[Senate Hearing 106-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
----------
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
[The following testimonies were received by the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary,
and Related Agencies for inclusion in the record. The submitted
materials relate to the fiscal year 2004 budget request for
programs within the subcommittee's jurisdiction.]
DEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
THE JUDICIARY
Prepared Statement of Leonidas Ralph Mecham, Director, Administrative
Office of the U.S. Courts
introduction
Chairman Gregg, Senator Hollings, and Members of the Subcommittee:
thank you for giving me the opportunity to present the fiscal year 2004
budget request for the Administrative Office of the United States
Courts (AO).
Let me first take a moment to thank you for your help in conference
on the fiscal year 2003 appropriation for the AO. I am grateful of your
support in providing the AO with an increase in funding above the
fiscal year 2002 appropriation. Crafting an acceptable conference
agreement within the limited allocation you were provided was a
difficult challenge. Your continued support and recognition of our
service to the courts are very much appreciated.
role of the administrative office
Created by an Act of Congress in 1939, the Administrative Office of
the United States Courts serves as the central support agency for the
federal court system, with key responsibility for judicial
administration, program management, and oversight.
As such, the AO is the focal point for judiciary communication,
information, program leadership, and administrative reform. Our
administrators, accountants, systems engineers, analysts, architects,
lawyers, statisticians, and other staff provide professional services
to meet the needs of judges and staff working in the federal courts
nationwide. We also staff the judiciary's policy-making body, the
Judicial Conference of the United States, and its 24 committees.
security of the judiciary
During this past year, in the wake of the events of September 11,
2001, and the anthrax incidents that followed, a principal focus of the
AO has been to provide additional guidance on security and emergency
preparedness to the courts. We have consulted with experts, analyzed
alternatives, and taken numerous steps to ensure the safety and
security of federal judges, judiciary staff, jurors, attorneys, the
public, and others associated with the judicial process. These efforts
would not have been possible without your support in providing the
judiciary with $129 million in emergency supplemental funding during
fiscal year 2002. I would like to take a few moments to highlight how
we have used these monies as well as share with you some of the
initiatives we have undertaken in the area of security during the last
year.
Emergency Supplemental Funding
First and foremost, the supplemental funding enabled the judiciary
to augment the U.S. Marshals Service's workforce with 106 new court
security inspectors who will oversee courthouse security and coordinate
on- and off-site protection of judges in each of the 94 districts and
12 regional courts of appeals. The funding also covered the costs
associated with 358 new Court Security Officers (CSOs) to provide a
higher level of security, including extended evening and weekend
coverage, enhanced perimeter and internal security patrols, 100 percent
identification checks, and visual inspection of vehicles. The inability
to provide expanded hours of security coverage in courthouses had been
a major weakness in the judiciary's security program. Your assistance
in addressing this need is very much appreciated.
In addition, the supplemental funding is being used to pay for such
things as bomb detection equipment, enhanced x-ray equipment for
screening, bullet-proof vests for CSOs, security enhancements around
the perimeter of courthouses, ballistic hardening of screening posts,
and special security requirements for courts handling high-threat
trials.
We also used emergency supplemental funding to enhance the physical
security of the Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building. Monies
have been used to upgrade the fire control system which includes
accessible features for secondary locations. Vehicles no longer are
allowed to park or idle outside the building. We have purchased new
state-of-the-art x-ray machines and video surveillance cameras,
installed protective film on perimeter windows, purchased evacuation
chairs, radiological monitoring devices, and are pursuing other
security upgrades based on expert security advice, and assessment
reports.
Safe Mail Handling
As I mentioned in my testimony before the Subcommittee last year,
immediately following the incidents of anthrax-contaminated mail, the
AO began sending nearly all correspondence to the courts via e-mail or
facsimile transmission. In addition, consultant architectural services
were obtained to study several existing courthouse mail facilities and
handling practices to help develop procedures, standards, and
infrastructure for safe mail handling in federal courthouses. In July
2002, the Judicial Conference endorsed recommendations regarding safe
mail handling procedures, and the construction of centralized mail
rooms in courthouses using $12 million in fiscal year 2002 emergency
supplemental funding. AO staff then developed guidelines and
specifications for prototype mail rooms based on the size of the
courthouse and the potential volume of mail.
Emergency Preparedness
Also during fiscal year 2002, the AO established the Judiciary
Emergency Preparedness Office to give direct guidance and other
assistance to courts for emergency preparedness, crisis response, and
continuity of operations plans. Such plans focus on the safety of
judiciary employees and the public, and ensure that essential functions
and activities are not interrupted for long and that critical functions
resume as quickly as possible. During the past year, representatives
from this office have briefed nearly 2,000 members of the judiciary on
the emergency preparedness program.
Continuity of Operations Planning (COOP)
And, with the help of an independent consultant, prototype
Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) templates and instructional
materials have been developed for each court type based on the actual
COOP plans developed with AO assistance by the courts in New York after
the terrorist events of September 11, 2001. Representatives from the
courts contributed to the development of the COOP template by
identifying specific issues courts need to consider in creating their
local plans. The final template was distributed to the courts in
November 2002 and will help them identify vulnerabilities in the event
of a crisis, do the advanced planning necessary to maintain normal
operations, and conduct the extensive coordination required among local
organizations. Courts can access templates and checklists about
emergency preparedness on the judiciary's Emergency Preparedness
Office's website. These templates will be refined and updated based on
experience and feedback from the courts.
Court Operations Support Center
We are particularly grateful for your endorsement in the conference
report of the recommendations of the Court Operations Support Center
and Continuity of Operations Housing Plan report that we provided to
the Subcommittee in November 2002. The establishment of a small leased
facility at least 20 miles outside of Washington, D.C. will help ensure
the continuity of critical court support operations in the event that
administrative and automation support functions are shut down as a
result of closure of the Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building.
While the primary purpose of the facility will be continuity of
operations, consistent with the conference report direction, we intend
to provide telework opportunities for judiciary employees at this
facility as well. We will work quickly to establish this facility, and
I will keep you apprized of its progress.
Courts Supported in High-Profile Trials
The ongoing terrorist threat to our nation and increased focus of
federal law enforcement resources on homeland security also mean that
the federal courts are likely to be the forum for many more highly
publicized and security-sensitive criminal proceedings. We've already
had the Richard Reid case in Massachusetts and the John Walker Lindh
case in the Eastern District of Virginia. We know of several more that
are upcoming, including the Zacarias Moussaoui case, also in the
Eastern District of Virginia. The courts hosting these trials face
unprecedented and extraordinary challenges involving a wide range of
issues from heightened security concerns, greater information
technology support needs, and furnishing closed-circuit broadcasts of
the proceedings to victims' families.
The courts rely on the AO to provide support and advice to them on
all of these issues. AO staff met with court staff from the Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and the Eastern District of Virginia to
discuss the possibilities of using videoconferencing for emergency
appeals resulting from terrorist-related cases in the circuit. The AO
also arranged for classified briefings from the National Security
Agency (NSA) for judges and others to discuss increased risks from
terrorists trials. In Massachusetts, staff, working with NSA
representatives, conducted an information security analysis at the
district and appellate courts, followed by briefings for court staff
and judges.
I look forward to working with you and the Members of this
Subcommittee as we develop more specific plans to ensure that the
federal courts are safe and readily accessible to the public. Even in
the face of the grim realities of a terrorist attack, chemical or
biological contamination, or natural disaster, we are doing our best to
ensure that the business of the judiciary can and will continue without
disruption.
relationship with the u.s. marshals service
In my role as Secretary to the Judicial Conference, one of my
primary responsibilities is to carry out and implement policy decisions
of the Judicial Conference. Not surprising, providing for the safety
and security of federal judges, judiciary staff, jurors, attorneys and
other participants in the judicial process has always been a top
priority for the judiciary.
On May 5, 1981, Chief Justice Warren Burger met with Attorney
General William French Smith to discuss the need for improved court
security. Following this meeting, in July 1981, Attorney General Smith
formed a task force to examine court security requirements and make
recommendations for improvements. The task force report was issued in
March 1982.
To quote from the Joint Statement of the Chief Justice and the
Attorney General before the Judicial Conference of the United States on
March 11, 1982:
The provisions of adequate security services to all the
participants in the federal judicial system, most especially the
Judiciary itself, is a critical element in the relationship between the
Department of Justice and the Federal Courts. If we cannot ensure the
safety of all participants in the judicial process, we cannot maintain
the integrity of the system, we cannot--in sum--``establish justice,''
as mandated in the preamble to the Constitution of the United States.
The statement goes on to point out that the needs of the judiciary
had risen dramatically due to the increase in the number of judges, the
increase in the number of cases, combined with the increasingly complex
and sensitive nature of the cases and people involved. Mr. Chairman, it
is disturbing to note that twenty-one years later these statements are
even more relevant.
Today, the federal courts are at risk from domestic and
international terrorists, organized domestic and international criminal
organizations, and litigants distressed at the outcome of their
individual cases. And, because of the role the judiciary plays in the
prosecution of international and domestic terrorists, as well as the
high profile of judges and court facilities in most communities,
security threats to the federal judicial system will no doubt continue
to increase.
USMS Staffing Shortfalls
The judiciary is a strong advocate for the resource needs of the
U.S. Marshals Service (USMS). But the judiciary has no binding
authority over the general level of security services provided it by
the USMS. By statute, the judiciary depends on the Executive Branch's
USMS as its security provider. This relationship makes it difficult for
us to ensure the judiciary receives the security services it requires.
During the past several years, the U.S. Marshals Service has
experienced severe personnel resource deficiencies, particularly at
courts along the Southwest border and in cities with burgeoning
criminal caseloads. The Marshals Service could not redeploy sufficient
resources to these areas without severely short-changing others. The AO
recently learned that the USMS' budgeting model identified personnel
shortages of approximately 1,200 positions. The USMS is operating at 70
percent of its required staffing. It is critical to the welfare of the
judiciary that the USMS be adequately staffed to perform all of its
various missions so that judicial security does not take a back seat to
other USMS priorities. We are, so to speak, at the mercy of the USMS,
the Department of Justice, and the Office of Management and Budget in
terms of their ability to provide the number of deputy marshals
necessary to ensure the judiciary has a top notch security program.
For more than a year, Judge Jane Roth, Chair of the Judicial
Conference Committee on Security and Facilities, and I have been
working with the Department of Justice and Director Reyna in an attempt
to evaluate the USMS staffing requirements and develop a multi-year
strategy to raise the number of funded marshals. To be frank, achieving
a collaborative effort has not been easy, but the Department has
recently decided to seek input from the judiciary in the development of
a revised staffing formula.
During consideration of the third fiscal year 2002 Emergency
Supplemental, Senator Graham was successful in amending the bill on the
Senate floor to include funding for the hiring of 200 additional deputy
U.S. marshals for the protection of the judiciary. With your help in
conference, $37.9 million was provided to support up to 250 new
positions for the USMS. Unfortunately, certain funds in the Act were
included on a contingent basis--contingent on the President submitting
an official budget request designating those funds as an emergency
requirement. In a letter dated August 6, 2002, I wrote to the President
on behalf of the Judicial Conference to urge expeditious submission of
an official budget request so these critically needed resources could
be released. The President declined to take that action.
For fiscal year 2003, through your leadership in conference on the
Omnibus Appropriations Bill, $7.9 million was included for 58
additional deputy U.S. marshal positions for the protection of the
judiciary for high threat trials, and for districts demonstrating the
highest priority needs. For fiscal year 2004, while the President's
budget for the U.S. Marshals Service seeks $26.6 million for 231
additional deputy U.S. marshal positions, it also includes a general
base reduction of $25.1 million to this same account. I am concerned
that judicial security may suffer as a result.
Comprehensive Study on Judicial Security
As I have tried to lay out before you, the AO and the Judicial
Conference have been concerned with the state of judicial security and
the unique position the judiciary finds itself in with regard to its
dependence on the Department of Justice for some time. Before September
11, 2001, the AO and the Judicial Conference Committee on Security and
Facilities had undertaken a comprehensive look at various aspects of
judicial security. Working with a private security contractor, the
findings of the review were issued in November 2001. Enhancements
funded by the three emergency supplementals and the initiatives that
have been undertaken by the AO to strengthen the security of the courts
were key recommendations contained in this comprehensive review.
In fact, the 106 supervisory-level deputy U.S. marshal positions
included in the emergency supplemental to coordinate judicial security
in the 94 districts and 12 regional circuits were a direct outgrowth of
a recommendation of the independent security experts. Congress has now
transferred the funding to the USMS, Salaries and Expenses account, but
I am grateful that you have included statutory language to ensure the
funding and positions will continue to be assigned to court security.
District marshals and judges have seen improvements in security with
the addition of the new security positions.
In the conference report accompanying the fiscal year 2003 Omnibus
Appropriation Bill, you have directed the U.S. Marshals Service to
conduct a study with an independent consultant on the management of the
Court Security program and the unique relationship between the Federal
Judiciary, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the Federal Protective
Service in administering the Court Security program and providing
facilities security for the judiciary. Mr. Chairman, consistent with
our responsibility to monitor the provision of court security and our
personal concern for the safety of the public, litigants, attorneys,
jurors, judges, court staff and others in the judicial process, I
respectfully urge you to permit the judiciary to share its views
regarding the management of court security during the course of this
study. Certainly the outcome of the study will have profound
implications for the future delivery of judicial security. Judge Jane
Roth and I hope that you will meet with us if you believe changes to
our security arrangements are warranted.
administrative office budget request
The fiscal year 2004 budget request for the Administrative Office
of the U.S. Courts is $70,584,000, representing an increase of
$7,497,000, or 11.9 percent above the fiscal year 2003 available
appropriation. While the percentage increase we are seeking appears
significant, it should be noted that more than three-fourths of the
requested increase for the AO, $5,842,000, is necessary to support
adjustments to base. These adjustments are mainly comprised of standard
pay and general inflationary increases, funding to replace a lower
level of fee carryover with appropriated funds, and $400,000 to restore
funding for critical cyclical replacement of information technology
equipment that had to be deferred into fiscal year 2004. We are highly
dependent on personal computers, data networks, and telecommunications
to conduct AO business and support the courts. Funds must be available
to ensure security and replacement of essential equipment.
The remaining increase of $1,655,000, which I will describe in
greater detail in a moment, is requested to support new security
requirements, strengthen programmatic oversight, audits, reviews and
assessments, allow us to fund an increase in the transit subsidy
benefit for AO employees, and implement a cafeteria-style flexible
benefit program.
AO Staff Support for the Courts
Specifically, $958,000 is requested to provide nine additional FTEs
for program and security oversight. Continuing to develop new programs
and systems while supporting a court system whose proportional growth
far outpaces that of the AO is a daunting task. The staffing level in
the AO has remained essentially the same over the last ten years, while
court staffing has grown by 20 percent during the same time period,
thus adding substantially to the AO workload.
Each vacancy that occurs is carefully evaluated and used to fulfill
our highest priority needs. Nowhere has this been more evident than
with our increased focus on security and emergency preparedness.
Without additional funding, we have had to shift duties and
responsibilities to meet the most pressing and immediate requirements
of the courts, and this has meant shortchanging other needs. For
example, during fiscal year 2002, the AO devoted $1 million and 8 FTEs
to homeland security efforts. Roughly 50 AO employees devoted staff-
hours equivalent to 8 FTEs, developing and implementing enhanced
judicial security programs--fulfilling responsibilities and carrying
out duties other than those for which their positions were originally
funded to support.
I am proud of my staff and their dedication to serving the needs of
the courts. However, because sufficient resources must be committed to
core functions such as running key systems, providing basic payroll,
personnel, and financial management services, and supporting the
committees of the Judicial Conference, program oversight functions are
in serious need of additional resources.
The nine additional FTEs we are requesting will be applied to the
following functions: adding staff to the facilities and security
program to ensure greater emphasis on the planning aspects of emergency
preparedness and crisis response; providing greater focus and support
to the probation and pretrial services program, which currently has
only 36 AO staff supporting 8,000 probation and pretrial services
personnel in 94 districts nationwide, and a budget of $850 million;
and, increasing program oversight and efficiency reviews to assist the
courts in areas such as automated case management, financial
management, and developing strengthened procurement policies and
procedures.
Mr. Chairman, I hope you can assist us with this much needed
request for additional staffing at the AO.
Cafeteria-Style Flexible Benefits Program
As you may recall, the Judicial Conference is seeking legislation
that would provide the judiciary with the authority to use appropriated
funds and/or fees to help defray the cost of providing supplemental
benefits to judiciary employees. Approval of the legislation will allow
a full-flexible cafeteria plan to be available to all judiciary
employees, including the AO, providing a supplemental benefits package
that is competitive with those already provided throughout the private
sector and state governments. Benefits that may potentially be offered
in a cafeteria plan include such items as a dental program, a vision
program, and life insurance, as well as short-term and long-term
disability insurance.
While the House passed its Federal Courts Improvement Bill with
this needed authorization in it, the Senate failed to act on the
measure during the 107th Congress. However, in anticipation of the
enactment of legislation in fiscal year 2003 allowing flexible
cafeteria-style benefits to be offered to the judiciary, our fiscal
year 2004 request includes $432,000 to begin implementing such a
program for AO employees. A similar request implementing the program
judiciary-wide is included in the Salaries and Expenses account.
Transit Subsidy
Pursuant to the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
(Public Law 105-78), the AO implemented a transit subsidy benefit for
its employees with available funding in fiscal year 2000. The benefit
is currently $60 per month with a participation rate of approximately
60 percent. Executive Order No. 13150 provided for an increase in the
allowable benefit to $100 per month in January 2002. The AO is
requesting $265,000 to increase the subsidy to the currently authorized
amount of $100 per month.
The already limited parking available in and around the Thurgood
Marshall Federal Judiciary Building has been further reduced by the
loss of parking spaces at Union Station due to security considerations.
Compounding the situation is the elimination of nearby parking as a
result of the construction of Station Place, which has necessitated
employees of the AO to seek parking in remote locations that are
unsafe. This, coupled with the continuing increase in traffic
congestion in the Washington, D.C. area, has increased AO employee
interest in the transit subsidy program. The requested program increase
of $265,000 will allow us to increase the benefit for AO employees to
the authorized level of $100 per month and cover the cost of an
anticipated increase in the participation rate to 70 percent.
responsibilities and accomplishments
As I mentioned earlier, the Administrative Office has key
responsibility for judicial administration, program management, and
oversight. It supports the Judicial Conference and its 24 committees in
determining judiciary policies, and develops new methods, systems, and
programs for conducting the business of the federal courts. The AO also
assists the courts in implementing better management practices,
developing and supporting innovative technologies that enhance the
operations of the courts, and collecting and analyzing statistics on
the business of the federal courts for planning and determining
resource needs.
It assists the courts in program management, addressing areas such
as case management, jury administration, defender services, court
interpreting services, and court reporting. One of our major areas of
support is of the probation and pretrial services program for which we
are seeking additional oversight positions. In fiscal year 2002,
probation and pretrial services offices supervised a record number of
offenders and defendants (143,672) living in our communities on
pretrial release, probation, parole, or supervised release. The AO
staff provided policy guidance and program support to a system that
encompasses 94 districts in 500 locations. The staff develop and
administer national contracts for drug testing and electronic
monitoring and help support 500 local purchase orders for substance
abuse and mental health treatment. The AO also provides financial
management services to the judiciary including budget formulation,
execution, and accounting; and personnel and payroll support for 32,000
judiciary employees. It supports the facilities and security needs of
over 800 facilities housing judiciary operations, and conducts
training, audits, and reviews to ensure the continued quality and
integrity of federal court operations.
In addition, the AO provides necessary support services to other
entities including the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation and
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
Throughout 2002, the AO excelled in its day-to-day
responsibilities. Let me take a moment to highlight just a few of these
areas.
Financial Stewardship
Working with the courts to ensure the efficient and effective use
of resources is a key AO function. It is imperative that we do all in
our power to ensure that the monies appropriated to the judiciary are
utilized prudently; assets and resources are protected from loss,
waste, or abuse; operations are efficient and effective; financial
reports are timely, accurate, and reliable; and business practices
comply with applicable laws and regulations. In 2001, a Management
Oversight and Stewardship Handbook was published and training on
management oversight was provided to chief district judges and chief
bankruptcy judges. In 2002, a companion program was launched for court
executives. The AO has held two of six planned workshops of the new
training program, Management in the Judiciary: The Rules, Tools and
Tips of Good Stewardship. To date, 110 court executives have received
training. The remaining 332 will receive training in fiscal years 2003
and 2004.
Strengthened Internal Controls
Good internal controls are systematic safeguards that ensure
objectives are achieved and assets are protected. With the
participation of court managers, AO staff is developing a model
internal controls handbook to assist court leaders in managing their
courts. The handbook will identify the minimum procedural checks and
balances that should be in place for finance, travel, procurement and
contracting, property, human resources, information technology,
records, and statistical reporting.
Information Technology
Another key responsibility of the AO is developing, implementing,
and supporting new automated systems and technologies for the courts.
One of our largest automation initiatives in recent years is the Case
Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) project, which permits courts
to receive documents over the Internet and maintain electronic case
filings. We began national roll-out of CM/ECF in 2001. By March 2003,
about 130 district and bankruptcy courts had begun or completed
implementing the new systems and national implementation in all courts
should be completed in 2005. More than 27,000 attorneys have already
filed documents electronically and more than 6 million cases involving
more than 15 million documents are in the electronic files systems. In
fact, several recent mega-bankruptcies were filed electronically,
enhancing both public access and case management. In 2002, the total
number of Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) accounts
topped 200,000. These systems will save considerable court resources
while also significantly improving public access to federal court
records.
Many systems have also been developed through the energy and
creativity of AO-court partnerships. Probation and pretrial services
officers who, as I noted earlier, supervise well over 100,000 persons,
have started using the Probation and Pretrial Services Automated Case
Tracking System-Electronic Case Management (PACTS-ECM), which in 2002
went live in 17 districts. It is a comprehensive system designed to
help probation and pretrial services officers by making offender case
information more easily accessible. The system electronically
generates, stores, and retrieves investigation and supervision case
information, and provides digital images of offenders. It also has
remote capabilities to allow officer access while in the field. The
PACTS-ECM system is an invaluable resource as the number of offenders
released from Federal prison who are serving terms of supervised
release continues to escalate.
conclusion
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee, I do not believe that
any one agency in the executive branch or the legislative branch offers
the broad range of services and functions that the AO provides to the
federal courts. However, in the interest of time and the particular
focus of this hearing, I have tried to limit my testimony to our fiscal
year 2004 budget request and the role of the AO in enhancing judicial
security and ensuring the safe and uninterrupted delivery of justice.
We take our responsibilities and service to the courts seriously and
are always looking for ways to improve. I ask your support in
accomplishing this by granting the increase the AO is seeking for
fiscal year 2004. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Honorable John G. Heyburn II, Chairman,
Committee on the Budget, Judicial Conference of the United States
introduction
Chairman Gregg, Senator Hollings, Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for giving me the opportunity to present the judiciary's
fiscal year 2004 budget request.
Before addressing our fiscal year 2004 request, on behalf of the
entire judiciary, I want to express our appreciation for the funding
levels provided to the judiciary for fiscal year 2003. We understand
the difficult decisions and concerns that you faced, and will continue
to face, balancing the needs of the newly-established Department of
Homeland Security, the ongoing war against terrorism, the war in Iraq,
and the funding needs of numerous domestic entities, while trying to
hold down spending. Although we did not get all the funding we
requested, we are very grateful that you and your dedicated staff
worked with us to fund the judiciary's most pressing needs.
budget overview
The budget request the judiciary has submitted for fiscal year 2004
is that which is necessary to maintain our current staff and operations
and to allow the courts to handle growing workload and other critical
needs. The appropriations request is 10.8 percent over the available
appropriations for fiscal year 2003. We realize that this request is
higher than the 3.8 percent increase requested for discretionary
spending, with the exception of homeland security, in the President's
Budget. Although we are mindful of the need for fiscal restraint, now
more than ever a strong judiciary is critical to the protection of our
citizens. Threats to homeland security potentially involve civil or
criminal actions that will require court orders and adjudication in
this nation's courts.
For all judiciary accounts, we are requesting a $530 million
increase in appropriations over the enacted appropriations for fiscal
year 2003. Nearly two-thirds of this requested increase ($338 million)
is required to maintain current operations with pay and benefit
adjustments, inflationary adjustments, increases in GSA space rental
costs, an increase in filled Article III judgeships, and continued
security measures. The remainder ($192 million) is primarily to provide
for the programmatic and workload-related needs such as high-profile
terrorist trials, the unprecedented numbers of bankruptcy filings, and
significant increases in the probation and pretrial services workload
as criminal filings continue to rise and as the number of offenders
released from prisons into our communities with a need for drug and
mental health treatment steadily increases. A detailed explanation of
our fiscal year 2004 request is included as an appendix.
protection of freedom
In these uncertain times, with our nation's safety and freedom
threatened as it has never been before, our three branches of
government must work together to protect the safety of our citizens and
our heritage of freedom. A strong, independent federal judiciary,
providing equal justice to all, is at the heart of what this nation
stands for. As Chief Justice Rehnquist noted in his 2002 year-end
report on the federal judiciary, there is a fundamental interdependence
of our three separate branches of government when it comes to funding
our nation's priorities, and we look to the Legislative and Executive
Branches for support, funding and staffing.
workload increases
The workload asked of the judiciary is truly uncontrollable,
whether it is processing criminal, civil, or bankruptcy cases; or
providing jury services, supervision and treatment of defendants and
released felons, or representation to those financially unable to
obtain private counsel. The judiciary has no major program which can be
cut or deferred, only the people who provide those services, the
systems that support them, and the facilities that house them.
Therefore, when funding is reduced, the only place the reduction can be
taken is in the staff and the supporting systems that perform those
essential services.
While we are not at a point where I would use the term crisis, I am
very concerned about certain workload indicators that I believe are
heading in the wrong direction, likely as a result of resource
shortfalls.
Pending criminal and bankruptcy cases have grown by 38 percent and
17 percent respectively between 1998 and 2002. This means that the
number of cases terminated is less than the number of new cases filed.
The number of judges and court staff has not kept pace with the growth
in caseload, and a disturbing argument could be made that this lack of
judicial resources has resulted in a growth in backlogs.
I am also concerned about our law enforcement function, probation
and pretrial services. The caseload in these offices has grown by
approximately 16 percent between 1998 and 2002. That in itself is
significant, but in addition, the nature of their work has also
changed. Officers are supervising more hardened offenders as evidenced
by their more extensive criminal histories and the 67 percent increase
in the average prison sentence. Furthermore, over this same time period
the number of offenders with mental health conditions has grown by 81
percent, and the number with substance abuse problems has grown by 48
percent. While the number of officers has kept pace with the growth in
the overall number of cases during this period, there has been no
increase associated with the increased risk presented by these cases.
Within the same relative level of staffing, our probation and pretrial
services officers must devote a higher level of supervision to the more
hardened criminals and those with drug abuse and mental health issues,
which means they must devote less time to their other cases. On the one
hand, I applaud them for prioritizing limited resources to the more
complex cases, but on the other hand, I am concerned that the level of
supervision of their other cases could pose a higher risk to the
community in the long run.
The courts experienced record workload increases in fiscal year
2002. Bankruptcy filings grew 8 percent, civil filings in the U.S.
district courts climbed 10 percent, criminal cases rose 7 percent, and
the number of persons under probation supervision and supervised
release as well as the defendants in the pretrial services systems each
increased by 4 percent.
As we look to what the future will bring, we note that in
Conference report on the fiscal year 2003 appropriations, additional
funds were provided to the U.S. Attorneys ``to aggressively prosecute
cases of corporate fraud'' and the funding provided to the FBI included
increases to combat violent crime and white collar crime. And, the
Bureau of Prisons inmate population has reached an all-time high of
165,000. Approximately 80 percent of these prisoners will be released
to the community and will be under the supervision of probation
officers at the completion of their sentences.
These are just a few of the indicators that point to continued
increases in workload for the federal judiciary. In fiscal year 2003,
because of limited funding, we will be unable to provide for the full
complement of staffing required to meet the workload requirements. I
urge the Subcommittee, as you determine your funding priorities in this
constrained environment, to consider providing the federal courts with
the resources required to perform the very important functions assigned
to them by the Constitution and the Congress. Without the funding
increases needed to address growing workload, I believe the judicial
system, and those who depend on it to resolve disputes, will begin to
suffer.
judicial pay
The need to increase judicial pay continues to be one of the most
pressing issues facing the judiciary. Federal judicial salaries have
lost 23.5 percent of their purchasing power since 1969, while during
this same time period private sector wages have increased by 17.5
percent. More than 70 Article III judges, all of whom have life-time
appointments, left the bench between 1990 and February 28, 2003--either
under the retirement statute if eligible or simply resigning--as did a
number of bankruptcy and magistrate judges. Another judge resigned at
the end of February, and two more judges have announced their intention
to retire from federal bench later this year. During the 1960s only a
handful of Article III judges retired or resigned. Many judges no
longer take senior status and we are losing their valuable
contributions as they seek private sector employment and compensation.
A study of 1999 data indicated that senior judges participated in 15
percent of appeals and presided over nearly 20 percent of trials.
Recently, the report of the National Commission on the Public
Service, also called the Volcker Commission, supported the need to
address this issue. In its final report, the Commission said, ``The lag
in judicial salaries has gone on too long, and the potential for
diminished quality in American jurisprudence is now too large. Too many
of America's best lawyers have declined judicial appointments.'' The
salary differential when compared with the legal education profession
has become quite dramatic. In 1969, the salaries of district court
judges had just been raised to $40,000 while the salary of the dean of
Harvard Law School was $33,000 and that of an average senior professor
at the school was $28,000. That relationship has now been erased. The
salaries of professors and deans at the twenty-five law schools ranked
highest in the annual U.S. News and World Report survey found that the
average salary for deans of those schools was $301,639. The average
base salary for full professors at those law schools was $209,571, with
summer research and teaching supplements typically ranging between
$33,000 and $80,000. This compares with a district court judge's salary
of $154,700. The Volcker Commission's report stated, ``Judicial
salaries are the most egregious example of the failure of federal
compensation policies. . . . Unless this is revised soon, the American
people will pay a high price for the low salaries we impose on the men
and women in whom we invest responsibility for the dispensation of
justice''. The Commission expressed similar concerns about the
inadequacy of congressional and executive salaries and recommended,
``Congress should grant an immediate and significant increase in
judicial, executive, and legislative salaries to ensure a reasonable
relationship to other professional opportunities.''
I know that to address this issue requires a broad Congressional
consensus. Nevertheless, this Committee can take a small, but vital
step in the right direction by including the funding for the annual ECI
adjustment for judges in this bill.
new judgeships
Despite the substantial increase in workload, there has not been a
major judgeship bill creating additional Article III judges since 1990
or a bankruptcy judgeship bill since 1992. We are grateful for nine
district judgeships added in the fiscal year 2000 appropriation, the
ten additional district judgeships added in the fiscal year 2001
appropriation, and the 15 additional permanent and temporary district
judgeships Congress authorized in November 2002 as part of the
Department of Justice authorization act. However, the need for
additional appellate, district and bankruptcy judges is critical. For
example, in 1992, when the last bankruptcy judgeships were created,
each bankruptcy judge handled an average of 2,998 cases; each now
handles an average of 4,777 cases. Likewise, appellate and district
judges are handling more cases. We hope that you will support and
provide funding for the Judicial Conference requests to create 57
additional Article III judgeships and 36 bankruptcy judgeships.
court support staff
The court support staff are the backbone of court operations. From
intake to disposition, it is the clerk's staff, along with the pretrial
services and probation officers who keep the wheels of justice running
smoothly. In order to ensure that resources are distributed as required
by workload, the judiciary has developed scientifically-derived
staffing formulas to construct the budget request and to allocate funds
to the clerks' offices and to the probation and pretrial services
offices. As filings and other workload factors fluctuate from year to
year, the application of the formulas to the individual court units
provides a corresponding increase or decrease in funding. This ensures
the equitable allocation of resources to meet workload requirements.
For the duration of the Continuing Resolutions this year, the
clerks' offices and probation and pretrial services offices were held
to a spending level significantly below the fiscal year 2002
allotments, which put a major strain on the staffs. Most offices were
unable to fill critical vacancies, and were anticipating the
possibility of RIFs and furloughs. We are grateful for the fiscal year
2003 appropriation, which will allow the courts the funding necessary
to maintain a current services level of operations for the remainder of
the year. However, it will not allow us to fully fund the formulas that
provide for the staff necessary to keep pace with steadily growing
workload. The gap between required staff levels and funded staff levels
continues to grow.
probation and pretrial services
Federal probation and pretrial services officers protect the public
through the investigation and supervision of defendants and released
offenders within the federal criminal justice system. Pretrial services
officers investigate the backgrounds of defendants charged with a
federal crime, recommend in a report to the court whether to release or
detain a defendant, and supervise those who are released to the
community while they await their day in court. The probation officer
enters the scene upon a finding of guilt, investigating the offender to
provide the court with a presentence report, and supervising all
offenders conditionally released to the community. As an example of the
dedication of these officers and the difference they make in our
communities I would like to tell you a success story that took place in
the Eastern District of Virginia.
``JB'' began his three-year term of supervised release after
serving time at the Federal Correctional Institution in Butner, North
Carolina on a conviction for making bomb threats. He had a long-
standing history of mental health problems characterized by anger,
suspicion, paranoia, and aggressiveness. The FBI, the local police
department, and JB's former employer--the target of JB's bomb threats--
were extremely anxious about JB's release because of his unstable
mental condition.
Supervision in this case became difficult even before release. JB's
request to relocate to his hometown in the Middle District of North
Carolina was turned down because he had sent numerous threatening
letters to his parents. With no acceptable release plan, he was to be
released to Richmond--where he had no ties and where his former
workplace was located.
A senior Probation Officer (PO) in Virginia Eastern initiated
contact with JB before he was released. She established and maintained
contacts with local law enforcement, corporate security for the victim,
and the probation office in the Middle District of North Carolina. She
found JB temporary housing and placed him in treatment. She also began
a close collaboration with the Richmond Behavioral and Health
Authority, where JB was to participate in a program for homeless people
in need of mental health treatment. This community resource provided
the medication and treatment necessary to stabilize JB's mental
condition and helped him with housing and job placement.
The PO met with JB within 30 minutes of his release from custody.
She conducted a thorough initial interview and gave him clear, detailed
instructions as to what he was to do next. After that first contact,
the PO closely monitored JB, speaking with him by telephone daily, when
necessary. With each change of residence or job, the PO made a prompt
on-site inspection and added new landlords and employers to her list of
collateral contacts.
Because the PO monitored JB's case very closely, she was able to
identify potential danger signals and intervene quickly before a crisis
arose, and to clarify what she expected of JB in each change of
circumstance. She reinforced her expectations of him by using a blend
of explanations, warnings, and incentives. For example, when JB took up
photography as a hobby, the PO first set clear limits for this
potentially intrusive activity. She then both monitored JB's work and
complimented his growing skill. The PO also helped JB deal with the
requirements of managing an independent life--serving as case manager
and service broker with mental health counselors, employers, landlords,
Social Security Administration officials, and family members. She
encouraged JB in his successes and consoled him in his disappointments,
while--within the bounds of confidentiality--also keeping her law
enforcement and corporate security contacts informed of his activities
and progress.
