traffics in, has control or
custody of, or possesses hardware or software that may be
used for--
``(A) modifying or copying an electronic serial number; or
``(B) altering or modifying a telecommunications instrument
so that the instrument may be used to obtain unauthorized
access to telecommunications services; or''.
(b) Penalties.--Section 1029(c) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Penalties.--The punishment for an offense under
subsection (a) or (b)(1) is--
``(1) in the case of an offense that does not occur after a
conviction for another offense under subsection (a) or
(b)(1), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under
subsection (a) or (b)(1), a fine under this title or twice
the value obtained by the offense, whichever is greater,
imprisonment for not more than 15 years, or both; and
``(2) in the case of an offense that occurs after a
conviction for another offense under subsection (a) or
(b)(1), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under
subsection (a) or (b)(1), a fine under this title or twice
the value obtained by the offense, whichever is greater,
imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both.''.
(c) Definition of Scanning Receiver.--Section 1029(e)(8) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting before
the period at the end the following: ``or any electronic
serial number, mobile identification number, personal
identification number, or other identifier of any
telecommunications service, equipment, or instrument''.
(d) Exception for Certain Telecommunications Services
Providers.--Section 1029 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Exception for Certain Telecommunications Services
Providers.--
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection, the term
`telecommunications carrier' has the same meaning as in
section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153).
``(2) Permissible activities.--This section does not
prohibit any telecommunications carrier, or an officer,
agent, or employee of, or a person under contract with a
telecommunications carrier, engaged in protecting any
property or legal right of the telecommunications carrier,
from sending through the mail, sending or carrying in
interstate or foreign commerce, having control or custody of,
or possessing, manufacturing, assembling, or producing any
otherwise unlawful--
``(A) device-making equipment, scanning receiver, or access
device; or
``(B) hardware or software used for--
``(i) modifying or altering an electronic serial number; or
``(ii) altering or modifying a telecommunications
instrument so that the instrument may be used to obtain
unauthorized access to telecommunications services.''.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. Abraham, and Mr. Reid):
S. 494. A bill to combat the overutilization of prison health care
services and control rising prisoner health care costs; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
The Federal Prison Health Care Copayment Act
Mr. KYL. Mr. President. I introduce the Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act, which would require Federal prisoners to pay a nominal
fee when they initiate a visit for medical attention. The fee would be
deposited in the Federal Crime Victims' Fund. Each time a prisoner pays
to heal himself, he will be paying to heal a victim.
Most working, law-abiding Americans are required to pay a copayment
fee when they seek medical care. It is time to impose this requirement
on Federal prisoners.
To date, at least 20 States--including my home State of Arizona--have
implemented statewide prisoner health care copayment programs. In
addition to Arizona, the following States have enacted this reform:
California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Oklahoma, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, Hew
Hampshire, New Jersey, Utah, Virginia, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.
Several other States are expected to soon institute a copayment system,
including, Alaska, Connecticut, Maine, Montana, Michigan, North
Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, and Wyoming.
Moreover, according to the National Sheriffs' Association, at least
25 States--some of which have not adopted medical copayment reform on a
statewide basis--have jail systems that impose a copayment.
In June, the National Commission on Correctional Health Care held a
conference that examined the statewide fee-for-service programs. At the
conference, Dr. Ron Waldron of the Federal Bureau of Prisons provided a
survey of some of the States that have adopted inmate medical copayment
programs and concluded that ``Inmate user fees programs appear to
reduce utilization, and do generate modest revenues.''
Dr. Waldron reported that prison copayment laws resulted in the
reduction of medical utilization of: between 16 and 29 percent in
Florida; between 30 and 50 percent in Kansas; 40 percent in Maryland;
50 percent in Nevada; and between 10 and 18 percent in Oklahoma. Terry
Stewart, director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, notes that,
``Over the life of the [Arizona copayment] program, there has been an
overall reduction of about 31 percent in the number of requests for
health care services. This strongly suggests that inmates are being
more discreet about, and giving more considered thought to, their need
for medical attention.'' I will have his letter placed in the
Congressional Record.
