January 15, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S615 

website, so that advocacy groups and 

others who are concerned about methamphetamine in their communities can 

identify retailers who are selling these 

products without complying with the 

law, and can notify the authorities. 

Third, distributors of these products 

will only be allowed to sell to retailers 

who have self-certified, which they will 

be able to verify by checking the DEA’s 

public website. Once recalcitrant retailers are faced with the real and immediate economic consequence of a 

possible cut-off of their desire to purchase these products, I am confident 

that most will file self-certifications as 

the law requires. 

Finally, the bill clarifies that even a 

negligent failure to self-certify, if proven, can give rise to civil sanctions. 

This is a common-sense bill, designed 

to strengthen the implementation of 

the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act. This bill would create incentives to ensure that the self-certification process of the law is made both 

effective and enforceable. 

I urge my colleagues to support this 

legislation. 

Mr. Presdient, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed 

in the RECORD. 

There being no objection, the text of 

the bill was ordered to be printed in 

the RECORD, as follows: 

S. 256 

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 ‘‘Combat 

Methamphetamine Enhancement Act of 

2009’’. 

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT OF SELF-CERTIFICATION 

BY ALL REGULATED PERSONS SELLING SCHEDULED LISTED CHEMICALS. 

Section 310(e)(2) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 830(e)(2)) is amended 

by inserting at the end the following: 

‘‘(C) Each regulated person who makes a 

sale at retail of a scheduled listed chemical 

product and is required under subsection 

(b)(3) to submit a report of the sales transaction to the Attorney General may not sell 

any scheduled listed chemical product at retail unless such regulated person has submitted to the Attorney General a self-certification including a statement that the seller 

understands each of the requirements that 

apply under this paragraph and under subsection (d) and agrees to comply with the requirements. The Attorney General shall by 

regulation establish criteria for certifications of mail-order distributors that are 

consistent with the criteria established for 

the certifications of regulated sellers under 

paragraph (1)(B).’’. 

SEC. 3. PUBLICATION OF SELF-CERTIFIED REGULATED SELLERS AND REGULATED 

PERSONS LISTS. 

Section 310(e)(1)(B) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 830(e)(1)(B)) is amended by inserting at the end the following: 

‘‘(v) PUBLICATION OF LIST OF SELF-CERTIFIED

PERSONS.—The Attorney General shall develop and make available a list of all persons 

who are currently self-certified in accordance with this section. This list shall be 

made publicly available on the website of the 

Drug Enforcement Administration in an 

electronically downloadable format.’’. 

SEC. 4. REQUIREMENT THAT DISTRIBUTORS OF 

LISTED CHEMICALS SELL ONLY TO 

SELF-CERTIFIED REGULATED SELLERS AND REGULATED PERSONS. 

Section 402(a) of the Controlled Substances 

Act (21 U.S.C. 842(a)) is amended— 

(1) in paragraph (13), by striking ‘‘or’’ after 

the semicolon; 

(2) in paragraph (14), by striking the period 

and inserting ‘‘; or’’; 

(3) by inserting after paragraph (14) the following: 

‘‘(15) to distribute a scheduled listed chemical product to a regulated seller, or to a regulated person referred to in section 

310(b)(3)(B), unless such regulated seller or 

regulated person is, at the time of such distribution, currently registered with the Drug 

Enforcement Administration, or on the list 

of persons referred to under section 

310(e)(1)(B)(v).’’; and 

(4) inserting at the end the following: ‘‘For 

purposes of paragraph (15), if the distributor 

is temporarily unable to access the list of 

persons referred to under section 

310(e)(1)(B)(v), the distributor may rely on a 

written, faxed, or electronic copy of a certificate of self-certification submitted by the 

regulated seller or regulated person, provided the distributor confirms within 7 business days of the distribution that such regulated seller or regulated person is on the list 

referred to under section 310(e)(1)(B)(v).’’. 