As a result of these efforts, JB got a job at a local YMCA, where
he became a productive, well-liked employee and served as their
unofficial photographer. He became stabilized on medication and began
receiving monthly social security disability benefits. JB occasionally
visited his hometown, under the supervision of the North Carolina
Middle probation office, and his relationship with his family improved
so much that the district accepted him for courtesy supervision.
When JB ended his term of supervised release, he was stable, back
in his hometown with his family, equipped with a new skill, and able to
support himself. The PO and the collateral network she developed
provided the structure, control, treatment, and support necessary for
JB to succeed and for the public to remain safe. Her efforts laid the
foundation for JB's continued success in the future.
Helping past offenders avoid becoming repeat offenders, while
protecting the community, is the primary goal of supervision. With
insufficient staffing resources and limited funds for programs that
help offenders become productive members of our communities, we
increase the risk to those communities.
Persons under supervision have increased by 16 percent since 1998.
More growth is expected for fiscal years 2003 and 2004. Further, the
level of danger posed by many of those under supervision and their
attendant drug and mental health problems has soared.
defender services
Defender Services is also affected by the increase in criminal
cases and the number of terrorist trials. In addition to the projected
growth in representations in fiscal year 2004, the current projections
for fiscal year 2003 exceed the funding provided. This means that some
panel attorney payments likely will have to be deferred into fiscal
year 2004, further raising the requirements for that year.
We are grateful for the panel attorney rate increase to $90 per
hour provided in fiscal year 2002. This was the first significant raise
in private panel attorney hourly rates in most judicial districts since
1986, and it was badly needed. The judiciary is collecting information
in response to the Committee's questions about the extent to which the
new rate has solved problems in obtaining adequate counsel for Criminal
Justice Act (CJA) representation. However, even in a district where the
$90 rate may now allow a court to obtain qualified counsel to accept
CJA appointments, lawyers are accepting the cases at a significant
financial sacrifice which ultimately will not bode well for the
criminal justice system.
To ensure that the panel rates do not further decline, in real
terms, below the rates envisioned by the CJA, the Judicial Conference
again has requested that the Congress raise the rate to $113 per hour.
Even at $113 per hour, CJA counsel, who provide representation
guaranteed by our Constitution, would be underpaid compared to rates
paid by many federal agencies to private lawyers. In a survey of hourly
rates paid to private counsel by government agencies conducted in 2001,
the General Accounting Office found that the average hourly fees paid
to private counsel ranged from $125 to $357, depending on the agency
and the type of legal services. In addition, the average hourly billing
rate charged by privately retained counsel, according to The 2002 Small
Law Firm Economic Survey (Altman Weil, Inc.), is approximately $190 for
sole practitioners and partners in small law firms. The judiciary and
panel attorneys understand that CJA hourly rates were not intended to
match those that lawyers charge their private clients. It is the
judiciary's view that panel attorneys' compensation should cover
reasonable overhead and a fair hourly fee, which warrants raising the
CJA rate to $113.
In deciding to continue to seek a nationwide $113 hourly rate for
fiscal year 2004, the judiciary considered the possibility of proposing
geographic-based rates. In addition to the reasons supporting a $113
rate, the judiciary took note of several factors regarding geographic-
based rates, including that the cost of living in an area is not the
only factor in a court's ability to recruit and retain qualified
attorneys to accept CJA appointments. For example, in a low-cost rural
area where there is a minimal retained federal criminal practice and a
limited pool of lawyers with federal criminal defense experience, a
higher rate may be needed in order to provide sufficient incentive for
attorneys to invest the time required to develop the necessary
expertise and to then be willing to take on a substantial portion of
the CJA caseload. The judiciary will continue to examine options, such
as geographic-based rates, in developing its future funding requests.
We are also requesting, for the first time, an increase in the
maximum hourly rate to $157 for panel attorney compensation in capital
cases. The $157 hourly rate represents the $125 rate adjusted for the
cumulative cost-of-living adjustments provided for in the Antiterrorism
and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. Counsel accepting appointments
to capital cases typically are sole practitioners or are from small,
independent firms, which do not have other attorneys willing or able to
subsidize the cost of the CJA work. The amount of time that the
attorneys need to devote to these capital cases is so extensive that it
is generally impossible for the attorneys to handle other cases
concurrently. The current maximum capital hourly rate of $125 is
significantly below the market rates charged by lawyers for providing
representation in comparable high-stakes, complex, and time-consuming
cases. An increase would be the first in the maximum rate for capital
cases since it was set statutorily in 1996. The cost of this increase
is only $2.9 million. We urge you to consider it.
court security
We appreciate your continued support of our Court Security program
and understand your concerns regarding budget administration and
oversight of the program. This is a unique account--appropriated to the
judiciary but primarily managed by the Department of Justice. The
safety of the public, litigants, attorneys, jurors, judges, court staff
and others in the judicial process is of primary concern to us, and we
are fully committed to working with the USMS to make sure that the
program is successful and that the resources you provide are managed in
the most efficient and effective manner. You have directed the USMS to
conduct a study on the management of this program, and we respectfully
ask that the judiciary be involved actively in this study since the
mission of the program is so important to us.
In these troubled times when courthouses are such visible targets
for terrorists, our Court Security program is more critical than ever.
Court Security Officers (CSO) and security systems are key aspects in
providing physical security to the courts. Statistical data provided by
the USMS indicates that our security process detected 641,489 weapons
such as guns, knives, and other items prohibited in courthouses in
fiscal year 2002. The USMS also reported the detention or arrest of 16
persons related to security breaches in courthouses during the year. I
will share with you a few stories illustrating the vigilance and
professionalism of our CSOs.
In October of 2002, in the district of Colorado, a CSO intercepted
an individual attempting to gain entrance into the courthouse with a
.380 caliber automatic handgun concealed in a leather carrying case.
The individual was also in possession of a loaded magazine. The
individual was taken into custody.
In December of 2001 in the Federal Courthouse and Post Office in El
Dorado, Arkansas, two CSOs noticed a man in the Post Office lobby with
a gun and badge. Although it is a reasonably large city, one of the
CSOs recognized this man as an individual who some years before had
been in court for a civil charge and was considered to have mental
health problems. The two CSOs approached him and had to fight him to
the floor. The individual had a fake badge and a real gun. He was
apprehended, charged and found guilty of several charges including
carrying a weapon into a federal building.
In February of 2002, an individual used a hammer to shatter the
glass in the front entrance door of the U.S. Federal Building at
Beckley, West Virginia. Two CSOs quickly subdued this individual and
restrained him until he was taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals
Service.
During a court session in the Southern District of Ohio a prisoner
attempted escape. The prisoner was able to get out of the courtroom and
almost out the front door, but two CSOs tackled and apprehended him at
the front entrance.
We appreciate your increased support and funding for this program.
While we recognize the practical reasons for transferring the 106
supervisory deputy marshal positions, approved by Congress in the
fiscal year 2002 supplemental appropriation, to the USMS in fiscal year
2003, these positions are a linchpin to effective security of our
courthouses, and we look for your support to ensure that they will
continue to be dedicated to courthouse security, and to our
participation in the study on the management of the Court Security
program.
cafeteria-style employees benefits program
For the past several years, the judiciary has been a leader in
offering enhanced benefits to employees. Long-term care was introduced
in 1999, followed by the existing flexible benefits plan, introduced in
fiscal year 2000, which offers pre-tax benefits such as flexible
spending accounts for health care, dependent care, payment of health
insurance premiums, and commuter reimbursement. The judiciary was able
to implement these benefits within the existing statutory framework and
without requiring additional funds. We would like to do more for our
employees to stay competitive in an era when skilled workers change
jobs frequently. This is especially important to the judiciary as the
work force of tempered professionals reaches retirement age and we are
looking to maintain a qualified, stable work force. We cannot continue
to be competitive in the employment market with substandard benefits,
and so we are seeking legislation and funding to establish a cafeteria-
style benefits program that would be funded in part by a modest per-
employee contribution by the judiciary. The combined employee and
employer contributions could eventually be used to purchase benefits
from a menu of choices such as dental insurance, vision insurance,
leave conversion, expanded commuter subsidies, short-term and long-term
disability, and prescription drug insurance and mental health insurance
to plug gaps in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) programs.
Benefit programs like these are common in state governments, the
private sector, and other federal agencies such as the Federal Reserve,
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Comptroller of the Currency and
the Postal Service--entities with which we compete for professional
staff.
Although the House passed the Federal Courts Improvement Bill with
the needed authorization allowing us to use appropriated funds and/or
fees to help defray the cost of providing these supplemental benefits,
the Senate failed to act on the measure during the 107th Congress.
However, in anticipation of the enactment of legislation in fiscal year
2003 allowing flexible cafeteria-style benefits to be offered in the
judiciary, we are including a request for $15.9 million, hoping to
begin implementing the program in fiscal year 2004.
contributions of the administrative office
The Administrative Office of the United States Courts serves as the
central support agency for the federal courts, with key responsibility
for judicial administration, policy implementation, program management,
and oversight. The Administrative Office (AO) not only performs
important administrative functions such as personnel, payroll,
procurement, space management and planning, and accounting, but also
provides a broad range of legal, financial, management, program, and
information technology services to the courts. The AO's staff has been
essentially frozen for ten years, while its work has expanded to
support the courts.
In the wake of the tragic events of September 11 and the anthrax
mail situation, the AO has been working to provide additional guidance
on security and emergency preparedness to the courts. The Director
established a permanent Judiciary Emergency Preparedness Office to
focus on crisis response, occupant emergency planning, and continuity
of operations planning. Following the anthrax mail contamination
crisis, the AO provided advice and contract support to test for anthrax
and address mail handling concerns at courts across the nation. To
avoid future contaminated mailings, the AO began using e-mail
broadcasts, facsimile transmissions, and more extensive posting to our
intranet site, the J-Net, to deliver information to the courts.
With the help of an independent consultant, prototype Continuity of
Operation Plan (COOP) templates and instructional materials have been
developed for each court type based on the actual COOP plans for the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the District and
Bankruptcy Courts for the Southern District of New York. Templates and
checklists about emergency preparedness have been made available on the
Emergency Preparedness Office's J-Net website.
The Director created a project team to assess the feasibility of
establishing a Court Operation Support Center (COSC) outside downtown
Washington, DC to address the vulnerability of key administrative and
technical support to the courts. The primary objective of an off-site
COSC is to ensure that support to the courts would continue
uninterrupted in the event the Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary
Building is rendered inaccessible. We intend to provide telework
opportunities for judiciary employees at this facility as well. We are
grateful for your endorsement of the COSC in the conference report on
the fiscal year 2003 appropriations.
As courts are facing more highly publicized and security-sensitive
criminal proceedings, the AO has been providing support and advice to
the courts on a wide range of issues from heightened security concerns
to information technology, and furnishing closed-circuit broadcasts of
the proceedings to victims' families.
Working with the courts to ensure the efficient and effective use
of resources is a key AO function. In fiscal year 2001, a Management
Oversight and Stewardship Handbook was published and training on
management oversight was provided to chief district judges and chief
bankruptcy judges. In 2002, a companion program was launched for court
executives. The AO has held two of the six planned workshops of the new
training program, Management in the Judiciary: The Rules, Tools and
Tips of Good Stewardship.
The fiscal year 2004 budget request for the AO is $70,584,000,
representing an increase of $7,497,000, or 11.9 percent above the
fiscal year 2003 available appropriation. More than three-fourths of
the requested increase is necessary to support adjustments to base,
mainly standard pay and general inflationary increases, as well as
funding to replace a lower level of fee carryover with appropriated
funds. Of the remaining $1,655,000 increase, $958,000 is requested to
provide nine additional FTE for program and security oversight. The
staffing level in the AO has remained essentially the same over the
last ten years, while court staffing has grown by 15 percent during the
same time period.
I urge the Committee to fund fully the AO's budget request. The
increase in funding will ensure that the AO continues to provide
program leadership and administrative support to the courts, and to
lead the efforts for them to operate efficiently.
contributions of the federal judicial center
The Federal Judicial Center is seeking a modest 8.3 percent
increase over its current appropriation. The Center is the federal
judiciary's education and research arm. Its support is vital to the
work of federal judges and the personnel of the courts.
Judge Smith will return to California later this year to resume her
duties as a U.S. district judge. All of us in the judiciary are
grateful to her and to the Center for its contributions under her four
years of leadership.
With Judge Smith, I thank you for last year's increase for the
Center, including the confirmation that the funds transferred in 2002
are part of its base budget and available to support some of the
distance education positions that it has requested for several years.
A main element of the increase that the Center seeks in 2004 would
restore its basic judicial education programs to a twelve-month cycle,
rather than the current eighteen-month cycle. Having to go a year and a
half between continuing education programs has been a matter of great
concern to judges over the country. These programs provide updates on
caselaw trends, on innovations in managing cases, and on such
specialized topics as admissibility of scientific evidence.
Furthermore, we can share notes with colleagues from other courts as
well as with the excellent faculty that the Center assembles.
I want also to recognize the importance of the Center's research,
primarily for committees of the Judicial Conference, as detailed in
Judge Smith's statement, and the Center's education to enhance
management skills in the federal courts. I participated last fall in a
Center program for new chief judges and unit executives, and it has
helped me immensely. Center programs also provide a forum to stress the
importance of economy in administration, which I did earlier this week
when speaking at a Center conference for the clerks and chief deputies
of the courts of appeals and the clerks of the bankruptcy appellate
panels. Last October I provided similar guidance on fiscal realities
and responsibility when making a presentation at a Center workshop for
the clerks and chief deputies of our federal district courts.
Center programs for our clerk's offices and our probation, and
pretrial services offices, almost all of it by satellite and on the
Web, has never been more important for court executives who must deal
with employee unease and insecurity in these troubled times. Its
importance highlights the need for the educational technology positions
the Center requests.
I believe the Center's request deserves the committee's support and
urge favorable action on the full amount.
conclusion
Chairman Gregg and Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my
statement. I look forward to working with you as you work to develop
the fiscal year 2004 appropriation bill for the Judiciary.
Appendix
summary
The fiscal year 2004 appropriation request for the Courts of
Appeals, District Courts and Other Judicial Services totals
$5,175,878,000, an increase of $540,200,000, or 11.7 percent, over the
fiscal year 2003 available appropriations. In addition to appropriated
funds, the judiciary utilizes other funding sources to supplement our
appropriations including fee collections, carry forward of fee balances
from a prior year, and the use of no-year funds. When all sources of
funds are considered, the increase in obligations for fiscal year 2004
is only $429,435,000 or 8.5 percent.
Of the $540,200,000 increase in appropriations, 66 percent
($357,481,000) is adjustments to the fiscal year 2003 base associated
with standard pay and other inflationary increases as well as other
adjustments that will allow the courts to maintain current services in
fiscal year 2004. The remaining 34 percent ($182,719,000) is needed to
respond to increased requirements for magistrate judges, federal
defender offices, security, drug and mental health treatment, and to
fund additional court staff required to process growing workload. The
request for the principal programs are summarized below.
Salaries and Expenses
The salaries and expenses of circuit, district, and bankruptcy
courts and probation and pretrial services offices account for most of
our request. A total of $4,467,930,000 in obligations is required for
this account, including funding for the Vaccine Injury program, in
fiscal year 2004. Funding totaling $276,285,000 is expected to be
available from other sources including fee collections and carryforward
balances to fund S&E requirements. This leaves an appropriation need of
$4,191,645,000, which is $411,864,000 above the fiscal year 2003
available appropriation.
Of the $411,864,000 increase, 61 percent ($249,697,000) is needed
to fund adjustments to the fiscal year 2003 base including: pay and
benefit increases for judges ($12,563,000); increases in the number of
filled Article III judges, senior judges, magistrates judges
adjustments, and the filling of vacant Special Masters to handle
vaccine injury cases ($13,725,000); pay and benefit increases for court
support and probation and pretrial services staff ($95,327,000);
increases necessary to maintain fiscal year 2003 staffing levels and
automation support because of a reduction in non-appropriated funding
($30,571,000); increases for space rental and associated costs
($60,084,000); inflationary increases for operating costs
($12,339,000); increases to support existing and newly installed
automated systems and to continue development of new information
technology systems ($17,934,000); and increases for maintenance of
telecommunications systems and systems for new space coming on-line
($7,154,000).
The remaining 39 percent ($162,167,000) will fund 10 additional
magistrate judges and their staff to help Article III judges handle the
growing volume of civil and criminal cases facing the courts
($4,119,000); 807 court support FTEs to address the shortfall in the
level of staffing and operating costs funded in fiscal year 2003
($97,025,000); 427 court support FTEs for a net increase in workload in
fiscal year 2004 ($28,200,000); a cafeteria-style flexible benefits
program for employees to reduce turnover and attract high quality new
hires ($15,886,000); increased mental health and substance abuse
treatment for projected growth in the number of offenders and
defendants under supervision requiring this treatment ($7,369,000);
annual recurring costs of the judiciary's off-site operations support
center ($3,495,000); additional funding for the installation of
courtroom audio systems during the construction of new courthouses
($4,384,000); and funding for background investigations for probation
and pretrial services officers and officer assistants, and for court
staff in sensitive positions ($1,689,000).
Defender Services
An appropriation of $635,481,000 is required for the Defender
Services program to provide representation for eligible criminal
defendants in fiscal year 2004. This is an increase of $100,520,000
above the available fiscal year 2003 appropriation.
Of this increase, 86 percent ($86,909,000) is needed for
adjustments to the fiscal year 2003 base for inflationary and workload
increases. Included in these adjustments are standard pay and inflation
increases for Federal Defender Organizations ($14,002,000); a cost-of-
living adjustment for panel attorneys ($1,247,000); other inflationary
increases ($2,149,000); increase in the projected number of
representations ($36,923,000); funding to maintain base caseload costs
($33,188,000); and a reduction in non-recurring costs (-$600,000).
The remaining increase of 14 percent ($13,611,000) will fund an
increase in the hourly panel attorney rate for non-capital cases, above
the inflationary adjustment, to $113 beginning on April 1, 2004
($10,378,000); an increase in the hourly panel attorney rate for
capital cases, beyond the inflationary increase requested, to $157
effective on April 1, 2004 ($2,633,000); and start-up costs of two new
federal defender offices expected to be opened in fiscal year 2004
($600,000). The Congress and the Judicial Conference have urged us to
establish more federal defender organizations as an alternative to
using panel attorneys in districts where this would be appropriate.
Fees of Jurors and Commissioners
For the Fees of Jurors program, an appropriation of $53,181,000 is
required, a decline of $1,100,000 from the fiscal year 2003 available
appropriation. This decline is the result of a decrease in the
projected number of juror days (-$1,447,000); and an increase for
inflation ($347,000).
Court Security
For the Court Security program, an appropriation of $295,571,000 is
required, which is an increase of $28,916,000 above the fiscal year
2003 available appropriation. Of this increase, 76 percent
($21,975,000) is for adjustments to base including: an increase for
standard pay, benefit and contractual services inflation ($13,237,000);
an increase to annualize the costs for 10 new court security officers
(CSOs) partially funded in fiscal year 2003 ($290,000); non-pay
inflationary increases ($303,000); an increase of 26 court security
officers for new or existing courthouse space ($980,000); and an
increase for the cyclical replacement of security systems and equipment
($7,165,000).
The remaining increase of 24 percent ($6,941,000) will fund
security systems and equipment for perimeter security, CSO radio
repeater installations, and systems in probation and pretrial services
offices ($6,072,000); CSO orientation training and contracting officer
training for staff who administer the CSO contract ($550,000); and four
additional FTE to administer the Court Security Program at the U.S.
Marshals Service to improve program oversight and administration
($319,000).
______
Prepared Statement of Gregory W. Carman, Chief Judge, United States
Court of International Trade
Chairman Gregg, Senator Hollings, and Members of the Subcommittee:
thank you once again for allowing me this opportunity to submit this
statement on behalf of the United States Court of International Trade,
which is a national trial-level federal court established under Article
III of the Constitution with exclusive nationwide jurisdiction over
civil actions pertaining to matters arising out of the administration
and enforcement of the customs and international trade laws of the
United States.
The Court's budget request for fiscal year 2004 is $14,206,000,
which is $519,000 or 3.8 percent over the fiscal year 2003 enacted
appropriation of $13,687,000 and an increase of $597,000 or 4.4 percent
over the level after the rescission imposed by Congress. This request
will enable the Court to maintain current services and provide for
standard pay and other inflationary adjustments to base. The Court's
budget request included a small program increase of $50,000 to upgrade
its security recording system to a digital system that will increase
the accuracy and reliability of its current system, while, at the same
time enhancing its internal and external surveillance capabilities. The
requested increase, however, was included in the recently enacted
Wartime Supplemental Appropriation Bill and will allow us to move
forward with this security upgrade during fiscal year 2003. The Court
continues, as it has done for the past nine years, to hold its
requested budget increases below 6 percent.
In response to several studies conducted by GSA and the U.S.
Marshals Service, and in the wake of September 11th, the Court, in
fiscal year 2002, requested and received funds for an architectural
analysis of the structure of the Courthouse in order to determine the
vulnerability of the facility in case of a bomb blast and/or a
terrorist attack. As a result of this analysis, the Court, using other
funds from its fiscal year 2002 appropriation, asked the contractor for
recommendations as to the feasibility of modifying the existing
building in a manner that would ensure the health, security and
effective operation of the Court. The contractor's final report was
completed at the beginning of fiscal year 2003. Specific
recommendations were made that would make the courthouse less
vulnerable and safer for the Judges, the employees and the public. The
Court is working closely with all relevant agencies to obtain
appropriate funding for the implementation of the needed modifications
to the building.
In accordance with its Long Range Plan, the Court continues to
upgrade its technology infrastructure and expand staff development
programs in the areas of technology and job related skills without
requesting additional funds. The Court is in the process of completing
the implementation of a customized version of the Federal Judiciary's
Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF.) System and the related
file tracking, scanning and indexing solutions. The upgrading of the
wiring of its data network and voice connections will be completed in
fiscal year 2003. This upgrade will greatly increase the Court's access
to the Judiciary's Data Communications Network (DCN), improve data
speeds and enable the Court to address its current and future
telecommunications needs. Additionally, the Court has installed its own
frame relay connections for direct access to the DCN and a separate
frame relay connection that enables the Court to host public access
systems, such as its Internet Website. In fiscal year 2003, the Court
will purchase a Virtual Private Network System (VPN) that will provide
high speed remote access to Court systems by the Judges and Court
employees working at remote locations. As in the past, the Court will
continue to use its Judiciary Information Technology Fund for the
cyclical replacement of aging desktop and server based hardware
systems.
In fiscal year 2004, the Court remains committed to ensuring that
the Court's technology infrastructure will continue to support its
short and long term needs, thereby permitting the Court to operate
efficiently and effectively. Among the projects to be supported by the
Court's budget request and the carryforward balance from its Judiciary
Information Technology Fund are: (1) supporting the Court's Case
Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/EC) System; (2) expanding,
improving and supporting the Court's remote access capability; (3)
supporting a windows-based financial management system; (4) improving
the Court's disaster recovery capabilities; (5) supporting new software
applications that not only enable Judges and Court staff to view
instructional videos at individual workstations, but integrates the
Federal Judiciary's Training Network with the Court's local area
network; (6) upgrading the Court's networked records management and
tracking system for all case records; and (7) upgrading and supporting
the online library automation system that enables the Judges and Court
staff to search electronically for books and resource materials in the
Court's Library collection.
Additionally, the fiscal year 2004 request will enable the Court to
continue its cyclical maintenance program of the Court's facilities,
including the replacement of certain furniture with ergonomic designs
that will minimize the risk of injury to Court personnel.
Lastly, the fiscal year 2004 request also includes funds for the
continued support and maintenance of security system upgrades
implemented by the Court in fiscal years 1999 through 2003.
The Court's continued commitment to fulfill its mission through the
use of technology will enable it to enhance the delivery of services to
the Court family, bar and public.
I would like to reaffirm that the Court will continue, as it has in
the past, to conserve its financial resources through sound and prudent
personnel and fiscal management practices. The Court's ``General
Statement and Information'' and ``Justification of Changes,'' which
provide more detailed descriptions of each line item adjustment, were
submitted previously. If the Committee requires any additional
information, we will be pleased to submit it.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Fern M. Smith, Director, Federal Judicial
Center
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee: I am pleased to submit
this statement in support of the Federal Judicial Center's request for
fiscal 2004 funds to help it improve the administration of justice.
This is the last request I will submit to you; this fall, having
completed my four-year commitment, I will return to the Northern
District of California, where I have been a U.S. district judge since
1988. It has been a pleasure to work with the subcommittee and its
staff.
The Center's statutory Board, which the Chief Justice chairs, has
selected U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein of Seattle as the
Center's ninth director. She will take up her duties in early
September.
This statement summarizes our 2004 request and provides a brief
accounting of major Center activities to promote improved judicial
administration in the United States and, to the degree our resources
permit it, to work with other public and private organizations to
provide help to the judiciaries in foreign countries that need our
assistance.
As to the Center's 2003 funding, especially in light of the fiscal
constraints you faced, I am grateful for the base funding and the
partial adjustments to that funding. Thank you as well for recognizing
as part of the base budget, the funds you transferred in 2002 for
distance education, which provide us some of the positions for distance
education that we have been requesting since 1998.
2004 request
The Center's Board unanimously approved the 2004 request for
$22,434,000, an 8.3 percent increase to provide adjustments to the 2003
base, modest program enhancements to allow a return to a twelve-month
cycle of education programs for federal judges, and five additional
distance education positions. Statement of Hon. Fern M. Smith,
Director, Federal Judicial Center, May 1, 2003
Judicial education and training programs ($500,000)
The funds for more timely education for federal judges are vital to
our task of keeping judges knowledgeable about the constant changes in
the law, science, and technology. Last year, in fact, the Board
prepared its own statement supporting this element of that year's
request, noting ``the Board does not burden Congress with direct
communications about the Center's appropriation, relying instead on the
Center director for that task. The special importance of restoring
these programs to an annual basis merits an exception to that
practice.''
Center educational programs last year reached almost 31,700
participants. Almost 80 percent participated in satellite broadcasts
and other forms of distance education.
For federal judges, the Center provides education in several forms,
including manuals, satellite broadcasts, and small seminars or
workshops to orient new judges to their responsibilities and to provide
experienced judges with assistance in specific areas, such as mediation
or intellectual property law.
Another fundamental element of our education for judges is
periodic, general continuing education programs for circuit judges,
district judges, magistrate judges, and bankruptcy judges. These
programs assist judges on a variety of subjects, including updating
them on new case law relevant to frequently litigated issues,
describing new techniques of case management, and reviewing the ethics
requirements that govern judges. Moreover, these programs allow judges
to learn from their colleagues as well as from the faculty we assemble
and to share innovations that have proven successful as well as those
that have not.
Until 1999, a judge could attend such a general program once a
year. In 1999, we shifted to an eighteen-month cycle as our
appropriation declined and because we thought that distance education
could compensate for longer intervals between programs.
That decision has provoked considerable negative commentary from
judges across the country. As the Center Board said last year, ``[o]f
all the comments we receive from other judges about the Center's work,
none is as frequent and widespread as the need to make these programs
available on an annual basis. The Center's general continuing education
programs are the core of its educational effort for judges. They are
essential to helping judges meet the challenges of rapid change,
increasing complexity, and growing numbers in the cases before them.''
Seeking this modest increase in funds for judicial education
seminars in no way signals the Center's retreat from distance
education. In most respects, distance education has been a great
success. Our travel budget, with this request, would still be about
$1,000,000 below our 1995 travel budget. We want to continue to
emphasize cost-effective, non-travel, asynchronous learning for the
employees of the courts and for judges to the degree it is effective.
At the same time, we recognize that some face-to-face educational
opportunities are essential, especially for those with responsibilities
like those of federal judges. Heavy caseloads and the isolation
inherent in performing judicial duties limit opportunities for judges
to meet in a detached atmosphere and discuss the nuances of changing
precedents and case-management techniques. These are not subjects or
procedures that lend themselves to learning solely by computer or video
screen.
Five additional positions (3 FTE) to enhance the Center's use of
distance education technologies ($311,000)
The Center has long relied on distance education technologies for
the bulk of the education it provides, including the Federal Judicial
Television Network, which the Center began operating in April 1998.
Since then, the Center has been requesting ten additional positions for
video, multimedia, and automation specialists to support distance
education and its necessary technologies. You provided for some of
these positions in 2002 by transferring $400,000 to the Center's
appropriation from the funds that Congress had earlier transferred to a
completed federal appellate courts study commission, and then including
those funds in our 2003 base. We appreciate that assistance, but the
need for the remaining positions has not diminished, and so I am
requesting again funds to provide for five additional distance
education-related positions.
The five additional positions we seek in 2004 will permit us to
bring on additional software engineers and computer-training
technologists to ensure the federal courts have readily available,
quality education without the need or expense of travel.
center services and activities
The following summary of current Center activities is an accounting
for our stewardship of the funds you provide.
Promoting security in the administration of justice
The Center's ``critical incident stress management'' training helps
courts develop teams to provide crisis intervention to their personnel
victimized by natural disasters, terrorist attacks, and work-related
trauma. Such teams assisted in the crisis response for the New York
federal courts following 9/11.
Center Federal Judicial Television Network series on security
include:
--crisis management training through Leading in Times of Crisis,
featuring court managers who have successfully confronted
crises in their own courts, and. Confronting Crises: The
Employee's Perspective, to help staff prepare for potential
security threats and crises
--a safety series to enable probation and pretrial services officers
to mentally rehearse appropriate reactions to security threats
in the office, in the field, and during home contacts with
offenders, defendants, and third parties.
Additionally, at the request of the Judicial Conference Committee
on Court Administration and Case Management, the Center is assessing
the Conference's Criminal Case Files Pilot Programs to learn, among
other things, about the possible harm or threats of harm that may
result from providing remote public electronic access to documents
filed in criminal cases.
Promoting the fair and efficient disposition of litigation
Helping judges dispose of cases fairly, quickly, and inexpensively
is a major theme of our initial orientation seminars for new judges. We
also provide judges an extensive array of manuals and sourcebooks about
case-management techniques, including recurring problems in criminal
trials, managing cases for resolution by alternatives to conventional
procedures, and effective use of courtroom technology.
Our research for committees of the Judicial Conference includes
analyses of class action litigation and a study of the incidence of
sealed settlements in district courts across the country, a subject of
national interest since the recent decision of the federal district
court in South Carolina not to permit the practice.
Judicial ethics
We work closely with the Judicial Conference Committee on the Codes
of Conduct to keep judges and their staffs fully informed of their
ethical obligations and to help them understand the often complex rules
designed to promote judicial impartiality. This year we published two
new guides, one for judges on their recusal obligations under the
judicial disqualification statute and one for judges' law clerks on the
restrictions that apply to them.
Helping courts help offenders
The Center is conducting two related studies of federal court
programs, prompted by increased national interest in offender re-entry
programs and recent legislation providing post-incarceration vocational
and remedial educational opportunities for certain releasees. One study
will produce empirical information about federal probation officers'
efforts to assist appropriate prisoners in preparing for reentry into
the community. The other will help the Eastern District of Missouri
evaluate its Offender Employment Program, which emphasizes the
educational and employment needs of the offender and provides
employment-related services coordinated by probation officers who are
trained employment specialists.
We are also assessing the substance abuse treatment and mental
health services needs of Native American offenders, in order to help
probation and pretrial services officers better meet the special needs
of this group.
Promoting public understanding of the judicial process
We recently released an interactive Web site, ``Inside the Federal
Courts,'' available at http://www.fjc.gov, that helps federal court
employees, as well as the media and citizens of this and other
countries, understand the federal court system's structure and
operation. This includes a section on Congress's role in improving the
federal courts. We also produced an eighteen-minute video, An
Introduction to the Patent System, that judges may use to help explain
patents and the patent process to jurors. Bar associations are making
copies available to lawyers and the public.
Assisting the judiciaries of foreign countries
Mr. Chairman, I would also like to give you a brief update of our
work to promote independent and effective dispute resolution in the
courts of foreign countries.
In the last twelve months, the Center has provided briefings about
the U.S. judicial system to 488 judges and legal officials from 66
countries, as well as a limited amount of more substantial assistance,
either by in-country technical assistance or seminars held here in the
United States. Neither our briefings nor our more extensive projects
for foreign judiciaries are funded from the Center's appropriation. We
provide this assistance at the request of either domestic agencies or
foreign institutions, which fund the travel, lodging, and subsistence.
Our activities this year included a small seminar on educational
techniques with our counterparts from Mexico and Canada, this a follow-
up to the Chief Justice's meeting with the President of the Supreme
Court of Mexico in September 2001. The Center also hosted a number of
judges, scholars, and government officials as part of its Visiting
Foreign Judicial Fellows Program. These included a labor judge from
Brazil, who researched the use of alternative dispute resolution at the
appellate level, and an official from the Ministry of Justice of
Azerbaijan, who studied judicial education. In October 2002, I, and
another representative from the Center, participated in a CEELI
Institute conference in Prague, Czech Republic, that brought together
representatives of judicial training centers from Russia, Eastern
Europe, and Central Asia to discuss strategies for delivering judicial
education. The Center continues to facilitate a variety of other
international exchanges, including a bimonthly digital video-conference
between judges from Ecuador and the United States and a recent panel
discussion on the judiciary for officials from Afghanistan.
The Center workplace
The Center's statute provides greater flexibility in personnel
matters than many federal agencies enjoy. We have used that flexibility
to adopt a broad payband system and to implement employee-recommended
policies that will further our ability to give the taxpayers their due
while providing employees flexible work schedules and workplace
options. We know that the latter often contributes to the former.
Well before 1990, we permitted flextime for all employees. Since
1994, we have allowed employees to choose a compressed work schedule.
All of our employees use flextime and more than half are on compressed
work schedules.
In 1997 we established a telecommuting policy applicable to all
Center employees, subject to managers' discretion. Although it is not
practical to do some Center jobs--such as video production--at home, 8
percent of Center employees telecommute regularly. We also make
telecommuting available to employees on a day-by-day basis, as the
needs present themselves, and last year, we accommodated more than 50
requests from a staff of fewer than 140. We intend to do even better in
this regard next year.
To encourage employee use of public transportation, we offer our
employees a transportation subsidy of $60 per month.
Our employees are also eligible to participate in a number of
supplemental benefits programs, such as pretax health insurance premium
payments, flexible spending accounts to fund health care, child care,
and commuter costs (beyond those covered by the subsidy noted above),
and a long-term care insurance program. We are grateful to the
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts for developing these
innovative policies.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to explain our
budgetary needs for the next fiscal year and to describe some of the
Center's work and its effect on the work of the courts.