Reducing frivolous medical visits saves taxpayers money. A December
28, 1996, New York Post editorial, ``Toward Healthier Prison Budgets,''
which I will also include in the Record, reported that the copayment
law in New Jersey allowed the State to cut its prison health care
budget by $17 million.
As to generating revenue, Dr. Waldron reported that California
collects about $60,000 per month in prisoner-copayment fees. In my home
State of Arizona, the State has collected about $400,000 since the
inception of the program in October 1994.
Not only are inmate copayment plans working well on the statewide
level, they are achieving success in jail systems across the United
States. In the January-February edition of Sheriff, the National
Sheriffs' Association President reported that copayment plans--which,
as mentioned above, are operational in jail systems in at least 25
States--have: First, discouraged overuse of service; and second, freed
health care staff to provide better care to inmates who truly need
medical attention. Yavapai County sheriff, G.C. ``Buck'' Buchanan, in a
letter that I will include in the Record, writes: ``Prior to the
institution of [copayment reform], many inmates in custody were taking
advantage of the health care which, or course, must be provided to
them. This could be construed as frivolous requests if you will, and
took up the valuable time of our health care providers * * *. Since
this policy has been in effect, we have realized a reduction in inmate
requests for medical services between 45 to 50 percent.''
[[Page
S2657]]
The success of the prison and jail fee-for-service initiatives should
come as no surprise. Common sense says that inmates will be less likely
to seek unnecessary medical attention if they are required to pick up
part of the tab.
I believe that Congress should follow the lead of the States and
provide the Federal Bureau of Prisons with the authority to charge
Federal inmates a nominal fee for elective health care visits. The
Federal system is particularly ripe for reform. According to the 1996
Corrections Yearbook, the system spends more per inmate on health care
than any State except Vermont. Federal inmate health care totaled $327
million in fiscal year 1996, up from $138 million in fiscal year 1990.
Average cost per inmate has increased over 60 percent during this
period, from $2,204 to $3,549.
The Prisoner Health Care Copayment Act provides that the Director of
the Bureau of Prisons shall assess and collect a fee of not less than
$3 and not more than $5 for each qualified health care visit. The term
``qualified health care visit'' does not include any health care visit
that is: Conducted during the intake process; an annual examination;
initiated by the health care staff of the Bureau of Prisons; the direct
result of a referral made by a prison official; or an emergency visit.
Prisoners who are pregnant or determined to be seriously mentally ill
are exempted from the copayment requirement altogether. No prisoner
shall be denied treatment on the basis of insolvency.
The act also gives the Director of the Bureau of Prisons the
authority to set by regulation a reasonable fee, not to exceed $5, for
prescriptions, emergency visits, and juvenile visits. And the
legislation permits the Director to charge an inmate's account for
medical treatment for injuries an inmate inflicts on himself or others.
As I mentioned above, all fees will be deposited in the Federal Crime
Victims' Fund.
Before I conclude, I would like to thank the Arizona Department of
Corrections for its assistance in helping me draft this reform.
Additionally, I appreciate the assistance that Sheriff Buchanan and his
office provided me.
I look forward to working with the Department of Justice, the Bureau
of Prisons, and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to implement
a fee-for-medical-services program--a sensible and overdue reform--for
Federal prisoners.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that additional material be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 494
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act''.
SEC. 2. PRISONER COPAYMENTS FOR HEALTH CARE SERVICES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 303 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 4048. Prisoner copayments for health care services
``(a) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `account' means the trust fund account (or
institutional equivalent) of a prisoner;
``(2) the term `Director' means the Director of the Bureau
of Prisons;
``(3) the term `health care provider' means any person and
who is licensed or certified under State law to provide
health care services who is operating within the scope of
such license;
``(4) the term `health care visit' means any visit by a
prisoner to an institutional or noninstitutional health care
provider, if the visit is made at the request of the
prisoner;
``(5) the term `prisoner' means any person subject to
incarceration, detention, or admission to any facility who is
accused of, convicted of, sentenced for, or adjudicated
delinquent for, violations of criminal law or the terms and
conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or
diversionary program; and
``(6) the term `qualified health care visit' means any
health care visit except a health care visit
``(A) that--
``(i) is conducted during the incarceration intake process;
``(ii) is an annual examination;
``(iii) is determined by the health care provider to be an
emergency visit;
``(iv) is an immunization;
``(v) is initiated by the health care staff of the Bureau
of Prisons; or
``(vi) is the direct result of a referral made by a prison
official; or
``(B) by a prisoner who is--
``(i) less than 18 years of age;
``(ii) pregnant; or
``(iii) determined by the appropriate official of the
Bureau of Prisons to be seriously mentally ill, or
permanently disabled.
