[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 51 (Thursday, April 30, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3940-S3943]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE CRIME IDENTIFICATION TECHNOLOGY ACT OF 1998
Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Crime
Identification Technology Act of 1998.
More than 20 years of experience working in the criminal justice
system have taught me that information is absolutely crucial to
successful law enforcement. As a prosecutor in Greene County, Ohio; as
Lieutenant Governor overseeing Ohio's anti-crime and anti-drug efforts;
and later as a member of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, I
have seen first-hand the importance of information and record-keeping
to criminal justice.
Our state and local law enforcement organizations--as well as our
courts--need to develop and upgrade their criminal information and
identification systems. The Federal Government has already invested
billions of dollars in information and identification systems whose
benefits will go largely unrealized--unless states receive the
resources to be able to participate in these systems. Our national data
bases are only as good as the information in which the states provide
by their participation.
Unfortunately, there is still a wide disparity between the criminal
identification systems that are available--and the ability of state and
local law enforcement to develop and use them. For example, while
computer technology exists that allows law enforcement to match
fingerprints electronically with criminal history databases, most
states lack the equipment and resources necessary to connect on any
broad scale with the databases operated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI).
Too many States lack the resources to contribute state criminal
histories to the FBI criminal history database in a timely manner or in
a computer-ready format, and have inadequate equipment to retrieve
information from the database quickly or on a widespread geographic
basis.
While we may disagree about the Brady Act, it funded the National
Criminal History Improvement Program (N-CHIP), administered by the
Bureau of Justice Statistics, which has successfully helped states
prepare to perform background checks. Unfortunately, N-CHIP expires
this year--but not all states are fully operational.
[[Page S3941]]
In addition, the FBI, the National Criminal Center (NCIC) 2000, and
the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System will be
fully operational--and ready for states to participate--soon.
Also, DNA casework testing has more than doubled in the last three
years because of demand by law enforcement to provide DNA analysis in
violent crime cases. In 48 states convicted offender DNA analysis is
mandated by statute. Further, advances in the use of DNA to solve
crimes based on automated searches of State and National CODIS DNA
profile databases are producing DNA matches, generating even more
demand for rapid testing of convicted felon DNA samples for database
input. The demand for casework results and the need for convicted
offender database analysis continues to grow at a rate that outstrips
the capacities and capabilities of state and local crime laboratories.
We need to make sure the states are able to make the fullest possible
use of this breathtaking technology.
That's the idea behind the bill I am introducing today. It would
provide $250 million in each of the next five years for grants to the
states. The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Justice Statistics,
is directed to make grants to each state to be used in conjunction with
units of local government, and other states, to develop, update, or
upgrade technologies, including the following:
Centralized, automated criminal history record information systems,
including arrest and disposition reporting.
Automated fingerprint identification systems that are compatible with
the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Finger imaging, live scan and
other automated systems to digitize fingerprints and to communicate
prints in a manner that is compatible with systems operated by states
and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Systems to facilitate full participation in the Interstate
Identification Index (III).
Programs and systems to facilitate full participation in the
Interstate Identification Index National Crime Prevention and Privacy
Compact.
Systems to facilitate full participation in the National Instant
Criminal Background Check System (NICS) for firearms eligibility
determinations.
Integrated criminal justice information systems to manage and
communicate criminal justice information among law enforcement, courts,
prosecution, and corrections.
Court-based criminal justice information systems to promote reporting
of dispositions to central state repositories and to the FBI, and to
promote the integration of court systems with other criminal justice
information systems.
Ballistics identification programs that are compatible --and
integrated--with the National Integrated Ballistics Network (NIBN).
Information, identification and communications programs for forensic
purposes, including for crime laboratory accreditation.
DNA programs for forensic and identification purposes.
Sexual offender identification and registration systems.
Domestic violence offender identification and information systems.
Criminal justice information systems with a capacity to provide
statistical and research products including incident-based reporting
systems and uniform crime reports.
Online and other state-of-the-art communications technologies and
programs.
Mr. President, all these proposals have one thing on common: they are
based on the principle that technology is the future of police work. It
is the number one edge our law enforcement officers are going to have
in the struggle against criminals, well into the 21st century. In this
sense, crime-fighting is a lot like baseball. It's a game of
percentages--and everything we can do to boost the average helps the
team.
We can continue to pursue increasingly sophisticated criminals with
outmoded twentieth century technology--or we can substantially boost
our team's average by providing states the Federal assistance required
to effectively participate in these programs. If we are serious about
reducing crime in America, the Federal Government has to step up to the
plate on this key issue of promoting state and local use of available
crime-fighting technology.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2022
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Crime Identification
Technology Act of 1998''.
