Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions S226

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. LIEBERMAN, and Mrs. FEINSTEIN):

S. 226. A bill to prohibit an individual from knowingly opening, maintaining, managing controlling, renting, leasing, making available for use, or profiting from any place for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, or using any controlled substance, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague Senator Biden today in introducing the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act. This is a continuation of an effort he and I spearheaded last year to update our laws so they can continue to be used effectively against drug dealers who are pushing drugs on our kids.

As drug dealers discover new drugs and new methods of pushing their poison, we must make sure our legal system is adequately structured to react appropriately. I believe this legislation does that.

Our proposal will modify the existing crack house statute so that its jurisdiction over temporary events, such as raves, would be more clear. And although this legislation grew out of the problems identified at raves, the criminal and civil penalties in the bill would also apply to people who promoted any type of event for the purpose of drug use or distribution. Illegal drug use in any location should not be tolerated, regardless of what cover activity is created to hide the transaction.

This said, I want to emphasize that our legislation should in no way hamper the activities of legitimate event promoters. I realize that drugs are not widely available at all raves or other events open to the public. And I know that my colleagues Senator Biden is just as aware as I am that drug use occurs at events without the knowledge or endorsement of the event promoters. This legislation should not affect the activities of legitimate event promoters. In no way is our bill aimed at stifling any type of music or public expression, it is only trying to deter illicit drug use and protect kids.

The sale of illicit narcotics, whether on a street corner here in Washington, D.C., or a warehouse in Des Moines, IA, must be confronted and halted wherever possible. One of the new, "trendy" illicit narcotics is Ecstasy—an especially popular club drug that is all too often being sold at all-night dance parties, or raves. Ecstasy is an illegal drug that has extremely dangerous side effects.

In general, Ecstasy raises the heart rate to dangerous levels, and in some cases the heart will stop. It also causes severe dehydration, a condition that is exacerbated by the high levels of physical exertion that happens at raves. Users must constantly drink water in an attempt to cool off—a fact that some unscrupulous event promoters take advantage of by charging exorbitant fees for bottles of water, after cutting off water to drinking fountains and rest room sinks.

Too often, Ecstasy users collapse and die because their bodies overheat. And even those who survive the short-term effects of Ecstasy use can look forward to long-term problems such as depression, paranoia, and confusion, as scientists have learned that Ecstasy causes irreversible changes to the brain.

Many young people perceive Ecstasy as harmless and it is wrongly termed a recreational or "kid-friendly" drug. This illegal substance does real damage to real lives. Although targeted at teenagers and young adults, its use has spread to the middle-aged population and rural areas, including my own State of Iowa. Ninety percent of all drug treatment and law enforcement experts say that Ecstasy is readily accessible in this country. We cannot continue to allow easy access to this drug or ignore the consequences of its use.

That is why I believe it is important that we update the laws that have been effectively used to shut down crack houses so they can go after temporary events used as a cover to sell drugs. It is important to remember that this legislation builds upon an existing statute, with existing case law, and therefore existing standards of how it is to be implemented. The existing statute has been used to go after landlords who "knowingly and intentionally" let their property be used for illegal narcotics activities. It has not, nor should it be used, to take action against every landlord of every property where drug activity takes place.

Similarly, the expansion of authorities created by this legislation is designed to target promoters who "knowingly and intentionally" allow drug use at their events. This is a high standard that should protect event promoters from casual application of this statute. Clearly, taking steps to reduce or eliminate drug use at an event, such as the posting of signs or through zero-tolerance instructions to security personnel, are not actions that would be taken by someone who would intentionally allow drug use to occur at an event.

I believe an event promoter does have some responsibility for what goes on at an event that they create. Particularly if they knowingly create an event for the purpose of buying, using, keeping, or selling drugs. While not common, there have been court cases which have been able to reach this high standard of proof. Using 21 U.S.C. 856, more popularly known as the "crack house" statute, law enforcement has arrested drug dealers who hosted raves and other dance events as a cover to push their product. Four cases have been brought to Federal court, with mixed results—mostly because the applicability of current law is unclear.

This legislation is an important step, but a careful one. Our future rests with the young people of this great nation and America is at risk. Ecstasy has shown itself to be a formidable threat and we must confront it on all fronts, not only through law enforcement but education and treatment as well. I hope my colleagues will join us in supporting this legislation, and help us work towards its quick passage.