JPEPA HAS NUMBERS

Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, chair of the Senate foreign relations committee, said that Senate concurrence on Jpepa is “virtually assured,” because 14 senators have already signed the committee report.

“The required two-thirds vote of the Senate is only 15 senators, so we only need one more vote. That won’t be hard, because the issue of constitutionality has already been settled,” she said.

Santiago said that just a few days ago, Japanese foreign minister Masahiko Komura authorized Ambassador Makoto Katsura to sign an exchange of notes with foreign affairs secretary Alberto Romulo, in effect amending the treaty.

“The result of the exchange of notes will be that all Philippine constitutional provisions reserving certain economic activities to Filipinos and to corporations 60% Filipino owned shall prevail over Jpepa,” she said.

Santiago said that in effect, the exchange of notes will cancel the Jpepa provision that Japanese in our country would get “national treatment” – meaning, the same treatment as Filipinos in investment activities.

“Our national patrimony and natural resources will remain safely in Filipino hands,” she said.

Santiago said that pursuant to the RP Constitution, many areas of economic activity will continue to be reserved to Filipinos, such as land ownership, use of natural resources, operation of public utilities, practice of all professions, ownership of schools, of mass media, of advertising industry, etc.

“Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Art. 13, an exchange of notes in effect constitutes a treaty in itself, provided it states that the exchange shall have that effect,” she said.

Santiago said that Jpepa might be RP’s most important bilateral economic agreement in the last 50 years.

“Agriculture and exports will be the biggest winners. The treaty will immediately have a positive impact on farmers, fishermen, and food processors,” she said.

Santiago said that the moment Jpepa becomes effective, immediately 95% of RP exports to Japan will enjoy zero duties.

“ Japan has already concluded similar economic partnership agreements (EPAs) with Singapore , Mexico , Malaysia , Thailand , Chile , Brunei , and Indonesia ,” she said.

Santiago said that Japan will certainly increase its foreign direct investment (FDI) in RP, which in 2002-2006 already amounted to US$938 million.

“Japan is our biggest source of official development assistance (ODA) which in 2006 already amounted to US$4.7 billion. With Jpepa, ODA will get even bigger,” she said.

Santiago said that with Jpepa, RP exports to Japan is expected to reach $405 million or P 559 billion by 2011.

“Although there will be zero tariffs on 145 waste products, they cannot come in, because they are banned by R.A. No. 6969 on toxic wastes, and R.A. No.9003 on ecological solid wastes,” she said.

Santiago also said that both countries are bound by the 2007 exchange of notes between the RP and Japanese foreign ministers, stating that “Japan would not be exporting wastes to RP, in accordance with the Basel Convention” on the control of transboundary moment of hazardous wastes.

The 14 senators who signed the committee report were: Sen. Santiago, Roxas, Angara , Arroyo, Enrile, Gordon, Lapid, Revilla, Zubiri, Biazon, Legarda, Estrada, Pangilinan, and Pimentel. All had reservations except Angara and Enrile.

The 5 senators who did not sign were: Honasan, Madrigal, Trillanes, Pia Cayetano, and Escudero.

MIRIAM HITS FOREIGN CHAMBERS ON IPPs

Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, chair of the Senate energy committee, said that the Joint Foreign Chambers of the Philippines (JFC) oppose amending Epira because they do not want a review of the IPP contracts.

Epira is the Electric Power Industry Reform Act, while IPP is an industry power producer.

“The foreign chambers have a conflict of interest. They want to preserve Epira, but at the same time they do not want a review of the IPP contracts, apparently because they want to protect their economic interests and investment returns,” Santiago said.

Santiago said that under the IPP law, any proposed electric generating facility should prove that it can generate electric energy cheaper than can be generated by Napocor (NPC), by accessing lower cost of capital, cheaper plant investment, and locally manufactured equipment.

She said that according to a study, in all types of power plants, the IPP costs are higher than NPC generation costs.

“Napocor IPP contracts are like the BOT contracts. They are not standard PPAs which take some levels of business risks,” Santiago said.

BOT stands for build-operate-transfer, while PPA stands for purchase power agreement.

