CREDIT CARD BALANCES BETWEEN $3,000 AND $7,000, WHILE ANOTHER
           10% HAD CREDIT CARD BALANCES GREATER THAN $7,000. THIS FIGURE,
           MR. PRESIDENT, OF 24% WITH CREDIT CARD DEBTS IN EXCESS OF
           $3,000 IS MORE THAN DOUBLE THE NUMBER FROM LAST YEAR. MOREOVER,
           MR. PRESIDENT, WHILE THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT STUDENT DEBT IS
           SKYROCKETING, SOME SURVEYS BY CREDIT CARD ISSUERS THEMSELVES
           SHOW THAT THE SAME GROUP OF CONSUMERS IS WOEFULLY UNINFORMED
           ABOUT THE BASIC CREDIT CARD TERMS AND ISSUES. A 1993 AMERICAN

           EXPRESS CONSUMER FEDERATION OF AMERICA STUDY FOUND THAT ONLY
           22% OF MORE THAN 2,000 COLLEGE STUDENTS SURVEYED KNEW THAT THE
           ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATE IS THE BEST INDICATOR OF THE TRUE COST
           OF A LOAN. ONLY 30% OF THOSE SURVEYED KNEW THAT EACH BANK SET
           THE INTEREST RATE ON THEIR CREDIT CARD, SO THAT IT IS POSSIBLE
           TO SHOP AROUND FOR THE BEST RATE. ONLY 30% KNEW THAT INTEREST
           RATES -- INTEREST WAS CHARGED ON NEW PURCHASES IF YOU CARRY A
           BALANCE OVER FROM THE PREVIOUS MONTH. SOME COLLEGE
           ADMINISTRATORS, MR. PRESIDENT, BUCKING THE TREND TO USE CREDIT

           CARD ISSUERS AS A SOURCE OF INCOME HAVE BECOME SO CONCERNED
           THAT THEY HAVE BANNED CREDIT CARD COMPANIES FROM THEIR CAMPUSES
           AND HAVE EVEN GONE SO FAR AS TO BAN CREDIT CARD ADVERTISEMENTS
           FROM THE CAMPUS BECOME STORES. ROGER WITHERSPOON AT JOHN JAY
           COLLEGE IN NEW YORK BANNED CARD SOLICITORS SAYING -- QUOTE --
           "INDEBTEDNESS WAS CAUSING STUDENTS TO DROP OUT. MIDDLE-CLASS
           PARENTS CAN BAIL OUT THEIR KIDS WHEN THIS HAPPENS, BUT

           LOWER-INCOME PARENTS CAN'T." MR. WHITHERSPOON SAID IN AN
           INTERVIEW, "KIDS ONLY FIND OUT LATER HOW MUCH IT MESSES UP
           THEIR LIVES." THAT'S IN QUOTATION FROM THE AMERICAN BANK. THE
           AMENDMENT I'M PROPOSG TODAY, MR. PRESIDENT, DOES NOT TAKE ANY
           SUCH DRACONIAN ACTION AGAINST THE CREDIT CARD COMPANIES. LET ME
           STATE HERE, BY THE WAY -- I SHOULD HAVE SAID THIS AT THE OUTSET
           -- MANY CREDIT CARD COMPANIES DO REQUIRE PARENTAL NOTICE OR
           APPROVAL OR EVIDENCE OF INDEPENDENT MEANS. THERE ARE MANY WHO
           DO THIS, MR. PRESIDENT. BUT THERE ARE SOME WHO DON'T AT ALL.
           AND SO AS MOST LAWS, IT'S NOT TARGETED TO THOSE WHO SHOW GOOD

           JUDGMENT AND GOOD SENSE, BUT TO THE FEW WHO DON'T. AND,
           UNFORTUNATELY, HERE WE HAVE A FEW WHO DON'T AT ALL. SO THIS
           AMENDMENT DOES NOT GO SO FAR AS TO BAN CREDIT CARDS OR BAN
           ADVERTISING. IT MERELY SAYS, LOOK, BETWEEN THE AGES OF 178 AND
           21, EITHER SHOW YOU'VE GOT THE INDEPENDENT MEANS TO MEET THE
           OBLIGATIONS OR GET A SIGNATURE FROM A PARENT THAT THEY
           UNDERSTAND THAT THE CHILD IS ABOUT TO TAKE OUT A CREDIT CARD. I
           AGREE. FOR THOSE WHO ARGUE, AS I SAID, THERE ARE MILLIONS OF

           PEOPLE UNDER THE AGE OF 21 WHO HOLD FULL-TIME JOBS, WHO ARE AS
           DESERVING OF CREDIT AS ANYONE OVER THE AGE OF 21. I AGREE WITH
           THAT. I ALSO AGREE STUDENTS SHOULD CONTINUE TO HAVE ACCESS TO
           CREDIT AND WE SHOULD NOT TRY TO PROHIBIT THE MARKET FROM MAKING
           THAT CREDIT AVAILABLE. BUT I ALSO RECOGNIZE, MR. PRESIDENT, THE
           PERIOD OF TIME FROM 18 TO 21 IS AN AGE OF TRANSITION, FROM
           ADOLESCENCE TO ADULTHOOD. AND THAT AS WE DO IN MANY OTHER
           PLACES IN FEDERAL LAW, SOME EXTRA CARE IS NEEDED TO MAKE SURE
           THAT MISTAKES MADE FROM YOUTHFUL INEXPERIENCE DOES NOT HAUNT

           THESE PEOPLE FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES OR A GOOD PART OF IT.
           ALL MY AMENDMENT DOES IS TO REQUIRE THAT A CREDIT CARD ISSUER,
           PRIOR TO GRANTING CREDIT, OBTAIN ONE OF TWO THINGS FROM THE
           APPLICANT UNDER THE AGE OF 21. EITHER THEY GET THE SIGNATURE OF
           A PARENT OR GUARDIAN OR THEY OBTAIN INFORMATION THAT
           DEMONSTRATES THE EXISTENCE OF AN INDEPENDENT MEANS OF PAYING
           OFF THE AMOUNT OF CREDIT OFFERED. FEDERAL LAW READY SAYS PEOPLE
           UNDER THE AGE OF 21 SHOULDN'T DRINK ALCOHOL. OUR TAX CODE MAKES
           THE PRUJS THAT IF SOMEONE IS A FULL-TIME STUDENT UNDER THE AGE

           OF 23 THAT THEY ARE FINANCIAL LIP DEPENDENT, OR THEIR PARENTS
           OR THEIR GUARDIANS. IT IS SO MUCH -- IS IT SO MUCH REALLY TO
           ASK THAT CREDIT CARD ISSUERS, IN THE MIDST OF A BANKRUPTCY BILL
           THAT WILL MAKE IT TOUGHER FOR PEOPLE TO TAKE THIS ACT, IS IT SO
           MUCH TO ASK THAT TWRI TO FIND OUT IF SOMEONE UNDER THE AGE OF
           21 IS FINANCIALLY CAPABLE OF PAYING BACK THEIR DEBT OR THAT
           THEIR PARENTS ARE WILLING TO ASSUME THE FINANCIAL
           RESPONSIBILITY?
           MR. PRESIDENT, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT MOST, AS I SAID,
           RESPONSIBLE CREDIT CARD ISSUERS ALREADY REQUIRE THIS
           INFORMATION IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER. IS IT TOO MUCH TO ASK THE

           ENTIRE CREDIT CARD INDUSTRY TO STRIVE TO MEET THEIR OWN BEST
           PRACTICES WHEN IT COMES TO OUR CHILDREN?
           MR. PRESIDENT, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS AMENDMENT IS EITHER
           UNDULY BURDENSOME ON THE CREDIT CARD INDUSTRY, NOR IS IT UNFAIR
           TO THE PEOPLE UNDER THE AGE OF 21. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS
           THAT THESE ABUSIVE SOLICITATIONS ASSUME THAT IF THE YOUNG ADULT
           IS UNABLE TO PAY, THEY WILL BE BAILED OUT BY THEIR PARENTS.
           MANY TIMES THIS MEANS THAT PARENTS MUST SACRIFICE OTHER THINGS
           IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THEIR CHILD DOES NOT START OUT THEIR
           ADULT LIFE IN A FINANCIAL HOLE OR WITH AN UGLY BLACK MARK ON

           THEIR CREDIT HISTORY. BY ADOPTING THIS AMENDMENT, MR.
           PRESIDENT, THE SENATE WILL SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE TO THOSE
           AGGRESSIVE CREDIT CARD COMPANIES THAT WE'LL NO LONGER
           COUNTENANCE THIS ABUSIVE BEHAVIOR. AND THIS AMENDMENT, MR.
           PRESIDENT, CORRECTS THAT BEHAVIOR BY MAKING THOSE OVERLY
           AGGRESSIVE COMPANIES, CREDIT COMPANIES EXERCISE THEIR BEST
           JUDGMENT INSTEAD OF THEIR MOST CRAVEN INSTINCTS WHEN IT COMES
           TO THE PEOPLE OBTAINING THEIR OVER CREDIT CARDS FOR THE VERY

           FIRST TIME. MR. PRESIDENT, I NOTE AS WELL IN AN INTERVIEW WITH
           THE N.P.R. PROGRAM JUST A FEW DAYS AGO ON THIS VERY ISSUE,
           NANCY LLOYD, WHO IS THE EDITOR IN CHARGE OF THE KIP LINGER
           PERSONAL FINANCE MAG SDEEN HAD THIS TO SAY ABOUT THIS FINANCIAL
           PRACTICE. SHE SAID THAT THE REAL REASON CREDIT CARD COMPANIES
           ARE GOING AFTER COLLEGE STUDENTS IS THAT THEY KNOW AFTER A
           PARENT HAS SPENT SEVERAL TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO
           EDUCATE THEIR STUDENT, THAT IF THEY FALL BEHIND ON THEIR BILLS,

           THAT THE PARENT WILL BAIL THEM OUT EVEN THOUGH THEY LEGALLY
           DON'T REALLY HAVE TO IF THEY ARE YOUNGER THAN 18. SO, MR.
           PRESIDENT, I DON'T THINK THIS IS A RADICAL PROPOSAL HERE. IT'S,
           AGAIN, IT'S A HUGE PROBLEM. NBC, I THINK, LAST EVENING RAN A
           SPECIAL REPORT ON THE FLEECING OF AMERICA IN WHICH THEY TALKED
           ABOUT THIS PROBLEM. I THINK THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF OTHER
           REPORTS ON THIS. WE BEGAN THIS ISSUE LAST DECEMBER AND RAISING
           THE QUESTION, WHEN I WENT TO MY OWN CAMPUSNESS CONNECTICUT, AS
           I MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO, TO FIND OUT HOW WIDESPREAD THIS WAS.

           AGAIN, THE INFORMATION WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO GATHER HERE, BASED ON
           THE DATA, THAT THIS IS A GROWING PROBLEM. THE DEBT HAS DOUBLED
           SINCE LAST YEAR. IT'S GOING TO GET WORSE. IF WE ADOPT THE
           UNDERLYING BILL, WHICH I HOPE WE DO, OBVIOUSLY THEIR ABILITY TO
           TAKE THE BANKRUPTCY ACT AND TO EXCUSE OBLIGATIONS ARE GOING TO
           GET TOUGHER. IT SEEMS TO ME IF WE'RE GOING TO DO A FAVOR TO THE
           BANKS BY MAKE IT GO TOUGHER FOR PEOPLE TO AVOID THEIR FINANCIAL
           RESPONSIBILITIES, WHICH WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD ALSO SEND A
           MESSAGE THAT WE DON'T BELIEVE YOU OUGHT TO BE DUMPING 3 BILLION

           CREDIT CARD SOLICITATIONS BUT PARTICULARLY DUMPING THESE IN
           WHERE A STUDENT I.D. OR A SIGNATURE FROM A 19-YEAR-OLD WITHOUT
           PARENTAL APPROVAL TO ASSUME $3,000, $4,000, $5,000, $6,000
           WORTH OF FINANCIAL AMENDMENT. I WOULD URGE THE ADOPTION OF THIS
           AMENDMENT.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WHO YIELDS TIME?
           THE SENATOR FROM UTAH.
           

           MR. HATCH: I KNOW THIS AMENDMENT IS WELL-INTENTIONED. BUT,
           LOOK, I WAS A BUILDING TRADESMAN AS A YOUNG 16-YEAR-OLD. I MADE
           A PRETTY GOOD LIVING AS A BUILDING TRADESMAN. I COULD HAVE
           WOUND UP AS A BUILDING TRADESMAN, WHICH I WAS VERY PROUD TO BE.
           NFERT -- [INAUDIBLE] IN FACT, ONE OF THEM WHEN THEY FOUND OUT I
           WAS A JANITOR AT ONE TIME PUTTING MYSELF THROUGH COLLEGE SAID I
           SHOULD HAVE STUCK WITH THAT. MAYBE SO. BUT I'D HATE LIKE HECK

           TO HAVE SOME ARTIFICIAL RULE OR SOME REGULATORY RULE BY SOME
           REGULATORY AGENCY OF GOVERNMENT TO SAY THAT I AS A HARD-WORKING
           CARPENTER WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GET A CREDIT CARD AND GET CREDIT
           THAT I MIGHT NEED FOR MY FAMILY TO MAKE OUR LIVES A LITTLE
           EASIER BECAUSE OF ARTIFIAL RULES LIKE WHAT HAPPENED AS A RESULT
           OF THIS WELL-INTENTIONED AMENDMENT. THIS IS A SLAP IN THE FACE
           OF EVERY 18-, 19- 19, 20-YEAR-OLD WHO CAN WORK. 16, 17, 18,

           1920-YEAR-OLDS WHO WORK HARD, SUPPORTING THEIR FAMILIES, WHO
           MAY NOT BE COLLEGE GRADUATES, THEY MAY NOT LOOK LIKE THEY HAVE
           THE FUTURE OF A SON WHO HAS A FATHER WHO HAD GONE TO COLLEGE
           MAY LOOK LIKE. THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET A CREDIT CARD AS A
           RESULT OF THIS. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD UNFAIRLY DISCRIMINATE
           AGAINST YOUNG ADULTS, AND I THINK IT HAS TO BE OPPOSED. AND I
           HOPE OUR COLLEAGUES WILL THINK ABOUT THIS. THE AMENDMENT WOULD
           REQUIRE PARENTAL CONSENT FOR EXTENSIONS OF OPEN-END CREDIT FOR

           ADULTS UNDER THE AGE OF 21. THINK OF THAT A LOT OF YOUNG ADULTS
           WHO ARE SUPPORTING THEIR COLLEGE AND DOING WHAT'S RIGHT BUT
           HAVEN'T BEEN TO COLLEGE -- OR EVEN THOSE WHO ARE IN COLLEGE AND
           ARE WORKING WELL IN COLLE, AS I HAD TO DO -- UNLESS THEY CAN
           DEMONSTRATE -- QUOTE -- "AN INDEPENDENT MEANS OF REPAYING" THE
           OBLIGATION. WHILE IT IS NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR WHAT WOULD
           CONSTITUTE A -- QUOTE -- "INDEPENDENT MEANS OF REPAYING" A
           DEBT, ONE THING IS CLEAR, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD HAVE THE BIZARRE
           EFFECT OF REQUIRING AN EMANCIPATED BUT TREARM UNEMPLOYED

           20-YEAR-OLD MOTHER TO OBTAIN HER -- BUT TEMPORARILY UNEMPLOYED
           20-YEAR-OLD MOTHER TO OBJECT TAIN -- TO OBTAIN PERMISSION FROM
           HER MOTHER. OR A 20-YEAR-OLD CARP PER TER WHO MIGHT NOT HAVE A
           JOB FOR THREE WEEKS OR MAYBE A MONTH OR TWO. I UNDERSTAND THAT
           LIFE. I UNDERSTAND HOW DIFFICULT IT IS. THE SAME WOULD BE TRUE
           WITH RESPECT TO A 20-YEAR-OLD PLUMBER OR CONSTRUCTION WORKER
           LIKE I'VE MENTIONED, WHO IS BETWEEN JOBS AND BETWEEN JOBS, AND
           WITH RESPECT TO A 20-YEAR-OLD RECENTLY DISCHARGED FROM THE U.S.

           MILITARY AND LOOKING FOR CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT. SOMEBODY WHO IS
           HONORABLE AND DECENT, WOULD PAY BACK ANY DEBT NO MATTER WHAT
           HAPPENED BUT COULDN'T GET A CREDIT CARD OF THESE ARTIFICIAL
           RESTRAINTS. THE AMENDMENT MAKES NO PROVISION FOR A YOUNG ADULT
           WHOSE PARENTS OR GUARDIAN MAY BE DECEASED. IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT
           RESPONSIBILITY, IF ANY, THE AMENDMENT WOULD IMPOSE ON A LENDER

           TO VERIFY IF THE SIGNATURE OF A PARENT OR GUARDIAN IS
           AUTHENTIC. DISCRIMINATING AGAINST DIVIDUALS SIMPLY CANNOT BE
           JUSTIFIED JUST BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT IT'S PRETTY EASY TO GET A
           CREDIT CARD OUT THERE AND IT IS ABUSED FRIMT. -- FROM TIME TO
           TIME. ALSO IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT INDIVIDUALS UNDER 18
           CANNOT ENTER INTO BINDING CONTRACTS. AND, THEREFORE, ANY CREDIT
           INADVERTENTLY EXTENDED TO THEM SUN ENFORCEABLE. I ENCOURAGE MY
           COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME IN OPPOSING THIS AMENDMENT,

           NOTWITHSTANDING ARGUMENTS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE. IT'S
           IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT NOT ALL 18, 19 OR 20-YEAR-OLD KIDS ARE
           COLLEGE STUDENTS OR UNEMPLOYED OR IRRESPONSIBLE OR BUMTS, IF
           YOU WANT TO SAY IT. -- OR BUMS, IF YOU WANT TO SAY IT. SOME
           HAVE FAMILIES. SOME SERVE IN THE MILITARY, ARE ASKED TO DEFEND
           OUR COUNTRY. IT PUTS THEIR ABILITY TO GAIN CREDIT IN DOUBT. OR
           SHOULD WE JUST CALL IT THE WAY IT IS -- IN THE HANDS OF FEDERAL REGULATORS?