I will be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
______
Prepared Statement of Diana E. Murphy, Chair, United States Sentencing
Commission
Chairman Gregg, Senator Hollings, Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to submit a statement in support of the
United States Sentencing Commission's appropriation request for fiscal
year 2004. The Commission was resurrected with the appointment of a
full complement of seven voting commissioners on November 15, 1999, and
I currently serve as Chair. In a relatively brief period, the
Commission has reestablished its policy making role in the federal
criminal justice system as envisioned by Congress under the Sentencing
Reform Act of 1984.
To date, the new commissioners have promulgated over fifty
amendments to the federal sentencing guidelines, and Congress has
without exception accepted all of the Commission's amendments. The
Commission has set aggressive annual agendas and achieved significant
results by creating new guidelines and modifying existing guidelines
covering offenses such as:
--nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons offenses,
--terrorism,
--sexual offenses against children,
--human trafficking and peonage,
--stalking,
--intellectual property infringement,
--identity theft,
--counterfeiting,
--economic crimes and money laundering,
--illegal firearm sales and possession,
--illegal reentry,
--ecstasy trafficking,
--methamphetamine and amphetamine manufacturing, and
--cultural heritage resources.
The Commission worked diligently to clear the significant backlog
of crime legislation created by previous vacancies on the Commission.
This amendment cycle, we expect to submit to Congress amendments to the
federal sentencing guidelines implementing new crime legislation and
addressing such difficult areas as:
--terrorism,
--corporate fraud,
--oxycodone offenses,
--cybersecurity,
--involuntary manslaughter,
--campaign finance violations, and
--offenses involving the use of body armor.
The Commission will be unable to respond to the emergencies
identified by Congress without the staff resources required. Sentencing
guidelines must be carefully crafted to meet policy needs and to fit
within our interlocking system. To accomplish what Congress expects,
the Commission must be able to maintain its ability to respond quickly
to emerging national priorities. The Commission is dedicated to
continuing its important role in addressing national priorities such as
terrorism and corporate crime, but our current resources limit our
ability to respond to new information, acquire sophisticated expertise,
and develop novel approaches.
For these reasons, the Commission requests an appropriation of
$13,200,000 for fiscal year 2004. This funding request for fiscal year
2004 represents a zero percent increase over the Commission's request
for fiscal year 2003.
resources requested
The Commission's appropriation request for fiscal year 2004 is
$13,200,000, the same amount requested for fiscal year 2003. We
understand increases are generally difficult to justify, particularly
this year, but we need to develop the necessary staff expertise in
areas of national importance such as terrorism and corporate crime.
Staff resources have become increasingly taxed at the same time as we
have received increased requests for sentencing information from the
Congress, the General Accounting Office, the federal Judiciary, the
media, and other interested parties. We now must analyze an increased
number of new case filings, develop ever more proposed guideline
amendments each year, and fulfill other statutory duties to train and
provide expertise on sentencing issues to the federal courts, Congress,
and the Executive branch. The Commission respectfully urges Congress to
appropriate $13,200,000 in fiscal year 2004 to enable the Commission to
keep pace with these significantly increased demands.
justification
Sentencing Reform Act Requirements
The Commission was created under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984
as a permanent, independent agency within the judicial branch. Congress
gave the Commission a dual mission: (a) to establish and maintain a
national guideline system for federal sentencing policies and
practices; and (b) to serve as an expert agency and leading authority
on federal sentencing matters.
In fulfilling these basic requirements, the Commission annually
issues a sentencing guidelines manual that delineates penalty levels
for all federal offenses. In addition to encompassing all federal
offenses, the guidelines manual incorporates amendments approved by the
Commission for newly enacted crime legislation passed by Congress. The
guidelines manual is used by prosecutors, defense counsel, and
probation officers in making sentencing recommendations to the courts.
Federal district judges must use the guidelines manual when imposing a
sentence, and it must also be relied upon by all federal appellate
judges and the justices of the United States Supreme Court when
reviewing the imposed penalties. Since the first manual went into
effect on November 1, 1987, over half a million defendants have been
sentenced under the guideline system.
Commission Response to the Threat of Terrorism and Corporate Crime
This appropriation request again grows out of the need to
reestablish the staffing levels necessary to respond to emerging
national priorities and to support a fully functioning Commission. The
policy work of the Commission generally is determined by three sources:
(1) legislative directives by Congress and new crime legislation; (2)
resolution of conflicting interpretations of sentencing guidelines
among the circuit courts of appeals; and (3) internal priorities that
are set by the commissioners following an annual solicitation published
in the Federal Register.
Due to the extended absence of voting commissioners in the late
1990s and a firm commitment on the part of the new Commission to
respond quickly to congressional directives, the Commission has focused
resources toward implementing crime legislation. Congress has called
upon the Commission to implement crime legislation covering a wide
range of disturbing criminal conduct, including sexual offenses against
children, human trafficking and peonage, stalking, identity theft,
ecstasy trafficking, methamphetamine and amphetamine manufacturing, and
intellectual property infringement.
New laws passed by Congress to secure our nation from the threats
of terrorism and to protect our workforce from economic disruption
caused by corporate crime are perhaps the most important--and most
complex--for the Commission to implement. In the area of terrorism, the
Commission submitted to Congress a guideline amendment that
significantly increased the penalties for offenses involving the
importation and exportation of nuclear, biological, and chemical
weapons on May 1, 2001, a full four months before the terrorist strikes
of September 11th and subsequent nationwide anthrax attacks and
threats. By utilizing our extensive datasets to review national
security offenses, the Commission identified the inadequacy of existing
penalties before concerns were widely shared.
Congress responded quickly to the threat of terrorism by passing
the USA PATRIOT Act, Pub. L. 107-56, and the Commission responded in
kind. In less than six months, the Commission promulgated a
comprehensive package of amendments to the guidelines implementing the
USA PATRIOT Act. Among the most significant of the provisions are
appropriately severe penalties for offenses committed against mass
transportation systems and interstate gas or hazardous liquid
pipelines, increased sentences for threats that substantially disrupt
governmental or business operations or result in costly cleanup
measures, expanded guideline coverage for bioterrorism offenses, and a
new guideline covering material support to foreign terrorist
organizations.
This year Congress once again has called upon the Commission to
implement terrorism related legislation. The Public Health Security and
Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-188,
and the Terrorist Bombings Convention Implementation Act of 2002, Pub.
L. 107-197 require the Commission to develop new guideline provisions
to address protection of the nation's food and water supplies and to
review the penalty structure for certain national security offenses,
including nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons offenses.
In addition, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (specifically
section 225, the ``Cyber Security Enhancement Act of 2002''), Pub. L.
107-296, requires the Commission implement new guideline provisions to
punish appropriately and effectively deter crimes that undermine our
nation's cybersecurity. Specifically, the Act requires the Commission
on an expedited basis to develop guideline provisions that adequately
account for eight enumerated factors, such as ``whether the offense
involved a computer used by the government in furtherance of national
defense, national security, or the administration of justice,'' and
``whether the violation was intended to, or had the effect of,
significantly interfering with or disrupting a critical
infrastructure.''
The Commission is making progress toward implementing each of these
new terrorism related legislative items. As the nation learns more
about identifying terrorism related conduct, the Commission expects
Congress will continue to respond with further legislation. The
Commission needs to acquire additional staff expertise to meets its
related responsibilities. For example, Congress has introduced
legislation that would require significantly increased penalties for
certain terrorism related offenses involving identity theft, the
``Identity Theft Penalty Enhancement Act of 2003.'' This legislation
already has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee and would require the
Commission to evaluate how it would affect and interact with existing
guideline provisions.
In April 2001, the Commission promulgated a multi-part amendment
that made comprehensive changes to the guidelines covering economic
crime. Economic offenses account for more than one quarter of all the
cases sentenced in the United States federal district courts. The
Commission had received from the federal Judiciary and the Department
of Justice testimony and survey results that indicate that the
sentences for these offenses were inadequate to punish appropriately
defendants in cases in which the monetary loss was substantial. After a
number of years of data collection, analyses, public comment, and
public hearings, the Commission passed a comprehensive economic crime
package that, among other things, provides significantly increased
penalties for mid and high level fraud, theft, and tax offenses
involving moderate and large monetary losses and significantly improved
the operation of the money laundering guideline.
While the Commission's guideline amendment was pending before
Congress, a number of corporate scandals became publicized. Congress
responded swiftly by passing the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 The Act
required the Commission to promulgate on an emergency basis several new
guideline provisions relating to securities fraud, pension fraud,
accounting fraud, and other more general types of fraud. Fortunately,
the Commission was able to build upon expertise it had acquired
developing the 2001 economic crime package, and in six months the
Commission completed a multi-part amendment that increases penalties
significantly for serious fraud offenses.
The emergency guideline, which became effective January 25, 2003,
includes new sentencing enhancements for offenses involving more than
100 victims, substantially endangering the solvency and financial
security of a publicly traded corporation or other organization with
1,000 or more employees, and securities fraud committed by officers or
directors of publicly traded corporations. The Commission continues to
address the problems and will submit for congressional review a
permanent amendment by May 1, 2003.
New Opportunities in Fiscal Year 2004 in Corporate Crime and Native
American Issues
Early in 2002 the Commission created two special panels of outside
experts to study problems related to corporate crime and disparities
encountered when Native Americans are sentenced in federal court under
the Major Crimes Act. Each ad hoc group was given eighteen months to
work on recommendations to the Commission, and each has been
functioning effectively and has obtained public input into its work.
Both groups will issue their reports in fiscal year 2004 which will be
shared with the public. Then the Commission will need to work on
possible amendments to Chapter 8 (the guidelines for sentencing
organizations, including corporations, associations, municipalities,
unions, etc.) and to guidelines particularly affecting Native
Americans. While this method of gathering expert assistance has proven
extremely cost effective, we need additional staff to draw out from a
wealth of material the optimum proposals and to translate them into
guidelines.
The corporate crime advisory group is comprised of sixteen
nationally recognized experts drawn from government, private business,
and academia, and is chaired by a former United States Attorney. The
Commission has requested the expert committee to review the
effectiveness of the criteria for an effective corporate compliance
program and the deterrence of corporate crime. The advisory committee
has actively engaged in research and soliciting public comment,
including a day-long public hearing. The hearing covered many issues
that bear directly on organizations' abilities and incentives to detect
and report wrongdoing before it becomes widespread and
institutionalized.
Congress also recognizes the critical role the organizational
guidelines perform, and in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act directed the
Commission to ensure that the guidelines that apply to organizations
are sufficient to deter and punish organizational misconduct. Because
the Commission had a jump start in this area and had already formed the
advisory group, the expert panel will be able to report its findings
and recommendations to the Commission in October 2003. At that time,
the Commission expects to have a sound foundation for staff to help us
deliberate and consider promulgation of appropriate modifications to
the organizational guidelines during fiscal year 2004.
The formation of the Native American advisory group grew out of a
hearing the Commission held in Rapid City, South Dakota in 2001. The
Rapid City hearing focused on issues relating to Native Americans and
was attended by a number of individuals who now serve on the advisory
group. As a result of testimony at the hearing as well as public
comment we received, the Commission formed the advisory group and
requested that the group to report its findings during fiscal year
2004. The Commission is devoting additional staff resources to
sentencing issues that particularly affect Native Americans. For
example, the Commission has created a new sentencing guideline aimed at
protecting our cultural heritage resources and other national
treasures, has conducted several days of intensive training for
prosecutors defense attorneys, and probation officers in Indian
Country, and has begun to study federal crimes for which Native
Americans comprise a significant proportion of offenders, such as
manslaughter.
Additional Sentencing Priorities
Drug trafficking offenders continue to comprise the majority of the
federal criminal caseload, and the Commission is constantly identifying
and responding to new drugs of abuse. In recent years, the Commission
has acted to increase penalties significantly for methamphetamine,
amphetamine, ecstasy, and certain List I chemical offenses.
This amendment cycle the Commission is focusing on the increasing
problem of oxycodone trafficking. Using its comprehensive sentencing
database, the Commission recently identified a significant increase in
the number of offenses involving the pain killer Oxycontin. The
Commission currently is considering an amendment to the drug guideline
that will recalibrate the way in which this drug is penalized so that
the penalties for offenses involving oxycodone will be substantially
increased. The Commission hopes that this increased penalty structure
will help deter any further increase in the abuse of this drug and
serve to punish appropriately those criminals who engage in its illegal
trafficking.
The Commission also is aware that Congress may enact legislation
directing it to review the guidelines pertaining to GHB, a drug that is
often associated with date rape. Bills have been introduced both in the
Senate and the House on this issue, and, if enacted, they would require
the Commission to engage in a comprehensive review of the penalty
structure for this particular drug during fiscal year 2004. The
Commission also is aware of other drug related legislation that would
require a response from us if enacted.
The Commission also is examining several guidelines covering
offenses against persons and this work must be extended through fiscal
year 2004. The 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations
Authorization Act, Pub. L. 107-273, for example, contains two
directives to the Commission. The first directs the Commission to
provide an appropriate sentencing enhancement for any crime of violence
or drug trafficking crime in which the defendant used body armor. The
Commission expects to submit an amendment to Congress by May 1, 2003,
implementing this first directive. The second and more complicated
directive requires the Commission to provide an appropriate sentencing
enhancement for assaults against a federal judge and lists eight
factors that the Commission must consider. The Commission expects that
the Native American advisory group's review of the federal assault
penalty structure will be helpful to implementation of this
congressional directive during fiscal year 2004.
The Commission also is reviewing the guideline covering involuntary
manslaughter after receiving congressional inquiries on the matter. The
Commission currently is considering an amendment that would
significantly increase the penalties for such offenses, but the
Commission's work in the area of crimes against individuals will
continue into fiscal year 2004. The overwhelming majority of offenders
convicted of assaults or homicide at the federal level are Native
Americans. As a result, the ad hoc committee also is examining the
guidelines pertaining to manslaughter. Even though the Commission may
make some change to the involuntary manslaughter guideline this
amendment cycle, we likely will continue our work in the area of
manslaughter until after receiving the report and recommendations from
the Native American advisory committee during fiscal year 2004.
The Commission also has been very active in the area of sexual
offenses. In every amendment cycle since the Commission was
reconstituted in 1999, the Commission has promulgated new amendment
provisions addressing various egregious sexual offenses. These many new
guideline provisions provide severe punishment for such heinous crimes
as human trafficking (in response to an emergency directive contained
in the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000),
sexual abuse of a minor, and commercial sex acts such as the production
of child pornography and prostitution.
Sexual offenses involving children, however, continues to be of
great concern, and the Commission is aware of several bills recently
introduced in the 108th Congress that would require further action by
the Commission. For example, the Senate recently overwhelming passed S.
151, the ``PROTECT Act,'' which creates several new offenses relating
to ``virtual'' child pornography and contains several directives to the
Commission. The directives, among other things, would require the
Commission to incorporate the new virtual child pornography offense
into the sentencing guidelines and revisit guideline treatment of
offenses involving interstate travel to engage in illegal sexual acts
with children. If S. 151 or other similar bills are enacted, the
Commission will be required to devote significant resources toward
implementing those provisions during fiscal year 2004.
Ongoing Research and Analysis Obligations
In fiscal year 2004, as part of its ongoing mission the Commission
will continue to work on several studies reflecting the operation of
the guidelines since their inception. In conjunction with these
studies, the Commission began a comprehensive assessment of the
guidelines pertaining to drug offenses, which comprise a majority of
the cases sentenced under the guidelines. In May 2002, the Commission
issued a comprehensive 112 page report to Congress examining the
current federal penalty structure for crack cocaine and powder cocaine
offenses. The report contained concrete recommendations for Congress to
consider regarding statutory and guideline penalties for cocaine
offenses which I presented at a hearing before the Senate Judiciary
Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs on May 22, 2002.
The report on federal cocaine sentencing policy was informed by an
intensive project which involved analyzing the court documents for
1,600 cocaine offense cases sentenced in fiscal year 2000--representing
approximately 20 percent of all federal cocaine offenses that year. The
Commission analyzed important variables such as the offender's function
in the offense, the geographic scope of the offense, and the presence
of aggravating factors such as possession, brandishment, or use of a
weapon, bodily injury, sales to protected persons such as minors, and
sales in protected locations such as areas surrounding schools and
playgrounds.
The Commission currently is collecting similar data with respect to
other major drugs of abuse, such as methamphetamine, heroin, and
marijuana. This process entails gathering information on the offense
conduct and offender characteristics for over 3,000 federal drug
trafficking offenders. This analysis is continuing through fiscal year
2004 and provide information on the organizational structure of drug
trafficking operations and assist in the evaluation of the sentencing
structure for these offenses.
The Commission has also undertaken the most comprehensive study of
recidivism rates for federal offenders. The Commission is tracking more
than 6,000 federal offenders through the criminal justice system to
determine who becomes a repeat offender and what factors may be
predictive of such behavior. The results will assist in evaluating the
established criminal history categories and the role of the guidelines
in deterring crime. While encouraged by the progress made on the
project, full access to arrest and conviction records to complete the
work only recently occurred when Congress authorized access by the
Commission to a National Crime Information Center terminal under the
21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Act. The Commission
expects both the recidivism study and the consideration of any
modifications to the guidelines in response to its findings to continue
through fiscal year 2004.
Commission Struggles with Increasing Caseload
A key component to the Commission's ability to implement
legislation and develop new guideline provisions is its comprehensive,
computerized data collection system. This comprehensive database serves
as a clearinghouse of federal sentencing information and forms the
basis for the Commission's monitoring and evaluating the guidelines,
undertaking many of its research projects, and responding to hundreds
of data requests received from Congress and other criminal justice
entities each year.
For each case sentenced under the guidelines, the Commission enters
over 200 items of information into its database, such as each count of
conviction, the number and nature of victims, the magnitude of economic
loss, the type and quantity of drugs, and the number and type of
weapons. The Commission is only funded and physically equipped to
process some 40,000 cases annually, but for each of the last four years
it has received well over 50,000 cases annually. We expect to receive
63,000 cases in fiscal year 2003, and our resources do not permit
timely processing of the extensive information. We plan to experiment
with an electronic file transfer system to enable the 94 federal
districts to submit five major court documents (the Judgment and
Commitment Order, the Presentence Report, the Indictment, the Plea
Agreement, and the Statement of Reasons) to the Commission in a
paperless manner, thereby improving efficiencies and lessening delays,
but this system will require substantial start up costs.
Additionally, the Commission performs case processing for
organizational/corporate sentences, appellate cases, and probation
revocation/supervised release violations. The Commission also has
received requests that additional coding modules be added to analyze
Rule 35 sentencings and plea bargaining, which we could undertake only
with additional funding.
Increased Training Needs for Larger Federal Criminal Justice System
Over the last several years, as Congress has devoted increased
resources to law enforcement, the number of federal judges,
prosecutors, probation officers, and defense attorneys who require
training and assistance on how to use the guidelines has increased
proportionately. The Sentencing Reform Act requires the Commission to
provide guideline training, in part because training promotes
uniformity in guideline application and thereby reduces sentencing
disparity--both central goals of the Act.
Commission staff provides training on the sentencing guidelines to
more than 2,500 individuals annually at approximately 50 training
programs across the country, including ongoing programs sponsored by
the Commission, the Federal Judicial Center, the Department of Justice,
the American Bar Association, and other criminal justice entities. Each
year the Commission cosponsors a National Sentencing Seminar to train
hundreds of probation officers, prosecutors, and defense attorneys on
guideline application. New personnel often have no knowledge of the
federal guidelines system, and seasoned personnel need training in the
new guidelines promulgated each year. The program is so popular that we
must turn away people due to the high volume of interest.
The Commission also plays a major role preparing for and
participating in the biennial National Sentencing Institute sponsored
by the Federal Judicial Center and attended by a large number of
federal judges. The Commission also maintains a telephone HelpLine
service to answer guideline application inquiries from federal judges,
probation officers, prosecuting and defense attorneys, and law clerks.
However, if the Commission is not provided sufficient funding to
restore personnel in other areas of the agency, its quality of training
will suffer because its training staff may be diverted to other
projects.
summation
The Commission has worked very hard with limited resources to
respond when called upon to help the President and Congress address
emerging national priorities such as the threat of terrorism and
corporate fraud. In many ways these are novel complex areas that
require the Commission to acquire and maintain additional in-house
expertise. Moreover, Congress and the Commission continue to identify
new areas of concern that require substantial resources, such as
oxycodone offenses, involuntary manslaughter, and sexual offenses
against children. We cannot undertake a policy agenda of any real
significance without enhancing our staff power, particularly given the
large increase in the number of cases sentenced each year which require
compilation and analysis.
The requested funding level would enable the Commission to continue
its work in areas of national importance, enhance staff expertise,
provide training to a rapidly expanding audience, process its surging
caseload effectively, continue its monitoring and research of the
guidelines, and continue to be responsive to the concerns of the
federal criminal justice community.
______
Prepared Statement of Haldane Robert Mayer, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to submit my statement to the Committee
for the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's fiscal
year 2004 budget request.
Our 2004 budget request totals $22,422,000. This is an increase of
$2,227,000 over the fiscal year 2003 approved appropriation of
$20,195,000. Twenty-nine percent (29 percent) of the requested
increase, $646,000, is for mandatory, uncontrollable increases in
costs. The remaining increase of $1,581,000 is for funding of
additional positions and other program increases.
Request for Program Increases
A total of $1,581,000 for program increases is requested. The
breakdown and further justification for each amount follows. The
justifications for the program increases are separated into four
categories: staffing; courtroom renovations; technology advancements;
and security staffing enhancements.
A portion of this program increase request, $653,000, was requested
to cover the cost of thirteen (13) additional Court Security Officers
(CSOs) for fiscal year 2004. These additional CSOs were requested and
needed to bring our total CSOs up to current U.S. Marshal Service
Standards. This requested increase, however, was included in the
recently enacted Supplemental Appropriation Bill. This amount will
enable us to begin the recruiting and hiring process in fiscal year
2003.
Two New Staff Positions
The court requests $208,000 to cover the cost of two new positions
for nine (9) months in fiscal year 2004. The positions requested are
for a Deputy to the Circuit Executive position ($130,000) and a
Computer Security Specialist ($78,000).
The position of Deputy to the Circuit Executive has become
necessary to assist the Circuit Executive with the variety of duties
assigned to that office. The Deputy would assist in overseeing the
offices that operate under the direction of the Circuit Executive and
would act in the absence of the Circuit Executive.
We also request funding to hire a full-time permanent Computer
Security Specialist. Upon completion of a formal security review and
assessment of the court's electronic information system, the National
Security Agency in August 2000 concluded that the court should hire an
Information Technology Specialist. This person would monitor and
protect the security of the court's information system. The Computer
Security Specialist would ensure that all electronic communications and
information in judges' chambers and staff offices are protected and
secure from compromise or unlawful release. Both of these positions
were requested in our fiscal year 2003 budget request and denied.
Courtroom Renovations
The court is requesting $170,000 to begin the long-overdue
renovations of courtrooms to bring them up to 21st Century security and
technology standards to benefit judges, attorneys, and litigants. There
have been no upgrades to the courtrooms, with the exception of new
carpet, since the opening of the courthouse in 1967.
We have requested funding for this project in our 2001, 2002, and
2003 budget requests. We have taken our request to GSA as suggested by
the Subcommittee. At this time, GSA has indicated that they are taking
every appropriate action to have this project included in their fiscal
years 2004 and 2005 budgets. Should the court be successful in
receiving funding through GSA to pay for the renovations of the
courtroom Congress will be notified that this request for $170,000 is
no longer necessary.
Improvements in the Court's Courtroom and Courthouse Computer
Technology and Security
We request $490,000 for program advancements in the area of
technology in the courtrooms, judges' chambers, and staff offices.
The Judicial Conference of the United States recognized that
courtroom technologies are a necessary and integral part of courtrooms.
Based on those findings and the fact that the Administrative Office of
the United States Courts (AO) currently is implementing this program in
courts across the country, the court is requesting funding to upgrade
the courtroom technology in one of its courtrooms. The figure of
$215,000 was provided to the court by the AO based on its experience to
date with upgrading courtrooms. Not only would this benefit the
Judiciary and the court, it would benefit counsel and litigants. One
phase of this new technology will give counsel the opportunity to argue
a case offsite while connected to the courtroom as if the attorney were
in the courthouse, thus cutting expenses for the litigant.
We also request $205,000 to develop and augment a disaster recovery
plan for the court's electronic data system. In the event of a major
disaster, it will be necessary to access the court's computer network
from a remote site as well as locally. This amount is a one-time cost
estimate to put this recovery system in place.
The National Security Agency performed a study of court security in
2000 and recommended improved computer security hardware and software
to assist in the detection and prevention of electronic computer
attacks and intrusions to the court's computer network. The cost of
upgrading the security of the court's computer system is $70,000.
Increased Security Position
This court requests $60,000 to cover the cost of hiring one (1)
Supervisory Level on-site Deputy U.S. Marshal.
The court requests funding to hire one (1) full-time Supervisory
Level Deputy U.S. Marshal Inspector to coordinate facilities security
at the National Courts Building based on this same need for upgraded
security. The Inspector will report to the Chief Judge, will ensure
that protection of judges on and off-site is properly coordinated, will
supervise the court security officers assigned to the National Courts
Building, and will work with the court security committee on matters
involving staff and courthouse security.
Currently the Federal Circuit shares a Deputy U.S. Marshal with the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and
the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The
shared U.S. Deputy Marshal is assigned to the U.S. District Court for
the District of Columbia and is located at the District of Columbia
Circuit courthouse. It is a daunting task and a big assignment for one
person to cover adequately the security needs of two separate
courthouses and four separate courts located in different parts of the
District of Columbia.
In a March 7, 2003 memorandum to Chief Judges of the U.S. Courts,
AO Director L. Ralph Mecham emphasized the importance of having a full-
time Deputy U.S. Marshal Inspector assigned to each court. ``It seems
clear,'' Director Mecham said, ``that in today's high risk environment
there should be USMS personnel at the local level assigned to security
responsibilities on a full-time basis.'' As the only United States
Court of Appeals with national jurisdiction, the Federal Circuit should
be given the same consideration in the assignment of security personnel
as the twelve other regional circuits. Indeed, it is hard to understand
how the USMS can assign a Deputy U.S. Marshal Inspector to the District
of Columbia Circuit--a regional court of appeals--and direct that
Inspector to provide security to the Federal Circuit--a national court
of appeals located across from The White House--on an as-needed basis.
I also would like to address a statement that was contained in the
Conference Report for our 2003 budget request. That document contained
language referring to a reduction in the number of filings at the
Federal Circuit between 1992 and 2001. Our figures show that total case
filings for the Federal Circuit for the ten-year period did drop 219
cases from 1,702 in fiscal year 1992 to 1,483 in fiscal year 2001. That
drop is consistent with the statement contained in the Conference
Report. However, the reduction in the court's caseload does not justify
a reduction in staff for two reasons.
First, starting with the 1,702 cases in 1992--which represented at
that time the second highest number of annual case filings since 1982--
the number of total cases filed each subsequent year through 2001
sometimes increased and sometimes decreased and occasionally exceeded
1,702. In fiscal year 2002, the Federal Circuit's total filings
increased to 1,748; this is the third highest number of filings ever
for the Federal Circuit--nearly 18 percent higher than the 2001 filings
and 3 percent higher than the 1992 filings.
The second reason why the reduction of 219 case filings over the
ten-year period does not justify a reduction in court staff is that the
reduction does not reflect an important change in the court's workload.
In short, it ignores how particular categories of cases have increased
or decreased. Attention to the number of appeals in patent cases from
district courts is critical when assessing the court's workload. Patent
cases typically involve complex science and engineering principles, as
well as multiple issues dealing with patent validity, infringement,
defenses, counterclaims, and damages. In addition, the patent cases
often have lengthy trial records and extensive damages. In sum, patent
appeals typically take much more time than, for example, the court's
Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) cases. Hence, even though case
filings went down by 219 when comparing 1992 to 2001, appeals from
district courts--almost all of which are patent cases--went up from 315
in 1992 (about 18.5 percent of the total cases), to 403 in 2001 (about
27 percent of the total cases). At the same time, the much easier MSPB
cases dropped from 789 in fiscal 1992, to 421 in fiscal 2001. And in
fiscal 2002, when total cases increased nearly 18 percent from 2001,
district court cases increased 19 percent, to 480, while MSPB cases
rose only 3 percent, to 435.
The significant rise over the last 10 years in the number of patent
infringement cases filed with the court and the nearly 18 percent
increase in the court's annual filings from 2001 to 2002 warrant an
increase--not a decrease--in court staff. Further, a careful review of
the number of support personnel assigned to the Federal Circuit will
establish that the staff numbers are considerably smaller than other
courts of appeals.
I would be pleased, Mr. Chairman, to answer any questions the
Committee may have or to meet with the Committee members or staff about
our budget requests.
Thank you.
______
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
Prepared Statement of the American Bar Association
The American Bar Association is centrally concerned with promoting
improvements in the administration of justice and preserving the
independence of the judiciary as fundamental to a free society. In
furtherance of these two objectives, we are submitting this statement
to address the need for increased compensation for Article III judges
and to urge Congress to appropriate adequate funds for the State
Justice Institute. We respectfully request that this statement be
incorporated into the Subcommittee's record of hearings on fiscal year
2004 appropriations for Commerce, Justice and State, the Judiciary and
Related Agencies.
state justice institute
In 1984, Congress created the State Justice Institute (SJI) as a
federally funded, private, non-profit corporation to award federal
grants to improve the quality of justice in state courts, facilitate
better coordination between state and federal courts, and foster
innovative, efficient solutions to common problems faced by all courts.
It is the only source of federal funding exclusively dedicated to
helping to meet the needs of our state courts, which hear over 97
percent of the nation's cases. Since it became operational in 1987, the
SJI has parlayed a modest amount of federal money into court
improvement projects that benefit the nation's judicial system in its
entirety and the public it serves. On behalf of the Association's
410,000 members, we can unequivocally say that the overwhelming
consensus in the legal community is that the SJI effectively,
efficiently and consistently executes its mandate despite a de minimis
annual budget, which has never exceeded $13.55 million.
In creating the State Justice Institute, Congress recognized that
our state and federal courts are separate but interdependent and that
the quality of justice in this nation depends on the vitality of both
court systems. Concluding that the federal government has a stake in
maintaining strong state judicial systems and improving state-court
partnerships, Congress created SJI to monitor the state judicial
system, assist in prioritizing the needs of the state courts and award
small federal grants to foster solutions to critical problems
confronting the courts. To enable all courts to benefit from federally
funded projects, Congress required SJI to maximize the impact of each
grant--even those that provide technical assistance to a court with a
specific problem--through a variety of techniques, such as maintaining
readily accessible information clearinghouses to assure that effective
new approaches are shared with courts nationwide, convening national
conferences to address emerging justice system issues, and placing
practical products into the hands of judges and court personnel who can
most benefit from them. These various strategies have proven effective
in maximizing the benefits derived from each spent federal dollar and
avoiding wasteful duplication of effort to solve identical or similar
judicial administration problems.
After 15 years of SJI's operation, and out of a renewed concern for
fiscal restraint in a time of competing budgetary demands, Congress
requested that the Attorney General of the United States evaluate and
report back on the effectiveness of the SJI. In November 2002, the
Attorney General submitted his report to Congress in which he concluded
that SJI effectively implements its mission with only minimal
administrative costs. Moreover, the Attorney General reaffirmed the
wisdom of the 98th Congress by validating the premise on which SJI was
created. He noted that an important Federal purpose was served by
supporting SJI's mission to improve the quality of justice in state
courts, observing that, ``given overlapping state-federal jurisdiction,
it is in the Federal government's interest to have effective and fair
state courts, lest litigants turn to Federal courts to resolve matters
properly within state court responsibilities.''
The American Bar Association concurs with these core findings. By
strengthening our state courts, SJI grants strengthen our entire
justice system. Furthermore, we would like to point out that the
federal government also has a direct interest in the vitality of our
state courts because many important federal programs depend on state
courts for their implementation.
Subsequent Congresses, including this one, have in fact
acknowledged the appropriateness of providing federal assistance to
state court projects by regularly appropriating funds for specific
state court improvement projects sponsored by individual members. In
fact, the funds spent on these projects often have exceeded the maximum
appropriation SJI has ever received. While we do not doubt that such
funds have been expended for worthy state court projects that have
improved the administration of justice in a particular jurisdiction or
state, we do not believe that it is a cost-efficient or effective way
to provide federal financial support to strengthen our state judicial
system. In contrast, disseminating federal funds through SJI assures
that government money is spent on finding solutions to the most
pressing judicial administration problems and sharing these solutions
with every state and federal court.
The conference report accompanying Pub. L. No. 108-7 appropriated
$3.1 million in funding for SJI for fiscal year 2003 but contained the
proviso that SJI should obtain future funding from ``bar associations
and the States, who are the beneficiaries of SJI's work.'' Such a
proposal is unrealistic and would effectively terminate this highly
effective program.
The courts are an integral part of our democratic system of
government. Their support should come from the public fisc. SJI was
created to provide federal support for needed improvements to
supplement state court resources, which are often inadequate because of
strapped state budgets. Bar associations and other grantee
organizations, in essence, already contribute their own funds to SJI by
absorbing some of the cost of any grant activity in which they are
involved. Furthermore, SJI relies on the dedication and expertise of
organizations, such as the ABA, to develop and implement programs that
will strengthen the justice system; and in return, SJI pays for a
substantial portion of the cost of worthy programs, while grantees
provide a certain amount of matching funds. In this way, SJI grants not
only require a sharing of the financial burden, but they also help
forge essential public-private partnerships to address justice system
issues.
In addition, the ABA and other bar associations already make
substantial financial (in addition to other) contributions to promote
excellence in the justice system by annually allocating a significant
amount of their general revenues for judicial system improvements. For
example, in fiscal year 2004, the ABA alone will spend almost $2.5
million on such programs and projects.
In conclusion, terminating funding for the only government-funded
entity exclusively dedicated to providing federal grants for projects
to improve state courts makes no sense, especially at a time when our
courts are facing a nation-wide fiscal crisis. Congress has a strong
federal interest in strengthening the state courts and maintaining a
robust justice system as well as a responsibility to implement sound
fiscal policies. To deny the small sum of $13.5 million to a program
that is supported by every state supreme court and highly praised by
the legal community, but authorize appropriations for projects that
primarily benefit individual state courts, represents a serious fiscal
miscalculation. For all these reasons, the ABA urges Congress to
preserve SJI as a federally funded institute and to appropriate
sufficient funds for fiscal year 2004 for SJI to carry out its mandate.
The ABA recommends an appropriation of $13.5 million--the amount that
SJI received in 1996.
Article III Judicial Salaries
The 108th Congress has inherited a federal salary system for top-
level government officials that is badly in need of reform. This is
particularly true with respect to the Federal Judiciary.
The National Commission on the Public Service (otherwise known as
the ``Volcker Commission'') concurs with this assessment. Composed of
government leaders from past Administrations, the non-partisan
Commission recently issued its report, Urgent Business for America:
Revitalizing the Federal government for the 21st Century, which
concluded that ``[j]udicial salaries are the most egregious example of
the failure of federal compensation policies.'' It recommended that
Congress take immediate steps to substantially raise federal judicial
pay.