“The IPPs make windfall profits at the expense of consumers. The IPP contracts are unconscionable because the IPPs are already paid for capacity, and for operation and maintenance. Yet at the same time they have a take-over-pay level for variable energy conversion fees. The take-or-pay provisions are excessive,” the senator said.

Santiago said that IPPs follow a fee structure of dollars per kilowatt hour, where the standard procedure is based on pesos per kilowatt hour.

Santiago listed the alleged inconsistencies in the JFC letter to Pres. Arroyo, as follows:

• JFC objects to Epira amendment, but does not particularly explain why.
• JFC contradicts itself because it rejects Epira amendment, but at the same time supports earlier open access. To achieve earlier open access, Epira has to be amended.
  
• JPC contradicts itself by calling for transparent and competitive electricity industry market and yet it rejects at the same time a review of IPP contracts. This is also conflict of interest on the part of JFC.
  
• JFC makes a bare statement that amending Epira will negatively impact the power industry market, without specifying the ways in which negative impact would result.

Santiago said that JFC issued the statement on the presumption that by the end of 2008, NPC will complete 70% privatization.

“What is the basis for this presumption? Will JFC members participate in bids for the JPC assets? At present, no foreign companies are involved in bidding for NPC assets. The only active bidders are local investors,” the senator said.

Santiago said virtually the entire Senate rose to criticize the recent JPC letter to Pres. Arroyo opposing Epira amendment, because the letter should have been addressed to the Congress.

“Lawmaking is the sole prerogative of Congress,” Santiago said.

Santiago said that the senators did not like the letter, because it appears to be an attempt by foreigners to meddle in Philippine policy making.

MIRIAM GOES AFTER ABSENT, LATE SENATORS

Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago successfully secured new Senate rules to punish absent or late senators, and to prevent them from delaying the passage of bills.

On Santiago ’s motion, without objection, the Senate adopted the new rule providing that absence of a senator will be deemed as a waiver of his right to interpellate the sponsor of any bill. “Under present practice, delay results when an absentee senator does not show up during the date that he reserved for interpellation. Delay also results, when a bill’s sponsor is absent, and there is no one to answer the questions,” the senator said.

Santiago said that if a senator has to be absent, then he should appoint a substitute senator to continue pending business. Another Santiago motion passed by the Senate is for session to start promptly at 3:00 p.m. as scheduled, and not to wait for a quorum which usually appears only at 3:30 or even 4:30 p.m.

Under the new rule, a Senate session will start at 3:00 p.m., on the condition precedent that the session will be deemed retroactively valid, when a quorum is raised, at which time roll call will be held.

“We are bending Robert’s Rules of Order, which requires a quorum to start a session. But the Supreme Court has held that the Senate can change its internal rules of procedure at any time,” said Santiago , a lawyer.

Santiago noted that last Wednesday, May 28, at 3:00 p.m., there was no quorum as usual, but when Senate President Manny Villar banged his gavel, immediately a quorum appeared. “It is a matter of self-discipline.

Late senators should not be allowed to determine when session will start,” the senator said. Santiago’s motions were supported by Senators Aquilino Pimentel, Jr., Juan Ponce Enrile, and Richard Gordon, who each spoke up to denounce absenteeism as a source of delay in legislation.

But Majority Leader Sen. Francis Pangilinan said the new rule will apply, only if the Senate President agrees to start session without a quorum. Santiago ’s third successful motion was to add two podiums facing the senators, in addition to the six installed podiums, which all face the Senate President.

The new podiums will be installed by Monday, June 2.

“This is the arrangement in most Congresses worldwide, including the U.S. Congress. At present, when a senator delivers a privilege speech or a sponsorship speech, he has to turn his back to the other senators, in order to face the Senate President. The present system also makes it hard for media and people in the gallery to follow the speeches,” Santiago said.

-End-

14 January 2008

MIRIAM TO CONGRESS: “DECELERATE” BIOFUEL

Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, chair of the powerful Joint Congressional Power Commission (JCPC) said she will write Senate President Manny Villar and Speaker Jose de Venecia to provide funds for the newly created Biofuels Oversight Committee, to ensure that “food acreage will not be prejudiced by biofuel acreage.”