SEC. 2. STATE GRANT PROGRAM FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE
IDENTIFICATION, INFORMATION, AND COMMUNICATION.
(a) In General.--Subject to the availability of amounts
provided in advance in appropriations Acts, the Attorney
General, through the Bureau of Justice Statistics of the
Department of Justice, shall make a grant to each State,
which shall be used by the State, in conjunction with units
of local government, State and local courts, other States, or
combinations thereof, to establish or upgrade an integrated
approach to develop information and identification
technologies and systems to--
(1) upgrade criminal history and criminal justice record
systems, including systems operated by law enforcement
agencies and courts;
(2) improve criminal justice identification;
(3) promote compatibility and integration of national,
State, and local systems for--
(A) criminal justice purposes;
(B) firearms eligibility determinations;
(C) identification of sexual offenders;
(D) identification of domestic violence offenders; and
(E) background checks for other authorized purposes
unrelated to criminal justice; and
(4) capture information for statistical and research
purposes to improve the administration of criminal justice.
(b) Use of Grant Amounts.--Grants under this section may be
used for programs to establish, develop, update, or upgrade--
(1) State centralized, automated, adult and juvenile
criminal history record information systems, including arrest
and disposition reporting;
(2) automated fingerprint identification systems that are
compatible with standards established by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology and interoperable with
the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System
(IAFIS) of the Federal Bureau of Investigation;
(3) finger imaging, live scan, and other automated systems
to digitize fingerprints and to communicate prints in a
manner that is compatible with standards established by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology and
interoperable with systems operated by States and by the
Federal Bureau of Investigation;
(4) programs and systems to facilitate full participation
in the Interstate Identification Index of the National Crime
Information Center;
(5) systems to facilitate full participation in any compact
relating to the Interstate Identification Index of the
National Crime Information Center;
(6) systems to facilitate full participation in the
national instant criminal background check system established
under section 103(b) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention
Act (18 U.S.C. 922 note) for firearms eligibility
determinations;
(7) integrated criminal justice information systems to
manage and communicate criminal justice information among law
enforcement agencies, courts, prosecutors, and corrections
agencies;
(8) noncriminal history record information systems relevant
to firearms eligibility determinations for availability and
accessibility to the national instant criminal background
check system established under section 103(b) of the Brady
Handgun Violence Prevention Act (18 U.S.C. 922 note);
(9) court-based criminal justice information systems that
promote--
(A) reporting of dispositions to central State repositories
and to the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and
(B) compatibility with, and integration of, court systems
with other criminal justice information systems;
(10) ballistics identification and information programs
that are compatible and integrated with the National
Integrated Ballistics Network (NIBN);
(11) DNA programs for forensic and identification purposes,
and identification and information programs to improve
forensic analysis and to assist in accrediting crime
laboratories;
(12) sexual offender identification and registration
systems;
(13) domestic violence offender identification and
information systems;
(14) programs for fingerprint-supported background checks
capability for noncriminal justice purposes, including youth
service employees and volunteers and other individuals in
positions of responsibility, if authorized by Federal or
State law and administered by a government agency;
(15) criminal justice information systems with a capacity
to provide statistical and research products including
incident-based reporting systems that are compatible with
[[Page S3942]]
the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and
uniform crime reports; and
(16) multiagency, multijurisdictional communications
systems among the States to share routine and emergency
information among Federal, State, and local law enforcement
agencies.
(c) Assurances.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this section, a State shall provide assurances to the
Attorney General that the State has the capability to
contribute pertinent information to the national instant
criminal background check system established under section
103(b) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (18
U.S.C. 922 note).
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this section $250,000,000 for each of fiscal years
1999 through 2003.
(2) Limitations.--Of the amount made available to carry out
this section in any fiscal year--
(A) not more than 3 percent may be used by the Attorney
General for salaries and administrative expenses;
(B) not more than 5 percent may be used for technical
assistance, training and evaluations, and studies
commissioned by Bureau of Justice Statistics of the
Department of Justice (through discretionary grants or
otherwise) in furtherance of the purposes of this section;
and
(C) the Attorney General shall ensure the amounts are
distributed on an equitable geographic basis.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am proud to join Senator DeWine in
introducing legislation to authorize comprehensive Department of
Justice grants to every state for criminal justice identification,
information and communications technologies and systems. I applaud the
Senator from Ohio for his leadership. I am also pleased that the
Chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the Democratic Leader are
original cosponsors of this bipartisan legislation.