SEC. 5. NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO SELF-CERTIFY 

AS REQUIRED. 

Section 402(a) of the Controlled Substances 

Act (21 U.S.C. 842(a)(10)) is amended by inserting before the semicolon the following: 

‘‘or negligently to fail to self-certify as required under section 310 (21 U.S.C. 830)’’. 

SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE AND REGULATIONS. 

(a) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This Act and the 

amendments made by this Act shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act. 

(b) REGULATIONS.—In promulgating the 

regulations authorized by section 2, the Attorney General may issue regulations on an 

interim basis as necessary to ensure the implementation of this Act by the effective 

date. 

By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, 

Mr. GRASSLEY, and Mr. BAYH): 

S. 258. A bill to amend the Controlled 

Substances Act to provide enhanced 

penalties for marketing controlled substances to minors; to the Committee 

on the Judiciary. 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I 

am pleased to introduce, along with 

Senators GRASSLEY and BAYH, the Saving Kids from Dangerous Drugs Act of 

2009. 

Over the last 2 years, Federal, State, 

and local law enforcement have increasingly seen drug dealers flavoring 

and marketing their illegal drugs to 

appeal to minors, using techniques like 

combing drugs with candy and other 

flavorings to entice younger users. 

This bill would increase the criminal 

penalties that apply when criminals do 

this. This bill will ensure these appalling tactics are criminalized and severely punished. 

The problem of flavoring illegal 

drugs to entice minors is well documented. A 2007 USA Today Article entitled ‘‘Flavored Meth Use on the Rise’’ 

stated that ‘‘reports of candy-flavored 

methamphetamine are emerging 

around the nation, stirring concern 

among police and abuse prevention experts that drug dealers are marketing 

the drug to younger people.’’ 

The flavoring of meth to appeal to 

minors is widespread across the Nation. In California, police have made 

repeated seizures of strawberry-flavored meth and local drug counselors 

warn that it also comes in cola, cherry, 

and orange flavors. 

Strawberry flavoring packets were 

found in a meth lab raid in Arkansas in 

May of 2007. Similar seizures of flavored meth have been made in Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, 

North Carolina, Oregon, and Virginia. 

Two people were arrested for manufacturing cotton candy flavored meth in 

Colorado in March of 2008. 

The candying and flavoring of controlled substances is not limited to 

methamphetamine. As recently as 

March of this year, the DEA seized 11⁄2

pounds of strawberry flavored powdered cocaine in Modesto, CA. 

DEA agents in California have also 

purchased cocaine with lemon, coconut, and cinnamon flavoring. It has 

also documented other controlled substances like marijuana and hash oil infused into candy bars and soda pop. 

Drug dealers are even selling boxes of 

‘‘Pot Tarts’’ that look exactly like 

commercial available Pop Tarts. 

Federal, State and local law enforcement all agree that such flavoring is 

done to entice more minors to use 

these illegal drugs. 

This bill would help address this 

growing problem by criminalizing the 

flavoring, coloring and marketing of 

such drugs and would impose enhanced 

penalties for these offenses. 

Under current law, there is already 

an enhanced penalty if someone distributes drugs to a minor. The maximum sentence is doubled, and tripled 

for a repeat offense, and there is a minimum of at least a year in prison. But 

this enhancement only applies if there 

is an actual distribution of the drug to 

a minor. Even possession with intent 

to distribute flavored or candied drugs 

doesn’t qualify. 

This bill would fix this loophole. If 

someone manufactures, creates, distributes, or possesses with intent to 

distribute a schedule I or II controlled 

substance that is combined with a 

candy, marketed or packaged to appear 

similar to a candy product, or modified 

by flavoring or coloring with the intent 

to sell to a minor, they would face enhanced penalties. 

The bill sends a strong and clear message to drug dealers—if you flavor or 

candy up your drugs to make them 

more appealing to our children, there 

will be a very heavy price to pay. It 

will make drug dealers think twice before flavoring up their drugs, and punish them appropriately if they don’t. 