Santiago was reacting to a statement in Manila last week of Dr. Hartmut Michel, 1998 Nobel prizewinner for chemistry, that biofuel development is counterproductive, because it produces little energy, compared to other alternative sources.

Ironically, Santiago was the Senate author and sponsor of the Biofuels Act signed by President Arroyo into law in January last year.

“The Biofuels Act is only a cushion for the global increase in oil prices. It is only meant to be a runup to the Renewable Energy Bill, which I will sponsor in the Senate when session opens at the end of the month,” Santiago said.

The Biofuels Act requires a minimum 1 percent biodiesel blend in diesel fuel, and 5 percent bioethanol blend in gasoline fuel, prompting business speculators to call for the conversion of riceland to sugarcane, corn, cassava, nipa, jatropha, palm, soy, grapeseed, and coconut.

“The Biofuels Oversight Committee is intended not only to ensure that the law will reduce the country’s dependence on imported oil, but also to prevent corporate greed and political opportunism from endangering food security,” Santiago said.

Santiago , chair of the Senate energy committee, said that at a recent meeting, her committee voted to adopt all the proceedings of the prior Congress, meaning that the proposed Renewable Energy Bill can go immediately without additional public hearings to the plenary session for debate.

“The Biofuels Act merely addresses energy use in the transport sector. But the renewable energy bill will cover all energy applications outside the transport sector,” Santiago said.

Santiago said that the main emphasis of the renewable energy program should not be biofuel, but hydropower, geothermal, solar, wind, and biomass power.

“Some politicians have overhyped the Biofuels Act to burnish their image, thus misleading the public. The Biofuels Act raises a serious debate on food versus biofuels in a small island country like ours,” she said.

Santiago enthusiastically supported Dr. Michel’s suggestions at the Nobel forum last week that instead of putting money in biofuel development, the government should put money in wind power.

“Biofuel is landbased, and will eventually compete with food. Because the Philippines has a small land area, biofuel production will tend to encroach on food production. Corporations are already searching for millions of hectares for jatropha alone. We have to step on the brakes and decelerate,” Santiago said.

She said that during President Arroyo’s state visit to Spain , Spanish businessmen expressed strong interest in helping the development of wind energy in the Philippines .

Santiago said that the renewable energy bill, like the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA), will establish a renewable energy market and a wholesale electricity spot market.

“The renewable energy bill provide for the green energy option, which gives consumers the choice to use renewable energy, and accelerate open access,” Santiago said.

Santiago said that the renewable energy bill will provide fiscal incentives to eligible proponents such as income tax holiday, preferential realty tax rate, exemptions from import duties, and reduction of the government share from royalties.

-o0o-

Transcript of Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago’s interview
11 December 2007

On the revival of the Cha-Cha in the Lower House

Theirs is no point resurrecting the dead. Why try and revive it? What is the reason for changing the Constitution at this particular time? Here in the Senate, we are all engaged in trying to pass the national budget this afternoon or at least this week. And in the Powercom, we have a series of scandals. In fact, as Chair of the JCPC, I am getting terminal headaches from all these scandals: the sale of the EDC shares of stock rather than just its geothermal fields packaged with steam sales agreement; the sale of Transco, which have been attacked by certain opposition senators because of the alleged conflict of interest with the PSALM president; and, most recently, the privilege speech of a congressman alleging that NAPOCOR has paid for coal that was grossly overcharged, and that overpayment will of course be reflected in next year’s electricity rates.

I want to know the following things about charter change:

1. Is there a necessity?
   
2. What are the benefits to be gained from it?
   
3. How practical is the proposal?
   

In all three issues, I submit that the answer is in the negative.

What maybe the motives behind this?

I don’t really know, except maybe if the House of Representatives just wants to prove to President Arroyo, since her recent altercation with the leadership of the House, that it still has some weight and cannot just be kicked around by the executive branch of government. There is always two countervailing forces that the House can fall back on whenever it feels that they are not getting their due: 1) the power to impeach, and 2) the power to initiate charter change.

This is all part of the power game, which is really very annoying and very tiring. We have so many priority bills. This morning at the LEDAC, we couldn’t even decide among ourselves which four or six bills to pass before Christmas break, and which fourteen or fifteen bills to pass before the first semester. And then we have all these extraneous political noise going on.