I know from my experience in law enforcement in Vermont over the last
30 years that access to quality, accurate information in a timely
fashion is of vital importance. As we prepare to enter the 21st
Century, we must provide our state and local law enforcement officers
with the resources to develop the latest technological tools and
communications systems to solve and prevent crime. I believe this bill
accomplishes that goal.
Our bipartisan legislation authorizes $250 million for each of the
next five years in grants to states for crime information and
identification systems. The Attorney General, through the Bureau of
Justice Statistics, is directed to make grants to each state to be used
in conjunction with units of local government, and other states, to use
information and identification technologies and systems to upgrade
criminal history and criminal justice record systems.
Grants made under our legislation may include programs to establish,
develop, update or upgrade--
State, centralized, automated criminal history record information
systems, including arrest and disposition reporting.
Automated fingerprint identification systems that are compatible with
the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Finger imaging, live scan and other automated systems to digitize
fingerprints and to communicate prints in a manner that is compatible
with systems operated by states and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
Systems to facilitate full participation in the Interstate
Identification Index (III).
Programs and systems to facilitate full participation in the
Interstate Identification Index National Crime Prevention and Privacy
Compact.
Systems to facilitate full participation in the National Instant
Criminal Background Check System (NICS) for firearms eligibility
determinations.
Integrated criminal justice information systems to manage and
communicate criminal justice information among law enforcement, courts,
prosecution, and corrections.
Non-criminal history record information systems relevant to firearms
eligibility determinations for availability and accessibility to the
NICS.
Court-based criminal justice information systems to promote reporting
of dispositions to central state repositories and to the FBI and to
promote the compatibility with, and integration of, court systems with
other criminal justice information systems.
Ballistics identification programs that are compatible and integrated
with the ballistics programs of the National Integrated Ballistics
Network (NIBN).
Information, identification and communications programs for forensic
purposes.
DNA programs for forensic and identification purposes.
Sexual offender identification and registration systems.
Domestic violence offender identification and information systems
Programs for fingerprint-supported background checks for non-criminal
justice purposes including youth service employees and volunteers and
other individuals in positions of trust, if authorized by federal or
state law and administered by a government agency.
Criminal justice information systems with a capacity to provide
statistical and research products including incident-based reporting
systems and uniform crime reports.
Online and other state-of-the-art communications technologies and
programs.
Multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional communications systems to share
routine and emergency information among federal, state and local law
enforcement agencies.
Let me just give a couple of examples from my home State of Vermont
that illustrate how our comprehensive legislation will aid state and
local law enforcement agencies across the country.
The future of law enforcement must focus on working together to
harness the power of today's information age to prevent crime and catch
criminals. One way to work together is for state and local law
enforcement agencies to band together to create efficiencies of scale.
For example, together with New Hampshire and Maine, the State of
Vermont has pooled its resources together to build a tri-state IAFIS
system to identify fingerprints. Our bipartisan legislation would
foster these partnerships by allowing groups of States to apply
together for grants.
Another challange for law enforcement agencies across the country is
communication difficulties between federal, state and local law
enforcement officials. In a recent report, the Department of Justice's
National Institute of Justice concluded that law enforcement agencies
throughout the nation lack adequate communications systems to respond
to crimes that cross state and local jurisdictions.
A 1997 incident along the Vermont and New Hampshire border
underscored this problem. During a cross border shooting spree that
left four people dead including two New Hampshire state troopers,
Vermont and New Hampshire officers were forced to park two police
cruisers next to one another to coordinate activities between federal,
state and local law enforcement officers because the two states' police
radios could not communicate with one another.
The Vermont Department of Public Safety, the Vermont U.S. Attorney's
Office and others have reacted to this communications problem by
developing the Northern Lights proposal. This project will allow the
northern borders States of Vermont, New York, New Hampshire and Maine
to integrate their law enforcement communications systems to better
coordinate interdiction efforts and share intelligence data seamlessly.
Our legislation would provide grants for the development of
integrated Federal, State and local law enforcement communications
systems to foster cutting edge efforts like the Northern Lights
project.
In addition, our bipartisan legislation will help each of our States
meet its obligations under national anti-crime initiatives. For
instance, the FBI will soon bring online NCIC 2000 and IAFIS which will
require states to update their criminal justice systems for the country
to benefit. States are also being asked to participate in several other
national programs such as sexual offender registries, national domestic
violence legislation, Brady Act, and National Child Protection Act.