During the past decade in particular, judges have experienced both
an absolute loss in purchasing power and a relative decline in
remuneration as the salaries of peer group members have risen
dramatically. Despite five salary adjustments since 1993, judges have
suffered a 10.9 percent decline in the purchasing power of their
salaries. That judicial pay has not even kept pace with inflation has
robbed judges of the prospect of salary stability during their tenure
on the bench.
Judges freely acknowledge that rendering public service in a highly
visible and respected role and serving in a lifetime appointment are
intangible benefits that help compensate for the reduced salary levels
associated with the bench. Nonetheless, compensation levels for
attorneys from other work sectors are relevant to the issue of fair and
adequate judicial compensation.
While the vast majority of federal judges have the requisite years
of experience and legal skills that would enable them to command
compensation similar to that paid to top-notch, seasoned attorneys in
the private sphere ($400,000 to $800,000 according to the most recent
surveys conducted by the National Law Journal), it is obviously not
practical to suggest that Federal judges should be paid that much. The
salaries of leaders of academia or nonprofit institutions are
considered more reasonable points of reference because the level of
education and expertise required of leaders of these institutions and
the psychic satisfaction derived from holding such jobs are comparable
to those of Federal judges.
Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, in testimony submitted to the
Volcker Commission, stated that the average salary of nonprofit CEOs is
$212,000--approximately 20 percent higher than that of a Supreme Court
Justice and about 35 percent higher than that of a federal district
judge. Further, the differential between federal judicial salaries and
salaries of leaders in the academic world is even larger: the average
salary for deans of the twenty-five law schools ranked highest in the
annual U.S. News and World Report survey was $301,639 and the average
base salary for full professors at those law schools was $209,571.
Even though market conditions alone should not be the measure of
the adequacy of judicial salaries, the widening disparity between
judicial salaries and those of attorneys with comparable skills
employed in the private sphere is causing demonstrable harm to our
nation's Third Branch by deterring excellent candidates from seeking
judicial appointments and motivating sitting judges to resign
prematurely from office to enter a more lucrative field.
Between 1990 and 2003, 77 Article III judges resigned or retired
from the Federal bench and many of them returned to private practice.
Fifty-one of the 77 departed judges entered the private practice of law
and 14 others accepted jobs in related fields. Sixteen of the 77 judges
departed before reaching retirement age, thereby forfeiting their right
to salary for life. Premature departures from the bench impose both
real and intangible costs upon the Third Branch, by compromising
judicial independence fostered by life tenure and depriving the Federal
Judiciary of the skills of some of its most capable and experienced
jurists.
Inadequate judicial salaries also disadvantage the Federal
Judiciary in the ``war for talent.'' Judicial pay may not be a
deterrent to individuals who are independently wealth or who are
already in public service, where salaries are generally lower, but it
is a strong disincentive for lawyers in private practice whose varied
experiences bring a perspective and independence that is vital to the
judiciary. Our analysis of the occupations held immediately prior to
the confirmation of all district and circuit court judges appointed
since 1977 supports this conclusion. For example, during President
Carter's term of office, 49.5 percent of his district court appointees
came from the public sector, while 57.6 percent of President Bush's
district court appointees through the 107th Congress have come from the
public sector.
White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales made this same point in an
interview published in the May 2002 edition of The Third Branch:
``We are aware of both young lawyers with family obligations and
established prominent lawyers with substantial investment in their
practice and community who feel that they cannot afford to go on the
federal bench. The Judiciary suffers when it cannot attract top tier
lawyers for whatever reason.''
The Federal Judiciary benefits from the collective wealth of
experience of its jurists who have served in different capacities in
the public and private sectors. It is enriched by their diverse
backgrounds and better able to serve the need of all Americans. We
cannot afford to lose the diversity of the bench that comes from the
appointment of individuals of varying financial means who have served
in different capacities in both the public and private sectors.
In conclusion, while we recognize that there is a compelling need
for salary reform within all top levels of government, we believe that
there is an urgent and immediate need to substantially increase
judicial salaries in order to maintain a stellar judiciary and protect
one of the pillars of our democracy--Federal judicial independence. We
urge you to support an appropriation for the Federal Judiciary that is
sufficient to cover a substantial pay raise for all Article III judges.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Sportfishing Association
The American Sportfishing Association (ASA) recommends the
following as the Subcommittee considers appropriations for the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for fiscal year 2004. The American
Sportfishing Association is a non-profit trade association whose 555
members include fishing tackle manufacturers, sport fishing retailers,
boat builders, state fish and wildlife agencies, and the outdoor media.
The ASA makes these recommendations on the basis of briefings with
agency staff and from years of experience with fisheries management in
this Nation. It is important to note that sportfishing provides $116
billion in economic output to the economy of the United States each
year. Sportfishing in marine waters alone provides a $31 billion impact
each year to coastal states.
Saltwater fishing is the fastest growing sector of recreational
fishing. Because of this the ASA urges NMFS to continue the pursuit of
sound management of marine fish stocks by supporting the Regional
Fishery Management Councils, the States, and the Interstate Marine
Fisheries Commissions. Collectively, these programs conduct research
and collect data that is essential for managers to appropriately
maintain marine stocks and assure that areas are open to anglers. For
the Regional Fishery Management Councils to carry out the regulations
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act they
must be properly funded. The Association recommends funding the
Regional Councils activities at the $16.032 million level.
The Association supports the fiscal year 2004 President's request
for a $3.0 million increase in funds for fisheries stock assessment and
improvement of data collection, but also recommends an additional $21.2
million with the goal of funding stock assessment at the $100 million
level by fiscal year 2008.
The ASA requests a total of $12.8 million for Fish Statistics--
Economics and Social Science Research. These would include:
--An increase in base funding for NOAA Fisheries could create a
premiere Center for Excellence in Recreational Fisheries
Economics. The Center could be housed in NOAA Fisheries and
could provide the umbrella for recreational fisheries data
collection and economic analysis conducted within NOAA
Fisheries and by academia under contract. The Center will serve
three primary functions: (1) strategic planning for data
collection and analysis; (2) development and application of
analytical techniques for measuring the costs, benefits, and
impacts of recreational fisheries management; and (3) improved
outreach and information sharing to ensure that both fisheries
managers and the public receive and understand the data
products. The Center will work in concert with and complement
the existing NOAA Fisheries recreational fisheries economics
program and the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey
(MRFSS) program. The ASA recommends a $500,000 increase in base
funding in fisheries statistics for the Center.
--The Association urges Congress to appropriate an additional $9.5
million in new base funding for fisheries statistics to
significantly improve catch and effort data through the NOAA
Fisheries' Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey
(MRFSS). Base funding has not increased substantially since the
survey's inception in 1979. Improved data collection is central
to achieving the rebuilding and management standards called for
in the Sustainable Fisheries Act.
--The ASA recommends Congress increase base funding by $2.8 million
for the NOAA Fisheries recreational economics program. This
program within NOAA Fisheries is severely understaffed and
under-funded. The most basic recreational fishery data is
unavailable making NOAA Fisheries unable to fulfill their
congressionally mandated requirements to provide the basic data
for recreational fisheries management. This additional funding
should go directly towards outfitting new Centers with PhD
level recreational fisheries economists, improving data
collection and conducting expenditure surveys, and conducting
critical research.
The Association urges congress to appropriate $10 million for the
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act which allows
government, state agencies, and interstate marine fishery commissions
to work together in support of fisheries resources. These efforts have
showed success in stripped bass and weakfish management, and it's
continued success relies on this level of funding.
Fish habitat restoration programs would be more cost-effective and
successful if partnered under a State-Federal cooperative program
undertaking research and management of fish habitat. ASA is pleased
with the Administration's budget of $13.22 million for fish habitat
restoration. Furthermore, we support the continuation of the Charleston
Bump Billfish Tagging program that serves as an important fish nursery
for Atlantic Highly Migratory Fish species (AHMF).
Providing a complete database of information on high priority
species aids in identification, protection and restoration efforts of
exploited fish along the Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific coasts. The SEAMAP
program builds this database and partners with another program, the
MARFIN program, and together they work to support fishery independent
research on high priority species. ASA is concerned about the erosion
of these partnerships and recommends funding for the SEAMAP program at
$6 million and the MARFIN program also at $6 million ($4 million for
the Southeast and $2 million for the Northeast).
The American Sportfishing Association is very concerned with the
low level of funding for the Anadromous Fisheries Act. Continual
declines in funding means the needs of most anadromous fish stocks will
not be met because funding cannot be supported through other federal
and state funds or the fisheries management community. Therefore, the
Association urges Congress to fund the Anadromous Fisheries Act grants
to States at $8 million.
The ASA is again disappointed in the level of funding for the
Saltonstall-Kennedy grant program. This program promotes and develops
fisheries by funding high priority research and development needs. ASA
urges the Administration to restore this program to the fiscal year
1999 level of $11.171 million.
The ASA agrees with the Administration's request to ensure NMFS'
vessels are in good condition for proper management and research needs.
These vessels are chartered privately by universities and states, and
thus their condition is important to the safety of their users.
Concluding with our NMFS recommendations we would also like to
comment on some of the other line items in NOAA's budget.
ASA urges Congress to recognize critical marine resources issues
and how funding efforts can play a large role in developing new
technologies. These efforts are stronger with the ability of a
coalition of federal and state scientists for these critical issues.
Two important efforts taking place at the Hollings Marine Laboratory
(HML) and the Fish Cooperative Institute, does important work on marine
environmental health, biotechnology, and ecototxicology. The
Association is pleased with the Administration's request to fund the
HML at $2.5 million and the Fish Cooperative Institute at $750,000.
The past few years have encountered a large breakout of algal
blooms resulting in bad pfiesteria seasons. In response to this, effort
to research and control the problem was largely taken on by the South
Carolina Harmful Algal Bloom Task Force and was funded by the
government. The Administration has proposed to terminate this program
and the ASA urges Congress to continue funding this program at $600,000
to continue the work on the outbreak of algal blooms.
Two of the most successful state-federal cooperative efforts to
improve the quality of our natural resources are the National Estuarine
Research Reserve (NERR) and Coastal Zone Management (CZM) programs. The
American Sportfishing Association is pleased with the proposed $16.4
million for NERR and the $10.012 million for research facilities at
NERR sites. In addition, we are very pleased with the many efforts of
these programs ranging from public access to non-point source
pollution. The ASA also supports the Administration's request for $85
million for the CZM grants to help states and local communities work to
improve coastal areas.
The Coastal Services Center makes valuable contributions toward
stewardship and provides support to the coastal states in regards to
advanced coastal decision support systems. This program has yielded
innovative work in conjunction with state participation and the ASA
urges funding at the $18 million level.
One important task of NOAA is to be able to access and treat
damaged marine resources caused by releases of hazardous substances.
The Damage Assessment and Restoration Program (DARP) directs these
efforts and takes on the responsibility of restoring these damaged
areas as quickly as possible to reduce the amount of loss of fisheries
and marine habitats. The Association strongly supports the President's
request for $17.199 million for damage assessment activities and
restoration efforts of DARP.
The Sea Grant College Program provides critical research and
educational opportunities for maintenance and improvement of marine
resources. The Association recommends funding at the authorized level
of $73 million and we also disagree with the proposed moving of the
program to the National Science Foundation. NOAA is more efficient at
connecting the researchers and their findings to the marine community.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, the ASA is concerned about NMFS' promotion
and use of marine reserves to the exclusion of other proven management
options. This has penalized recreational anglers and is far from a
proven management tool for marine resources. Public closures should be
the last management option, not the first. Furthermore, NMFS has
prepared no standardized implementation guidelines, no conservation
goals, or long term monitoring plans for the use of marine reserves.
The ASA requests that funding for the planning and implementation of
any future marine reserves be halted until management guidelines, such
as those outlined in the Freedom To Fish legislation, are put in place.
Mr. Chairman, please make these recommendations part of the record
for the Subcommittee's 2004 appropriations process.
______
Prepared Statement of the Doris Day Animal League
Mr. Chairman and members of the Appropriations Subcommittee on
Commerce, Justice, State and Judiciary, thank you for the opportunity
to submit testimony on behalf of the 300,000 members and supporters of
the Doris Day Animal League requesting that the Federal Bureau of
Investigation assign the crime of animal cruelty its own classification
in the Uniform Crime Reporting Program.
The Significance of Animal Cruelty as a Crime: ``The Violence
Connection''
Animal cruelty, especially egregious acts, was once viewed as an
offensive behavior unrelated to other crimes. Now it is recognized as a
serious crime with important implications for human society. A growing
body of research, produced over the last thirty years, establishes a
clear link between animal abuse and human violence. One comprehensive
study of data from a twenty-year period found that adults convicted of
animal were more likely than their peers to engage in other forms of
criminal activities, including violent crimes against humans, property
crimes, and drug and disorderly offenses. Other studies conducted in a
number of counties in the United States confirm the overlap between
committing acts of animal cruelty and engaging in other types of
criminal behavior. In addition to the association between animal
cruelty and criminal behavior, there is also evidence that the severity
of violence against animals can indicate the degree of aggressiveness
toward human individuals. Research on incarcerated adult males
demonstrated that the most aggressive inmates had the most violent
histories of animal cruelty. It is worth noting that in dangerous
situations such as a hostage taking, the FBI has included a history of
animal cruelty among the factors used to determine an individual's
threat level.
Another important link between animal abuse and human violence,
with important policy implications, is the co-occurrence of family
violence and animal abuse. In interview studies with domestic violence
victims, between 54-71 percent of the women report that their partners
also harmed or killed the family pet. Child abuse and animal abuse also
are linked: animal abuse was confirmed in 88 percent of families under
the supervision of a child welfare agency for physically abusing their
children.
In addition to being linked to other types of criminal activity and
family violence, animal abuse by children signals an important warning.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation was one of the first to recognize
the significance of juvenile animal cruelty when it reported that many
serial killers had abused animals as children. It also has been
reported that many of the school shooters had engaged in various forms
of animal cruelty. The National Crime Prevention Council, the
Department of Education, and the American Psychological Association all
list animal cruelty as one of the indicators or warning signs of future
violence. Furthermore, researchers agree that persistent aggressive
behavior in childhood, termed ``conduct disorder,'' tends to be fairly
stable trait throughout life and is the single best predictor of later
criminal behavior. Animal cruelty is one of the symptoms for a
diagnosis of conduct disorder and therefore can be one of the earliest
indicators that a child is at risk.
Not all children who abuse animals will become serial killers,
school shooters, or criminals as adults. However, research clearly
suggests that engaging in childhood animal cruelty conditions an
individual to accept, or engage in, interpersonal violence as an adult.
Responses to ``The Violence Connection''
Government bodies, professional organizations, and communities have
responded to information about the animal abuse-human violence
connection. For example, before 1990, only seven states had felony
provisions in their animal anti-cruelty statutes; now 41 states and the
District of Columbia have felony-level laws. As of this date, 24 states
have provisions in their animal anti-cruelty statutes that permit or
mandate psychological counseling for offenders.
In addition to changes in state animal cruelty statutes, awareness
of the significance of animal abuse as a crime has resulted in the
development of a number of programs. ``Safe Pet'' programs, in which
the pets of domestic violence victims are provided safekeeping so that
women feel free to leave dangerous situations, are being instituted in
communities throughout the United States. Animal control officers are
being trained to ``cross report,'' that is, to look for signs of child
and spousal abuse when investigating an animal abuse or neglect
complaint. Intervention programs for children and adults who abuse
animals have been developed and mental health professionals are being
trained in this area of treatment.
Modifying the Reporting Categories of the Uniform Crime Reporting
Program
The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program is a nationwide effort in
which crime statistics are collected from nearly 17,000 city, county,
and state law enforcement agencies. During 2000, the participating
agencies represented 94 percent of the total U.S. population. The
current UCR Program classifies offenses in two groups, Part I and Part
II. Crimes vary from criminal homicide in Part I to vagrancy and curfew
and loitering laws in Part II. Not only law enforcement, but also
criminologists, sociologists, legislators, municipal planners, the
media, and others interested in criminal justice use the statistics for
research and planning purposes. However, under the current UCR Program,
there is no category to report crimes of animal cruelty, even though
animal abuse often is an indicator of other types of criminal behavior,
including family violence.
Assigning the crime of animal cruelty to its own classification
would have a number of advantages. Law enforcement agencies,
researchers, policy planners, and others would be better able to
understand the factors associated with animal abuse, track trends at
the state and national level, and determine demographic characteristics
associated with animal abuse--all of which would assist in promoting
more effective intervention and prevention strategies to interrupt the
cycle of violence. Finally, assigning animal cruelty its own category
would assist law enforcement agencies by helping them identify and
track individuals with histories of violence.
Proposed Report Language for the Senate Subcommittee on Commerce,
Justice, State and Judiciary Appropriations
We respectfully request that the Subcommittee consider the
following report language for the Commerce, Justice, State and
Judiciary Appropriations bill:
``The Committee commends the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
for its successful Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. Currently,
there is no individual category for animal cruelty in the UCR Program
even though animal cruelty is a crime in all states, certain acts of
animal cruelty are felonies in 41 and the District of Columbia, and it
is linked to other types of crime, including family violence.
Therefore, there is no way to systematically track such cases. The
current practice is to rely on the limited ability of local animal
control agencies to monitor animal cruelty cases or literally check
local court records. Given the current arrangement, state and national
trends are impossible to identify.
``The Committee directs the FBI to provide the necessary resources
to assign the crime of animal cruelty its own classification in the UCR
Program by adding this category to its software and other reporting
mechanisms. This will enable law enforcement agencies and researchers
to track trends and better understand factors associated with
committing animal abuse, allowing more effective interventions.
Additionally, individuals who are more likely to commit other serious
crimes could be identified.
``The Committee further directs the FBI to provide a report to the
Committee by December 2003 on the integration of this category into its
UCR Program.''
reference list
Ascione, F. A. (1993). Children who are cruel to animals: A review
of research and Implications for developmental psychopathology.
Anthrozoos, 6, 226-247.
Ascione, F. A. (1998). Battered women's reports of their partners'
and their children's' cruelty to animals. Journal of Emotional Abuse,
1, 119-133.
Ascione, F. A. (2001). Animal abuse and youth violence. Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), Juvenile Justice
Bulletin, September.
Boat, B. (1999). Abuse of children and abuse of animals: Using the
links to inform child assessment and protection. In F. R. Ascione & P.
Arkow (Eds.), Child abuse, domestic violence, and animal abuse: Linking
the circles of compassion for prevention and intervention (pp. 83-100).
West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press.
Deviney, E., Dickert, J., & Lockwood, R. (1983). The care of pets
within child abusing families. International Journal for the Study of
Animal Problems, 4, 321-329.
Felthous, A.R. & Kellert, S.R (1987). Childhood cruelty to animals
and later aggression against people: A review. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 144, 710-717.
Flynn, C. P. (2000). Why family professionals can no longer ignore
violence toward animals. Family Relations, 49, 87-95.
Jory, B. & Randour, M.L. (1999). The AniCare Model of Treatment for
Animal Abuse (adult version). Printed and distributed by the Doris Day
Animal Foundation and Psychologists for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals.
Kellert, S.R. & Felthous, A. R. (1985). Childhood cruelty toward
animals among criminals and noncriminals. Human Relations, 38, 1113-
1129.
Luke, C., Arluke, A., Levin, (1997) Cruelty to animals and other
crimes: A study by the MSPCA and Northeastern University. Boston:
Massachusetts. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
Randour, M.L., Krinsk, S., & Wolf, J. (2002). AniCare Child: An
Approach for the Assessment and Treatment of Childhood Animal Abuse.
Printed and distributed by the Doris Day Animal Foundation and
Psychologists for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
______
Prepared Statement of the University Corporation for Atmospheric
Research
On behalf of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
(UCAR) and the university community involved in weather and climate
research and related education, training and support activities, I
submit this written testimony for the record of the U.S. Senate
Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State
and the Judiciary. This testimony pertains to the fiscal year 2004
budget request for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA). UCAR is a consortium of 66 universities that manages and
operates the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and
additional atmospheric and related sciences programs. In addition to
its member universities, UCAR has formal relationships with
approximately 100 additional undergraduate and graduate schools
including several historically black and minority-serving institutions,
and 40 international universities and laboratories. The National
Science Foundation (NSF) and other federal agencies, including NOAA,
support UCAR.
introduction
As one of the world's foremost scientific and environmental
agencies, NOAA has responded to the needs of the nation in designing
its budget and program to protect citizens, the environment and the
economy. Last year the NOAA leadership conducted a nationwide program
review, asking for input from NOAA's many stakeholders. Those responses
are reflected in the subsequent strategic plan, ``New Priorities for
the 21st Century.'' We applaud the NOAA leadership for its vision, and
urge the Committee to support the critical, evolving work of this
agency. Within the NOAA fiscal year 2004 budget request, I would like
to comment on the following offices and programs:
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR)
The OAR supports a network of scientists and environmental research
laboratories in order to provide the sound science upon which decision
makers can frame effective regulations to solve environmental problems
and upon which economic growth can be managed in an environmentally
sound manner. The President's request for OAR overall is down 2 percent
from the fiscal year 2003 final appropriation. However, since the
fiscal year 2004 request, which preceded the fiscal year 2003 final
numbers, was based on the fiscal year 2003 request and reflected a
major increase for OAR, we believe that the Administration is
demonstrating strong commitment to the work of OAR. Therefore, I ask
the Committee to provide OAR with a five percent increase and fund the
Office at $384.0 million in fiscal year 2004.
U.S. Weather Research Program (USWRP).--USWRP is an interagency
program that is dedicated to making forecasts of high-impact weather
more specific, accurate, and reliable, thereby saving lives and
property, and helping regional economies. I urge the Committee to
support the fiscal year 2004 request of $4.0 million for the USWRP Base
and $1.3 million for THORPEX, an international program focused on
extending weather predictability from the current 7 days to two weeks
and double the rate of improvements in forecast skill by 2012, and to
support the request of $7.3 million for the High Impact Weather Program
component of the USWRP.
U.S. Weather Research Program--Collaborations Fund.--Through the
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) and the National
Weather Service (NWS), NOAA bears a great responsibility for advancing
the nation's weather research and the application of that research to
improve weather forecasts and warnings. The best way to accomplish this
is to form working alliances, or partnerships, between the scientific
expertise that exists within NOAA and the country's broad expertise
within the university and private sector communities. Competitive
proposals and a peer review process through the establishment of a
Collaborations Fund would ensure that the best research results and
technologies are achieved for the resources available. I urge the
Committee to establish the USWRP Collaborations Fund with a new
allocation of $20 million in NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric
Research, in order to leverage the research and research applications
expertise of this country toward accelerated implementation of the
USWRP goals.
Climate and Global Change Program.--The climate variability
predictions provided by the Climate and Global Change Program are
absolutely critical to related national and international policy
formulation and to efforts to adapt to and mitigate the effects of
long-term climate change. The Program is an integral part of the
interagency U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) that is the
major U.S. contributor to the world's understanding of the global
climate system. The President's request for this program is $73.0
million, down 2.3 percent from the fiscal year 2003 final
appropriation. I urge the Committee to provide the Climate and Global
Change Program $74.7 million at the very least, the level at which this
program is funded for fiscal year 2003.
Phased-Array Radar.--NOAA requests $1 million to develop new
technologies for forecasting and detecting tornadoes and other forms of
severe weather and to disseminate this information to emergency
managers, the media, and the general public for appropriate action.
This initiative will provide the meteorological research community with
the first dedicated phased-array radar facility to collect real-time
data around the clock. When fully implemented, tornado warning lead
times could be doubled from 11 to a life-saving 22 minutes. I urge the
Committee to support the $1 million request for the Phased-Array Radar.
Climate Observations and Services Program.--I urge the Committee to
fund the $55.3 million fiscal year 2004 request for Climate
Observations and Services. A robust observing system is perhaps the
most critical tool for the development of more accurate weather and
climate models. The increase for this program will build the climate
observing system required to support the research, modeling, and
decision support activities for the Administration's Climate Change
Research Initiative (CCRI). I further urge the Committee to support the
President's fiscal year 2004 request of $42.0 million for CCRI, our
nation's key research contribution to the global issue of climate and
environmental change.
Laboratories and Joint Institutes
The 12 NOAA Research Laboratories, located across the country with
field stations around the world, conduct an integrated program of
fundamental research, technology development, and services to improve
understanding of the Earth and its oceans and inland waters, the lower
and upper atmosphere, and the space environment. The Laboratories have
established formal collaborative agreements with universities and non-
profit research institutions to form 11 Joint Institutes to study the
earth's oceans, inland waters, intermountain west, atmosphere, arctic,
and solar-terrestrial environment. I would like to comment on the
fiscal year 2004 request for the following laboratories:
Forecast Systems Laboratory (FSL).--The fiscal year 2004 request
terminates the nation's Wind Profiler Network, 35 stations that provide
hourly wind profiles from the ground to 53,000 feet to operational
weather forecasters and weather models. These data provide invaluable
support in the forecasting of tornadoes, winter storms and flash
floods. I strongly urge the Committee to restore $4.1 million for the
Wind Profiler Network and to thereby fund the Forecast Systems
Laboratory $11.5 million for fiscal year 2004.
Boulder Facilities Operations.--Six of the 12 NOAA Research
Laboratories, one NESDIS Data Center, one of OAR's 11 Joint Institutes,
and the Denver Forecast Office of the National Weather Service (NWS)
are all housed in Boulder at the David Skaggs Research Center. The
fiscal year 2003 Omnibus Bill eliminated rent, maintenance, utility,
and security charges assessed by the General Services Administration
for this building. It is critical that the Committee support Boulder
Facilities Operations at $4.5 million as requested for fiscal year
2004.
Adjustments to Base.--Failure to fund unavoidable increases to the
base budget, such as inflationary costs, changes in costs for salaries,
and good and services, can have a significant impact on the operations
of an agency, and affect productivity over time when those increases
have to be funded out of research programs. I urge the Committee to
restore the $4.5 million that was cut from Adjustments to Base in the
fiscal year 2003 Omnibus Bill, thereby increasing the fiscal year 2004
request to $10.0 million.
Space Environment Center (SEC).--The SEC is the national and world
warning center for disturbances that can affect people and equipment
working in the space environment. It provides real-time monitoring and
forecasting of solar and geophysical events, conducts research in
solar-terrestrial physics, and develops techniques for forecasting
solar and geophysical disturbances. SEC's Space Weather Operations
Center is jointly operated with the U.S. Air Force because DOD's smart
weapons' accuracies, as well as the ability of ships, planes and
special forces units to fix their positions using GPS, are adversely
affected by space weather events. The fiscal year 20043 Omnibus Bill
cut the SEC by $2.25 million, an amount that seems to have been
restored in the fiscal year 2004 request. I urge the Committee to fund
the fiscal year 2004 request of $8.3 million for the Space Environment
Center.
National Weather Service (NWS)
As the nation's vulnerability to weather related hazards rises
because of increasing population, enhanced infrastructure, and
population movement toward cities in threatened regions such as coastal
areas, the NWS strives to mitigate impacts through improved forecasts
and warning systems for the protection of life and property. There are
few agency programs that impact our daily lives and the health of our
economy as profoundly as does the NWS. I urge the Committee to support
the fiscal year 2004 NWS overall request of $820 million. Within NWS, I
would like to comment on the following programs:
NWS Adjustments to Base.--As the largest and most labor-intensive
service within NOAA--70 percent of its budget dedicated to labor--the
NWS depends on full funding of personnel cost increases in order to
sustain current service levels. In the past, reductions in ATBs
resulted in cutbacks in NWS research grants and forecaster training
programs. It is critical that the Committee support the $20.1 million
to fund adjustments to base.
NOAA Center for Weather and Climate Prediction.--The Department of
Commerce, the State of Maryland, and academic community advisors have
all agreed on a shared vision to build a Center of Excellence for
Environmental Research, Education, Applications and Operations in order
to meet NOAA operational requirements to create research synergy in
weather and climate prediction; to accelerate transition of new science
and technology into operations; and to enhance recruitment
opportunities. I ask that the Committee support the request of $10.4
million for this new state-of-the-art facility.
Advanced Hydrologic Prediction System (AHPS).--Seventy-five percent
of all Presidential Disaster Declarations involve flood damages. AHPS
will provide emergency managers with critical data with which to save
lives and property, manage energy and water resources more efficiently,
and enable a more rapid infusion of scientific advances into the
system. Within the NWS Operations, Research, and Facilities account, I
urge the Committee to support the fiscal year 2004 request of $6.1
million.
Aviation Weather.--Weather is the cause of approximately 200 U.S.
general aviation pilot fatalities per year and over 70 percent of U.S.
commercial airline delays that result in tremendous cost to customers
and companies. The Aviation Weather program increases the number of
aviation weather observations; transitions research into operations
more efficiently; and develops and implements new training programs for
forecasters, pilots, and air traffic controllers. I urge the Committee
to support the NWS Aviation Weather initiative at the requested $2.5
million for fiscal year 2004.
NWS Weather and Climate Supercomputing and Backup (Systems
Acquisition).--The critical nature of the separate request for NWS
supercomputing backup cannot be exaggerated. The NWS forecast computing
capabilities are located at a single facility which means that the
nation's severe weather watches and warnings all emanate from one
location that could fail for a number of reasons including faulty
technology, power supply problems, or terrorism. The redundancy,
provided by supercomputing backup, covers those risks and is a critical
component of the Department of Commerce Homeland Security Initiative.
When not in emergency use, the backup provides needed computing time
for weather and climate research. I urge the Committee to support the
fiscal year 2004 request of $19.3 million for NWS Weather and Climate
Supercomputing and $7.2 million to implement the backup computer
system.
Radiosonde Replacement Network.--There is little doubt that the
obsolete infrastructure for this principle data source on upper air for
all weather forecasts and models will fail by 2005 if it does not
receive adequate modernization funding now. I urge the Committee to
support the fiscal year 2004 request of $6.9 million for the Radiosonde
Replacement Network in the NWS Procurement, Acquisition and
Construction (PAC) account.
Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System (AWIPS).--This
interactive computer system integrates all meteorological and
hydrological data, and all satellite and radar data. AWIPS is a
fundamental source of data for the research community and, when
combined with NEXRAD radar, it enables the NWS to issue far more
effective weather warnings and forecasts for the entire country. In the
NWS Operations, Research and Facilities (ORF) account, I urge the
Committee to support the fiscal year 2004 proposed amount of $37.6
million for AWIPS. In the NWS Procurement, Acquisition and Construction
(PAC) account, I urge the Committee to fund AWIPS at the $16.3 million
request at least, an amount level with fiscal year 2003.
Cooperative Observer Network.--The network's 11,000 weather
observation sites are used to maintain the country's climate record and
to provide data to NWS local field offices and to university
laboratories. I urge the Committee to support the request of $1.9
million, the same as the fiscal year 2003 enacted level, for
Cooperative Observer Network maintenance.
Central Forecast Guidance.--The NWS Central Forecast Guidance line
provides most of the funding for the National Centers for Environmental
Prediction (NCEP), nine centers within the NWS that all work together
toward the common goal of using data for weather predictions and
seasonal forecasts in order to save lives, protect property, and create
economic opportunity. Forecasts that reach the public via media outlets
originate at NCEP. In recent years, the centers have not been supported
adequately to process weather data and transfer it into operations. In
order to address this problem, I urge the Committee to support the
fiscal year 2004 request of $45.1 million, a 3.7 percent increase over
the fiscal year 2003 enacted level.
National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service (NESDIS)
NESDIS operates this country's space-based component of the global
environment observing system, and manages the world's largest
collection of atmospheric, geophysical, and oceanographic data
representing 85 percent of the data used by the NWS for forecasting
activities. Society depends on NESDIS for data that affect numerous
activities including distributing energy supplies, maintaining
satellite communications, developing global food supplies, increasing
aviation safety, managing natural resources, protecting citizens from
natural hazards, and transporting our nation's armed forces. I urge the
Committee to support the fiscal year 2004 request of $91.2 million for
NESDIS Environmental Satellite Observing Systems, an increase of $5
million over the fiscal year 2003 enacted level.
The rich data collected by the NESDIS satellite systems are
acquired, processed, analyzed, archived and disseminated through the
Data Information Management Systems to commerce, industry, agriculture,
science and engineering, the general public, and government at all
levels. While the Satellite Systems function collects data, the Data
Centers and Information Services function makes those data useful and
available, so I am disturbed to see that the data management function
is recommended for a $5.3 million decrease. An increase in funding for
the observing systems that collect data obviously should be coupled
with an increase in funding for the management systems that make the
collected data useful and accessible. I urge the Committee to
appropriate, at the very least, $5.3 million above the request in order
to restore the NESDIS Data Centers and Information Services to the
fiscal year 2003 enacted level of $64.4 million in fiscal year 2004.
Educational Partnership Program with Minority Serving Institutions
Under-representation of minorities in earth science disciplines in
this country is a serious issue that must be addressed by multiple
programs across multiple agencies and institutions. I urge the
Committee to support the $15.0 million request for NOAA's Educational
Partnership Program with Minority Serving Institutions.
On behalf of the UCAR community, I want to thank the Committee for
the important work you do for U.S. scientific research, infrastructure,
education, and training. We understand and appreciate that the nation
is undergoing significant budget pressures at this time, but a strong
nation in the future depends on the investments we make in science and
technology today. We appreciate your attention to the recommendations
of our community concerning the fiscal year 2004 budget of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Federation of Community Broadcasters
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony to this
Subcommittee regarding the appropriation for the Public
Telecommunications Facilities Program (PTFP). As the President and CEO
of the National Federation of Community Broadcasters, I speak on behalf
of over 200 community radio stations and related organizations across
the country. This includes the new Low Power FM service that has
recently been authorized by the FCC. NFCB is the sole national
organization representing this group of stations, which provide service
in both the smallest communities and largest metropolitan areas of this
country. Nearly half of our members are rural stations, and half are
minority controlled stations.
In summary, the points we wish to make to this Subcommittee are
that NFCB:
--Supports funding for PTFP that will cover the on-going needs of
public radio and television stations.
--Supports funding for conversion of public radio and television to
digital broadcasting.
--Requests report language to ensure that PTFP utilizes any digital
funds it receives for radio as well as television needs.
Community radio supports $70 million in funding for the Public
Telecommunications Facilities Program in fiscal year 2004.--Federal
support distributed through the PTFP is essential to continuing and
expanding the public broadcasting service throughout the United States.
It is particularly critical for rural stations and for those stations
serving minority communities. PTFP funds new stations, expanding the
reach of public broadcasting to rural areas and to audiences that are
not presently served by existing stations. In addition, it replaces
obsolete and worn out equipment so that the existing stations can
continue to broadcast high quality programming. Finally, with the
advent of digital broadcasting, PTFP funding will help with the
conversion to this new technology.
We support $70 million in funding to ensure that both the on-going
program--currently funded in fiscal year 2003 at $43.4 million--will be
continued, and that the increase to $70 million will be available to
help cover the cost of radio and television converting to digital
transmission. This increase in funding is particularly urgent this year
because the FCC has now endorsed a standard for digital radio
broadcasting and the television conversion deadline is imminent.