On the composition of the Ethics Committee as principal obstacle from hearing the resolution to suspend or expel Sen. Trillanes

Apparently, the committee has not yet been organized. This is perfectly understandable because no senator wants to sit in judgment over his or her own colleague. Nobody wants to be chair of the Ethics Committee and nobody wants to be a member. That’s the problem: nobody wants to pass judgment, because if you don’t judge anything, then you don’t get into trouble over anything. My contention is that we have a power granted to the Senate not only by the Rules of the Senate but by the Constitution itself. And we cannot simply abnegate this power simply by non-action. Our inaction or our silence, as provided by the Civil Code and in the Penal Code, will be interpreted as consent. In love, sex, the Civil Code, the Penal Code, and the actions of the Senate, silence means consent.

-o0o-

FOURTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC )
OF THE PHILIPPINES )
First Regular Session )

SENATE

P.S.R. No. 228


Introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago


URGENT RESOLUTION
EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT IT IS AN UNPARLIAMENTARY ACT FOR A SENATOR TO LEAD AN ATTEMPTED COUP D’ETAT AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT,
AND CALLING FOR HIS PROPER PUNISHMENT

WHEREAS, on 29 November 2007, Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, who is detained and under trial on a charge of coup d’etat, walked out of a Makati courtroom and stormed into a hotel where he participated in the reading of a prepared seditious statement calling not only for the President to resign, but also for the public, in effect, to compel her to leave office;

WHEREAS, the Rules of the Senate, Rule 34, Section 97, provides:

SEC. 97. Upon the recommendation of the Committee on Ethics and Privileges, the Senate may punish any Member for disorderly behavior and, with the concurrence of two-thirds (2/3) of the entire membership, suspend or expel a Member. A penalty of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60) calendar days.

WHEREAS, the Constitution, Article II, Section 3, provides:

SEC. 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the State.

WHEREAS, this provision means that the President, as commander-in-chief, is supreme not only over the military, but also over its rogue elements. Furthermore, the provision that the AFP is the protector of the people is not meant to authorize any of the rogue military to stage a coup d’etat, but is intended to emphasize the defense of the country from foreign attack;

WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Senate Committee on Ethics and Privileges, should meet immediately and recommend the proper punishment for Senator Trillanes for disorderly behavior and unparliamentary acts and language, including if necessary, his suspension or expulsion from the Senate.

Adopted,


                                                                                                                         (Sgd.)

MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO

Senator wants Trillanes expelled from Senate

From Inquirer.net
First posted 04:34:01 (Mla time) December 01, 2007  

MANILA, Philippines -- Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago is preparing to ask the Senate to reprimand or even expel Senator Antonio Trillanes IV for leading a siege on a hotel in the Makati business district Thursday.

In a resolution that she plans to submit for action on Monday, Santiago said: “The Senate committee on ethics and privileges should meet immediately and recommend the proper punishment for Senator Trillanes for disorderly behavior and unparliamentary acts and language, including, if necessary, his suspension or expulsion from the Senate.”

The ethics committee is chaired by Sen. Pia Cayetano.

Santiago said she believed that Trillanes’ acts on Thursday had been planned: “He participated in the reading of a prepared seditious statement calling not only for the President to resign, but also for the public, in effect, to compel her to leave office.”

The Senate’s rules allow punishment of any of its members for disorderly behavior upon the recommendation of the ethics committee, as long as this is concurred in by two-thirds of the members of the chamber, said Santiago, a staunch ally of President Gloria Macaagal-Arroyo, whom she is joining in a trip to London and Spain this Saturday night.

But she conceded that penalizing Trillanes would be difficult, considering that his oppositionist allies accounted for the majority in the Senate.

Before Thursday, Trillanes had been in detention on a coup d’état charge for his role in a 2003 military mutiny. He has yet to attend a session at the Senate since his election last May.

Premature

Sen. Pia Cayetano said that while her committee was bound to act on Santiago’s resolution, any Senate action on Trillanes would be “premature” because his cases were still pending in court.