Currently, there are no comprehensive programs to support these
national crime-fighting systems. Our legislation will fill this void by
helping the each State meet its obligations under these Federal laws.
Our bipartisan legislation provides a helping hand with the heavy
hand of a
[[Page S3943]]
top-down, Washington-knows-best approach. Unfortunately, some in
Congress have pushed legislation mandating minute detail changes that
States must make in their laws to qualify for Federal funds. Our bill
rejects this approach. Instead, we provide the States with Federal
support to improve their criminal justice idenfication, information and
communication systems without prescriping new Federal mandates.
Mr. President, we have patterned the administration of the technology
grants under our bill after the highly successful DOJ National Criminal
History Improvement Program (N-CHIP), which was created by the 1993
Brady Act.
The Vermont Department of Public Safety has received funds under the
N-CHIP program for the past three years and I have been proud to
strongly support their efforts. With that Federal assistance, Vermont
has been achieved acquiring the automated fingerprint identification
system in conjunction with Maine and New Hampshire, upgrading its
records repository computer systems, as well as extending their online
incident-based reporting system to local jurisdictions throughout
Vermont. Our bill builds on the Justice Department's existing
infrastructure under the successful N-CHIP program to provide fair and
effective grant administration.
I know that the Justice Department, under Attorney General Reno's
leadership, has made it a priority to modernize and automate criminal
history records. Our legislation will continue that leadership by
providing each State with the necessary resources to continue to make
important efforts to bring their criminal justice systems up to date.
I urge my colleagues to support our bipartisan bill to provide each
State with the resources to capture the power of emerging information
and communications technologies to serve and protect all of our
citizens.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, law enforcement agencies in every state
rely increasingly on criminal history record information. Suspected
criminals cross state lines and move between communities, creating an
unprecedented need for greater cooperation between the 50 states and
between states and the federal government to share this information. It
is imperative that each state be able to take advantage of emerging
technologies that make this cooperation possible. It is for that reason
that I am pleased to cosponsor the State Grant Program for Criminal
Justice Identification, Information and Communication. This legislation
will help states upgrade their criminal justice information and
identification operations, assist in integrating those operations, and
make those operations compatible with the FBI's communication
technology.
Revolutionary technological improvements in communication systems
allow localities separated by great distances to share information
instantaneously. This communication between law enforcement agencies
can make the difference between locating suspects and getting them off
the streets, or leaving them free to commit more crimes. I believe we
have a responsibility to ensure that states have full access to new
criminal history record technologies. This legislation will provide the
federal financial assistance and leadership that the states need by
establishing a $1.25 billion, 5-year, comprehensive federal assistance
program to provide grants to every state for criminal justice
identification, information and communications technologies and
systems.
In addition, grants provided under this legislation will assist
states as they upgrade their fingerprint and other identification
technologies so that they are compatible with the Federal Bureau of
Investigation's (FBI) criminal history record information systems. The
FBI will soon implement 2 major information and identification
initiatives, the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System
(IAFIS) and NCIC 2000, that could dramatically improve the access law
enforcement agencies have to criminal history record information.
IAFIS, in particular, will greatly enhance the exchange of information
between the FBI and the states, providing rapid electronic submission
and transfer of fingerprint and criminal history information. The
states will need the funding assistance provided by this legislation to
obtain the equipment necessary to derive full benefit from these new
systems.
In recent years, Congress has recognized the urgent need to secure
the safety of our streets for our children and our families, and this
has led to the enactment of federal initiatives, such as sexual
offender registries, domestic violence initiatives, the National Child
Protection Act, and the Brady National Instant Background Check System.
Although these initiatives have done a great deal to protect adults and
children in communities nationwide, additional steps need to be taken.
The State Grant Program for Criminal Justice Identification,
Information and Communication will provide assistance to states so they
can take that next step.
Criminal tracking programs have been far more effective in
identifying and apprehending dangerous criminals than any other
programs in recent memory, but we have an opportunity to make these
tracking programs much more effective. As technology continues to
improve this country's communication systems, we must make sure the
states are not left behind. If the states cannot access these systems,
or do not have the funding to obtain them, then this revolutionary
technology will be of little help. By enacting the State Grant Program
for Criminal Justice Identification, Information and Communication, we
have the opportunity to improve the cooperation between law enforcement
agencies nationwide. This will be instrumental in getting criminals off
the streets and away from our children, and I urge my colleagues to
join me in support of this bill.
____________________