``(b) Copayments For Health Care Services.--The Director
shall assess and collect a fee in accordance with this
section--
``(1) in an amount equal to not less than $3 and not more
than $5, for each qualified health care visit;
``(2) in an amount not to exceed $5, which shall be
established by the Director by regulation, for--
``(A) each prescription medication provided to the prisoner
by a health care provider; and
``(B) each health care visit described in subparagraph
(A)(iii) or (B)(i) of subsection (a)(6); and
``(3) in an amount established by the Director by
regulation, for each health care visit occurring as a result
of an injury inflicted on a prisoner by another prisoner.
``(c) Responsibility for Payment.--Each fee assessed under
subsection (b) shall be collected by the Director from the
account of--
``(1) the prisoner making the health care visit or
receiving the prescription medication; or
``(2) in the case of a health care visit described in
subsection (b)(3), the prisoner who is determined by the
Director to have inflicted the injury.
``(d) Timing.--Each fee assessed under this section shall
be collected from the appropriate account under subsection
(c)--
``(1) on the date on which the qualified health care visit
occurs; or
``(2) in the case of a prisoner whose account balance is
determined by the Director to be insufficient for collection
of the fee in accordance with paragraph (1), in accordance
with an installment payment plan, which shall be established
by the Director by regulation.
``(e) No Refusal of Treatment for Financial Reasons.--
Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit any
refusal of treatment to a prisoner on the basis that--
``(1) account of the prisoner is insolvent; or
``(2) the prisoner is otherwise unable to pay a fee
assessed under this section in accordance with subsection
(d)(1).
``(f) Use of Amounts.--Any amounts collected by the
Director under this section shall be deposited in the Crime
Victims' Fund established under section 1402 of the Victims
of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601).
``(g) Reports to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of the Federal Prisoner Health Care
Copayment Act and annually thereafter, the Director shall
submit to Congress a report, which shall include--
``(1) a description of the amounts collected under this
section during the preceding 12-month period; and
``(2) an analysis of the effects of the implementation of
this section, if any, on the nature and extent of health care
visits by prisoners.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
303 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``4048. Prisoner copayments for health care services.''.
____
Arizona Department of Corrections,
Phoenix, AZ, March 7, 1997.
Hon. Jon Kyl,
U.S. Senate, Senate Hart Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Inmate Health Care--Fee for Service
Dear Senator Kyl: On October 15, 1994, the Arizona
Department of Corrections began its fee for service program
for inmate health care. The program was intended to reduce
inmate abuse of the health care delivery system, to place on
the inmate some responsibility for his/her own health care,
and to offset the increasing costs of inmate health care.
This program has proven itself effective in accomplishing the
purposes intended.
There has been a noticeable decrease in the number of
requests for health care services. For example, upon
implementation of the program, and depending upon the
facility, we experienced an initial reduction of between 40%
and 60% in the number health care requests. Over the life of
the program, there has been an overall reduction of about 31%
in the number of requests for health care services. This
strongly suggests that inmates are being more discreet about,
and giving more considered thought to, their need for medical
attention.
The program has also proven a great benefit to Arizona's
taxpayers. From October 15, 1994 through December 31, 1996,
the Arizona Department of Corrections has collected
$392,843.59 for health care services provided to its inmates.
This money is returned to Arizona's general fund, where it
can be utilized to fund other State programs. This means that
fewer taxpayer dollars are required to fund State programs.
In light of the results achieved by this program in
Arizona, I highly recommend that similar programs be adopted
by prison and jail systems nationwide, and I support and
greatly appreciate your efforts to this end.
Sincerely,
Terry L. Stewart,
Director.
[[Page
S2658]]
____
Yavapai County Sheriff's Office,
Prescott, AZ, March 4, 1997.
