I 112th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 3470 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES November 17, 2011 Mr. Ribble (for himself, Mr. Petri, Mr. Meehan, and Mr. Austria) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary A BILL To remove arbitrary and anticompetitive limitations from the grant program for ICAC Program training.

1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Competitive Justice Training Act of 2011.

2.

Findings

The Congress finds as follows: (1)The Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program (hereinafter referred to as the ICAC Program) was developed in 1998 in response to the increasing number of children and teenagers using the Internet, the proliferation of child pornography, and heightened online activity by predators seeking unsupervised contact with potential underage victims. (2)The ICAC Program is a national network of more than 60 coordinated task forces representing more than 3,000 Federal, State, and local law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies. (3)The ICAC Program has identified millions of child pornography transactions involving images and video of child sexual assault from millions of computer IP addresses worldwide. (4)The ICAC Program has helped State and local officials develop and coordinate an effective response to cyber-enticement and child pornography cases. (5)Since its creation, the ICAC Program has reviewed more than 180,000 complaints of alleged child sexual victimization resulting in the arrest of more than 16,500 individuals. (6)In fiscal year 2010, ICAC Program investigations led to more than 5,400 arrests, over 30,000 forensic examinations, and the identification of over 2,100 children who were victims of some form of abuse or neglect. (7)The ICAC Program technical and training assistance program (hereinafter referred to as ICAC Program training) has trained more than 288,000 law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and other professionals, including 31,000 law enforcement personnel, more than 2,400 prosecutors, and more than 9,000 other professionals in fiscal year 2010 alone. (8)The benefits of a competitive and open grant process are widely accepted as the best method to match unique grantees with program requirements, responsibly administer taxpayer dollars, and ensure a fair and unbiased process for making grant award determinations. (9)ICAC Program training has historically been awarded through a competitive, open process. In general, Department of Justice grants are awarded without arbitrary restrictions and on a competitive basis. Further, most training administered by Federal agencies is administered on a full and competitive open grant process.

3.

Sense of Congress

It is the sense of the Congress that— (1)deviating from the competitive open grant process for ICAC Program training and establishing arbitrary limitations on the amount of ICAC Program training provided by certain providers is anticompetitive and does not result in maximizing taxpayer value, training participation, or program quality, or reducing associated overhead costs; and (2)the Attorney General should administer grants for ICAC Program training without arbitrary statutory or regulatory limitations, and in administering such grants should prioritize cost, quality, and proven training results.

4.

Removal of arbitrary anticompetive cap on ICAC Program training

Section 102(b)(4) of the PROTECT Our Children Act of 2008 (42 U.S.C. 17612(b)(4)) is amended— (1)by striking subparagraph (B); and (2)by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).