quorum call:

mrs. murray: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be dispensed. .the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mrs. murray: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent it be in order to consent a managers' package. i ask unanimous consent it be in order to consider a managers' package. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mrs. murray: in a people i will send a managers' package to the desk. we're waiting for -- mrs. murray: we're waiting for

one quick decision, hopefully. in a moment i'll be sending a managers' package to the desk with a number of amendments that have been worked out on both sides. we hope to adopt that. members have been waiting to get to votes. we have several senators who require vote ons their amendments and we hope to start that here fairly shortly since this package -- as soon as this package is adopted. mrs. murray: i send to the desk a managers' package, that the amendment be considered and agreed to and modifies as indicated, where indicated and agreed to en bloc the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table be laid upon the table, en bloc; that the consideration of these amendments appear separately in the record and any statements relating to their consideration appear at the appropriate place, as if read. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered.

mrs. murray: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mrs. murray: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be dispensed. i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be dispensed. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mrs. murray: i ask unanimous consent that hatch amendment number 1428 be agreed to, as amended. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mrs. murray: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the prpresiding officer: the clk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. vit vitd a like unanimous consent to call off the quorum call so that i may present -- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. vitter: thank you, mr. president. so that i may present my second-degree amendment. mr. president, in a few minutes we'll be voting on the vitter second-degree amendment to the dodd amendment. this is very straightforward and it's something that this body has considered very directly before. this amendment simply prohibits funds in the bill from being used by custom and border

security to prevent the reimportation of prescription drugs from canada only and for personal use only. so it's a reimportation amendment, but only from canada and only for personal use. it's very limited in that regard. also, mr. president, it also -- it only limits funding with regard to enforcement by custom and border security. so there are numerous other agencies in the federal government, like the justice department and many law enforcement agencies which regularly are in the business for going after counterfeits and other problems in the drug trade, and this amendment doesn't limit that activity in any way because it only impacts custom and border security. finally, mr. president, this exact amendment was considered and passed by the senate in july

of 2006. and it was not only passed by the senate, but that vitter amendment essentially identical passed 68-32. a few months later, modified language passed the entire congress, and it was somewhat modified, but it passed the entire congress and is law now. sew based on all of that -- so based on all of that history, mr. president, i urge a strong bipartisan vote in favor of this amendment, as we had in 2006, and i reserve the balance of my time. mr. hatch: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: mr. president, i am going to speak in opposition to my friend's amendment. for the past several years there has been a provision in this appropriations bill that says that customs and border protection cannot stop an individual from bringing in on their person 90 days' worth of a prescription drug from canada. well, i'm not crazy about this language. it's been law for sometime and

codifies what had been an existing practice at the border. however, my colleague from louisiana is proposing to radically alter what happens at the border. this amendment is bad policy, and i hope that our colleagues will vote against t it is not adequate to protect the public health and it will not keep americans safe. his amendment would strike three important elements of existing law: instead of just individuals -- anyone could bring in drugs. there would be no license required for businesses to get into this line of work. there would be no inspections of their facilities. no minimum qualifications, no background checks, no limits on resale no oversight whatsoever. this would be an open door for criminals to get into americans' medicine cabinets. the amendment removes the limit on the method of importation. instead of bringing in the drugs on your person, you could do it by mail-order or more likely via the internet. this creates the problem of

drugs coming not from canada but through canada. many of the drugs ordered online today are purported to be from canada. but when g.a.o. and others investigate, they are found to be from other countries. finally, there would be no limits on the quantities permitted to be imported. dan has only one-tenth the population of the united states. -- canada has only one-tenth the population of the united states. they cannot serve as our farm six the drugs will be sourced from somewhere else. it is inevitable. while many people may be comfortable with drugs from canada, i doubt they will have the same level of comfort with drugs from pakistan, china or mall tavment there's nothing in this amendment to ensure that the drugs come from canada, but there is every incentive for them not to come from canada. most americans who turn to imported drugs do so because of cost, but a counterfeit, tainted, or substandard drug is unsafe at any price.