Senator Jon Kyl,
2240 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Kyl: As you have requested, a copy of the
current Yavapai County Sheriff's Office Detention Services
Procedure Manual with respect to Inmate Health Care Co-
Payment policy, has been attached. This policy is sanctioned
under Arizona Revised Statute 31-151 and has been in
existence since November 1995.
Prior to the institution of this policy, many inmates in
custody were taking advantage of the health care which, of
course, must be provided to them. This could be construed as
frivolous requests if you will, and took up the valuable time
of our health care providers. Time was not being utilized to
full potential including any request for psychological
analysis and treatment.
Since this policy has been in effect, we have realized a
reduction in inmate requests for medical services between 45%
to 50%. Consequently, when an inmate is given the choice of
how to best spend his money, the preference is not for
unnecessary medical care. Those in custody have nothing
better to do than take advantage of the system for just a
change in the daily routine. This has ceased. There is no
denial of medical services, it just becomes a matter of
priority for the inmate.
Over the past eleven months, in the special account in
which the co-payment fee is retained, approximately $3500.00
has been placed into deposit. Although this is not a large
amount of revenue, the savings which have been noticed are
that of a reduction in staff time and an increase in the
quality of care the physician provides for this service
delivery. One could only imagine the magnitude of budget
savings if a program such as this were initiated on the
federal inmate population.
In Yavapai County this policy has proven to be a success
and it is through this success that you have my full support
in this proposed legislation.
In matters of mutual concern I remain,
G.C. ``Buck'' Buchanan,
Yavapai County Sheriff.
____
[From the New York Post, Dec. 28, 1996]
Toward Healthier Prison Budgets
Since April, New Jersey has experienced a 60 percent drop
in the number of prison inmates seeking medical attention.
Have prisoners suddenly begun pursuing a healthier lifestyle?
Perhaps--but we prefer to think it has something to do with
the fact that inmates must now ante up $5 every time they
demand to see a doctor.
New Jersey prison officials are extremely pleased with the
new system. The fee deters prisoners with vague or minor
complaints or whose primary motivation appears to be simply,
to get out of their cells for a few hours.
Result: The state has been able to cut its prison health-
care budget by $17 million. Fewer inmates being escorted to
and from the infirmary also enhances security within prison
walls.
Predictably, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
isn't pleased. It claims the $5 fee--equal to about two days'
prison wages--is preventing some chronically ill inmates from
seeking proper care. Naturally, a lawsuit has been filed. In
May, a judge ruled in favor of the prison system (the
decision is being appealed).
Charging prisoners a fee for medical services, however, is
nothing new, nor is it unique to New Jersey. Prisons and
jails in at least 18 states now charge for health care, up
from just nine in 1995. New Jersey has allowed such fees
since 1995. In fact, the Bergen County jail charges inmates
$10 per doctor visit.
State prison officials dismiss the ACLU's concerns as
``highly speculative.'' Inmates diagnosed with chronic
illnesses, the officials point out, are not charged for all
visits. One diabetic inmate, interviewed by The New York
Times, complained that the fee was a ``burden'' because it
meant he could no longer buy ``toothpaste and stuff.'' He
admitted, however, that he'd had to pay only ``three or four
times'' since April 1.
This isn't exactly Black Hole of Calcutta stuff. New Jersey
appears to be making good use of a sound prison-management
technique.
______
By Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. Lott, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Mack, Mr.
Coverdell, Mr. Helms, Mr. Shelby, and Mrs. Hutchison):
S. 495. A bill to provide criminal and civil penalties for the
unlawful acquisition, transfer, or use of any chemical weapon or
biological weapon, and to reduce the threat of acts of terrorism or
armed aggression involving the use of any such weapon against the
United States, its citizens, or Armed Forces, or those of any allied
country, and for other purposes.
the chemical and biological weapons threat reduction act of 1997
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 495
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Chemical
and Biological Weapons Threat Reduction Act of 1997''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Policy.
Sec. 4. Definitions.
TITLE I--PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR
BY UNITED STATES NATIONALS ABROAD
Subtitle A--Criminal Penalties
Sec. 101. Criminal provisions.
Subtitle B--Civil Penalties
Sec. 111. Designation of lead agency.