The bill is supported by the National 

Narcotics Officers Association Coalition, which is comprised of 44 State 

narcotics officers’ associations. 

I urge my colleagues to join me in 

supporting this bill. 

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed 

in the RECORD. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with SENATE
S616 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 15, 2009 

There being no objection, the text of 

the bill was ordered to be printed in 

the RECORD, as follows: 

S. 258 

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 ‘‘Saving Kids 

from Dangerous Drugs Act of 2009’’. 

SEC. 2. OFFENSES INVOLVING CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES MARKETED TO MINORS. 

Section 401 of the Controlled Substances 

Act (21 U.S.C. 841) is amended by adding at 

the end the following: 

‘‘(h) OFFENSES INVOLVING CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES MARKETED TO MINORS.— 

‘‘(1) UNLAWFUL ACTS.—Except as authorized 

under this title, including paragraph (3), it 

shall be unlawful for any person at least 18 

years of age to knowingly or intentionally 

manufacture, create, distribute, dispense, or 

possess with intent to manufacture, create, 

distribute, or dispense, a controlled substance listed in schedule I or II that is— 

‘‘(A) combined with a candy product; 

‘‘(B) marketed or packaged to appear similar to a candy product; or 

‘‘(C) modified by flavoring or coloring the 

controlled substance with the intent to distribute, dispense, or sell the controlled substance to a person under 21 years of age. 

‘‘(2) PENALTIES.—Except as provided in section 418, 419, or 420, any person who violates 

paragraph (1) of this subsection shall be subject to— 

‘‘(A) 2 times the maximum punishment and 

at least 2 times any term of supervised release authorized by subsection (b) of this section for a first offense involving the same 

controlled substance and schedule; and 

‘‘(B) 3 times the maximum punishment and 

at least 3 times any term of supervised release authorized by subsection (b) of this section for a second or subsequent offense involving the same controlled substance and 

schedule. 

‘‘(3) EXCEPTIONS.—Paragraph (1) shall not 

apply to any controlled substance that— 

‘‘(A) has been approved by the Secretary 

under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355), if the contents, marketing, and packaging of the controlled substance have not been altered from 

the form approved by the Secretary; or 

‘‘(B) has been altered at the direction of a 

practitioner who is acting for a legitimate 

medical purpose in the usual course of professional practice.’’. 

By Mr. DORGAN (for himself, Ms. 

MIKULSKI, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. 

DURBIN, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. 

BROWN, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. HARKIN, 

Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, 

Mr. KOHL, Ms. STABENOW, and 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN): 

S. 260. A bill to amend the Internal 

Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the 

taxation of income of controlled foreign corporations attributable to imported property; to the Committee on 

Finance. 

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, today I 

am introducing legislation with Senator MIKULSKI and 10 of our colleagues 

that I hope will be added to any economic stimulus package considered by 

Congress in the coming weeks. This bill 

will put the brakes on a tax break 

granted to U.S. companies that move 

U.S. jobs offshore. 

The U.S. economy is facing its most 

serious financial challenge since the 

Great Depression, and we must respond 

aggressively. I think a new economic 

stimulus plan is urgently needed to 

help prevent the economy from sliding 

deeper into a long-term recession. I 

agree with those who say that a major 

goal of the stimulus package should be 

to create more jobs, but I think we also 

have an opportunity to make a change 

to ensure that we keep the jobs we already have. 

Employers have been slashing jobs at 

an alarming rate—2.6 million jobs last 

year—to reduce operating costs. The 

manufacturing and construction sectors have been particularly hard hit 

during this downturn. The manufacturing sector laid off 791,000 workers in 

2008, continuing the disturbing loss of 

more than 4 million U.S. manufacturing jobs since the end of 2000. Federal tax laws have contributed to this 

problem. 