           THERE'S A LIMIT TO EVERYTHING. YES, THERE ARE SOME ABUSES HERE.
           YES, SOME OF THESE CREDIT CARD COMPANIES GET SOME OF THESE
           YOUNG PEOPLE HOOKED ON CREDIT CARDS AND THINKING THEY CAN JUST
           LIVE WITH THEIR CREDIT CARD. BUT IN THE INTEREST OF SOLVING
           THAT PROBLEM, DO YOU ABUSE ALL THE OTHER HONEST, HARD-WORKING,
           DECENT YOUNG PEOPLE BETWEEN THE AGES OF 18 AND 21?
           DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THEM SO THAT THEY CAN'T GET A CREDIT CARD
           THAT MIGHT MAKE THEIR LIVES MAYBE A LITTLE BIT BETTER OR A

           LITTLE MORE LIVABLE OR A LITTLE MORE SUSTAINABLE?
           MY ATTITUDE IS THAT THIS AMENDMENT OUGHT TO BE DEFEATED BECAUSE
           IT'S A ONE-SIDED AMENDMENT THAT, IN MY OPINION, HASN'T BEEN
           WELL THOUGHT THROUGH. THAT'S NOT A KNOCK AT MY COLLEAGUE
           BECAUSE I KNOW HE'S SINCERE. I KNOW HE HAS GOOD INTENTIONS
           HERE. AND I KNOW THERE ARE SOME VALUES THAT HE'S TRYING TO
           DEFEND. BUT I THINK THE OVERWHELMING WAY OF MATURITY ON THIS
           PART IS ON THE SIDE OF YOUNG PEOPLE WHO HAVE A CREDIT CARD WHO

           WOULD PAY BACK THEIR CREDIT CARD, WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS
           AND DON'T NEED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO TELL THEM WHAT THEY
           CAN AND CANNOT DO IN THIS AREA. THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A FEW
           CREDIT CARD COMPANIES THAT ABUSE THE SYSTEM DOESN'T MEAN THAT
           WE SHOULD PASS THIS TYPE OF AN AMENDMENT. I'D BE HAPPY TO YIELD
           FIVE MINUTES TO THE DISTINGUISHED SENATOR FROM ALABAMA.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM ALABAMA IS RECOGNIZED.
           

           MR. SESSIONS: MR. PRESIDENT, I WANT TO THANK THE SENATOR FROM
           UTAH FOR HIS EXCELLENT REMARKS AND POINTING OUT THAT A LOT OF
           PEOPLE AGE 18 TO 21 ARE NOT IN COLLEGE. BUT I JUST HAD TWO
           GRADUATE FROM COLLEGE AND ONE IN COLLEGE. AND I'M GOING TO TELL
           YOU, A CREDIT CARD IS A GOOD THING FOR THEM TO HAVE. ALMOST
           EVERY COLLEGE STUDENT -- WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THEM -- IS
           GOING TO HAVE A CREDIT CARD. AND THE FACT THAT WE'VE NOW BEGAN
           FOR THE FIRST TIME TO HAVE SOME COMPETITION IN THE CREDIT CARD

           INDUSTRY, AND THEY'RE OFFERING LOWER RATES AND LESS CHARGES IF
           YOU'LL USE OUR CREDIT CARD, THAT'S GOOD. WE'VE NEEDED THAT, IN
           MY OPINION. THE BIGGEST COMPLAINT ABOUT CREDIT CARDS IS THEY
           CHARGE TOO MUCH INTEREST. THAT IS BEING DRIVEN NOW BECAUSE OF
           COMPETITION. THERE ARE 6,000 CREDIT CARD COMPANIES AND THEY ARE
           SENDING OUT MAILINGS AND THEY ARE ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO USE
           THEIR CREDIT CARD. WHAT'S BAD ABOUT THAT?
           AND WHAT TROUBLES ME IS WE'RE SAYING IF YOU WANT A YOUNG PERSON

           TO HAVE A CREDIT CARD, THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO GET THEIR
           PARENTS TO SIGN AS A COSIGNER AND BE FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE
           FOR THAT DEBT. THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO ME TO BE FAIR OR CORRECT.
{END: 1998/09/17 TIME: 13-30 , Thu.  105TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}