Sec. 112. Prohibitions on chemical and biological weapons-related
activities.
Sec. 113. Civil penalties.
Sec. 114. Regulatory authority; application of other laws.
Subtitle C--Other Penalties
Sec. 121. Revocations of export privileges.
Sec. 122. Suspension of patent rights.
TITLE II--FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DEFENSE-RELATED PROVISIONS
Sec. 201. Sanctions for use of chemical or biological weapons.
Sec. 202. Continuation and enhancement of multilateral control regimes.
Sec. 203. Criteria for United States assistance to Russia.
Sec. 204. Report on the state of chemical and biological weapons
proliferation.
Sec. 205. International conference to strengthen the 1925 Geneva
Protocol.
Sec. 206. Restriction on use of funds for the Organization for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
Sec. 207. Enhancements to robust chemical and biological defenses.
Sec. 208. Negative security assurances.
Sec. 209. Riot control agents.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that--
(1) the United States eliminated its stockpile of
biological weapons pursuant to the 1972 Biological Weapons
Convention and has pledged to destroy its entire inventory of
chemical weapons by 2004, independent of the Chemical Weapons
Convention entering into force;
(2) the use of chemical or biological weapons in
contravention of international law is abhorrent and should
trigger immediate and effective sanctions;
(3) United Nations Security Council Resolution 620, adopted
on August 26, 1988, states the intention of the Security
Council to consider immediately ``appropriate and effective''
sanctions against any nation using chemical and biological
weapons in violation of international law;
(4) the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade recognizes
that national security concerns may serve as legitimate
grounds for limiting trade; title XXI of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade states that ``nothing in this
Agreement shall be construed . . . to prevent any contracting
party from taking any action which it considers necessary for
the protection of its essential security interests. . .'';
(5) on September 30, 1993, the President declared by
Executive Order No. 12868 a national emergency to deal with
``the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national
security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States''
posed by the proliferation of nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons, and of the means for delivering such
weapons;
(6) Russia has not implemented the 1990 United States-
Russian Bilateral Agreement on Destruction and Non-Production
of Chemical Weapons and on Measures to Facilitate the
Multilateral Convention on Banning Chemical Weapons, known as
the ``BDA'', nor has the United States and Russia resolved,
to the satisfaction of the United States, the outstanding
compliance issues under the Memorandum of Understanding
Between the United States of America and the Government of
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Regarding a Bilateral
Verification Experiment and Data Exchange Related To
Prohibition on Chemical Weapons, known as the ``1989 Wyoming
MOU'';
(7) the Intelligence Community has stated that a number of
countries, among them China, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North
Korea, Syria, and Russia, possess chemical and biological
weapons and the means to deliver them;
(8) four countries in the Middle East--Iran, Iraq, Libya,
and Syria--have, as a national policy, supported
international terrorism;
(9) chemical and biological weapons have been used by
states in the past for intimidation and military aggression,
most recently during the Iran-Iraq war and by Iraq against
its Kurdish minority;
(10) the grave new threat of chemical and biological
terrorism has been demonstrated by the 1995 nerve gas attack
on the Tokyo subway by the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo;
(11) the urgent need to improve domestic preparedness to
protect against chemical and
[[Page
S2659]]
biological threats was underscored by enactment of the 1997
Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act;
(12) the Department of Defense, in light of growing
chemical and biological threats in regions of key concern,
including Northeast Asia, and the Middle East, has stated
that United States forces must be properly trained and
equipped for all missions, including those in which opponents
might threaten use of chemical or biological weapons; and
(13) Australia Group controls on the exports of chemical
and biological agents, and related equipment, and the Missile
Technology Control Regime, together provide an indispensable
foundation for international and national efforts to curb the
spread of chemical and biological weapons, and their delivery
means.
SEC. 3. POLICY.