There is one thing that Congress can 

do immediately to stem the loss of 

more manufacturing jobs: repeal the 

perverse tax subsidy in the Federal Tax 

Code for U.S. companies that move 

manufacturing operations and American jobs overseas. Not only will this 

help keep good-paying manufacturing 

jobs here at home, it will save American taxpayers more than $15 billion in 

revenue over the next decade. 

Unbelievably, there is an insidious 

tax subsidy that rewards U.S. firms 

that move their production overseas 

and then turn around and import those 

now foreign-made products back to the 

United States for sale. When a U.S. 

company closes down a U.S. manufacturing plant such as Huffy bicycles or 

Radio Flyer little red wagons, fires its 

American workers and moves those 

good-paying jobs to China or other locations abroad, U.S. tax law actually 

provide those companies with a large 

tax break called deferral—allowing 

them to avoid paying any U.S. income 

taxes on their foreign earnings until 

those profits are returned, if ever, to 

this country. If a company making the 

same product decides to stay in this 

country, on the other hand, it is required to pay immediate U.S. taxes on 

the profits it earns here. 

Repealing this jobs export tax subsidy will not hinder the ability of U.S. 

firms to compete against foreign competitors in foreign markets, as some 

special interests have claimed. It is 

targeted only to U.S. firms that move 

production abroad and then turn 

around and ship those products back to 

this country for sale. 

If there was ever a tax policy change 

that would help save U.S. manufacturing jobs and should be part of a robust economic stimulus plan, this is it. 

I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this 

legislation. With a new Congress and 

administration in place, now is the 

time to kill this ill-advised tax subsidy 

once and for all. I look forward to 

working with my colleagues on this 

important tax policy matter in the 

coming weeks. 

By Ms. STABENOW: 

S. 264. A bill to amend title XIX of 

the Social Security Act to encourage 

the use of certified health information 

technology by providers in the Medicaid program and the Children’s 

Health Insurance Program, and for 

other purposes; to the Committee on 

Finance. 

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I 

rise today to introduce the E-Centives 

Act, which will help ensure safety-net 

providers serving our most vulnerable 

citizens can acquire Health Information Technology, HIT. 

As I have spoken about many times, 

HIT promises to transform the delivery 

of health care in the United States, improving the overall efficiency and effectiveness of healthcare. Some specific quality improvements that result 

from HIT include reduction in errors 

that come from illegible handwriting; 

electronic systems that prompt prescription of generic rather than brandname drugs; reduction in duplicate diagnostic tests; physician reminders regarding appropriate preventive care; 

clinical decision support systems that 

encourage use of evidence-based medicine; identification of drug interactions and patient allergies; and assistance to physicians to manage patients with complex, chronic conditions. 

While HIT holds great promise for 

transforming health care, unfortunately not all providers have the financial means to adopt and use this technology. In fact, the cost of acquiring 

technology is a major barrier to adoption among health care providers. Cost 

is particularly burdensome to small 

practices and safety-net providers that 

often operate with low financial margins. 

Several organizations, including the 

Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and 

the Uninsured and the Healthcare Information and Management Systems 

Society, recognize the essential role 

that the Federal Government must 

play to assist providers in the Medicaid 

and Children’s Health Insurance Program, CHIP, to acquire HIT. But absent Federal funding, we could see a 

‘‘digital divide’’ in health care. 

The bill that I am introducing today 

will help accelerate investment in certified HIT by providers predominantly 

serving Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries. The bill accomplishes this by 

providing authority to State Medicaid 

programs to reimburse providers at the 

enhanced SCHIP FMAP rate for the 

costs associated with the meaningful 

use of a certified electronic medical 

record. This bill also helps streamline 

the administration and enrollment 

process for the Medicaid program by 

modifying the current regulation that 

governs the Medicaid Management Information System to include funding 

for electronic information and eligibility systems, patient registries for 

disease screening, and office staff 

training on electronic information and 

eligibility systems. 

I look forward to working with my 

colleagues to ensure that all health 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with SENATE