Federal funding is particularly critical to stations serving rural
and underserved audiences which have limited potential for fundraising
because of sparse populations, limited number of local businesses, and
low income levels. Even so, PTFP funding is a matching program so that
the federal money is leveraged with a local commitment of funds. This
program is a strong motivating factor in raising the significant money
necessary to replace, upgrade and purchase expensive broadcast
equipment.
Community radio supports funding for conversion to digital
broadcasting for public radio and television.--While public
television's digital conversion needs are more immediate, the Federal
Communications Commission has now approved a standard for digital radio
transmission. The initial conversion of radio stations is being
concentrated in 13 seed markets. The Corporation for Public
Broadcasting (CPB) is using some of its previously appropriated digital
funds to help public stations in these markets convert to digital,
conduct additional research on AM radio conversion, and work with radio
receiver manufacturers to build in the capacity to receive a 2nd audio
channel. The development of 2nd audio channels will potentially double
the public service that public radio can provide, particularly to
unserved and underserved communities. This initial funding from CPB
will only help a small number of the stations that will ultimately need
to either convert or be left behind while the world goes digital.
We appreciate Congress' direction to the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting that it utilize its digital conversion fund for both radio
and television and ask that you ensure that the PTFP funds are used for
both media. Congress stated, with regard to the fiscal year 2000
digital conversion funds:
The required (digital) conversion will impose enormous costs on
both individual stations and the public broadcasting system as a whole.
Because television and radio infrastructures are closely linked, the
conversion of television to digital will create immediate costs not
only for television, but also for public radio stations (emphasis
added). Therefore, the Committee has included $15,000,000 to assist
radio stations and television stations in the conversion to
digitization . . . (S. Rpt. 105-300)
NFCB requests that the funding for digital conversion be committed
in advance to facilitate the orderly transition of a very
individualized process--a process that will be different at each
station. Advance funding will give the system time to raise the
substantial matching funds that will be necessary and to know what
additional funds will be needed to complete the process.
Thank you for your consideration of our testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS)
Program
The Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS) Program
respectfully requests that Congress appropriate for fiscal year 2004,
$50 million to continue their support in combating drug trafficking and
organized crime.
These funds will enable RISS to continue identifying, targeting,
prosecuting, and removing criminal conspirators involved in terrorism
activity, drug trafficking, organized criminal activity, criminal
gangs, and violent crime that span multijurisdictional boundaries.
Funds will allow RISS to continue to support the investigation and
prosecution efforts of over 6,300 local, state, and federal law
enforcement member agencies across the nation comprising over 675,000
sworn law enforcement personnel.
Through funding from Congress, RISS has implemented and operates
the only secure Web-based nationwide network--called riss.net--for
communications and sharing of criminal intelligence by local, state,
and federal law enforcement agencies. Funds will allow RISS to upgrade
the technology infrastructure and resources to support increased use
and reliance on the system by member law enforcement agencies and
support the integration of other systems connected to riss.net for
information sharing and communication. Using Virtual Private Network
technology, the law enforcement users access the public Internet from
their desktop and have a secure connection over the private riss.net
intranet to all RISS criminal intelligence databases and resources.
RISS member law enforcement agencies accessed riss.net an average of
3.9 million times per month during fiscal year 2002. Riss.net is a
proven, highly effective system that improves the quality of criminal
intelligence information available and puts it in the hands of the law
enforcement officers to make key decisions at critical points in their
investigation and prosecution efforts.
The Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Regional Information Sharing
Systems (RISS) is a federally funded program comprised of six regional
intelligence centers. The six centers provide criminal information
exchange and other related operational support services to local,
state, and federal law enforcement agencies located in all fifty
states, the District of Columbia, U.S. territories, Canada, Australia,
and England. These centers are:
Middle Atlantic-Great Lakes Organized Crime Law Enforcement Network
(MAGLOCLEN).--Delaware, District of Columbia, Indiana, Maryland,
Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey, and New York, as well as
Canada and England.
Mid-States Organized Crime Information Center (MOCIC).--Illinois,
Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South
Dakota, and Wisconsin, as well as Canada.
New England State Police Information Network (NESPIN).--
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and
Vermont, as well as Canada.
Regional Organized Crime Information Center (ROCIC).--Alabama,
Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and
West Virginia, as well as Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Rocky Mountain Information Network (RMIN).--Arizona, Colorado,
Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, as well as
Canada.
Western States Information Network (WSIN).--Alaska, California,
Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington, as well as Canada, Guam, and Australia.
RISS is a crucial force in fighting terrorism, increased violent
criminal activity by street gangs, drug traffickers, sophisticated
cyber criminals, and emerging criminal groups that require a
cooperative effort by local, state, and federal law enforcement.
Interagency cooperation has proven to be the best method to combat the
increasing criminal activity in these areas. The RISS Centers are
filling law enforcement's need for rapid, but controlled sharing of
information and intelligence pertaining to known or suspected drug
traffickers and criminals. Congress funded the RISS Program to address
this need as evidenced by its authorization in the Anti-Drug Abuse Act
of 1988.
The success of RISS has been acknowledged and vigorously endorsed
by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), as well as
other national law enforcement groups such as the National Sheriff's
Association (NSA) and the National Fraternal Order of Police (NFOP).
These groups have seen the value of this congressional program to law
enforcement nationally and have worked with the National Association of
Attorneys General (NAAG), the National District Attorneys Association
(NDAA), and the National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA) to further
strengthen the awareness of RISS.
RISS is operating current state-of-the-art technical capabilities
and systems architecture that allow local, state, and federal law
enforcement member agencies to interact electronically with one another
in a secure environment. The RISS system has built-in accountability
and security. The RISS secure intranet (riss.net) protects information
through use of encryption, smart cards, Internet protocol security
standards, and firewalls to prevent unauthorized access. The RISS
system is governed by the operating principles and security and privacy
standards of 28 CFR Part 23 (Criminal Intelligence Systems Operating
Policies). The technical architecture adopted by RISS requires proper
authorization to access information, but also provides flexibility in
the levels of electronic access assigned to individual users based on
security and need-to-know issues. Riss.net supports secure e-mail and
is easily accessible using the Internet. This type system and
architecture is referenced and recommended in the General Counterdrug
Intelligence Plan (GCIP).
The RISS Program promotes federal, state, local, and tribal law
enforcement information sharing. RISS is the mechanism that state and
federal law enforcement agencies are using to leverage their resources
and existing systems for sharing sensitive but unclassified
information. RISS has entered into a partnership with the High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) to electronically connect all
of the HIDTA's to riss.net for communications and information sharing.
Currently, 15 HIDTA's are electronically connected as nodes to riss.net
and RISS is working to complete the connection of the remaining
HIDTA's. Nine state agencies are currently connected as nodes on
riss.net. An additional 15 state law enforcement agencies are pending
connection as nodes to share information, including terrorism and
homeland security information, using riss.net.
The National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC) is a member of RISS
and uses the RISS network as a communications mechanism for publishing
counterdrug intelligence products to federal, state, and local law
enforcement members. RISS and the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC)
officials entered into a partnership and have electronically connected
EPIC as a node to riss.net to capture clandestine laboratory seizure
data from RISS state and local law enforcement member agencies. RISS is
currently working with the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management (BLM), to connect all of the BLM offices to riss.net.
Other systems connected to riss.net are the Law Enforcement
Intelligence Unit (LEIU) and the National Drug Pointer Index (NDPIX).
The National White Collar Crime Center (NW\3\C) and the Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) are currently pending connection to
riss.net as nodes.
During 2002, officials of the FBI Law Enforcement Online (LEO)
system and the RISS system achieved interconnection of the two systems
for distribution of sensitive but unclassified homeland security
information to authorized users of both LEO and RISS. In addition, the
Executive Office of the United States Attorneys (EOUSA) and the RISS
Centers initiated actions to connect staff to riss.net at each of the
93 U.S. Attorneys' Offices (USAO) Anti-Terrorism Task Forces throughout
the United States.
RISS is also expanding its resources to deliver the RISS Anti-
Terrorism Information Exchange (RISS ATIX) to provide access through
riss.net to additional groups of users for secure interagency
communication, information sharing, and dissemination of terrorist
threat information. These additional groups of users, referred to as
RISS ATIX participants, will include public service, public safety,
emergency management, utility, and other critical infrastructure
personnel that have traditionally not been served by RISS. RISS ATIX
participants will be assigned restricted access to certain specific
RISS services and resources as appropriate in consideration of their
roles with regard to terrorism and disasters.
All of these above mentioned state and federal agencies are
integrating with and using the riss.net secure nationwide
communications backbone to share criminal intelligence and alerts and
homeland security information within their own agencies and among the
other agencies. RISS needs funds to purchase hardware and software to
support these agency system connections to riss.net to continue to
provide and improve access for sharing information for law enforcement
agencies across the country. In addition, RISS has developed RISS ATIX
to provide first responders and critical infrastructure personnel with
a secure means via riss.net to communicate, share information, and
receive terrorist threat information. RISS is operating an
unprecedented nationwide network for communicating critical information
in a secure environment to both law enforcement and other first
responders. To support the increased needs of these personnel and
continue to maintain the RISS system and demand for RISS services and
resources, RISS is requesting an increase in funding to $50 million for
2004.
RISS continues to promote interagency investigations by improving
capabilities for member agencies to quickly and easily access RISS
databases and resources by expanding the enrollment of member agencies
for access to riss.net through distribution of security hardware and
software. In view of today's increasing demands on federal, state, and
local law enforcement budgets, requests for RISS services have risen.
The Institute for Intergovernmental Research (IIR) report on the RISS
Program showed that as of December 31, 2002, the number of criminal
subjects maintained in the RISSIntel intelligence databases for all
Centers combined was 1,079,369 with 258,907 new subjects being added in
2002. The combined databases of all six RISS Centers also maintained
data on 1,712,307 locations, vehicles, weapons, and telephone numbers
for a grand total of 2,791,676 data entries available for search. For
the twelve-month period January through December 2002, the total number
of inquiries by law enforcement member agencies to the RISSIntel
database for all six regional intelligence centers combined was
766,845. These inquiries resulted in hits or information to assist law
enforcement agencies in their criminal cases. All RISS Centers combined
delivered 19,777 analytical products to member agencies in support of
their investigation and prosecution efforts in 2002.
This support of law enforcement has had a dramatic impact on the
success of their investigations. Over the three-year period 2000-2002,
RISS generated a return by member agencies that resulted in 10,024
arrests, seizure of narcotics valued at almost $141 million, seizure of
over $13 million in currency, and recovery or seizure of property
valued at over $25 million. In addition, almost $3 million was seized
through RICO civil procedures. In the 22-year period since 1980 when
the Program was fully implemented, the RISS Program has assisted its
member agencies with their investigations. Results of these
investigations have amounted to over $12.7 billion dollars in
recoveries at a total cost that approximates 2.72 percent of that
amount, or a $37 return for every dollar spent.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance administers the RISS Program and
has established guidelines for provision of services to member
agencies. The RISS regional intelligence centers are subject to
oversight, monitoring, and auditing by the U.S. Congress, the General
Accounting Office, a federally funded program evaluation office; the
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance; and local
government units. The Intelligence Systems Policy Review Board also
monitors the RISS Centers for 28 CFR Part 23 compliance.
It is respectfully requested that the Congress fully fund the RISS
Program as a line item in the congressional budget, in the requested
amount of $50 million. Local and state law enforcement, who depend on
the RISS Centers for information sharing, training, analytical support,
funding, and technical assistance, are anticipating increased
competition for decreasing budget resources. The state and local
agencies require more, not less, funding to fight the nation's crime/
drug problem.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide the committee with
this testimony and appreciate the support this committee has
continuously provided to the RISS Program.
______
Prepared Statement of The Ocean Conservancy
The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) is pleased to share its views regarding
the marine conservation programs in the budgets of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) and the Department of State's
Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific
Affairs. TOC requests that this statement be included in the official
record for the fiscal year 2004 Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary
and Related Agencies bill. TOC cannot overstate the importance of this
Subcommittee in advancing marine conservation and greatly appreciates
the funding provided in fiscal year 2003. TOC recognizes the
constraints this Subcommittee faces this year and urges you to continue
to make ocean conservation a top priority.
national oceanic and atmospheric administration
Conservation Trust Fund
Passed by Congress in 2000, the Conservation Trust Fund (also
referred to as the Conservation Spending Category) is a groundbreaking
bipartisan accomplishment and represents a major advancement in
conservation funding. TOC is grateful that this Subcommittee has upheld
its commitment to funding the Conservation Trust Fund over the last
three fiscal years and calls for your continued commitment in fiscal
year 2004 by dedicating $520 million for critical ocean and coastal
conservation activities within NOAA. We also urge you to protect the
integrity of the trust fund by limiting its uses for net increases
rather than a substitute for base funding.
Coral Reef Conservation
NOAA plays a critical role in protecting coral reefs, serves on the
successful Interagency Coral Reef Task Force and has major
responsibilities for implementing the National Action Plan to Conserve
Coral Reefs. Through monitoring, mapping, restoration and outreach
activities, NOAA works with state, territory, local and other parties
to reduce land-based pollution, overfishing, diseases, and other
threats to coral reefs. TOC is disappointed that the Subcommittee cut
funding for coral reefs in fiscal year 2003 and respectfully requests
that at a minimum, funding be restored in fiscal year 2004. In
addition, $2 million above the Administration's request is desperately
needed to support local efforts to protect coral reefs and should be
directed to the Coral Reef Conservation Fund established by the Coral
Reef Conservation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-562). This funding will
leverage an additional $2 to $4 million in matching resources through
partnerships with local, state and territory governments, universities,
the private sector and others to fund on-the-ground coral reef
conservation and management activities in the United States and its
territories. This funding is one of The Ocean Conservancy's highest
priorities.
National Ocean Service
Marine Sanctuary Program
Our nation's 13 sanctuaries encompass almost 18,000 square miles of
our most significant marine resources. TOC requests the Subcommittee
provide $37.8 million for sanctuary operations, $2 million above the
Administration's request. This increase is critical to reducing
staffing shortages and supporting conservation, community outreach,
research, and education programs, and updating sanctuary management
plans as required by law. TOC also supports the Administration's
request of $10 million for construction, particularly for interpretive
facilities to educate the general public about the role of the federal
government in managing our nation's ocean and coastal resources.
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)
TOC greatly appreciates this Subcommittee's $1 million increase in
fiscal year 2003 to support NOAA's MPAs initiative and requests an
additional $1 million increase in fiscal year 2004. This $5 million
will allow NOAA to work more effectively with federal and state
agencies and other partners to acquire data for the ongoing MPA
inventory and support the recently formed Marine Protected Areas
Advisory Committee and its working groups. This increase will allow
NOAA to better assist stakeholders, including states, the National Park
Service and others by holding regional workshops and providing training
and technical assistance to determine how best to design and implement
MPAs.
Nonpoint Pollution Implementation Grants
Nonpoint source pollution continues to be the nation's largest
source of water pollution. There were over 13,410 closings and
advisories at U.S. beaches in the year 2001. TOC supports the
Administration's fiscal year 2004 request of $10 million to help
coastal states and territories, with approved nonpoint plans, continue
to make progress in implementing their priority activities.
National Marine Fisheries Service
The Ocean Conservancy remains concerned about the state of our
nation's fisheries. As the $100 million for fisheries disaster
assistance in fiscal year 2003 demonstrates, we must do a better job
managing our fisheries. Below is what TOC believes are NMFS's most
pressing needs.
Expanding Fisheries Stock Assessments
The status of roughly two-thirds of our commercially caught ocean
fish populations is unknown due in large part to lack of funding for
basic research and regular stock assessments. We applaud the
Subcommittee's decision to increase stock assessment funding to $17
million in fiscal year 2003 and urge that this trend continues with $25
million in fiscal year 2004. Doing so will help reduce the backlog in
research days-at-sea and give managers baseline information critical to
managing our fisheries. This funding is one of The Ocean Conservancy's
highest priorities.
Fisheries Observers
Along with stock assessments, reliable, objective information about
how many fish are being caught, directly and as bycatch, is crucial to
responsible management of our fish populations. Observers are a key
means of collecting such information. TOC recommends $25 million for
fisheries observers in fiscal year 2004, $5 million above the
Administration's request and encourages the Subcommittee to prioritize
the following three programs.
Bycatch Observers
TOC fully supports the Administration's $2.8 million initiative to
reduce bycatch. The $2 million within this initiative for bycatch
observers will support approximately 2,000 observer days-at-sea,
thereby enhancing the collection of bycatch data from commercial and
recreational fishing vessels. Two fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico in
desperate need of increased observer coverage are the bottom longline
fishery and the shrimp otter trawl fishery. Longlines capture a variety
of ocean wildlife besides the reef fish they target, including marine
birds, sea turtles and soft corals. The shrimp fishery is believed to
be the largest fishery in the Gulf of Mexico, but efforts to monitor
the effort and catch are limited. With revised turtle excluder device
regulations going into effect in August, it is critical that an
observer program be established.
National Observer Program
While encouraged by the Administration's request to expand the
national observer program, TOC believes that $7 million is still
inadequate and recommends additional support for NMFS to meet its
national observer needs.
West Coast Observers
TOC respectfully requests that the Subcommittee, at the minimum,
return funding for West Coast Observers to the fiscal year 2002 level
of $4.0 million.
Enforcement/Surveillance and Vessel Monitoring System
In addition to better data, enforcement of our fishery management
laws is critical. Unfortunately, lack of funding has hampered NMFS's
ability to kept pace with the need. TOC urges $46.9 million in fiscal
year 2004 to address this shortfall so that more officers can be hired
to better enforce our fisheries management laws. TOC supports expanding
the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) program. While we are pleased that
the Subcommittee provided a slight increase in VMS in fiscal year 2003,
we urge that the President's request of $7.4 million be fully supported
in fiscal year 2004.
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)
Given the need to better understand the impacts of fishing and
other activities on EFH, and the need to more fully comply with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act's requirement
to minimize impacts to those habitats, TOC believes that increased
funding is crucial and requests $12.5 million in fiscal year 2004.
Atlantic Coast Cooperative Statistics Program
TOC greatly appreciates the Subcommittee's support of $2 million in
fiscal year 2003 for this unique cooperative state and federal
fisheries data collection program. We request $3 million in fiscal year
2004 so that this program can be expanded and better implemented along
the East Coast, thereby helping to ensure that data collection methods
are more consistent and reliable.
Highly Migratory Shark Fisheries Research Program
This effective multi-regional collaborative effort conducts
research on shark and ray populations in the Gulf of Mexico, the
Atlantic, and the Pacific. Information developed from this program has
provided critical information for assessing the status of shark
populations and informing better management. TOC greatly appreciates
the Subcommittee's rejection of the Administration's proposed cut in
fiscal year 2003 and requests at least level funding in fiscal year
2004.
Pacific Highly Migratory Species Research
TOC supports funding for this program, believes the
Administration's request of $750,000 is inadequate and requests $1.5
million in fiscal year 2004. Specifically, funding is needed to conduct
stock assessments and biological studies and improve bycatch mitigation
techniques for these fisheries.
Marine Mammal Protection
TOC believes the lack of adequate resources has severely hampered
NMFS's ability to effectively implement the MMPA and requests $9.1
million in fiscal year 2004, $2 million above the Administration's
request. This increase is necessary to fund top priority studies
identified by the take reduction teams: to design and implement fishery
management plans that will not endanger marine mammals; conduct
research on population trends, health, and demographics; and to carry
out education and enforcement programs. It would also allow research
into the causes of strandings and die-offs and identification of
mitigation measures to prevent such deaths in the future.
Bottlenose Dolphin Research
In response to the more than 100 bottlenose dolphin mortalities in
the gillnet fishery off North Carolina (over four times allowable
levels), the Atlantic Bottlenose Take Reduction Team was established in
2001. TOC recommends $3 million in fiscal year 2004 to reduce dolphin
mortalities by refining population estimates, conducting bycatch
estimates and increasing observer coverage.
Endangered Species
NMFS bears significant responsibility for administering the
Endangered Species Act and is responsible not only for the recovery of
already-listed species such as Northern Atlantic Right Whales (see
below), smalltooth sawfish, Steller sea lions, and all species of sea
turtles found in U.S. waters, but also for responding to listing
petitions in a timely fashion, consulting with federal agencies on
proposed actions that may affect listed species, designating critical
habitat, and implementing recovery plans. TOC is concerned about NMFS's
ability to meet its responsibilities under the ESA and respectfully
requests the Subcommittee increase NMFS's ESA base funding by $2
million to meet its fiscal year 2004 demands.
North Atlantic Right Whales
With approximately only 300 North Atlantic Right Whales still
alive, funding is needed to improve our understanding of right whales
and to develop fishing technologies to reduce entanglements. TOC thanks
the Subcommittee for its support of $10 million in fiscal year 2003 and
requests level funding in fiscal year 2004.
department of state
Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs
International Fisheries Commission Account
TOC requests $200,000 for the State Department to support
implementation of two landmark agreements, the Inter-American
Convention for the Protection and Conservation of Sea Turtles (IAC) and
the Memorandum of Understanding on the Conservation and Management of
Marine Turtles and their Habitats of the Indian Ocean and South East
Asia (IO). To date, nine nations, including Brazil, Costa Rica,
Ecuador, Honduras, Mexico, the Netherlands, Peru, and Venezuela have
ratified the IAC. To date, 23 countries have signed the IO agreement.
Since ratifying the IAC and becoming a signatory of the IO agreement in
2000, the United States has played a leading role in the establishment
of these instruments and continued leadership and support will ensure
their early momentum continues.
marine mammal commission
TOC requests that the Subcommittee support the Marine Mammal
Commission at $1.895 million in fiscal year 2004, per the
Administration's request.
anti-environmental riders
TOC urges this Subcommittee to not attach any anti-environmental
rider to this or any other appropriations bill. In the past, riders
have been used by Members of Congress to rollback environmental
protection and prevent NOAA from advancing marine conservation.
These programs and issues are of the utmost importance to the
stewardship of the nation's living marine resources. We greatly
appreciate your support for these programs in the past and look forward
to continued, responsible funding for these programs in fiscal year
2004. Thank you for considering our requests.
______
Prepared Statement of The Asia Foundation
The importance and continuing relevance of the Asia Foundation's
mission and mandate have been underscored by the events of September 11
and the war on terrorism: to develop institutions of governance,
including constitutional frameworks, legislative branch and judiciary;
support civil discourse and conflict resolution; expand economic
opportunity to improve the quality of life and give more people a stake
in stability; and promote better understanding between the United
States and the countries of Asia.
The Asia Foundation is gratified by the confidence of the Congress
in its programs, as demonstrated by an increased appropriation of
$10.44 million for fiscal year 2003, $1 million above the
Administration's request. While the Administration has endorsed the
work of The Asia Foundation by requesting an appropriation of $9.25
million for fiscal year 2004, the Foundation respectfully hopes that
the Congress will once again add to its funding, given the unparalleled
new challenges facing Asia and The Asia Foundation's distinctive
capacity to address them. As the Subcommittee knows, The Asia
Foundation implements concrete programs in Asia that improve governance
and legal reform, protect human rights, promote economic reform and
encourage peaceful, cooperative international relations.
In the face of growing anti-Americanism and the threats of rising
extremism in countries with predominantly Muslim populations in Asia,
where over 70 percent of the world's Muslims live, it is more important
than ever to address the root causes of persistent poverty, lack of
opportunity, and loss of faith in local leaders and institutions. These
new circumstances in Asia highlight the importance and value of The
Asia Foundation's programs. The Foundation is the only American
organization with a distinctive history of fifty years of presence and
engagement in Asia, especially in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Indonesia,
the front line states in the war on terrorism.
overview
The United States and Asia both face new challenges, complicated by
the war on terrorism, the war in Iraq and the instability likely to
occur in its aftermath. More than ever, the United States must support
political stability, and economic reform, and give attention to
countries where recent events have exacerbated U.S. bilateral
relations, in countries that have been traditional allies of the United
States, as well as in the countries with predominantly Muslim
populations in Asia. Working together with Asian organizations as a
trusted partner through a network of 17 offices in Asia, The Asia
Foundation is the only longstanding American nongovernmental,
nonpartisan organization with local credibility, a nuanced
understanding of the issues facing each country, and unparalleled
access and relationships with government, nongovernmental groups, and
the private sector. In addition to the importance of these programs in
the lives of people of these countries, the Foundation's efforts also
make an important and tangible contribution to public diplomacy for the
United States.
the asia foundation's mission
The Asia Foundation's core objectives are central to U.S. interests
in the Asia-Pacific region.
--Democracy, human rights and the rule of law: developing and
strengthening democratic institutions and encouraging an
active, informed and responsible non-governmental sector;
advancing the rule of law; and building institutions to uphold
and protect human rights, including women's rights and
opportunity;
--Open Trade and Investment: supporting open trade, investment and
economic reform at the regional and national levels;
--Peaceful and Stable Regional Relations: promoting U.S.-Asian
dialogue on security, regional economic cooperation, law and
human rights.
In the past, this Committee has encouraged the Foundation's grant
making role, and we remain faithful to that mission. The Foundation's
hallmark is to make sequential grants to steadily build and strengthen
institutions, develop leadership, and advance policy reforms in Asia.
Foundation assistance supports training, technical assistance, and seed
funding for new, local organizations, all aimed at promoting reform,
building Asian capacity, and strengthening U.S.-Asia relations.
Foundation grantees can be found in every sector in Asia, leaders of
government and industry and at the grass roots level, in the
increasingly diverse civil society of Asia. The Foundation is
distinctive in this role, not only providing the technical assistance
necessary, as in the case of the drafting of the Afghan constitution,
but also in providing grants that cover nuts and bolts necessities to
support that effort, such as reference materials, equipment and
administrative support costs for the Constitutional Commission. The
Asia Foundation is a well recognized American organization, but its
programs are grounded in Asia, helping to solve local problems in
cooperation with Asian partners.
programs
Examples of programs include:
--Legislative Development.--The Foundation has contributed to the
development of legislatures in 17 countries in Asia through
technical assistance, training members and staff and
facilitating interaction with the nongovernmental sector. The
Foundation is the only American organization providing
legislative training on responsible legislative practice, and
orientation for all four newly elected provincial assemblies in
Pakistan. The Foundation is also the only American organization
providing technical assistance to the Constitutional Commission
in Afghanistan for the drafting of the new constitution, the
public consultation and Constitutional Loya Jirga process.
--Civil Society.--The Foundation is the single largest supporter of
the nongovernmental sector in the Asian countries in which we
operate. The Foundation builds the capacity of organizations,
encourages public participation and works to improve the
regulatory environment for NGOs. In Cambodia, the Foundation
continues to be the largest supporter of human rights,
environment and research and policy NGOs in Cambodia. The
Foundation's Pakistan programs support community based
organizations that provide educational services in areas where
none exist, particularly in the economically distressed border
areas of the Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP). The Foundation
also supports new NGO activities in Afghanistan, such as
ASCHIANA which provides education for girls and young women
denied schooling under the Taliban through a cooperative
project with the National Geographic Society.
--Human Rights, Conflict and Islam.--The Foundation's human rights
programs promote the protection and advancement of human rights
through support of nongovernmental and governmental human
rights efforts at the local, regional and national levels. The
Foundation's programs focus on human rights education, the
development of monitoring groups, forensic training to
investigate past abuses, media training, guides on
international human rights standards, conflict reporting for
journalists, programs to prevent trafficking and violence
against women and alternative dispute resolution programs in
conflict areas. The Foundation's twenty year history of working
with mainstream Muslim groups in Indonesia, Pakistan and
Mindanao in the Philippines makes it uniquely positioned to
encourage programs that promote moderate views, religious
tolerance, peace, conflict management and the rights of women
under Islam, including the use of Islamic scriptures to
communicate messages of tolerance and non-violence. These
innovative and sensitive programs can only be accomplished
through an on the ground knowledge of the context facing
mainstream Muslims, and through partnerships built on trust.
The Foundation gives special attention to the troubled areas of
Indonesia through support for local human rights efforts in
Aceh, Papua and most recently, in the Maluku Islands. Programs
include media campaigns through radio and television by
moderate groups to promote pluralism and tolerance in conflict
prone areas and the utilization of mosque youth networks to
educate and strengthen networks for democracy and pluralistic
Islam.
--Legal Reform.--In East Timor, the Foundation provided technical
assistance for the drafting of the constitution and new
legislation, and for increased access to justice for citizens,
by involving civil society and public consultation in the law
making process. In China, the Foundation supports legal aid
services and popular legal education in some of China's poorest
provinces, including those with minority populations such as
Yunnan and Xinjiang, and for millions of migrant women workers
in Guangdong. In Nepal, the Foundation piloted mediation
projects in western Nepal, areas under the heavy influence of
the Maoist rebels, and continues to expand community mediation
programs, legal reform within the courts, establishment of
legal information systems, and the development of watchdog
citizens' groups to raise awareness of corruption and
misconduct. The Foundation supports reform of the Supreme Court
in Indonesia, which has included civil society input in an
unprecedented step to reform case assignment, audit its
procedures and processes, and improve the quality of the
judicial appointment process.
--Economic Growth and Opportunity.--Small and medium enterprises are
a vital engine for economic growth, providing employment and
opportunity for millions throughout the region. The
Foundation's programs help to reform the environment for small
business growth in Indonesia, Bangladesh, Thailand, and Sri
Lanka by removing policy barriers and regulatory red tape,
reducing corruption, and providing a voice for small
entrepreneurs through support for business associations and
business-government dialogue. The Foundation funds efforts to
improve corporate governance in Korea, China, Japan, and the
Philippines.
--International Relations.--The Foundation continues to invest in
young leaders through diplomatic training programs in U.S.
universities for Chinese foreign affairs staff, fellowships for
Vietnamese and Indian diplomats, and study programs for
Southeast Asian young leaders. Programs also include support
for the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific
(CSCAP), training programs for compliance with trade agreements
and the WTO for Chinese and Vietnamese officials, and track II
programs on cross-straits relations and Northeast Asian
security.
conclusion
As the preceding examples of The Asia Foundation's work emphasize,
the Foundation is a field-based organization that supports projects in
Asia that build the capacity of Asian institutions and support reform
efforts, while at the same time maintaining close links with the U.S.
foreign policy community. We are first and foremost a grant making
organization. The Foundation has consistently received national
recognition for its efficient grant-to-operating ratio, reflecting its
commitment to maximizing the impact of its programs in Asia, while
keeping expenses low. We are not a research organization or an academic
institution, nor are we Washington based. We operate on the ground in
Asia as an accepted, trusted partner and supporter of Asian reform
efforts that simultaneously support and reinforce American political,
economic, and security interests. We partner in our programs with
American and international public and private organizations to leverage
our resources and make investments pay off. The Foundation's
partnership with the Microsoft Corporation on the Cambodian Information
Centers, the first project of its kind to expand Internet and media
resources to all 22 provinces of the country, is but one example.
Public funding is essential to the Foundation's mission. While the
Foundation has made gains in expanding private funding, the flexibility
and reliability that public funding lends to the Foundation's efforts
are critical. As an organization committed to U.S. interests in Asia,
we can only be successful if potential private donors understand that
the U.S. government continues to support our efforts in the region.
Furthermore, private funds are almost always tied to specific projects
(as are USAID funds for which the Foundation competes) and do not
replace public funding, either in scale or flexibility. Moreover, the
flexibility afforded by U.S. government appropriated funds enables the
Foundation to respond quickly to fast-breaking developments and program
opportunities, as demonstrated by our programs related to the needs of
the Ministry of Women's Affairs in Afghanistan in 2001 and the National
Human Rights Commission office in Aceh, during the height of the
violence in the conflict-prone province in 2002.
Budget constraints resulted in significant reductions in the
Foundation's annual appropriation in 1996. The current requested level
for fiscal year 2004 is still well below the Foundation's $15 million
annual appropriation during the decade prior to 1996. The $15 million
level has been authorized consistently by the Congressional authorizers
in recent years. We have worked hard to manage our budget, reduce staff
and expenditures, increase our efficiency, and diversify our funding
sources. We have struggled to maintain our country office presence in
Asia, although budget cuts did force closure of the Malaysia office in
1996.
But commitment to a field operation is not without risk, as seen in
the situation facing U.S. embassies abroad. Now more than ever, the
Foundation and its supporters believe that its critical and most
important asset is its field office network in Asia, enabling the
Foundation to address critical development and reform on the ground,
especially in critical front line states such as Pakistan, Afghanistan,
and Indonesia. Increased security measures to protect Foundation staff
have been necessary, and Foundation offices all have contingency
evacuation measures in place. Maintaining overseas offices costs more
than maintaining operations within the United States and the new
demands to ensure adequate security have added to this cost. Today, we
face serious budgetary constraints. We cannot forsake the safety of our
staff, but at the same time, we are, as always, committed to ensuring
that the maximum possible amount of appropriated funds are dedicated to
programs on the ground.
In closing, we believe that we have an opportunity and the
obligation to demonstrate America's strong commitment to working with
Asian leaders to assure the security and well being of the people of
Asia. The Asia Foundation's programs represent a distinctive and
positive American response to the challenges facing Asia today,
contributing to the development of stable societies and advancing the
interests of the United States in the region. At a time of rapid change
and uncertainty, additional funding would enable the Foundation to
expand its role and its programs to help meet these challenges.
______
Prepared Statement of the Investment Company Institute
The Investment Company Institute \1\ appreciates this opportunity
to submit testimony to the Subcommittee in support of the fiscal year
2004 Appropriations request for the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC). The Institute would like to commend the Subcommittee for its
consistent past efforts to assure adequate resources for the SEC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Investment Company Institute is the national association of
the American investment company industry. Its membership includes 8,929
open-end investment companies (``mutual funds''), 553 closed-end
investment companies and 6 sponsors of unit investment trusts. Its
mutual fund members have assets of about $6.322 trillion, accounting
for approximately 95 percent of total industry assets, and 90.2 million
individual shareholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mutual funds are one of the primary savings and investment vehicles
for middle-income Americans. Today, more than 95 million investors in
over 54 million U.S. households own mutual fund shares. Since 1990, the
percentage of U.S. retirement assets held in mutual funds has more than
quadrupled. Moreover, most mutual fund investors are ordinary
Americans; the median household income of fund shareholders is
approximately $62,000. These millions of average Americans deserve
continued vigilant regulatory oversight of mutual funds. For this
reason, sufficient funding of the SEC should be a priority. The
Institute urges Congress to provide appropriations at a level
sufficient to ensure the SEC's ability to fulfill its regulatory
mandate.
The Administration's fiscal year 2004 budget proposes SEC funding
at a level of $841.5 million. This greatly exceeds last year's
appropriation of $711.7 million. The Institute supports this enhanced
level of funding to support the SEC's operations, especially those of
the Division of Investment Management, which regulates the mutual fund
industry. Such resources will help the SEC to carry out its many
important initiatives, which include, among other things, adopting
requirements for improved shareholder reports, analyzing the
feasibility of requiring new compliance related rules for investment
companies and investment advisers, finalizing rules to combat money
laundering, and finalizing amendments to the mutual fund advertising
rules.