It should be the policy of the United States to take all
appropriate measures to--
(1) prevent and deter the threat or use of chemical and
biological weapons against the citizens, Armed Forces, and
territory of the United States and its allies, and to protect
against, and manage the consequences of, such use should it
occur;
(2) discourage the proliferation of chemical and biological
weapons, their means of delivery, and related equipment,
material, and technology;
(3) prohibit within the United States the development,
production, acquisition, stockpiling, and transfer to third
parties of chemical or biological weapons, their precursors
and related technology; and
(4) impose unilateral sanctions, and seek immediately
international sanctions, against any nation using chemical
and biological weapons in violation of international law.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Australia group.--The term ``Australia Group'' refers
to the informal forum of countries, formed in 1984 and
chaired by Australia, whose goal is to discourage and impede
chemical and biological weapons proliferation by harmonizing
national export controls on precursor chemicals for chemical
weapons, biological weapons pathogens, and dual-use
equipment, sharing information on target countries, and
seeking other ways to curb the use of chemical weapons and
biological weapons.
(2) Biological weapon.--The term ``biological weapon''
means the following, together or separately:
(A) Any micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses, fungi,
rickettsiae or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious substance,
or any naturally occurring, bio-engineered or synthesized
component of any such micro-organism, pathogen, or infectious
substance, whatever its origin or method of production,
capable of causing--
(i) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a
human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
(ii) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or
materials of any kind; or
(iii) deleterious alteration of the environment.
(B) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of those
biological weapons specified in subparagraph (A), which would
be released as a result of the employment of such munition or
device.
(C) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in
connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
(D) Any living organism specifically designed to carry a
biological weapon specified in subparagraph (A) to a host.
(3) Chemical weapon.--The term ``chemical weapon'' means
the following, together or separately:
(A) Any of the following chemical agents: tabun, Sarin,
Soman, GF, VX, sulfur mustard, nitrogen mustard, phosgene
oxime, lewisite, phenyldichloroarsine, ethyldi- chloroarsine,
methyldichloroarsine, phosgene, diphosgene, hydrogen cyanide,
cyanogen chloride, and arsine.
(B) Any of the 54 chemicals other than a riot control agent
that is controlled by the Australia Group as of the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(C) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of a
chemical weapon specified in subparagraph (A) or (B), which
would be released as a result of the employment of such
munition or device.
(D) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in
connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
(4) Knowingly.--The term ``knowingly'' is used within the
meaning of ``knows'' as that term is defined in section 104
of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-
2) and includes situations in which a person has reason to
know.
(5) National of the united states.--The term ``national of
the United States'' has the same meaning given such term in
section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)).
(6) Person.--The term ``person'' means any individual,
corporation, partnership, firm, association, or other legal
entity.
(7) Purpose not prohibited under this act.--The term
``purpose not prohibited under this Act'' means--
(A) any industrial, agricultural, research, medical,
pharmaceutical, or other peaceful purpose;
(B) any protective purpose, namely any purpose directly
related to protection against a chemical or biological
weapon;
(C) any military purpose that is not connected with the use
of a chemical or biological weapon or that is not dependent
on the use of the toxic properties of the chemical or
biological weapon to cause death or other harm; or
(D) any law enforcement purpose, including any domestic
riot control purpose.
(8) Riot control agent.--The term ``riot control agent''
means any substance, including diphenylchloroarsine,
diphenyl- cyanoarsine, adamsite, chloroacetophenone,
chloropicrin, bromobenzyl cyanide, 0-chlorobenzylidene
malononitrile, or 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate, that is designed
or used to produce rapidly in humans any nonlethal sensory
irritation or disabling physical effect that disappears
within a short time following termination of exposure.
(9) United states.--The term ``United States'' means the
several States of the United States, the District of
Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions
of the United States and includes all places under the
jurisdiction or control of the United States, including--
(A) any of the places within the provisions of section
101(41) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49
U.S.C. App. sec. 1301(41));
(B) any public aircraft or civil aircraft of the United
States, as such terms are defined in sections 101 (36) and
(18) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49
U.S.C. App. secs. 1301(36) and 1301(18)); and
(C) any vessel of the United States, as such term is
defined in section 3(b) of the Maritime Drug Enforcement Act,
as amended (46 U.S.C., App. sec. 1903(b)).
TITLE I--PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR
BY UNITED STATES NATIONALS ABROAD
Subtitle A--Criminal Penalties
SEC. 101. CRIMINAL PROVISIONS.