She cited the case of former congressman Romeo Jalosjos, who was expelled from the House of Representatives only after the Supreme Court had upheld his conviction for rape.

Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr. concurred with Cayetano, saying: “Trillanes is innocent of the crimes until he is convicted. He has to be convicted first before he is punished. He should not be prejudged before he is convicted.”

Senate President Manuel Villar said his position was that the chamber should tread carefully in disciplining one of its own.

He said he doubted whether Trillanes could be expelled, especially with the opposition in control of the Senate.

Send a clear message

Whether the Senate reprimands, suspends or expels Trillanes, Santiago said it was important that the Senate would send a clear message to the public that it was not tolerating crimes committed by a senator.

She said some opposition senators who were also lawyers like herself were most likely as “annoyed and offended” by Trillanes’ actions.

“Nagdudunung-dunungan kasi’ [He’s trying to look intelligent]. He is interpreting the Constitution as a layman, which should not be because you need four years to have the skill to interpret it,” she said.

-o0o-

Transcript of today’s media interview with Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago

19 September 2007

On the decision of President Arroyo to allow executive officials to appear before Senate hearings:

As a lawyer and a senator, I commend the President for allowing her cabinet members and other high executive officials to appear and honor the invitation or the subpoena from the respective Senate committees that are presently holding investigations on certain transactions by the Executive allegedly participated in by certain executive officials. This is in keeping with the trend in the Supreme Court to expand the power of Congress to conduct legislative enquiries that are in aid of legislation. It was in a series of cases last year where the Supreme Court made the power broader on the ground that the right to hold legislative investigations in aid of legislation is constitutionally protected. The right is specifically provided for in our Constitution. Therefore, all the powers that are needed for the efficient discharge of this constitutional duty should be granted to the Senate. What for is our power to investigate if we subpoena people and they wouldn’t come and will be considered excused. We should have the coercive power to cite for contempt. And we should have the power to call any person and to compel that person to testify before us. If his testimony is irrelevant, then we can judge for ourselves, but he must come first. He cannot interpret the relevance or materiality of his testimony by himself. He has to allow the Senate to pass on that. In the same way that no public official can claim executive privilege, and expect the Senate to accept it. We also have the power in the Senate to pass upon the question of whether executive privilege is being properly invoked or not. All of these actions by President Arroyo are consonant with Supreme Court decisions, the first of which is Senate v. Ermita, where the Supreme Court said that there can be no blanket invocation of executive privilege, each claim must be explained in full to the Senate. The second is Gudani v. Senga, where the Supreme Court said that even military officers cannot claim to be obeying the prohibition of the President, as commander-in-chief, to appear before the Senate. Even the military power of the President must yield to the power of legislative inquiry by the Senate. In Sabio v. Gordon, the Supreme Court said that even though a case was pending in the Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan, the officials subpoenaed by the Senate must appear before the Senate. There is an implication that even though a case is pending before a judicial tribunal, the Senate still has the power to compel persons to testify about those pending cases. They cannot use as an excuse the doctrine of sub judice. This is a welcome development. I am sure that the senators will appreciate the President’s cooperative attitude.

On the First Gentleman being subpoenaed by the Senate:

We are bound by the doctrine of interdepartmental comity. This means that we have to be courteous of each other because there are three branches (of government), and each branch is equal to and independent of each other. If we in the Senate invite or even subpoena the First Gentleman, he should, as a matter of courtesy, appear and explain why his testimony is not relevant or what has been said about him is false. No person may be excused just by writing a letter to the Senate. They must appear and explain why they think they should no longer be asked to testify. If the Senate insists that they testify, then they have to, because the Supreme Court said that the power of contempt of the Senate is equal to the power of the courts.

Suppose the First Gentleman say that according to his doctors, this might be either fatal to him or seriously impair his medical health, then we can subpoena his doctors if we want to go behind him and if we don’t want to accept his explanation on its face. We are at a liberty to subpoena his doctors. But an investigation need not be a fatal threat in his medical condition. It just has to be potentially and substantially injurious to a person’s health. If this is the case, we have to apply the rule in our Senate Rules of Procedure that the rights of persons affected by the legislative inquiry must be respected. Certainly, the right to life or good health must be protected. But if it comes to that, we first have to wait for the response of the First Gentleman.