The recommended enhanced level of funding also will permit the SEC
to monitor compliance with the many significant new requirements
adopted as a result of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which include,
among others, disclosure regarding codes of ethics for senior executive
officers and the presence of financial experts on audit committees,
certification of financial and other information, independence
standards for public company auditors, and standards of conduct for
corporate attorneys. Moreover, it will permit the SEC to fulfill its
mandate to oversee the operation of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (PCAOB), including the ratification of fundamental
rules and procedures for the PCAOB. We also are pleased that H.R. 658/
S. 496, ``The Accountant, Compliance, and Enforcement Staffing Act of
2003,'' has been introduced in both the House and the Senate. This bill
would permit the SEC more flexibility in its hiring process, making it
easier for the SEC to hire the staff it needs to carry out these
additional responsibilities.
Several important SEC initiatives indicate an enhanced workload for
the Division of Investment Management. First, the Division will be
responsible for monitoring compliance with the new requirements related
to proxy voting. Second, the Division will be responsible for providing
the SEC with a report on the hedge fund industry, assisting with SEC
hearings to be conducted in connection with this endeavor, and
analyzing the need for, and potentially developing, new regulations
related to hedge funds. Third, the Division will be instrumental in
responding to Congressional inquiries related to mutual fund issues.
These important initiatives, which will affect millions of American
investors, will require additional staff to see that they are properly
analyzed and to develop appropriate recommendations.
Adequate funding is also needed for the SEC's new enhanced risk-
based inspection program, which began in fiscal year 2003 and will
continue in fiscal year 2004. For investment companies and investment
advisers, this means that those with relatively higher risk profiles
will be examined every two years, while all remaining firms will be
examined no less frequently than every four years. These more frequent
inspections are a significant improvement over the five-year inspection
cycle for investment advisers and investment companies that existed
prior to fiscal year 2003, and the SEC's appropriations should be
sufficient to continue this important initiative.
Finally, adequate funding is essential to the SEC's efforts to
educate investors. The SEC's Internet website contains many sources of
important information for investors, including an on-line publication
explaining mutual funds and investor alerts that help investors avoid
scams and securities frauds. These and other SEC programs assist
investors to understand the capital markets and establish realistic
expectations about market performance. This is an integral part of the
agency's mission to protect investors.
In order to accomplish these worthy objectives and to continue to
function as an effective regulatory agency, we support that the SEC be
funded at the level requested by the Administration and supported by
Chairman Donaldson.
We appreciate your consideration of our views.
______
Prepared Statement of American Rivers
national oceanic and atmospheric administration
This year, American Rivers was joined by more than 400 national,
regional and local organizations concerned with river conservation
throughout the United States \1\ in calling for significantly increased
funding for the following programs in the Commerce, Justice, State and
the Judiciary (CJS) Appropriations bill. I urge that these requests be
incorporated in the CJS Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These groups have endorsed the ``River Budget for fiscal year
2004'', a report of national funding priorities for local river
conservation. A list of groups endorsing the River Budget can be viewed
at http://www.americanrivers.org/riverbudget/default.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Salmon Plan for the Columbia and Snake rivers
Several Members of Congress from the Northwest, as well as the
Administration, have pledged to work to restore twelve Endangered
Species Act listed stocks of Snake and Columbia river salmon without
partially removing the lower four Snake River dams. Congress can help
honor that commitment by funding the necessary salmon recovery
measures. More than two years since the release of the 2000 Federal
Salmon Plan for the Columbia and Snake rivers, federal agencies have
failed to fulfill nearly three-quarters of its requirements.
The Salmon Plan relies primarily on improving tributary and estuary
habitat and reforming hatchery and harvest practices. While over 500
fisheries scientists and most conservationists believe that partial
removal of the lower Snake River dams must be the cornerstone of a
larger strategy to recover Snake River salmon, many elements of the
Salmon Plan are also necessary to achieve salmon recovery.
If the Salmon Plan's non-breach recovery package is not funded and
implemented, or if these actions do not yield the needed biological
benefit for Snake River stocks, the plan contemplates seeking
congressional authorization--after a ``check-in'' this September--to
partially remove the four lower Snake River dams or pursue other
stronger recovery measures.
Inadequate federal funding is a major reason that implementation of
the Salmon Plan has fallen so far behind. Full funding for fiscal year
2004 will require $529.3 million distributed among ten different
federal agencies through five different appropriations bills. The CJS
Appropriations bill governs funding for the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), which is charged with pursuing and administering the
Salmon Plan's crucial science and monitoring activities, as well as
implementing hatchery and harvest reform measures. The administration
has proposed increasing the NMFS budget for Columbia River salmon by
approximately 50 percent this year, from the fiscal year 2003 level of
$26.2 million to $39.7 million in fiscal year 2004. While this increase
would be helpful, internal NMFS documents estimate that fully
implementing the Salmon Plan would require an increase of closer to 200
percent.
To ensure full development of the scientific standards, reforms,
and restoration activities required by the Federal Salmon Plan,
Congress should fund NMFS Columbia Basin salmon programs at $69.8
million.
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund
Pacific salmon are a national treasure with enormous economic,
cultural, and environmental significance in the states of Washington,
Oregon, California, Idaho, and Alaska. A century ago, salmon were an
anchor of the region's economy. Unfortunately, past and present
mismanagement of our rivers, lands, and salmon fisheries have caused
populations of salmon to decline dramatically over the past century,
and 26 runs of Pacific salmon and steelhead are now listed under the
Endangered Species Act.
One important program aimed at restoring imperiled runs of chinook,
coho, sockeye, and chum salmon, as well as steelhead trout, is the
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund, funded through the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. For the past three years, this
program has provided much-needed assistance to state, local, and tribal
governments in Washington, Oregon, California, and Alaska for salmon
recovery projects. This year we urge Congress to make the State of
Idaho and Snake River salmon and steelhead eligible to benefit from
this program as well.
By increasing funding for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund
in fiscal year 2004, Congress can help restore this economically,
culturally, and ecologically valuable resource and help the Northwest
states and local communities to adopt and embrace the measures needed
to restore Pacific salmon and steelhead. Restoring salmon will also
allow the United States to satisfy treaty obligations with Northwest
Indian tribes and Canada.
We urge Congress to increase funding for the Pacific Coastal Salmon
Recovery Fund to no less than $200 million in fiscal year 2004.
Fisheries Habitat Restoration
The fisheries habitat provided by estuaries and coastal wetlands
serves many essential functions for communities across the nation.
Eighty to 90 percent of all recreational fish catch and 75 percent of
all commercial harvest depends upon healthy coastal and estuarine
habitats. More than half the coastal wetlands in the lower 48 states
have been lost, and almost 40 percent of estuarine habitat has been
impaired by damming and diverting countless rivers and streams.
The Fisheries Habitat Restoration program, funded through the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Restoration
Center, reaches out to local constituencies to accomplish on-the-
ground, community-based projects to restore estuaries and coastal
habitats. Partnerships and local involvement are fundamental to the
success of this program. Partners typically match federal dollars 1:1
and leverage those dollars up to 10 times more through state and local
participation. To date, the program has funded 600 projects in 25
states, promoting fishery habitat restoration in coastal areas with a
grassroots, bottom-up approach.
We urge Congress to provide the NOAA Fisheries Habitat Restoration
Program with $18,500,000 to help more communities restore and protect
and restore the health of their estuaries and coastal habitats.
Hydropower Relicensing
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) would greatly benefit
from additional funding to address the growing number of hydropower
dams that need renewal of their operating licenses from the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Under the Federal Power Act, NMFS
plays a role in setting license conditions to protect and conserve
anadromous (sea-run) fisheries such as Pacific and Atlantic salmon,
steelhead and sea-run cutthroat trout, and shad. Licenses are nearing
expiration at hundreds of dams around the country, and workloads are
increasing for NMFS and other resource agencies. Increasing NMFS's
limited hydropower relicensing budget would help ensure a more
efficient licensing process, benefit the hydropower industry, and
further efforts to protect and restore our nation's anadromous
fisheries.
Congress should provide NMFS with a $2 million increase to its
Habitat Conservation line item specifically for hydropower relicensing.
______
Prepared Statement of the Alliance for International Educational and
Cultural Exchange
The Alliance for International Educational and Cultural Exchange
appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony in support of the
educational and cultural exchange programs administered by the
Department of State.
The Alliance is the leading policy voice of the U.S. exchange
community, and has worked closely with the subcommittee on exchange
issues. We note with gratitude the subcommittee's role in increasing
exchange appropriations in recent years.
The Alliance comprises 67 nongovernmental organizations, with
nearly 8000 staff and 1.25 million volunteers throughout the United
States. Through its members, the Alliance supports the international
interests of 3300 American institutions of higher education.
With grassroots networks reaching all 50 states, Alliance members
help advance the U.S. national interest by putting a human face on
American foreign policy, transmitting American values, fostering
economic ties with rapidly developing overseas markets, and assisting
individuals with the development of critical foreign language, cross-
cultural, and area studies expertise. Our members also leverage
considerable private resources--in cash and in kind--in support of
these critical programs.
By engaging a very broad array of American individuals and
institutions in the conduct of our foreign affairs, exchange programs
build both enhanced understanding and a web of productive contacts
between Americans and the rest of the world.
Our requests for the fiscal year 2004 exchange appropriation fall
into three broad categories:
Core Exchange Budget--Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
As a nation, we need to provide more opportunities for emerging
leaders around the world to experience first-hand our society, our
values, and our people. The Alliance therefore urges the subcommittee
to provide substantial increases in funding for exchange programs.
While appropriations for these programs have moved up in recent years,
this account still lags well behind its historic levels in constant
dollars due to the deep cuts of the mid-nineties. Coupled with the
increases in fixed program costs such as airfare and accommodation,
reduced appropriations have resulted in significantly diminished
participant levels in programs consistently cited by our embassies as
one of their most effective means of advancing U.S. policy interests.
For example, the Bush Administration's request for the State
Department's core exchanges in fiscal year 2004, excluding funding for
programs provided for under the Freedom Support Act and SEED, appears
to be level with the current year appropriation of $245 million. In
fact, we understand that this ``level funding'' amounts to a reduction
of approximately $7.5 million available for programs, when one factors
in increased costs.
While exchange budgets have risen in recent years thanks to the
leadership of this subcommittee, State Department figures for the core
exchange budget--excluding Freedom Support Act and SEED funding--
indicate that exchange funding has declined 40 percent in constant
dollars over a 10-year period (1993-2002).
As our experiences since September 11, 2001, demonstrate clearly,
we need public diplomacy and exchanges more than ever. We need to build
trust and understanding for our people and our policy goals not just in
the Muslim world--an effort that will be of critical importance--but
around the globe. To win the war on terrorism and to rebuild Iraq, we
will need the help of our friends and allies in every region of the
world. This is a time to intensify and expand our public diplomacy, and
we believe there is strong bipartisan support in Congress to do exactly
that.
We therefore urge the subcommittee to fund the Department of
State's core exchange budget at $286 million, the level authorized by
the 107th Congress. This amount would provide for targeted, meaningful
growth in every region of the world in support of our most important
foreign policy objectives.
Exchanges with the countries of the former Soviet Union and Central
Europe
We note that the Bush Administration budget request moves funding
for exchange programs authorized by the Freedom Support Act (FSA) and
SEED into the CJS bill for the first time. If the appropriations
subcommittees agree with this change and the CJS subcommittee includes
these programs in its bill, we urge you to substantially increase
funding over the Administration's request.
The Administration has requested $100 million for these programs.
Our best estimates suggest that this level represents a cut of
approximately 28 percent. We hope the subcommittee will agree that this
reduction is unwise in regions of the world of such strategic
importance to the United States. This is particularly true when one
considers the effectiveness and impact of these exchange programs.
We urge the subcommittee to fund FSA and SEED programs at an
overall level of $145 million, which would allow for increases in
program costs and a modest boost for these high priority activities.
A central aspect to the opening of the region has been the
opportunity for the peoples of these countries to see how a democratic
society functions, based on the principles of democracy and a free
market economy. In recent Congressional testimony, former U.S.
Ambassador to the Russian Federation James W. Collins said, ``Efforts
at reform in business and education--are just beginning to take hold.
We're just starting to create an established and recognizable critical
mass of individuals able to sustain our national interest in fostering
reforms in these countries. Now is not the time to be reducing these
efforts, particularly with Russia and Ukraine, whose challenges remain
paramount. I believe there is no greater priority in Eurasia at this
time than developing and sustaining the young leadership of that region
in their associations with the West and that responsibility remains
critically in our hands.''
Islamic Exchange Initiative--Building Cultural Bridges
While the need for increased funding is worldwide, increased
exchanges with the Islamic world are particularly critical as we pursue
the war on terrorism. To defeat terrorism, the United States will need
more than the might and skill of our armed forces. To ultimately defeat
terrorism, we must also engage the Muslim world in the realm of ideas,
values, and beliefs.
No previous foreign affairs crisis has been so deeply rooted in
cultural misunderstanding. One of the lessons of September 11 is that
we have not done an adequate job of explaining ourselves to the world,
or of building the personal and institutional connections with these
countries that support healthy bilateral relationships. Policy
disagreements alone cannot account for the fact that many in Islamic
countries regard the United States, the greatest force for good in
human history, as a source of evil.
A Gallup poll conducted in February 2002 reported that 61 percent
of Muslims believe that Arabs did not carry out the attack on the
United States. That statistic alone speaks somber volumes about our
failure to project our values and ideals effectively in Islamic
nations.
Given the importance and urgency of the task and the broad arc of
countries we will need to engage, stretching from Africa to Southeast
Asia, we urge the subcommittee to appropriate $100 million for this
purpose.
As a long-term solution to the profound problems of cultural
misunderstanding, there is no substitute for public diplomacy. It must
be a key component of our long-term effort to eradicate terrorism.
Public diplomacy in the Muslim world will require a sustained, serious
effort if we are to succeed in our quest for lasting peace and
security, stable bilateral relationships, and an end to terrorism. An
Islamic Exchange Initiative, designed to broaden the range of
meaningful relationships based on shared interests with current and
emerging leaders and key institutions in Muslim countries, will be
critical to our success.
Changing minds--or merely opening them--is a long, painstaking
process. There are no quick fixes. If we are to win the war on
terrorism, there will be no avoiding the need to build bridges between
the American people and the people of the Muslim world. We must begin
this process now.
In the Islamic world, we envision this initiative engaging the full
range of programs and activities managed by the Bureau of Educational
and Cultural Affairs: Fulbright and Humphrey exchanges that will
stimulate broader cultural understanding, joint research and teaching,
and foster positive relationships with a new generation of leaders;
university affiliations targeted toward key fields such as mass media
and economic development; International Visitor and other citizen
exchange programs designed to bring emerging leaders into significant
and direct contact with their professional counterparts and the daily
substance of American life; youth and teacher exchanges and enhanced
English teaching programs, all designed to bring larger numbers of
young people a direct and accurate picture of our society, based on
personal experience rather than vicious stereotyping.
Increasing the State Department's exchanges with the Islamic world
will give us the means to develop productive, positive relationships.
This initiative will engage the American public--in our communities,
schools, and universities--in an effort to project American values. We
will find no better or more convincing representatives of our way of
life.
And the engagement of the American public will leverage significant
additional resources to support this effort.
Initial efforts were made during the 107th Congress to both
authorize and fund programs on a broad range of exchange activities to
build relationships with the Islamic world and enhance U.S. national
security.
We commend the subcommittee for funds made available in the fiscal
year 2002 supplemental for Islamic exchanges. The $10 million
appropriated by this subcommittee has been put to good use by the
Department of State in key programs such as Fulbright, International
Visitors, and English teaching.
We also recognize that this funding reflected the broad bipartisan
support for an Islamic Exchange Initiative, clearly expressed in the
passage in the House of the Hyde/Lantos Freedom Promotion Act, and in
the Kennedy/Lugar Cultural Bridges Act, which attracted 12 cosponsors
of both parties in the Senate.
A meaningful and effective Islamic exchange initiative will require
$100 million above the appropriation for the State Department's core
exchanges. We recognize that this is a significant amount of money. We
believe, however, that this funding level is necessary and appropriate
given the expanse of the Muslim world and the urgency and importance of
the task at hand. Moreover, this amount of money spent on promoting our
ideas and values is very small when compared to the sums we will expend
on military hardware, but it is no less crucial to our success.
The level of support we have witnessed from senior members of both
parties and both chambers underscores the timeliness and importance of
this initiative. This is a moment when our national interests require
Congressional leadership to build these cultural bridges.
Other program issues
In addition, we would like to draw the subcommittee's attention to
three specific programs we believe are deserving of additional support:
--The Foreign Study Grants for U.S. Undergraduates program, also
known as the Gilman Scholarship Program, assists students of
limited financial means from the United States to pursue study
abroad. Demand for the scholarships is enormous, demonstrated
by the nearly 3,000 applicants from 44 states and Puerto Rico
last year. Due to funding constraints, however, the program was
only able to grant 302 awards.
--The Educational Partnership Program (formerly known as the College
and University Affiliations Program) supports cooperation
between U.S. colleges and universities and foreign post-
secondary institutions in the form of faculty exchanges,
curriculum development, collaborative research and other
activities.
--Overseas Educational Advising/Information Centers serve as an
important, unbiased information resource for prospective
foreign students interested in the United States.
We have provided subcommittee staff with report language on these
issues and welcome the opportunity to discuss them with you.
The U.S. exchange community stands ready to assist you in these
efforts, and is grateful for your support.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Foreign Service Association
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of the
American Foreign Service Association (AFSA) and the 23,000 active-duty
and retired members of the Foreign Service, I express our appreciation
for the opportunity to share our views and concerns with you.
The work of this Subcommittee is vital to the success of our
Nation's foreign policy. Your decisions determine whether we have the
infrastructure and many of the tools of diplomacy needed to implement
our policy. The Subcommittee's and the Congress's support of the
Administration's request in meeting our staffing needs, improving our
information technology systems, making our posts and missions more
secure, and providing for an active exchange program is very much
appreciated. Certainly Secretary of State Colin Powell and his staff
also must be thanked for their hard work on our behalf as they make
their presentations before the Congress. The Secretary consistently
describes his current role as both the President's principal foreign
policy advisor and as the CEO of the Department of State. It has been a
long time since the Foreign Service has had a Secretary who has worn
both hats so effectively.
As the representative of the Foreign Service, our major concern is
the appropriations for the Administration of Foreign Affairs section of
the appropriations bill. This area covers funding for personnel and
especially the Secretary's Diplomatic Readiness Initiative (DRI),
funding to bring the Department into the 21st Century in terms of
information and communications technology, and the security of our
people as they serve this Nation in over 250 posts and missions around
the world.
continued vigilance of staffing needs required
With the fiscal year 2004 request of $97 million for the DRI to
hire 399 additional foreign affairs personnel above attrition, we are
in the final year of a three-year plan to fill an identified personnel
shortfall of over 1,100 people.
As you know, several important 1999 and 2000 studies from very
respectable organizations found the infrastructure of diplomacy ``near
a state of crisis.'' The Overseas Presence Advisory Panel (OPAP)
reported in 1999:
``The United States overseas presence, which provided the essential
underpinnings of U.S. foreign policy for many decades, is near a state
of crisis. Insecure and often decrepit facilities, obsolete information
technology, outmoded administrative and human resources practices, poor
allocation of resources, and competition from the private sector for
talented staff threaten to cripple our nation's overseas capability,
with far-reaching consequences for national security and prosperity.''
Fortunately the warnings in those studies were taken to heart. The
Secretary and the Congress worked together to fill that personnel
shortfall and to improve our information technology over three years.
We are already beginning to see the benefits as new personnel are
hired, the stress is being lifted from the shoulders of overly
stretched personnel and there is an easing, though not a reduction, in
the work expectations of ``doing more with less.'' Foreign Service
personnel are able to take needed training and participate in career
development programs instead of having to choose between training and
filling an empty position, and a surge capacity is developing.
Further, because of the support for our information and
communications technology systems, our equipment is modern and we have
or will soon have classified and unclassified connectivity to every
post that requires it, and access to the Internet from our desktops.
Our communications and information systems are no longer the sad joke
they had become, and there are plans to continue improvements in these
areas including the SMART initiative to overhaul the systems for
cables, messaging, information sharing, and document archiving.
The momentum that started two years ago needs to be maintained. The
DRI needs to be successfully completed and the drive to improve our
information and communications technology sustained.
However, Mr. Chairman, in terms of the DRI, I would also urge the
Subcommittee to see adequate staffing as a dynamic process. The 1,158-
person shortfall was identified nearly 3 years ago as existing at that
point in time. Conditions have changed since then, and the complexity
of the demands on diplomacy continue to grow around the world. Section
301 of Public Law 107-228, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act of
2003 requires the Secretary of State to submit a ``Comprehensive
Workforce Plan'' for the Department for the fiscal years 2003 through
2007. ``The plan shall consider personnel needs in both the Civil
Service and the Foreign Service and expected domestic and overseas
personnel allocations.'' AFSA would encourage the Subcommittee to
consider these workforce plans for staffing considerations as a start
to accommodate changes in the world in the coming years. We were near
crisis until the Administration and the Congress stepped in to turn
things around. The job is not done, and such a situation should not be
allowed to occur again. As the Secretary often states, ``diplomacy is
the first line of offense,'' and there are serious consequences for the
economy, the welfare and the security of our nation if diplomacy is not
adequately funded to do the job.
embassy security--still much to be done
AFSA believes that together, the Department of State and the
Congress have been making impressive strides in improving the security
of our posts and missions abroad. After the 1998 east Africa bombings
of our embassies, the Accountability Review Boards (ARB), chaired by
Admiral William Crowe, looked into the cause of those bombings and made
several important conclusions. First, they found that there was a new
face to international terrorism and a new threat environment. Secondly,
the ARB found that the cause of the bombings could not be placed at the
doorstep of any single individual but that it was a systemic problem of
inattention.
``. . . there was a collective failure by several Administrations
and Congresses over the past decade to invest adequate efforts and
resources to reduce the vulnerability of U.S. diplomatic missions
around the world to terrorist attacks.''
The ``new threat environment'' continues to haunt us as seen by the
continued attacks on the symbols of our country at home and abroad.
However, we have seen the second lesson addressed through a major
multi-year increase in security funding in both the hiring of
additional security personnel and in security upgrades that has left no
facility abroad unimproved. This increased funding is paying off as
evidenced by the minimal damage done to the American Consulate in
Karachi in a terrorist bombing in July 2002.
Mr. Chairman, despite significant upgrades to the security of our
facilities around the world, the General Accounting Office reported in
its March 20, 2003 testimony before the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations:
``. . . even with these improvements, most office facilities do not
meet security standards. As of December 2002, the primary office
building at 232 posts lacked desired security because it did not meet
one or more of State's five key current security standards. . . . Only
12 posts have a primary building that meets all 5 standards. As a
result, thousands of U.S. government and foreign national employees may
be vulnerable to terrorist attacks.''
The Foreign Service does not seek hilltop fortresses in which to do
our work. Such would be counterproductive to our purpose for being in a
country. We accept the dangers that are part of our profession, but we
also expect that our government, which sends us to these posts, should
seek to provide for our safety as much as possible. AFSA urges that
funding continue at its current, if not an accelerated pace, to
complete the work of securing our posts and missions abroad.
``Soft Targets''.--There is a subset of our concerns about the
security of our posts and missions abroad. As you know from our
testimony submitted to the Subcommittee last year, threats to ``soft
targets'' are a major concern to the Foreign Service. In just the past
year, we have had a mother and daughter killed in a church in
Islamabad, Pakistan, and an USAID official assassinated in front of his
house in Amman, Jordan. We also saw the bombing of a nightclub that was
popular a Western tourist spot in Bali, Indonesia. The threats to
``soft targets'' are very real for us. To Foreign Service members, the
term ``soft targets'' means our spouses and children as we try and lead
a somewhat normal life of going to school, to church, and on other
family outings.
Mr. Chairman, we appreciate and thank you for your personal concern
and leadership in this area. It is clear that through your and this
Committee's work, the legislative branch understands that more than
bricks and mortar need to be protected, but the Foreign Service
community as well. The lead that this Committee took in setting aside
funds to examine the threat against schools abroad that our children
attend, and the Senate's designation, through your work, to have $10
million additional funds for soft target protection in the fiscal year
2003 Supplemental Appropriations add to our appreciation. While the
additional funds for embassy security were significant, we were sorry
to see that Conference recommendations had dropped the additional funds
specifically designated for soft target protection.
AFSA urges this Subcommittee to continue in its efforts to provide
additional funding to shore up this important part of our overseas
security. ``Soft targets'' is a descriptive euphemism, but what we are
really talking about is the lives of our people and their families as
they serve this Nation abroad.
conclusion
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I again wish to
express our appreciation for the opportunity for the American Foreign
Service Association to share our views and concerns with you. The
decisions you make affect both our professional and private lives as we
serve this Nation abroad. You directly help determine how safe we are
at work and in our housing abroad; what our working conditions are
like, from having to work in converted cargo boxes to comfortable,
fully equipped offices; whether we have adequate staffing to share the
work and whether we have information and telecommunications software
and equipment to talk to our Colleagues around the world. We thank you
for your understanding these past few years, and we ask for your
continued support in the fiscal year 2004 funding process and beyond.
______
Prepared Statement of the Association of Small Business Development
Centers
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member and members of the Subcommittee, I
am Donald Wilson, President of the Association of Small Business
Development Centers (ASBDC). The Association is grateful for the
opportunity to submit this testimony for the record of the
Subcommittee's fiscal year 2004 hearings.
ASBDC's members are the 58 State, Regional and Territorial Small
Business Development Center programs comprising America's Small
Business Development Center Network. All Small Business Development
Center (SBDC) grantees, located throughout the 50 States, the District
of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam and American Samoa,
are members of the ASBDC.
Since its establishment by Congress in 1980, America's Small
Business Development Center Network has provided in-depth counseling of
an hour or more, and training of two hours or more, to roughly 10
million small business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs. In addition,
millions more entrepreneurs have used the network as an informational
resource for answers to questions as simple as how to get a business
license or where to get an employer identification number.
ASBDC urges the Subcommittee to fund our nation's SBDC network at
its currently authorized level of $125 million in the fiscal year 2004
Commerce-Justice-State Appropriations bill. The Association recognizes
the difficult funding choices that the Subcommittee must make in these
difficult times, and that ASBDC's recommendation represents a
significant increase in the current funding level for the SBDC program.
However, America's SBDC network can help our country recover from its
current economic stagnation, create desperately needed new jobs, and
generate the additional Federal revenues needed to reduce the budget
deficit.
First, it is important to note that Federal funding for the SBDC
network generates more revenue for the Federal treasury than it costs
the taxpayer. The President's fiscal year 2004 Budget points out that
an independent evaluation of the SBDC program indicated that each $1
spent on SBDC counseling resulted in $2.78 in tax revenues. The SBDC
program generated an estimated $182.9 million in Federal revenue in
2001--an excellent return for a Federal investment of $88 million for
the nationwide SBDC program.
In addition, America's SBDC network has a proven record of creating
jobs and generating growth for America's small businesses. At the
beginning of the most recent recession in 2001, as large corporation
after large corporation announced layoffs, long-term counseling clients
of the SBDCs added 46,688 new jobs, saved 34,215 existing jobs, started
12,872 new businesses, increased sales by $3.9 billion, and saved an
additional $4.3 billion in sales. In addition, SBDC long-term
counseling helped small businesses obtain an estimated $2.7 billion in
financing in 2001. That means every dollar spent on the operation of
the SBDC network leveraged approximately $15.89 in new capital raised
by long-term SBDC clients in 2001.
Based on its record over the past 10 years, with funding of $125
million our nation's SBDC network could help SBDC long-term counseling
clients to:
--create an estimated 111,744 new full time jobs;
--increase sales by an estimated nine billion dollars;
--produce an estimated $266 million in additional revenue for the
Federal government; and
--produce an estimated $397 million in additional tax revenue for
State governments.
Federal funding for the national SBDC network is an investment in
the job creation potential of America's small business sector--the
engine of our nation's economy. Today, job creation by small businesses
has declined as America's entrepreneurs struggle in a sluggish economy.
Initial weekly unemployment claims have been above 400,000 for the past
eleven consecutive weeks--a clear indication that the economy is still
struggling to recover from recession. In fact, 2001 and 2002 were the
worst two consecutive years of job creation in the American economy
since the 1950's.
America's SBDC Network can help the small business sector of our
economy generate jobs again, but we need the resources to do the job.
Federal funding available for distribution to the SBDC program
decreased between fiscal year 1994 and fiscal year 2004 (after
accounting for inflation, earmarks and the establishment of the SBDC
program in Guam and American Samoa)--while Federal government receipts
increased by 26 percent in constant dollars. In addition, as a result
of the 2000 Census, 24 States--including Kentucky, Maryland, New Mexico
and Wisconsin--are subject to receiving less Federal funding for their
SBDC programs than they received in 2001--simply because their
populations did not grow as fast as other State populations.
There is room in the Federal budget for increased resources for our
nation's SBDC network. For example, the Small Business Administration
(SBA) Budget proposal for fiscal year 2004 calls for increasing the
SBA's Salaries and Expenses account to $219 million. That is an
increase of $57 million (35 percent) compared to fiscal year 2002, and
an increase of $10 million (5 percent) compared to the SBA's fiscal
year 2003 Budget proposal. However, the SBA's Budget proposal calls for
cutting the SBA Non-Credit Business Assistance account to $141 million
in fiscal year 2004. This is the account that funds SBDCs and other
programs that provide direct assistance to small businesses. For those
programs, the SBA's Budget proposes to cut $26 million (20 percent)
compared to fiscal year 2002, and $3 million (2 percent) compared to
the SBA's fiscal year 2003 Budget proposal. Funding for SBA can be more
wisely spent on direct assistance for small businesses rather than on
administrative overhead.
I urge you to consider that Federal funding for the SBDC network is
now more important than ever, as State governments across the country--
including possibly Colorado, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, New Hampshire,
Texas, Vermont, Wisconsin and others--are cutting back on their
contributions to the SBDCs. This is not because of lack of support for
the SBDC program, but rather because of the revenue crises faced by
State governments across the country. Unless Federal support for the
national SBDC network is able to make up for cuts in State funding,
SBDC program capacity across the United States will have to be severely
cut back. Counselors will have to be laid off and service centers will
have to be closed. The job creation and economic development activities
of the SBDC network will be curtailed proportionately--at the very time
that the economy is in need of a stimulus.
Recent and pending state budget cuts in SBDC funding will assure
that America's Small Business Development Center network will contract
even further this year without a significantly increased federal
appropriation. Rural areas which have unique economic development needs
have already been adversely impacted by the closing of centers and the
laying off of counselors. Unlike other federal management and technical
assistance programs, federal dollars appropriated to the SBDC program
leverage roughly three additional non-federal dollars. The decline in
state resources as result of the crisis in state budgets cannot
possibly be made up from private sector sources in the current economic
climate. The Federal government needs to recognize the growing
financial plight of the SBDC network in these trying economic times. If
the Federal government does not allocate resources to the SBDC program
at a level approximating $125 million for fiscal year 2004, the
management and technical assistance needs of tens of thousands of small
firms will go unmet and thousands of private sector jobs will likely be
lost. The resulting decline in economic activity will surely have a
significantly negative impact on state and federal budgets. The
remarkable infrastructure of over 900 SBDC service centers developed
over the past twenty-three years will deteriorate even further as more
service centers are closed and dedicated counselors are laid off.
The work of America's Small Business Development Center Network is
constantly being recognized by others. The Bill J. Priest Institute for
Economic Development, a Division of the Dallas County Community College
District, was the only recipient of the Texas Award for Performance
Excellence in 2002. The award is patterned after the Malcolm Baldrige
National Quality award and recognizes Texas organizations that excel in
world-class management, achievement, and performance excellence in
applying quality and customer satisfaction principles. A critical
component of the Institute is the Dallas Regional SBDC. NAMTAC, the
National Association of Manufacturing and Technical Assistance
Center's, presented its 2002 Outstanding Project of the Year Award to
the New York State SBDC for its efforts to help small businesses
recover from the September 11, 2001 terrorists attack in that state.
The Maine SBDC program late last year was awarded the Margaret Chase
Smith Maine State Quality Award. This award recognizes organizations
for performance excellence based on criteria corresponding to the
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award.
In June of last year Secretary of Commerce Evans presented the
Black Hawk College Export Trade Center, a special component of the
Black Hawk College SBDC, with the President's ``E'' Award for Exporting
Excellence. This prestigious award was created by President John F.
Kennedy to recognize U.S. Businesses or organizations that have
demonstrated outstanding growth and innovation in exports or export
service. ASBDC is proud of the accomplishments of its members and their
capable and committed personnel.
The Subcommittee's consideration of fiscal year 2004 funding for
the SBDC program comes at a critical time for our nation's economy.
Small businesses generate 52 percent of Gross Domestic Product,
represent 99 percent of all employers and employ 51 percent of all
private sector employees. During the past decade small businesses
created roughly 70 percent of net new jobs in our economy. But all is
not well with the small business sector. The most recent data available
from SBA's Office of Advocacy finds that in 2001 small business
bankruptcies nationwide increased nearly 13 percent over the previous
year. No doubt, newer national figures will show those numbers further
increasing. The majority of small business owners have never received
any formal entrepreneurial training. The majority has never managed a
business during an economic downturn. The need for management and
technical assistance within the small business sector is greater today
than ever before. The Department of Labor confirms that when
unemployment rises, self-employment rises.
There are 23 million small business owners in the United States,
and the Kauffman Foundation estimates that one in 10 adult Americans is
seeking to start his or her own business. Forty percent of SBDC clients
are women (SBDC's served over a quarter million female clients last
year) and 22 percent are minorities. Demand for entrepreneurial
services among these constituencies is exploding.
SBA figures for fiscal year 2002 show that SBDC counseling cases
and training attendees combined increased from 610,000 in fiscal year
2001 to 650,000 in fiscal year 2002 despite an increase in federal
funding of less than $100,000. These client numbers represent real
people, your constituents, individuals, many with families, and
mortgages, tuition payments and dreams. They are real people like Dr.
Harris Goldberg, a chemist from Hillsborough, New Jersey who was
featured in a December 16, 2002 article in the Wall Street Journal. Dr.
Goldberg had been laid off, decided to seek assistance at his local
SBDC and now has his own successful firm providing employment to
others.
If we are to have any chance of growing this economy at the level
needed to provide jobs and enhance federal revenues, there must be a
clear determination by Congress to provide the resources to increase
the service capacity of the SBDC program. ASBDC appreciates the
Subcommittee's support for the SBDC network in past years. I urge you
to support an appropriation of $125 million for our nation's SBDC
network in the fiscal year 2004 Commerce-Justice-State Appropriations
bill. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of The Nature Conservancy
The Nature Conservancy is escalating its focus on freshwater,
coastal, and marine conservation by establishing Freshwater and Marine
Initiatives that will employ the science, partnerships, ecosystem
approach, and site-based conservation that has worked throughout our
fifty-year history. These initiatives will strengthen the work that we
are engaging in with partners to develop a ``conservation blueprint''
identifying the places that, if conserved, will collectively protect
the nation's plants, animals, and natural communities for the long-
term. Several NOAA programs have been, or will be successful at
conserving many places identified by our blueprint.
Coastal Zone Management
CZM Grants to States--$80 million
CZM Program Administration--$7.5 million
Non-point Pollution Implementation Grants--$15 million
This unique federal-state-territorial partnership created under the
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) serves to protect, restore, and
responsibly develop the nation's coastal communities and resources
along 95,000 miles of shoreline. State and territorial CZM programs
link national objectives with implementation and stewardship at the
local level. Increased funding for this program in fiscal year 2004
would advance protection of coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes species and
their habitats; maintain the natural shoreline such as beaches, dunes
and wetlands; and enhance scientific research and education, while
allowing for certain economic growth.
Many Conservancy chapters already pursue mutual goals with state
CZM programs. We are working to strengthen these partnerships in light
of our heightened emphasis on conserving freshwater, coastal, and
marine biodiversity.
National Estuarine Research Reserve System
Operations--$18 million
Procurement, Acquisition and Construction--$15 million
Authorized as part of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), the
twenty-five ``living laboratories'' making up the National Estuarine
Research Reserve System (NERRS) require funding appropriate to the
importance of estuaries to critical habitat and coastal economies.
Adequate funding for the NERRS will permit individual reserves to
better implement strong management, research, education, and
stewardship activities within surrounding communities, and acquire key
tracts of land and conservation easements that buffer development
impacts. This funding would also facilitate implementation of system-
wide monitoring and coastal training programs, and would enable
expansion in order for the system to represent the suite of
biogeographic regions that together comprise our nation's coastlines.
We work closely with New Hampshire's Great Bay, Florida's
Apalachicola Bay, Alaska's Kachemak Bay, South Carolina's ACE Basin,
and Mississippi's Grand Bay reserves. As preserve managers, we at the
Conservancy know first hand that the NERRS implements solid science to
inform communities about how coastal ecosystems function, how humans
affect them, and methods for improving their condition.
National Marine Sanctuaries--$38 million
The Nature Conservancy urges the Committee to fund the National
Marine Sanctuary Program at their fully authorized level of $38 million
in fiscal year 2004 and we support the President's funding request for
$10 million for Procurement, Acquisition & Construction for the
Sanctuaries. This funding would extend volunteer programs, provide for
additional monitoring, and would fulfill a national plan for public
outreach. It would also enable new investments in science needed to
better manage complex issues surrounding sanctuaries. Finally,
additional funding will enable implementation of revised and more
detailed management plans.
The Conservancy is currently working cooperatively with the NMS
program and the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation to develop
effective volunteer programs for all of the Sanctuaries to better
leverage federal investments with the ``sweat equity'' of those
thousands of committed volunteers across the country. We are also
working with the Monterey Bay NMS to determine overlapping goals and
opportunities for collaboration as the sanctuary reviews its management
plan. Finally, our most extensive experience has been with the Florida
Keys NMS where their management plan, developed in cooperation with the
state of Florida and the Sanctuary Advisory Committee, is being
implemented.
Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program--$60 million
The Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program (CELCP) was
authorized by Congress as part of the Commerce, Justice, State, and
Judiciary Appropriations Act of 2002. In its first year, this new
program directed $15.8 million to coastal and estuarine areas with
significant conservation, recreation, ecological, historical, or
aesthetic value that are threatened by conversion from their natural
state to other uses.
Nowhere in the nation are threats such as sprawl, habitat loss, and
fragmentation more significant than along our nation's coasts. That is
why a program providing grants that allow for land acquisition as a
conservation strategy serves as an important addition to federal
efforts focused on protecting valuable habitat for the long-term. As a
result, The Nature Conservancy supports a significant increase in
funding ($60 million) for the CELCP in fiscal year 2004.
In addition, we have identified four high-priority projects for
CELP funding in fiscal year 2004:
--Crow's Nest (VA)--$4 million
--Gustavus Land Access and Enhancement (AK)--$1.5 million
--Amsterdam Beach (NY)--$3 million
--Ingleside (TX)--$500,000
Fisheries Habitat Restoration--$20 million
The Nature Conservancy strongly supports NOAA's coastal habitat
restoration efforts, and recommends funding levels of $20 million for
Fishery Habitat Restoration. Most of this funding would ensure the
continued success of NOAA's Community-based Restoration Program (CRP).
This funding level would enable the CRP to direct more seed money to
local communities across the country for the restoration of vital
habitats including wetlands, seagrass beds, mangroves, anadromous fish
spawning areas, and coastal rivers. Additionally, it would increase the
CRP's geographic scope and the rate at which it can encourage community
ownership and restoration of critical and rapidly dwindling habitat.
This program has not only leveraged up to $10 for every federal dollar
invested at more than 500 projects, but has also leveraged a
conservation ethic across the nation.
As a national partner, the Conservancy has experienced first hand
how the CRP inspires local efforts to conduct meaningful, on-the-ground
restoration of freshwater, coastal, and marine habitat. Since
partnering with the CRP in 2000, we have already directed $1 million to
community-based projects in Florida, New York, Connecticut, North
Carolina, Delaware, Virginia, California, and Texas. With one year
remaining in our national partnership, we are excited about what lies
ahead.
Pacific Salmon Recovery Program
The Conservancy considers salmon conservation a critical aspect of
our work in the Pacific Northwest, Alaska, and the Northeast. Given the
complex life history of this keystone species--migrating hundreds of
miles past forests and farms, cities and dams, from fresh to saltwater
during their lifecycle--successful salmon conservation requires action
across a broad landscape.
History has shown that money spent on habitat restoration and
recovery could have been used more effectively and at less cost to the
taxpayer if applied at a landscape-scale before systems were altered
and degraded. However, habitat destruction, reduced streamflows,
pollution, passage impediments, and overharvest have already played a
role in the decline of salmon stocks. That is why generous funding to
conserve and recover salmon in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska ($200
million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund; $55 million for
NMFS Funding for Pacific Salmon Recovery), and in the Northeast ($30
million for an equivalent Atlantic Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund), is
now needed.
In the Pacific Northwest and Alaska, the Pacific Coastal Salmon
Recovery Fund has enabled states and tribes to support local efforts to
evaluate, protect, and restore key habitat while enhancing local
economies. NMFS funding enhances that support with scientific research
and monitoring, and by spurring new cooperative efforts. In the
Northeast, a significant amount of collaborative work among federal
agencies, industry, private landowners, and other stakeholders has
begun. The time is right to establish a similar approach and
complementary funding for USFWS and NMFS.
Marine Protected Areas--$5 million
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are proven tools for rebuilding and
sustaining fisheries, recovering threatened and endangered species, and
providing recreational opportunities. The Conservancy has learned this
first hand through work with scientists, community members,
international governments, and federal agencies to establish MPAs and
identify and protect biodiversity within them in places such as the
Florida Keys, the Exuma Cays Land and Sea Park in the Bahamas, and
Kimbe Bay in Papua New Guinea.
The Conservancy recommends that $5 million be appropriated for MPAs
so that NOAA can continue working with federal and state agencies and
other partners to assess MPA design and effectiveness as a management
tool that protects biodiversity while permitting use of the nation's
valuable marine resources. Increased funding would also expedite
information collection and collaborative efforts required for
completion of the first nationwide inventory of MPAs. Additional funds
would be employed to improve coordination and information sharing at
regional and national levels; support training and technical assistance
for communities, users, management agencies, and others; and increase
public involvement through the MPA web site.
Coral Reef Conservation--$30.25 million (total)
The Nature Conservancy supports the President's request for $28.25
million in fiscal year 2004 for activities that benefit coral reefs,
including:
--National Ocean Service--$16 million + $2 million
--National Marine Fisheries Service--$11 million
--Ocean and Atmospheric Research--$500,000
--NESDIS--$750,000
This funding would be used to advance priorities identified by the
U.S. Coral Reef Task Force including comprehensive mapping and
monitoring of coral reefs, research into ecological processes upon
which reefs depend, integration of human activities, and public
education. With such funding, this scientifically-based effort will
protect and restore coral reefs in the United States and its
territories. It will serve as a model in intergovernmental coordination
and coral reef protection for similar initiatives around the world.
The Conservancy urges the Committee to add to the President's
request $2 million for grants to support on-the-ground conservation
efforts. The availability of a small pot of funds that could be made
available as grants to community-based efforts to address land-based
sources of pollution or to support collaborative efforts to identify
and designate Marine Protected Areas would be of substantial benefit to
implementing the Coral Reef Task Force Action Plan.
While NOAA's activities, guided by the Task Force, have made great
strides in coral reef conservation, the Conservancy would like to see
more funding dedicated to addressing this issue at an international
scale. The combined effects of global climate change and human
activities have led coral reef ecosystem health to decline severely all
over the world in recent decades. It is now critical to take action
before the tragedy becomes irreversible. Successful conservation of
coral reefs will involve a broad-scale, global, and long-term
commitment.
Estuary Restoration Program--$1.2 million
The Nature Conservancy supports the President's request of $1.2
million for NOAA in fiscal year 2004 to carry out their duties related
to this program.
The Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 created this program with the
goal of restoring one million acres of estuary habitat by 2010. Subject
to annual appropriations by Congress, the legislation authorized $275
million over five years dedicated to public-private partnerships
reversing the deterioration of estuaries through restoration of habitat
that has been degraded by population growth, dams, and pollution. The
Estuary Restoration Act emphasized the need for a centralized source of
information on restoration activities, that provides for a consistent
monitoring methodology that supports an iterative process and
meaningful measures of success.
International Conservation
Technical Assistance under CZMA--$1 million
International Cooperation under NMSA--$500,000
We recognize the significant accomplishments of the National Ocean
Service (NOS) over the past several years in developing international
capacity for integrated coastal management and marine protected area
management particularly in Asia, the Pacific, and the Caribbean. NOS
provides critical environmental leadership, for example: in the
development of the recently ratified Protocol on Specially Protected
Areas and Wildlife (SPAW) in the wider Caribbean region, its support of
the International Coral Reef Initiative and the Global Coral Reef
Monitoring Network, its leadership of IUCN's World Commission on
Protected Areas (Marine) and especially extensive preparations for the
marine program of the World Parks Congress in September 2003. We
encourage increased allocation of resources toward these and other
international activities with $1 million added to appropriations under
Section 310, Technical Assistance, of the Coastal Zone Management Act,
and $500,000 added to appropriations under Section 305, International
Cooperation, of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Bar Association
I am Jonathan Ross a lawyer in private practice with the
Manchester, New Hampshire law firm of Wiggin & Nourie. This testimony
is submitted at the request of the President of the American Bar
Association, Alfred P. Carlton, Jr., to voice the Association's views
with respect to the fiscal year 2004 appropriations for the Legal
Services Corporation and the Judiciary's Defender Services Program.
I submit this testimony in my capacity as Chair of the American Bar
Association's Standing Committee on Legal Aid and Indigent Defendants.
This Standing Committee serves the ABA and the nation by examining
issues relating to the delivery of civil legal assistance and criminal
defender services to the poor. It maintains a close liaison with state
and local bar association leaders, providing information and developing
policy and initiatives on civil legal aid and indigent defense.
legal services corporation
The ABA recommends LSC's fiscal year 2004 appropriation be
increased to $387.7 million.--The ABA is profoundly grateful for the
Subcommittee's inclusion of the Harkin-Smith-Domenici amendment in the
Senate's version of the fiscal year 2003 appropriation bill. This
amendment increased LSC's funding by $19 million and was intended to
prevent drastic funding cuts to legal aid programs serving 26 states.
We are also grateful for the Subcommittee's hard work to ensure that
half of that amount, $9.5 million, was included in the final version of
the fiscal year 2003 appropriations bill.
As you know, the Corporation redistributes grants to local legal
aid programs every 10 years using a formula based on the most recent
census. This reallocation resulted in significant cuts to service areas
in these 26 states, including Ohio, Mississippi, Pennsylvania,
Missouri, Kentucky, Alabama, Texas, Wisconsin, Vermont, Louisiana,
Illinois, West Virginia, Minnesota and Michigan. Because of the static
nature of LSC funding and the 5.74 percent increase in the poverty
population nationwide, even states whose poverty population (and LSC-
eligible clients) remained the same or actually increased may have
received funding cuts.
At present, however, no state is able to meet the current demand
for legal assistance, as programs must continue to turn away eligible
clients with all but critical legal needs. In addition to the increase
in the number of eligible clients as a result of the increase in the
national poverty population, almost every state has already experienced
or expects significant decreases in supplemental funding provided
through state legislatures and/or Interest on Lawyer Trust Accounts
(IOLTA).
At the same time, various credible studies--state and national--
continue to show that despite the combined efforts of legal aid
programs and private bar pro bono attorneys, 80 percent of the legal
needs of those in poverty go unmet. These people are substantially the
``working poor'' who encounter legal problems relating to family
relationships, domestic violence, health, employment, housing and other
basic life issues. Such hardships have only increased in scope and
frequency since the terrorist attacks and as a result of the faltering
economy. Now, with the mobilization of U.S. forces for the war in Iraq,
there has been an increased demand for legal services among our
servicemen and women, many of whom qualify for legal aid.
We understand that your Subcommittee faces many difficult funding
choices right now. However, assuring access to our justice system for
low-income individuals to resolve their legal problems peacefully is
essential to preserving the rule of law. At this time, the ABA
respectfully requests that the Subcommittee fund LSC at $387.7 million
for fiscal year 2004.
The LSC has historically been grossly under-funded. In 1996,
Congress reduced LSC's funding by 30 percent from $415 million to $278
million and required many reforms in the way the LSC operated and
restricted the activities of its local program grantees. The LSC has
fully implemented all the required reforms, insuring that local
grantees focus on meeting the basic, everyday legal needs of the poor.
The appropriation has increased modestly since 1996, to $338.8 million
for fiscal year 2003, but this amount is less than half the funding, in
constant dollars, that LSC received in 1980.
We estimate that, with inflation, the amount needed to merely bring
LSC to pre-1996 levels would be $490 million. The ABA therefore urges
Congress to restore LSC's funding to $490 million. In view of other
pressing needs, we recognize that this cannot be accomplished at once,
and ask the Subcommittee to increase LSC's funding from the fiscal year
2003 level of $338.8 million to this amount over a three-year period
starting with a $51.1 million increase in fiscal year 2004.
At the very minimum, the ABA urges the Subcommittee to provide at
least $352.4 million for fiscal year 2004, as recently requested by the
Legal Services Corporation. LSC's request represents an increase
correlating to the increase in the poverty population reported by the
2000 census.
The Legal Services Corporation Plays A Vital Role in the Justice
System.--For more than a quarter century, the Legal Services
Corporation has been a lifeline for Americans in desperate need. For
poor Americans, LSC-funded legal services programs have been there at
times when they had nowhere else to go. These are just a few examples
of the millions of people legal aid lawyers help every year:
--Alexander and his wife had to move to another state for health
reasons. They were unable to sell their mobile home, and
eventually the lender repossessed the unit. Later, a collection
agency notified them that they still owed $12,000 on the note.
At age 84, Alexander, who took pride in his good credit rating,
wanted to do the right thing. He could not, however, pay the
amount owed, nor could he afford an attorney. The local legal
services office was able to assist him in obtaining a
settlement agreement. He paid the settlement amount and was
able to keep his good credit rating. He has returned to the
work force part time and is caring for his ailing wife.
--Mark, 38 years old, was dying from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Conventional chemotherapy had helped, but he needed a special
type of bone marrow transplant to ensure that the lymphoma
would not recur. Without the procedure, his doctors predicted
that he would have only one year to live. Medicaid denied the
procedure, claiming that this type of transplant was not a
covered benefit even though it is considered the current
standard of care for the disease. Mark's legal services
attorney successfully argued that the denial was improper. The
transplant was successful, and Mark is now home and seeking
employment.
The Corporation, formed in 1974 with bipartisan Congressional
support and the endorsement of the Nixon Administration, was created to
ensure that all Americans have access to a lawyer and the justice
system for civil legal issues regardless of their ability to pay.
Today, this is more important than ever. A weak economy has created
pressing new legal needs for many Americans who have lost employment or
suffered other setbacks. According to the 2000 census, more than 36
million Americans live in poverty, making more than one in six
Americans eligible for LSC-funded representation.
The National Legal Aid Program Merits Strong Congressional Support
Because:
--LSC-funded programs provide basic legal services for poor Americans
in every Congressional District in the country.--LSC disburses
95 percent of its annual federal appropriation to 161 local
legal aid programs serving low-income individuals and families
in every county and Congressional District in the country.
Boards consisting of leaders in the local business and legal
communities set the priorities for and oversee these programs,
which are required by law to provide basic legal services to
the poor.
--LSC-funded legal aid lawyers save and protect American families.--
Local legal aid programs make a real difference in the lives of
millions of low-income American families by helping them
resolve everyday legal matters, including family law, housing,
and consumer issues, and by helping them obtain wrongly denied
benefits such as social security and veterans' pensions. LSC-
funded programs often provide assistance to those who suddenly
qualify and need legal assistance, such as when natural or
national disaster strikes; LSC-funded programs were
instrumental in assisting September 11 victims and families.
Many low-income military families qualify for legal aid, and
seek help with such matters as estate planning, consumer and
landlord/tenant problems and family law.
--LSC-funded programs are the nation's primary source of legal
assistance for women who are victims of domestic violence.--
Legal aid programs identify domestic violence as one of the top
priorities in their caseloads. While domestic violence occurs
at all income levels, low-income women are significantly more
likely to experience violence than other women, according to
the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Recent studies also show
that the only public service that reduces domestic abuse in the
long term is women's access to legal aid.
--The White House, the Congress and the American people support the
LSC.--President Bush supports funding for the LSC, recognizing
that ``[f]or millions of Americans, LSC-funded legal services
is the only resource available to access the justice system.''
A bipartisan majority in Congress supports LSC; the Harkin-
Smith-Domenici amendment ultimately added $9.5 million to LSC's
fiscal year 2003 budget at a time when many other domestic
programs were being cut or flat-funded. The American public
agrees that federal tax dollars should fund LSC: a national
poll reported in 2000 that 82 percent of those surveyed
supported government-funded legal aid.
--The private bar cannot replace the services provided by LSC-funded
programs.--The private bar actively encourages and organizes
its members to provide pro bono legal services. Among many
other efforts, the ABA's Standing Committee on Legal Aid to
Military Personnel helps the military and the Department of
Defense improve the effectiveness of legal assistance in civil
matters to an estimated nine million servicemen and women and
their dependents. However, a well-funded federal legal services
program is essential to leverage other resources--human and
financial--to help meet the legal needs of the poor. Without
adequate federal funding, these non-LSC resources would be both
less abundant and less effectively utilized--and, in many
cases, would not exist.
criminal justice act: defender services program
The ABA supports the request of the U.S. Judicial Conference for an
hourly rate increase from $90 to $113 for compensation for panel
attorneys who represent indigent defendants under the Criminal Justice
Act. This modest increase is needed to continue to attract and retain
competent panel attorneys. We also support the Judiciary's request for
funds sufficient to increase the maximum hourly capital panel attorney
rate from $128 to $157. The current capital panel attorney rate has not
been raised since 1989, and now does not even cover overhead costs for
many attorneys doing this most difficult work, work often done under
highly stressful, emergency conditions. The Florida Supreme Court
recently concluded that every capital case by definition involves
``extraordinary circumstances and unusual representation.'' Without a
fee increase, scores of qualified attorneys will simply stop taking
capital cases.
conclusion
The American Bar Association urges the Subcommittee to provide
adequate funding for the Legal Services Corporation and the Defender
Services Program. These two programs are essential for ensuring ``equal
access to justice'' for all.
Thank you for your consideration.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Center for Victims of Crime
My name is Susan Herman, and I am the executive director of the
National Center for Victims of Crime. I submit this testimony to urge
members of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State and the
Judiciary to raise the cap on the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) Fund to
$685 million for fiscal year 2004. In addition, I urge you to prevent
the creation of additional earmarks off the top of the VOCA Fund.
The National Center for Victims of Crime is the leading resource
and advocacy organization for victims of crime. We are well acquainted
with the funding needs of the nation's crime victim assistance
programs. Since its founding in 1985, the National Center has worked
with public and private non-profit organizations and agencies across
the country, and has provided information, support, and technical
assistance to hundreds of thousands of victims, victim service
providers, allied professionals, and advocates. Our toll-free
information and referral Helpline keeps us in touch with the needs of
crime victims nationwide. Through our day-to-day interactions with our
members and with the 7,800 crime victim service providers in our
service referral network, we are aware of the work they do and of the
impact that funding decisions at the federal level have on their
ability to meet the needs of victims. We also interact with crime
victim service providers through our Training Institute, which offers
training on a variety of issues to service providers throughout the
country. In short, we hear from victims and service providers every day
about the impact and importance of the VOCA Fund.
As you know, the VOCA Fund consists of fines and penalties imposed
on federal offenders. The bulk of the money is distributed each year by
formula grants to the states to fund both their crime victim
compensation programs, which pay many of the out-of-pocket expenses
incurred by victims, and victim assistance programs, such as rape
crisis centers, domestic violence shelters, victim assistants in law
enforcement and prosecutor offices, and other direct services for
victims of crime.
Last year's $600 million cap on the VOCA Fund translated to a cut
in funding for crime victim assistance programs of approximately eight
percent. This eight percent funding decrease resulted from a change in
the VOCA formula enacted in October 2001 as part of the anti-terrorism
legislation, the USA PATRIOT Act, Pub. L. 107-56. That change increased
the amount of VOCA Funds paid to states for their crime victim
compensation programs, leaving less available for grants to victim
service agencies.
The amount of VOCA money a state receives for compensation is
limited to a percentage of what that state paid out in a given year.
Previously, states received a reimbursement of 40 percent of what they
paid out in crime victim compensation. Beginning in fiscal year 2003,
that amount increased to 60 percent of what the state paid out. The
increase in VOCA funds that states received for compensation programs
limited the funds available for crime victim services. The USA PATRIOT
Act had coupled the formula change with an incremental annual increase
in the VOCA cap that would have offset the loss of funds for victim
services. That annual increase mechanism, however, was stricken by
language in the appropriations measures for fiscal year 2002.
The impact of that eight percent cut has been significant for
programs already suffering from reduced private giving and state
support. From around the country, programs have reported to us that
they have had to:
--Lay off staff, or reduce full time staff to part time.--Uniformly,
programs reported that they were already operating at bare
bones levels. The only area left to cut is staff time, which
directly reduces services available to victims. Many programs
also reported that there were no similar agencies or services
in their area to whom victims could turn. The following
response from a Louisiana rape crisis center was typical: ``We
have already cut as many positions as we can without shutting
down entirely. We counsel victims of sexual assault, and any
cut will mean no counseling for those victims.'' In many
instances, programs have only one or two paid staff, and the
reduction in their time will necessitate elimination of
extensive volunteer programs because there will be insufficient
professional oversight and coordination.
--Limit their geographic coverage.--For instance, from Colorado,
Michigan, and Virginia we heard from programs that had been
serving victims in 5 to 10 counties; now they have had to pull
back from service in the outlying regions, leaving those
victims without services. Some programs serving rural victims
can no longer reimburse mileage or phone costs for volunteer
advocates who offer services throughout a large area.
--Discontinue services for special populations of victims.--In some
places, victim assistance programs have recently conducted or
been a part of needs assessments and strategic planning
efforts, and thus have a clear picture of special victim
populations which are not being adequately served. Many
services that had been developed for special populations are
being eliminated because of reduced funding. One program from
Minnesota stated that their ``immigrant and refugee program to
sexual assault victims will be cut. The bilingual advocate for
this program will most likely be laid off. The outreach to this
population in our community has been building for the past 8
years. The trust and confidence from the community will be
eroded. Most importantly, an underserved community will go
unserved.''
--Discontinue services for secondary victims.--For example, many
battered women's programs, which had relied on VOCA funding to
support services for the children who witnessed or sustained
abuse, are having to restrict and even eliminate those
services. A North Carolina shelter told us, ``In [our] county
there have been two domestic violence murders in 2003 one of
which was a stalking case. The five children involved in those
cases need our programs and we may not have the resources to
serve them. Then what?''
--Turn away crime victims.--Victim service providers from Alabama,
Massachusetts, and Nevada all reported that the numbers of
victims seeking assistance, and the numbers of schools and
other organizations seeking outreach programs, have increased
at the same time the available funding has decreased. One North
Carolina program noted, ``County guidance counselors and
medical professionals continue to identify and refer more and
more children who are victims of family violence, sexual
assault and sexual abuse due to the education provided by this
agency to teach them how to recognize child victims/witnesses
of domestic violence. Yet, we will not be able to offer our
afternoon programming or summer programs to additional children
until some of the current children enrolled in the program age
out.''
The effect of this year's cuts have been significant. The National
Center for Victims of Crime is asking that the VOCA Fund cap be raised
to $685 million for fiscal year 2004, to help programs make up for the
loss in funding this year and enable them to begin to expand their
programs. When we asked victim assistance programs about their spending
priorities for any increase in funding, they reported the following
needs:
--Services to immigrant victims of crime.--All over the country,
there are limited services, or even a complete absence of
services, for large groups of immigrant victims of crime. Such
victims are often linguistically or culturally isolated.
Without the availability of interpreters or bi-lingual service
providers, such victims cannot access the services that may
otherwise be available. Additionally, victims who come from a
society where the police are not trusted, or a culture where
sexual violence is unmentioned or domestic violence is
condoned, often require a different approach to providing
services. Effective victim services require ready access to
service providers who are culturally knowledgeable and
sensitive to these varying needs, and programs in Arizona,
Georgia, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, and Wyoming all
listed providing services to immigrant victims as a priority.
--Services to victims in rural jurisdictions.--Too many victims in
rural jurisdictions still lack access to basic services. In
many parts of the country, victims are hundreds of miles from
the nearest rape crisis center or battered women's shelter.
Victim service providers in Alabama, Idaho, Kentucky, and
Montana all reported a need to expand efforts to cover multi-
county areas through the creation of satellite offices, the use
of volunteers or staff to travel to victims' homes or other
locations; or to increase the use of the Internet to serve
victims in rural communities.
--Assistance to victims with disabilities.--One area of greatest need
is in reaching and serving crime victims with disabilities:
developmentally disabled victims, mentally ill victims, hearing
impaired victims, and others whose disability makes them
simultaneously more vulnerable to crime and less able to access
existing services. Many service providers, including programs
in Michigan, Minnesota and Pennsylvania, would like to expand
their programs to provide appropriate services to such crime
victims.
--Assistance to elderly victims.--A number of victim assistance
programs noted a need to increase their services to elderly
victims of crime, who often lack other forms of support and who
may require a service provider to visit them in their homes.
Victim assistance programs in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and
Wyoming all listed services to elder victims as a priority.
--Assistance to teen victims.--Many victim assistance programs are
hoping to extend services to teen victims of crime, especially
teen victims of dating violence. Providing prompt services to
teen victims can significantly lessen the lifelong impact of
crime, and programs in Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, and Texas all
described a need for services to teen victims.
--Providing more timely services to victims.--Victims in many
programs are waiting weeks or months to get into counseling or
support groups; victims in the criminal justice system may not
be contacted until close to the trial stage. Victim service
providers in Colorado, Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia
all spoke of the need to hire additional staff to eliminate or
significantly reduce such waiting periods for services.
--Serving victims of non-violent crime.--As the incidence of identity
theft and fraud have increased, and the understanding of the
impact of non-violent crime on victims has grown, many victim
assistance programs, including those in Minnesota, Ohio, and
Pennsylvania, expressed a desire to expand their services to
include such victims.
--Technology investments to enhance victim services.--Many victim
assistance programs reported that outdated computer equipment
limits their efficiency. There is also a great need for case
management software and assessment tools to help programs
improve and evaluate their effectiveness in serving victims of
crime. Programs in Kentucky, Pennsylvania and Texas all noted
such needs.
Finally, while our first priority is to see the cap on the VOCA
Fund raised to $685 million for fiscal year 2004, we also urge you to
discontinue earmarks for federal positions off the top of the VOCA
Fund. New earmarks on the Fund have been enacted over the last several
legislative sessions, limiting the amount of money ultimately available
to states to fund local programs. These earmarks provide for victim/
witness coordinators in U.S. Attorneys' offices, for victim assistance
in the FBI, and for an automated victim notification system at the
federal level. Such expenditures are expected to be nearly $34 million
in fiscal year 2003. These earmarks result in a significant decrease in
funding available to help the vast majority of crime victims--victims
whose cases are prosecuted and who are served at the state and local
levels. Such federal positions may be warranted, but surely Congress
can find other sources of revenue to support federal employees.
The most important action Congress can take to help this nation's
victims of crime is to provide the funding for services and
compensation programs that help them rebuild their lives. Congress'
creation of the VOCA Fund in 1984 was a landmark action that
fundamentally changed the way our society responds to victims of crime.
We urge you to continue this great effort, by raising the cap on the
VOCA Fund to $685 million, and resisting pressure to earmark the Fund.
We must continue the progress of our national response to victims of
crime.
______
Prepared Statement of the California Industry and Government Central
California Ozone Study (CCOS) Coalition
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: On behalf of the
California Industry and Government Central California Ozone Study
(CCOS) Coalition, we are pleased to submit this statement for the
record in support of our fiscal year 2004 funding request of $500,000
from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for
CCOS as part of a Federal match for the $9.1 million already
contributed by California State and local agencies and the private
sector. NOAA was under contract for approximately $700,000 to measure
winds and temperatures during the CCOS field study. Currently, NOAA is
under contract for $250,000 to participate in the CCOS data analysis
and modeling. This request will partially replace funding already spent
for NOAA's participation in CCOS.
Most of central California does not attain federal health-based
standards for ozone and particulate matter. The San Joaquin Valley is
developing new State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for the federal ozone
and particulate matter standards in the 2002 to 2004 timeframe. The San
Francisco Bay Area has committed to update their ozone SIP in 2004
based on new technical data. In addition, none of these areas attain
the new federal 8-hour ozone standard. SIPs for the 8-hour standard
will be due in the 2007 timeframe--and must include an evaluation of
the impact of transported air pollution on downwind areas such as the
Mountain Counties. Photochemical air quality modeling will be necessary
to prepare SIPs that are approvable by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
The Central California Ozone Study is designed to enable central
California to meet Clean Air Act requirements for ozone State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) as well as advance fundamental science for
use nationwide. The CCOS field measurement program was conducted during
the summer of 2000 in conjunction with the California Regional
PM10/PM2.5 Air Quality Study (CRPAQS), a major
study of the origin, nature, and extent of excessive levels of fine
particles in central California. CCOS includes an ozone field study, a
deposition study, data analysis, modeling performance evaluations, and
a retrospective look at previous SIP modeling. The CCOS study area
extends over central and most of northern California. The goal of the
CCOS is to better understand the nature of the ozone problem across the
region, providing a strong scientific foundation for preparing the next
round of State and Federal attainment plans. The study includes six
main components:
--Developed the design of the field study
--Conducted an intensive field monitoring study from June 1 to
September 30, 2000
--Developing an emission inventory to support modeling
--Developing and evaluating a photochemical model for the region
--Designing and conducting a deposition field study
--Evaluating emission control strategies for upcoming ozone
attainment plans
The CCOS is directed by Policy and Technical Committees consisting
of representatives from Federal, State and local governments, as well
as private industry. These committees, which managed the San Joaquin
Valley Ozone Study and are currently managing the California Regional
Particulate Air Quality Study, are landmark examples of collaborative
environmental management. The proven methods and established teamwork
provide a solid foundation for CCOS. The sponsors of CCOS, representing
state, local government and industry, have contributed approximately
$9.1 million for the field study. The federal government has
contributed $3,730,000 to support some data analysis and modeling. In
addition, CCOS sponsors are providing $2 million of in-kind support.
The Policy Committee is seeking federal co-funding of $6.25 million to
complete the data analysis and modeling portions of the study and for a
future deposition study. California is an ideal natural laboratory for
studies that address these issues, given the scale and diversity of the
various ground surfaces in the region (crops, woodlands, forests, urban
and suburban areas).
There is a national need to address national data gaps and
California should not bear the entire cost of addressing these gaps.
National data gaps include issues relating to the integration of
particulate matter and ozone control strategies. The CCOS field study
took place concurrently with the California Regional Particulate Matter
Study--previously jointly funded through Federal, State, local and
private sector funds. CCOS was timed to enable leveraging the efforts
of the particulate matter study. Some equipment and personnel served
dual functions to reduce the net cost of the CCOS field study. From a
technical standpoint, carrying out both studies concurrently was a
unique opportunity to address the integration of particulate matter and
ozone control efforts. To effectively address these issues requires
federal assistance.
For fiscal year 2004, our Coalition is seeking funding of $500,000
from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Meteorological data were continuously collected during the CCOS field
program. Extensive meteorological data collected as part of the field
study can be used by NOAA to strengthen its ongoing research activities
such as improving meteorological forecasting and providing information
on weather conditions along the Pacific coast for use in U.S. weather
models. In addition, CCOS provides data for research on air flows in
complex terrain. The improved results obtained from this research have
national applicability.
Thank you very much for your consideration of our request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Monmouth University School of Science,
Technology and Engineering
establishment of the center for coastal watershed management
The Department of the Interior's policies and practices reflect the
fact that clean water is essential to all Americans. Water resources in
the United States provide water to drink, water to irrigate crops,
provide habitat for a diversity of fish and wildlife, as wells as
provide for recreational opportunities such as fishing, boating, and
swimming. However, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
acknowledged that a majority of our watersheds have water quality
problems that include contamination with pathogens or toxic chemicals,
nutrient enrichment, fish and wildlife habitat loss, and invasive
species. According the EPA, these problems continue to impair
watersheds nationwide and prohibit the attainment of water quality
goals. They conclude by stating that problems are complex and varied,
and that governments working alone cannot solve all of them.
The Nation's fish and aquatic resources are among the richest and
most diverse in the world and annually they provide ecological, social,
and economic benefits to citizens and visitors. However, despite
efforts to conserve fish and other aquatic resources, a growing number
are declining and in need of special protection or management efforts
in some part of their natural or historic range. According to the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the reasons for these declines are
linked largely to habitat loss or alteration and the impacts of harmful
exotic or transplanted species. To move forward in efforts to conserve
and manage aquatic resources and their habitats across the country, FWS
acknowledges the need to take an ecosystems approach and form
partnerships that promote collaboration among governmental agencies,
organizations, and individuals.
Rationale for a Coastal Watersheds Approach
New Jersey is a state richly endowed with coastal resources. These
resources support traditional fisheries and maritime industries as well
as more contemporary businesses and rapidly growing new concepts in
residential development. However, because of the rapid growth of both
resident and tourist populations, the nation's most densely populated
state faces enormous pressures balancing growth demand with the limited
nature of its coastal resources.
The marine ecosystems within the state currently exhibit signs of
stress and deterioration, as documented in the scientific and popular
literature. As coastal use and development increase and coastal
population continues to rise, impacts on the environment will become
even more severe. Among the most important impacts of concern in the
coastal zone are degradation and loss of habitats and the deterioration
of water quality.
The health and vitality of New Jersey's marine resources are
dependent upon the ability of governmental decision-making processes to
protect and enhance the coastal environment and reduce environmental
risk associated with unwise development and waste disposal practices.
However, throughout the past decade New Jersey citizens have been
disillusioned by what many perceive as an apparent inability to
properly manage the coastal zone even after such events as beach
closures, nuisance algal blooms, fish kills, contamination of habitats
and organisms with pathogens and toxic chemicals, sewage treatment
problems, depletion of fish stocks, and rampant coastal development
resulting in nonpoint pollution problems in ocean waters, coastal bays,
their tributaries and watersheds. A significant part of this
frustration is due to the inability of multiple governmental units to
collectively respond to very complex environmental phenomena.
the center for coastal watershed management
Progress To Date
Projects conducted by the Monmouth University Center for Coastal
Watershed Management will assist federal, state and local agencies,
communities, and organizations in achieving their goals and objects as
they relate to coastal watersheds and their natural and living
resources.
During the past year, as plans for the Center for Coastal Watershed
Management were under development at Monmouth, a number of projects
dealing with watershed research and education were initiated:
--Bacterial source tracking (BST) methodologies are being used for
identification of specific sources of fecal contamination in
local rivers, lakes, and estuaries.
--Rapid bioassessment (RBA) techniques are being used to characterize
several streams and lakes in Monmouth County.
--Fish communities in Whale Pond Brook, Deal Lake, Wreck Pond and the
Manasquan River Estuary are being characterized using passive
and active fishery sampling techniques.
--Local watershed and community groups have been assisted with
organization and implementation of stream cleanups and
assessments of impairments to the Whale Pond Brook and Poplar
Brook watersheds.
--STE has hosted or conducted numerous seminars and workshops dealing
with coastal and watershed issues in conjunction with a variety
of groups:
--Atmospheric Deposition (NJ Sea Grant Program)
--Nuisance Algal Blooms (NJ Sea Grant Program)
--Early Life History of Fishes of the Mid-Atlantic (NOAA/NMFS)
--Watershed Educators Workshop (NJDEP/Monmouth County)
--Stormwater Management and Restoration Techniques for Coastal
Ponds and Lakes (NJDEP/Monmouth County)
--Volunteer Watershed Monitoring (NJDEP/Monmouth County)
--Watershed Area 12 Congress (NJDEP/Monmouth County)
--Water Monitoring Training Course (Monmouth County/YSI, Inc.)
Current and Future Objectives
In New Jersey, persistent coastal issues remain to be addressed,
including nonpoint source pollution, headwaters destruction, deposition
of pollutants into waterways, and habitat degradation. The State of New
Jersey has acknowledged the need for creative, comprehensive solutions
to watershed preservation, protection, and management. In 1997,
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) began implementing a
statewide watershed management framework to provide a means to further
restore and maintain the physical, chemical, and biological integrity
of waters in the state using sustainable management principles that
allow a more holistic, rather than site-specific, approach to most
effectively protect water resources. The state's watershed management
framework is based on three key components: a geographic focus;
continuous improvement based on sound science; and partnership/
stakeholder involvement.
The Monmouth University Center for Coastal Watershed Management (MU
CCWM) will be housed within the School of Science, Technology and
Engineering. The Center will spearhead the application of science and
technology to the effective management of watershed resources in New
Jersey's coastal environment. The Center, in partnership with the
Monmouth County Health Department and with other regional
organizations, will serve as a focal point for the development of
leading edge approaches to the solution of problems facing local
communities and decision-makers at all levels of government by:
--Promoting interdisciplinary studies of coastal watersheds by
Monmouth University faculty, students, associates, and
colleagues; and
--Fostering collaboration between citizens, watershed and community
organizations, governmental agencies, local businesses, the
scientific community, and other parties interested in watershed
management and restoration.
Specific objectives of the Monmouth University Center for Coastal
Watershed Management include:
--Strengthen teaching, research, and outreach at Monmouth University
with emphasis on programs crossing university departmental
boundaries as they relate to the environmental, social, and
economic aspects of coastal watershed management.
--Provide a forum for the integration of knowledge from a wide array
of technical disciplines in addressing watershed management
issues.
--Establish an analytical capability to provide scientific
information necessary for making informed watershed management
decisions.
--Facilitate access to objective and scientifically sound information
on effective techniques to protect and restore coastal and
urban watersheds.
--Conduct community outreach programs highlighting the need for
greater protection of our waters and reliable and effective
ways of protecting and restoring coastal and urban watersheds.
--Conduct workshops and special programs for pre-college students and
educators from local school districts.
--Conduct continuing professional education programs for practicing
professionals in the form of short courses, workshops, and
seminars.
--Involve undergraduate students in faculty-supervised independent
research related to ecology, natural resource management,
environmental and resource economics, and local environmental
issues.
--Maximize University participation in the local, regional, and
statewide watershed initiatives.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Museum of Natural History
About the American Museum of Natural History
The American Museum of Natural History [AMNH] is one of the
nation's preeminent institutions for scientific research and public
education. Since its founding in 1869, the Museum has pursued its
mission to ``discover, interpret, and disseminate--through scientific
research and education--knowledge about human cultures, the natural
world, and the universe.'' It is renowned for its exhibitions and
collections of more than 32 million natural specimens and cultural
artifacts. With nearly four million annual visitors--approximately half
of them children--its audience is one of the largest, fastest growing,
and most diverse of any museum in the country. Museum scientists
conduct groundbreaking research in fields ranging from all branches of
zoology, comparative genomics, and informatics to earth, space, and
environmental sciences and biodiversity conservation. Their work forms
the basis for all the Museum's activities that seek to explain complex
issues and help people to understand the events and processes that
created and continue to shape the Earth, life and civilization on this
planet, and the universe beyond.
Today more than 200 Museum scientists with internationally
recognized expertise, led by 46 curators, conduct laboratory and
collections-based research programs as well as fieldwork and training.
The Museum's research programs are organized under five divisions
(Anthropology; Earth, Planetary, and Space Sciences; Invertebrate
Zoology; Paleontology; and Vertebrate Zoology), along with the Center
for Biodiversity and Conservation (CBC). The Museum also conducts
graduate training programs in conjunction with a host of distinguished
universities, supports doctoral and postdoctoral scientists with highly
competitive research fellowships, and offers talented undergraduates an
opportunity to work with Museum scientists.
The Museum's Center for Biodiversity and Conservation, founded in
1993, is dedicated to enhancing the use of rigorous scientific data to
mitigate critical threats to global biodiversity. The CBC draws on the
strengths of the Museum's scientific, education, and exhibition
departments to integrate this information into the conservation process
and to disseminate it widely. It forges key partnerships to conduct
conservation-related field projects around the world, train scientists,
organize scientific symposia, present public programs, and produce
publications geared toward scientists, policy makers, and the lay
public. Each spring, the CBC hosts symposia that focus on conservation
issues. In 2002, the symposium, ``Sustaining Seascapes: the Science and
Policy of Marine Resource Management,'' was co-sponsored by NOAA's
Marine Protected Areas Center, along with other federal and private
organizations, and examined the large-scale conservation of marine
ecosystems, giving special consideration to novel approaches to the
sustainable management of biodiversity and fisheries. The focus of
2003's symposium, held March 20-21, was on conservation issues related
to increased ecotourism in Southeast Asia.
The Museum's vast collections are a major scientific resource,
providing the foundation for the Museum's interrelated research,
education, and exhibition missions. They often include endangered and
extinct species as well as many of the only known ``type specimens''--
examples of species by which all other finds are compared. Within the
collections are many spectacular individual collections, including the
world's most comprehensive collections of dinosaurs, fossil mammals,
Northwest Coast and Siberian cultural artifacts, North American
butterflies, spiders, Australian and Chinese amphibians, reptiles,
fishes, and one of the world's most important bird collections.
Collections such as these are historical libraries of expertly
identified and documented examples of species and artifacts, providing
an irreplaceable record of life on earth. They provide vital data for
Museum scientists as well for more than 250 national and international
visiting scientists each year.
An exciting chapter in the Museum's history will occur this spring
when one of the flagship and most popular halls--the Hall of Ocean
Life--reopens after an extension renovation. Drawing on the Museum's
world-renowned expertise in Ichthyology as well as other areas of
vertebrate as well as invertebrate zoology, the Hall will be pivotal in
educating visitors about the oceans' key role in sustaining life on our
planet. It will feature two new ``Spectrum of Life'' walls highlighting
the extraordinary diversity of marine life, a completely renovated two-
story diorama of the Andros Coral Reef, a spectacular sea floor slab
from the late Jurassic Period, and panels showcasing fossil specimens
and some of the earliest signs of life on Earth, as well as the
beloved, and refurbished, 94-foot-long giant blue whale. The renovated
Hall of Ocean Life, together with the new Halls of Biodiversity, Planet
Earth, and the Universe and the rebuilt Hayden Planetarium (part of the
new Rose Center for Earth and Space), will provide visitors a seamless
educational journey from the universe's beginnings to the formation and
processes of Earth to the extraordinary diversity of life on our
planet.
With the reopening of the Hall of Ocean Life, the Museum will have
a singular opportunity for public education about marine environments,
and it will draw on its vast educational resources to do so. In its
Halls of Biodiversity, Planet Earth, and Ocean Life, the Museum
presents current science news through Science Bulletins--multimedia
productions that bring the latest science news and discoveries to the
public using high-definition video documentaries, kiosks, and the web.
The Bulletins will present features on such issues as marine
biodiversity report, ocean life discoveries, and more. In addition, the
Museum's Education Department provides standards-based curricular
materials and on-site programs for more than 400,000 students and
teachers who visit the Museum in school and camp groups each year, as
well as professional development programs for teachers, Moveable
Museums that travel to schools and community sites, a model after-
school program, award-winning online educational resources, and
lectures, workshops, and field excursions for adult learners. The
Museum's National Center for Science Literacy, Education, and
Technology, launched in 1997 in partnership with NASA, employs
innovative technologies to bring educational materials and programs to
online audiences nationwide.
common goals of noaa and the american museum
Today, as throughout its history, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] is committed to describing and
predicting changes in the Earth's environment and to conservation and
wise management of the nation's coastal and marine resources. It
dedicates itself to forecasting environmental changes, providing
decision makers with reliable scientific information, and fostering
global environmental stewardship.
The American Museum shares NOAA's commitment to these environmental
goals and to the scientific research, technologies, and public
education that underlie them. Indeed, informed environmental
stewardship and preservation of our planet's biodiversity and
resources--in marine, coastal, and other natural environments and
habitats--are integral to the Museum's most fundamental purposes.
Museum scientists conduct research worldwide on conservation biology
and habitat protection. Their investigations advance scientific
understanding and public awareness of these vital issues. The Museum
has also long been at the forefront of developing new research modes
and methods, and today, throughout the science divisions and the CBC,
AMNH investigators are exploring applications of GIS and remote sensing
technologies to advance research pertinent to conservation and
protecting threatened species and habitats.
The research programs of the CBC and the science divisions are
enhanced by the Museum's research resources and technological capacity.
New research tools--including molecular technologies, new collection
types, innovations in computation, and GIS and remote sensing--are
revolutionizing the way research can be conducted and data analyzed, as
well as the way museum collections can be used and accessed by
scientists, educators, policy makers, and the general public. The
Museum has significant resources in these areas which it would bring to
bear in its proposed partnership with NOAA. These include the
following:
Molecular Laboratories.--The Museum's molecular systematics program
is at the leading edge of comparative genomics and the analysis of DNA
sequences for evolutionary research. It includes two Molecular
Systematics Laboratories, with sophisticated technologies for
sequencing and advanced genomics research. In these laboratories, more
than 40 researchers in molecular systematics, conservation genetics,
and developmental biology conduct their research on a variety of study
organisms.
Frozen Tissue Collection.--The Museum is expanding its collections
to include preserved biological tissues and isolated DNA in its new
super-cold storage facility. This collection is an invaluable resource
for research in many fields, including conservation biology, genetics
and comparative genomics because it preserves genetic material and gene
products from rare and endangered organisms that may become extinct
before science fully exploits their potential. Capable of housing one
million specimens, it will be the largest super-cold tissue collection
of its kind. In the past two years, 15,000 specimens not available at
any other institute or facility have already accessioned. At the same
time, the Museum is pioneering the development of collection and
storage protocols for such collections. To maximize use and utility of
the facility for researchers worldwide, the Museum is also developing a
sophisticated website and online database that includes collection
information and digitized images.
Supercomputing.--Museum researchers now have onsite access to a
560-processor cluster--the fastest parallel computing cluster in an
evolutionary biology laboratory and one of the fastest installed in a
non-defense environment. This computing cluster, constructed in-house
from scratch, represents one of the key achievements of Museum
scientists who, over the last eight years, have taken a leadership role
in developing and applying new computational approaches to deciphering
evolutionary relationships through time and across species. Their
groundbreaking efforts in cluster computing, algorithm development, and
evolutionary theory have been widely recognized and commended for their
broad applicability for biology as a whole. Indeed, the bioinformatics
tools these Museum scientists are creating will not only help to
generate evolutionary scenarios, but also will inform and make more
efficient large genome sequencing efforts pertinent to biodiversity
science as well as be applicable in other informatics contexts, in non-
genomics areas of evolutionary biology as well as in other disciplines.
Remote Sensing and Geographical Information Systems Technologies.--
The CBC houses a Remote Sensing/Geographical Information Systems (RS/
GIS) lab which has had noted success since it was launched in the fall
of 1998. Wise conservation policy requires effective knowledge of the
distribution of species and ecological communities at local, regional,
and global scales. Without this information, it is difficult to decide
where to allocate scarce conservation resources. Remote sensing
technologies can provide essential data on such things as land-cover
and land-use, as well as sea surface temperatures and chlorophyll
content. GIS makes it possible for scientists to compare and visualize
the relationships among satellite and legacy data, raw standardized
samples, and data obtained through ground truthing. Because it provides
the database backbone than can connect field work to analysis, GIS is
becoming an indispensable component in environmental data analysis and
is thus revolutionizing work in conservation.
The CBC uses its RS/GIS technologies in biodiversity and marine
reserve research in various ways--for example, to identify sites
suitable for biological inventory; to provide supplementary
quantitative and qualitative data in and around study sites (e.g.
extent of habitat fragmentation); and to develop persuasive visual
depictions and digital presentations for reports, publications, and
meetings.
Building on the scientific strengths and resources outlined above,
the Museum now proposes to launch, in partnership with NOAA, a basic
and applied research initiative that employs the latest technologies to
advance scientific understanding of resource management and stewardship
issues for marine and coastal environments. The explosion of research
technologies creates a unique window of opportunity for the Museum to
develop new ways to integrate these state-of-the-art analytical tools
into its biological and environmental research, as well as to present
results to the public in its exhibition halls, websites, and
educational programs. It is this intersection of research capability
and technological opportunity that underlies the planned initiative.
The Museum proposes a multifaceted initiative to include work in
areas of concern it shares with NOAA, such as the following:
Conservation research using GIS.--Museum vertebrate and
invertebrate zoologists carry out ambitious field work and collection
expansion programs throughout the tropical freshwaters of the globe,
conduct biotic surveys, and explore marine ecosystems:
--Ichthyologists, for example, study the evolution, behavior, and
conservation of the largest and most diverse populations--and
one of the most endangered of all vertebrate groups--the
fishes. Their work concerns not only discovery and
classification of many still unknown species but also the
protection and conservation of many species whose habitats and
survival are at risk.
--Invertebrate zoologists are discovering many species of marine
invertebrates. Field research in the Florida Keys, for
instance, is documenting for the first time the extraordinary
biodiversity of marine mollusks.
These researchers, in studying endangered ecosystems, marine
species, and marine reserves, can use GIS to develop finer, tighter,
more precise datasets. Also, GIS analysis enables them to ask more
sophisticated and flexible questions, and to discover patterns, series,
and gradations.
Biodiversity conservation.--CBC investigators are conducting
important research field projects relying on the capacities of GIS/RS.
They include:
--Marine reserve networks.--Researchers in the CBC's marine program
are using GIS to analyze the physical, biological, and cultural
processes affecting coral reef systems in the Bahamas. GIS is
an indispensable tool in this research, because it allows the
researchers to integrate maps with sets of biophysical and
socioeconomic data and to create dynamic models for testing
hypotheses about marine reserve networks in a spatially
realistic framework.
--Humpback whales in Madagascar.--Collaborating researchers from the
American Museum and the Wildlife Conservation Society are using
GIS to track the migrations of Humpback whales in the western
Indian Ocean region. They are creating a database that contains
identification photos, biopsies, DNA sequences, and sighting
information for hundreds of individual whales. Being able to
identify individuals at the genetic level will enable
researchers to unravel the complex migration patterns of
Humpbacks with greater accuracy, thus improving conservation
practices and increasing understanding of marine sanctuaries,
the status of whales, their population structure, abundance,
and recent trends in their distribution.
--Biotic surveys and inventories.--The CBC conducts floral and faunal
surveys in ecologically threatened regions of Bolivia and
Vietnam. Both countries are extremely rich in biodiversity that
is threatened by high rates of deforestation and inadequate
conservation planning. These biotic surveys provide essential
data on the distribution and abundance of species, thus
enabling researchers to analyze the role of climate change on
land cover and develop plans to reduce threats to biodiversity.
They also create an opportunity for Museum researchers to train
local field biologists and conservation managers how to conduct
surveys using remote sensing data and biophysical measures and
how to apply results to the long-term management and
conservation of biodiversity.
Collections data and access.--Museum researchers can use GIS to
bring the Museum's vast collections alive and to increase exponentially
the analyses that researchers can carry out for conservation research
and decision making. By coupling GIS with the Museum's increasingly
strong web presence to provide easy access, researchers worldwide will
be able to pose more sophisticated questions and uncover new
connections and relationships among the collections data. For example,
by using georeferenced data, researchers can compare current maps with
legacy data to trace environmental changes over time.
Public education and outreach.--As an added benefit of the proposed
partnership with NOAA, the Museum plans to feature current NOAA-related
science and discovery in the renovated Hall of Ocean Life as well as in
its other educational programs and resources. With access to GIS
applications and datasets, the Science Bulletins, for example, can
promote public understanding of current science through global earth
science-related datasets, maps, and more.
These research applications for GIS and other technologies
demonstrate the Museum's enormous potential for using cutting-edge
tools to help advance environmental forecasting, provide decision
makers with reliable scientific information, and foster global
environmental stewardship.
We therefore request $1 million to join in partnership with NOAA to
advance basic and applied research that will strengthen resource
management and conservation of marine and coastal environments and
public understanding of these issues. In so doing, the Museum will
support its participatory share with funds from nonfederal as well as
federal sources. By generating critical scientific knowledge about the
vital role of ocean and marine environments, we can advance our shared
commitment to environmental stewardship so pivotal to our nation's and
our planet's health.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Gainesville, Florida
Mr. Chairman: On behalf of the City of Gainesville, Florida, I
appreciate the opportunity to present this written testimony to you
today. The City of Gainesville is seeking federal funds in the fiscal
year 2004 Commerce, Justice, State and Judiciary Appropriations bill to
assist with the following innovative projects the City is undertaking:
--The Joint Communications Project, to facilitate communication and
data sharing between our urban area public safety and court
system agencies. The project is an innovative crime data
gathering, reporting and training system that will include a
Geographic Information System (GIS), interactive Internet/
Intranet applications, Crime Mapping and automated reporting
through the use of laptop computers. The goal is to obtain
accurate, timely information that will be shared with the
appropriate criminal justice system entities and/or individuals
and to focus efforts on training others in this highly
technical area of law enforcement.
Joint Communications Project
The City of Gainesville seeks a federal funding strategy to
implement an innovative crime data gathering, reporting and training
system that will include a Geographic Information System, (GIS),
interactive Internet/Intranet applications, Crime Mapping and automated
reporting through the use of laptop computers. Though portions of this
project have been attempted by other agencies, the Gainesville Police
Department will become one of the first law enforcement agencies in the
state to gather, analyze and provide information regarding crime and
quality of life type incidents in such an efficient, comprehensive and
automated manner.
The goal is to obtain accurate, timely information that will be
shared with the appropriate criminal justice system entities and/or
individuals and to focus efforts on training others in this highly
technical area of law enforcement. At least one outcome of this effort
will be the facilitation of communication and data sharing between our
urban area public safety and court system agencies through the use of
system-wide technology upgrades. The impact for the entire region is
considerable, since this county serves as the regional center for much
of rural north Florida's medical care, disaster management, and
criminal justice services. The estimated funds needed to continue these
efforts are $4.77 million.
The City of Gainesville, located in the north central portion of
the State of Florida, is a diverse community of 110,000 and serves as
the county seat for Alachua County and its additional 130,000
residents. Gainesville is the home of the University of Florida and
serves as the regional business center for the surrounding,
predominately rural counties. The community is served primarily by
three law enforcement agencies, the Gainesville Police Department, the
University Police Department and the Alachua County Sheriff's Office
representing approximately 625 sworn men and women. The City of
Gainesville has been a proven leader for many years in the field of law
enforcement with innovative programs developed here being adopted by
agencies from around the nation. Over the past 15 years the City has
been dedicated to the principles of Community Oriented Policing and is
one of the few agencies in the nation to apply its concepts department
wide. The City and County serve as the regional center for much of
rural north Florida's medical care, disaster management, and criminal
justice services.
The need for this system is driven by the lack of availability of
resources provided to tier 1 (population over 250,000) and tier 2 (seat
of government) cities that have been funded by prior Federal
initiatives. Although the region has a total population over 450,000
and geographic area of 8,500 square miles, it is not within the primary
grant recipient categories in previous efforts. However, considerable
efforts have been made to provide resources through other means and
utilizing existing resources. The estimated funds needed to continue
these efforts are $4.77 million.
This community faces problems endemic to communities nationwide. In
a time where the individual on the street can obtain any amount of
immediate and up to date information, the law enforcement officer must
often make decisions based on information that is incomplete or out of
date. The City of Gainesville has taken steps to attempt to partially
remedy this situation by combining communications systems with area law
enforcement in an effort allowing neighboring agencies to at least
communicate by voice transmission. What we are seeking is the funding
to take these initial steps to the next level providing the officer on
the street with clear, complete, and accurate information about the
situations they encounter. Included in this project is the benefit of
data sharing between agencies working in this community allowing better
informed decision making and improved distribution of resources. The
various portions of this program are designed to work together to
provide improved, more effective service to the residents of this
community.
The project consists of:
--Equipping law enforcement, fire personnel and emergency medical
responders with interoperable mobile data communications
system. ($3.54 million), and
--System wide upgrades to improve data collection, incident
assignment and dissemination of data to allow combined
operations. ($1.23 million).
Communications interoperability and accurate, timely data
collection are crucial to law enforcement and disaster response. Recent
events such as acts of domestic terrorism, natural disasters, anti-war
protests and mass casualty tragedies have highlighted the importance of
coordinated interactions among public safety agencies from all levels
of government. This ability to interoperate among public safety
responders can be measured in lives saved. Interoperability consists of
the ability of public safety personnel from one agency to communicate
by radio and data transmission with personnel from other agencies on
demand and in real time. To achieve interoperability requires improving
public safety wireless communications by addressing each of the five
areas of interoperability--coordination and partnerships, funding,
spectrum, standards and technology, and security.
The Alachua County Sheriff, with funding from the City and County,
operates a combined communication center constructed in fiscal year
2000 with $4.2 million in local funding. The center serves five law
enforcement agencies, eleven fire rescue agencies, the county
correctional facility, multiple government agencies of the city and
county, a regional airport, and an industrial fire brigade. The local
city owned utility, Gainesville Regional Utilities, provides an owned
and operated 800 Mhz. Trunked Radio System (voice-only) to all of these
agencies, along with another, the University of Florida's Police
Department. This project has demonstrated the nadir of the
interoperability standard promulgated by the FCC and other Federal
agencies. The infrastructure for digital interoperability has also been
built into the system, but thus far only one agency, because of its
small numbers of units, has been able to make that next step into
wireless data communications. The funds being sought for data
interoperability will take the system to the next step by enhancing
joint response capability, information sharing, data acquisition,
intelligence gathering and dissemination, data security, and agency
efficiency. While each entity alone and in joint projects such as the
communications center has attempted to address these shortcomings, the
high capital cost of these acquisitions is the major stumbling block to
providing the final step to what is truly the pinnacle of
interoperability achievement in a medium-sized community (225,000 total
county population).
The utilization of a mobile data system has numerous advantages for
the law enforcement officer as well as for the public. Removing the
reliance on strictly verbal communication by way of radio and widening
the information flow through direct data communications results in an
enhancement of the ability to successfully resolve problems in the
field. Laptop computers as in-car computer aided dispatch terminals
significantly increase the ability for public safety officers to
communicate.
Computers used in this manner can perform many important tasks. The
mobile data computers can send and receive information between the
officer and the dispatcher, including calls for service. Non-emergency
calls are forwarded from the dispatcher to the appropriate unit without
the need to transmit the information verbally over the radio, thus
saving ``air-time'' for use in emergency situations and reducing the
possibility of misunderstanding or receiving incorrect information.
This also allows an increase in the amount of information the officer
in the field has available in responding to situations. Additionally
there is the potential for a decrease in the need for additional
dispatchers even if the number of calls for service increases.
Through the use of mobile data computers officers and supervisors
can find the location of other officers and check on their current
status. Eliminating the need for officers to request this information
from a dispatcher gives all members of the agency a complete picture of
the availability of officers for calls for service. Officers can also
refer to information about calls awaiting dispatch and information
regarding previous calls for service. Officers would be able to view
past and current activity within his/her assigned area. Obtaining
pertinent information in a timely manner permits the officer(s) to make
more informed strategic and investigative decisions. This accessibility
to information would permit officers to better inform citizens and
business owners regarding activities. In addition officers would be
able to communicate vehicle-to-vehicle by sending messages from one
officer to another. This eliminates the need for officers to use ``air-
time'' with less important transmissions. Law enforcement officers can
conduct computer checks on wanted persons and stolen vehicles without
having to tie up a dispatcher. This allows officers to check a large
number of persons and vehicles, which can significantly increase the
number of people who are arrested for warrants and the number of
recovered stolen vehicles. A single dispatcher can only handle one (1)
request at a time, while the computer system can handle numerous
requests at the same time.
In a time where crime knows no geographical boundaries, the ability
to easily share timely information between differing agencies is of
great importance. The ability for field officers to share information
is a growing concern. Incidents spill across jurisdictional boundaries
and there is an increasing need to share resources between agencies.
The widening of the data pipeline to the field officer allows more
flexibility and increases the amount of information readily available.
The use of mobile data computers would allow increased and easier
information sharing which should improve the ability of officers to
respond to most situations.
______
Prepared Statement of the Hoopa Valley Tribe
He Yung: my name is Clifford Lyle Marshall, Chairman of the Hoopa
Valley Tribe. The Hoopa Valley Tribe is located in Northern California
and in the County of Humboldt. Our treaty was signed providing the
whole Hoopa Valley as a reservation. It was not until 1876 that an
executive order was signed acknowledging this treaty. Since first
European contact the culture and tradition remains to this day.
The culture of the Hoopa Valley People is a way of life. Our
ceremonial dances are healing or payer dances. These dances are held
for spiritual meaning performed at sacred places, to balance the world.
The Hoopa Valley People lived in harmony for over 10,000 years prior to
European Contact. We had our own laws and rules that our people
followed to live together and settle controversial issues by a form of
payment.
Currently we have a Tribal Court and Tribal Police Department that
operates on a daily basis and is utilized by the Hoopa and surrounding
Communities. We do not receive any of the monies for fines or tickets
issued on the Hoopa Valley Tribal Reservation this money is collected
by the State of California. This is not helping our community as far as
administering the law enforcement or Tribal Court Programs. Our
community looses approximately $750,000 annually in fines that should
be distributed back to the Hoopa Valley Tribe to offer more services to
our community. Further, the county refers probationary matters, such as
counseling and the like, to our Human Services Department without
paying part of expenses. This is becoming costly and burdensome to the
Tribe.
Law Enforcement operations consist of many diverse activities which
are directed toward the attainment of Department objectives. Activities
such as patrolling and issuing traffic citations are not objectives in
themselves, rather, they are methods of achieving the real objectives
of preventing and deterring crime, arresting criminal offenders, and
preventing traffic accidents.
Law Enforcement needs:
--15 Full Time Officers (at $36,000 per year) = $540,000.00
--6 Part Time Positions (at $18,000 per year) = $108,000.00
--7 Dispatchers
--2 Full-time: x $22,880.00 = $160,160
--5 Part-time x $11,440.00 = $57,200
--Vehicles: 3 at 35,000 = $105,000
--Gas/maintenance/other = $50,000
--Communications = $12,000.00
Tribal Court Needs
A new building. The current building is over 78 years old. We are
growing as a community and will need to grow to accommodate the needs
as follows:
--Automated Case Management System: $26,000
--Personnel and Automated Court Services: $395,000
--Law Library: $15,457
--Structural Modification: $1,336,000.00
--Tribal Court Improvements: $43,800
tribal court needs assessment
The Hoopa Valley Tribal Court's prospective improvements are listed
below according to the level of priority within each category. We have
included a brief summary of information, which follows each list.
Please note that some of the items are listed below as autonomous
functions and the court lists them in the interest of demonstrating
their supplemental impact upon the court's ability to function
effectively within our jurisdiction.
Unresolved Essential Tribal Court Needs
--Automated Case Management System $26,000.00
--Telephone System with Voice Mail
Our court currently operates on a hard paper file system with very
little computer management backup. This creates a burden upon the court
because it compromises the court's ability to effectively manage its
caseload. As our caseload begins to increase as a result of recent
legislative activity, the daily operations of the tribal court will
increasingly begin to diminish in the absence of the above listed
requirements.
Our current telephone system is antiquated and problematic. Our
Court employs the use of a single answering machine, which makes it
necessary to personally manage all incoming telephone calls, which is
often an ineffective use of the current clerk's time.
Funding Requirements for Personnel and Ancillary Court Services
Existing Positions
--Court Liaison Officer/Bailiff Subsidization $24,000.00
Proposed Positions
--Deputy Court Clerk $27,000.00
--Public Defender $45,000.00
--Probation Officer $40,000.00
--Mediator/Mediation Services Provider $70,000.00
--Associate Judge $60,000.00
--Legal Aid Provider $36,000.00
--Guardian Ad Litem $46,000.00
--Public Guardian $47,000.00
Our existing personnel have repeatedly proven themselves committed
both to the Tribal Court and to its community. Although the budget has
not previously allowed for any substantial increases, the tribal court
staff deserves to be adequately compensated for their exemplary work.
The Hoopa Valley Tribal Police Department has recently provided the
court an opportunity to utilize a Court Liaison Officer who functions
as a liaison between the court, the law enforcement department, and the
community. The court would like to retain this myriad of services by
supplementing the CLO salary in conjunction with the Hoopa Valley
Tribal Police Department.
Law Library
--Three Computers $6,000.00
--One Computer Printer $257.00
--Subscription to Lexis-Nexis on line legal search engine $600.00
--Self Help Legal Aid Manuals $8,600.00
Our Court is required to provide a legal library to the public.
This library currently consists of the entire Hoopa Valley Tribal Law
and Order Code and the Indian Law Reporter. These often prove sorely
inadequate in meeting our public's needs. We would ultimately like to
provide three computers that would allow citizens to conduct legal
research via a computer generated legal search engine. We would also
like to empower our litigants to represent themselves using Self-Help
manuals that we would provide in our library.
Necessary Structural Modifications
--Secured Parking Area $10,000.00
--Court Renovation $126,000.00
--Juvenile Detention Facility $585,000.00
--Youth Regional Treatment Facility $615,000.00
The court staff currently utilizes 90 percent of the court's
available parking. This creates a problem for persons attempting to
access the court. Our courthouse also needs a great deal of structural
renovation. Our courthouse has had very basic maintenance services in
the 38 years that it has existed. Our building requires a great deal of
renovation and preventive maintenance in order to secure its continued
existence for the coming years. We have a new juvenile justice avenue
available in our court. The effectiveness of this juvenile court would
be tenfold with the use of ancillary programs such as a detention
facility and a treatment facility. The court is ready to assist
juveniles and the families of juveniles in need, and these ancillary
programs would greatly increase our effectiveness in doing so.
Tribal Court Improvements
Tables, Chairs, Desks $10,000.00
Fireproof File Cabinets $800.00
Metal Detector $5,000.00
Court Automobile $28,000.00
Some additional minor improvements such as these listed above would
assist in the daily functioning of the court. Our courtroom needs
plaintiff and defendant tables, and we are currently utilizing very old
court furniture that belongs to the state court. We need additional
file cabinets with the ability to protect our files from damage, and
security and convenience necessitate the additional listed items.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association of University Fisheries
and Wildlife Programs
The National Association of University Fisheries and Wildlife
Programs (NAUFWP) appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony
concerning the National Sea Grant Program in the fiscal year 2004
budget of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
NAUFWP represents approximately 55 university programs and their 440
faculty members, scientists, and extension specialists, and over 9,200
undergraduates and graduate students working to enhance the science and
management of fisheries and wildlife resources.
The Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) is the main
research arm of NOAA, contributing to all other Line Offices and
Strategic Plan goals and providing the scientific basis for national
policy decisions in key areas. OAR supports a world-class network of
scientists and environmental research laboratories, and partnerships
with academia and the private sector. NAUFWP supports the President's
fiscal year 2004 request of $380.6 million for Oceanic and Atmospheric
Research.
The National Sea Grant College Program provides essential academic
research, education, and extension services for the oceans community.
Sea Grant research is critical to the maintenance and improvement of
the nation's marine resources. We were concerned by the
Administration's proposal in fiscal year 2003 to move the Sea Grant
College Program to the National Science Foundation (NSF). While the
NSF's record of accomplishment in basic research is unparalleled, their
strength is not in the deployment of applied research, education, and
extension--the very characteristics that have made the National Sea
Grant College Program so successful. Unfortunately, the Sea Grant
program has been under funded for many years. Therefore, NAUFWP
strongly supports the maintenance of the Sea Grant Program in the NOAA
budget, and urges Congress to appropriate $68.41 million for this
program in fiscal year 2004.
NAUFWP supports the National Invasive Species Act Program, and the
Marine Aquaculture Program, two partnership programs within NOAA that
provide information to support policy and management decisions,
increase knowledge of coastal and marine ecosystems, and provide the
scientific basis for enhancing the Nation's marine economic sector.
NAUFWP supports the Administration's $1 million increase for the NOAA
Invasive Species Initiative, and the $2.6 million request for the NOAA
Marine Aquaculture Program. We urge Congress to appropriate these
amounts for fiscal year 2004.
Thank you for considering the views of universities with fisheries
and wildlife programs. We look forward to working with you and your
staff to ensure adequate funding for fish and wildlife research,
education, and conservation.