(a) In General.--Part I of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after chapter 11A the following new
chapter:
``CHAPTER 11B--CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS
``Sec.
``229. Penalties and prohibitions with respect to chemical and
biological weapons.
``229A. Seizure, forfeiture, and destruction.
``229B. Other prohibitions.
``229C. Injunctions.
``229D. Requests for military assistance to enforce prohibition in
certain emergencies.
``229E. Definitions.
``Sec. 229. Penalties and prohibitions with respect to
chemical and biological weapons
``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (c),
whoever knowingly develops, produces, otherwise acquires,
receives from any person located outside the territory of the
United States, stockpiles, retains, directly or indirectly
transfers, uses, owns, or possesses any chemical weapon or
any biological weapon, or knowingly assists, encourages or
induces, in any way, any person to do so, or attempt or
conspire to do so, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for life or any term of years or both, unless--
``(1) the chemical weapon or biological weapon is intended
for a purpose not prohibited under this Act;
``(2) the types and quantities of chemical weapons or
biological weapons are strictly limited to those that can be
justified for such purposes; and
``(3) the amount of such chemical weapons or biological
weapons per person at any given time does not exceed a
quantity that under the circumstances is inconsistent with
the purposes not prohibited under this Act.
``(b) Death Penalty.--Any person who knowingly uses
chemical or biological weapons in violation of subsection (a)
and by whose action the death of another person is the result
shall be punished by death or imprisoned for life.
``(c) Exclusion.--
``(1) In general.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the
retention, ownership, or possession of a chemical weapon or a
biological weapon by an agency of the United States or a
person described in paragraph (2) pending destruction of the
weapon.
``(2) Covered persons.--A person referred to in paragraph
(1) is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or
any other person if the person is authorized by the head of
an agency of the United States to retain, own, or possess the
chemical or biological weapon.
``(d) Jurisdiction.--Conduct prohibited by subsection (a)
is within the jurisdiction of the United States if the
prohibited conduct--
``(1) takes place in the United States; or
``(2) takes place outside of the United States and is
committed by a national of the United States.
``(e) Reimbursement of Costs.--The court shall order any
person convicted of an offense under this section to
reimburse the United States for any expenses incurred by the
United States incident to the seizure, storage, handling,
transportation, and destruction or other disposition of any
property that was seized in connection with an investigation
of the commission of the offense by that person. A person
ordered to reimburse the United States for expenses
[[Page
S2660]]
under this subsection shall be jointly and severally liable
for such expenses with each other person, if any, who is
ordered under this subsection to reimburse the United States
for the same expenses.
``Sec. 229A. Seizure, forfeiture, and destruction
``(a) Seizure.--
``(1) Seizures on warrants.--The Attorney General may
request the issuance, in the same manner as provided for a
search warrant, of a warrant authorizing the seizure of any
chemical weapon or any biological weapon that is of a type or
quantity that, under the circumstances, is inconsistent with
the purposes not prohibited under this Act.
``(2) Warrantless seizures.--In exigent circumstances,
seizure and destruction of any such chemical weapon or
biological weapon described in paragraph (1) may be made by
the Attorney General upon probable cause without the
necessity for a warrant.
``(b) Procedure for Forfeiture and Destruction.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (a)(2),
property seized pursuant to subsection (a) shall be forfeited
to the United States after notice to potential claimants and
an opportunity for a hearing.
``(2) Burden of persuasion.--At such a hearing, the United
States shall bear the burden of persuasion by a preponderance
of the evidence.
``(3) Procedures.--The provisions of chapter 46 of this
title relating to civil forfeitures shall apply to a seizure
or forfeiture under this section except to the extent (if
any) that such provisions are inconsistent with this section.
``(4) Destruction or other disposition.--The Attorney
General shall provide for the destruction or other
appropriate disposition of any chemical or biological weapon
seized and forfeited pursuant to this section.
``(c) Other Seizure, Forfeiture, and Destruction.--
``(1) Seizures on warrant.--The Attorney General may
request the issuance, in the same manner as provided for a
search warrant, of a warrant authorizing the seizure of any
chemical weapon or biological weapon that exists by reason of
conduct prohibited under section 229 of this title.