The First Gentleman cannot just ignore a subpoena from the Senate. But as an exception, he can submit a letter if the very fact of his appearance in the Senate may, for example, raise his blood pressure or already damage his heart. In that case, we must make an exception for him. But if some senators are skeptical, then we can subpoena his doctors.

-o0o-

Announcement

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, chaired by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago, will hold on 14 September 2007, Friday, 10 a.m., at the Pecson Room, Philippine Senate, the first public hearing on the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA). The topic will be trade and investment.

Press Release

16 June 2007

MIRIAM DARES NEW SOLONS TO SPEND PORK WITHOUT KICKBACKS

Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago dared newly-elected senators to prove their integrity by donating their annual pork barrel funds to “kickback-free” projects for the Philippine General Hospital, the country’s biggest charity hospital, and to the University of the Philippines, the country’s premier state university.

“It is well-known in the pork barrel trade that there are no kickbacks for such projects as state-of-the-art machines for public hospitals, or new buildings for state universities. This project should be the litmus test for new senators claiming to be honest,” Santiago said.

Santiago was honored guest at a special program June 15 during the inauguration of new PGH medical facilities, headed by UP President Emerlinda Roman, PGH Director Carmelo Alfiler, and PGH cardiologist, now DSWD Secretary Esperanza Cabral.

Starting 2005, Santiago launched her personal campaign for “one senator, one machine” for PGH, leading the way by donating at that time P16 million for new equipment for the adult gastroenterology and cardiology sections.

The senator followed this up with her recent donation of another P6 million for the renovation of three rooms, called the control room, medical call room, and medical auxiliary room. In addition, Santiago’s pork barrel provided medical gas facilities to ensure that oxygen and lifesaving gases will be available to PGH patients.

Later this year, Santiago has already committed another P12 million to purchase an endoscopic ultrasound equipment for the new gastroenterology center at UP-PGH, the first of its kind in the Philippines to make diagnostic and treatment procedures available to patients who cannot afford similar facilities in private hospitals.

Santiago said that in 2005, she passed around the Senate a “pledge sheet” containing a list of machines urgently needed by PGH, with the intention that every senator should indicate opposite the machine of his choice the amount he was willing to donate from his pork barrel.

“Sadly, my project called ‘one senator, one PGH machine’ raised a lot of curiosity and interest among the senators, but apparently no senator followed up on his pledge,” Santiago lamented.

Santiago said that it is virtually useless for a senator to make public mere refusal of his pork barrel funds, because those funds will simply go to another agency where they could be subjected to corruption.

“Mere renunciation of pork barrel does not constitute a public service. It needs follow-up to make sure that the money refused goes to worthwhile social services. Instead of seeking publicity for giving up pork barrel, senators should allocate their pork barrel to ‘clean’ projects where it is impossible to get a kickback, such as the importation of expensive medical machines to be made available free to the poor,” Santiago said.

Santiago made banner headline news in 1996, when a leading newspaper exposed additional pork barrel that senators allocated for themselves, called the Congressional Initiative Allocation, by refusing it on the ground that it had no constitutional basis.

“Pork barrel has a constitutional basis, so it is legal. But in most cases, it is reduced by kickbacks shared among the legislator, local government official, and contractor. The most kickback-prone projects are those involving public works,” Santiago said.

UP President Roman lauded Santiago’s consistent support over the years for UP-PGH, particularly her donation of annual pork barrel to complete the new National Institute of Physics building in the UP Diliman campus, where Santiago graduated.

“A senator or representative can sponsor a building by donating pork barrel funds in annual increments until the building is finished. I hope Sen. Santiago’s example will be followed by other senators,” Roman said.

DSWD Secretary Cabral, known to be a close friend of Santiago, and a former practitioner at PGH, pointed out that PGH is the country’s biggest charity hospital, catering to more than 600,000 patients a year, 90 percent of whom are indigents.

“Senators who genuinely care for the poor can help them directly by funding the importation of the latest medical machines. This process does not allow kickbacks, so any senator who donates medical equipment is automatically clean. That should be the attraction for the new senators,” she said.

-o0o-