``(2) Warrantless seizures.--In exigent circumstances,
seizure and destruction of any such chemical weapon or
biological weapon described in paragraph (1) may be made by
the Attorney General upon probable cause without the
necessity for a warrant.
``(3) Forfeiture and destruction.--Property seized pursuant
to this subsection shall be summarily forfeited (within the
meaning of section 609(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930) to the
United States and destroyed.
``(d) Assistance.--The Attorney General may request the
head of any agency of the United States to assist in the
handling, storage, transportation, or destruction of property
seized under this section.
``(e) Owner or Possessor Liability.--The owner or possessor
of any property seized under this section shall be jointly
and severally liable to the United States in an action for
money damages for any expenses incurred by the United States
incident to the seizure, including any expenses relating to
the handling, storage, transportation, destruction or other
disposition of the seized property.
``Sec. 229B. Other prohibitions
``(a) In General.--Whoever knowingly uses riot control
agents as an act of terrorism, or knowingly assists any
person to do so, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned for a term of not more than 10 years, or both.
``(b) Jurisdiction.--Conduct prohibited by this section is
within the jurisdiction of the United States if the
prohibited conduct--
``(1) takes place in the United States; or
``(2) takes place outside of the United States and is
committed by a national of the United States.
``Sec. 229C. Injunctions
``The United States may obtain in a civil action an
injunction against--
``(1) the conduct prohibited under section 229 of this
title; or
``(2) the preparation or solicitation to engage in conduct
prohibited under section 229 of this title.
``Sec. 229D. Requests for military assistance to enforce
prohibition in certain emergencies
``The Attorney General may request the Secretary of Defense
to provide assistance under section 382 of title 10 in
support of Department of Justice activities relating to the
enforcement of section 229 of this title in an emergency
situation involving a biological weapon or chemical weapon.
The authority to make such a request may be exercised by
another official of the Department of Justice in accordance
with section 382(f)(2) of title 10.
``Sec. 229E. Definitions
``In this chapter:
``(1) Australia group.--The term `Australia Group' refers
to the informal forum of countries, formed in 1984 and
chaired by Australia, whose goal is to discourage and impede
chemical and biological weapons proliferation by harmonizing
national export controls on precursor chemicals for chemical
weapons, biological weapons pathogens, and dual-use
equipment, sharing information on target countries, and
seeking other ways to curb the use of chemical and biological
weapons.
``(2) Biological weapon.--The term `biological weapon'
means the following, together or separately:
``(A) Any micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses,
fungi, rickettsiae or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious
substance, or any naturally occurring, bio-engineered or
synthesized component of any such micro-organism, pathogen,
or infectious substance, whatever its origin or method of
production, capable of causing--
``(i) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a
human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
``(ii) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies,
or materials of any kind; or
``(iii) deleterious alteration of the environment.
``(B) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of those
biological weapons specified in subparagraph (A), which would
be released as a result of the employment of such munition or
device.
``(C) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly
in connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
``(D) Any living organism specifically designed to carry a
biological weapon specified in subparagraph (A) to a host.
``(3) Chemical weapon.--The term `chemical weapon' means
the following, together or separately:
``(A) Any of the following chemical agents: tabun, Sarin,
Soman, GF, VX, sulfur mustard, nitrogen mustard, phosgene
oxime, lewisite, phenyldichloroarsine, ethyldichloroarsine,
methyldichloroarsine, phosgene, diphosgene, hydrogen cyanide,
cyanogen chloride, and arsine.
``(B) Any of the 54 chemicals, other than a riot control
agent, controlled by the Australia Group as of the date of
the enactment of this Act.
``(C) Any munition or device specifically designed to cause
death or other harm through the toxic properties of a
chemical weapon specified in subparagraph (A) or (B), which
would be released as a result of the employment of such
munition or device.
``(D) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly
in connection with the employment of munitions or devices
specified in this section.
``(4) Knowingly.--The term `knowingly' is used within the
meaning of `knows' as that term is defined in section 104 of
the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (15 U.S.C. 78dd-2)
and includes situations in which a person has reason to know.
``(5) National of the united states.--The term `national of
the United States' has the same meaning given such term in
se
Amendments:
Cosponsors:
