[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 75 (Thursday, June 11, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H4491-H4531]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      CHILD PROTECTION AND SEXUAL PREDATOR PUNISHMENT ACT OF 1998

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 465 and rule 
XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 3494.

                              {time}  1205


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 3494) to amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to 
violent sex crimes against children, and for other purposes, with Mr. 
McHugh in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) and the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum).
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 3494, the Child Protection and Sexual Predator 
Punishment Act of 1998, is a very important piece of legislation that 
responds to the horrifying threat of sex crimes against children, 
particularly crimes against children facilitated by the Internet.
  Industry experts estimate that more than 10 million children 
currently spend time on the Information Superhighway, and by the year 
2002, 45 million children will use the Internet to talk with friends, 
do homework assignments, and explore the vast world around them.
  Computer technologies and Internet innovations have unveiled a world 
of information that is literally just a mouse click away. 
Unfortunately, individuals who seek children to sexually exploit and 
victimize them also use the mouse click.
  ``Cyber-predators'' often ``cruise'' the Internet in search of 
lonely, curious, or trusting young people. Sex offenders who prey on 
children no longer need to hang in the parks or malls or school yards. 
Instead, they can roam from Web site to chat room seeking victims with 
no risk of detection.
  The anonymous nature of the on-line relationship allows users to 
misrepresent their age, gender, or interests. Perfect strangers can 
reach into the home and befriend a child.
  Parents are confronted with new challenges regarding the World Wide 
Web. While they may warn their children about the dangers outside the 
home, they may not be aware of the dangers posed to a child on the 
Information Superhighway. Children are rarely supervised while they are 
on the Internet. Unfortunately, this is exactly what cyber-predators 
look for. We are seeing numerous accounts in which pedophiles have used 
the Internet to seduce or persuade children to meet them to engage in 
sexual activities. Children who have been persuaded to meet their new 
on-line friend face to face have been kidnapped, raped, photographed 
for child pornography, and worse. Some children have never been heard 
from again.
  Law enforcement have also found a close relationship between child 
pornography and victimization by pedophiles. Even more than a snapshot 
of one child's horrible victimization, child pornography is a horrible 
tool for child molesters to recruit new victims. Often used to break 
down inhibitions and introduce and validate specific sex acts as normal 
to a child, pedophiles frequently send pictures to young people to 
gauge a child's interest in a relationship. Child pornography is often 
used to blackmail a child into silence, once molestation ends.
  Three factors, the skyrocketing on-line presence of children, the 
proliferation of child pornography on the Internet, and the presence of 
sexual predators trolling for unsupervised contact with children, has 
resulted in a chilling mix which has resulted in far too many terrible 
tragedies that steal the innocence from our children and create scars 
for life.
  H.R. 3494, the Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act, 
provides law enforcement with the tools it needs to investigate and 
bring to justice those individuals who prey on our Nation's children, 
and sends a message to those individuals who commit these heinous 
crimes that they will be punished swiftly and severely.
  H.R. 3494 targets pedophiles who stalk children on the Internet. It 
prohibits contacting a minor over the Internet for the purposes of 
engaging in illegal sexual activity and prohibits knowingly 
transferring obscene materials to a minor, or an assumed minor, over 
the Internet.
  H.R. 3494 also prohibits transmitting or advertising identifying 
information about a child to encourage or facilitate criminal sexual 
activity. This bill doubles the maximum prison sentence from 5 to 10 
years for enticing a minor to travel across State lines to engage in 
illegal sexual activity, and increases the maximum prison sentence from 
10 to 15 years for persuading a minor to engage in prostitution or a 
sexual act. Moreover, the bill establishes a minimum sentence of 3 
years for using a computer to coerce or entice a minor to engage in 
illegal sexual activity.
  In addition to Internet-related crimes, the bill also includes other 
very important provisions such as cracking down on serial rapists 
(those who commit Federal sexual assaults and have been convicted twice 
previously of serious State or Federal sex crimes), and authorizing 
pretrial detention for Federal sex offenders.
  Mr. Chairman, nearly two-thirds of prisoners serving time for rape 
and sexual assault victimize children. Almost one-third of these 
victims were less than 11 years old.
  The bill also increases the maximum prison sentence from 10 to 15 
years for transporting a minor in interstate commerce for prostitution 
or sexual activity and requires the U.S. Sentencing Commission to 
review and amend the Federal sex offenses against children.
  H.R. 3494 also doubles prison sentences for abusive sexual contact if 
the victim is under the age of 12, and doubles the maximum prison 
sentence available for second-time sex offenders.
  H.R. 3494 also gives law enforcement the tools it needs to track down 
pedophiles, kidnappers, and serial killers. The bill allows for 
administrative

[[Page H4492]]

subpoenas in certain child exploitation investigations and provides for 
immediate commencement of Federal investigations into kidnapping cases.
  The bill also allows for Federal investigation of serial murder 
offenses when such an investigation is requested by a State or local 
law enforcement agency with jurisdiction over the offense.
  Finally, the bill prohibits unsupervised access to the Internet by 
Federal prisoners. It expresses a sense of Congress that State 
governors, State legislators, and State prison officials should also 
prohibit unsupervised access to the Internet by State prisoners.
  Mr. Chairman, as Members can see, this is a substantive bill that the 
subcommittee has worked very hard to put together. It is comprehensive. 
In fact, it is the most comprehensive package of new crimes and 
increased penalties we have ever developed in response to this horrible 
problem.
  It is a bipartisan effort. It is supported by the administration. 
Moreover, this bill received a great amount of input from several 
Members of Congress, Federal, State and local law enforcement, child 
advocacy groups, and victims' parents. Were it not for their invaluable 
assistance, I would not be proposing this essential package of 
legislation today.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an important bill and I urge my colleagues to 
support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I join in support of House Resolution 3494. I commend 
the cooperation between the staffs and the members of the committee. 
This is truly a bipartisan piece of legislation. We are united in 
recognizing the heinous crimes that are committed against children, 
particularly sex crimes involving children.
  We also are sensitive to the new perils of the Internet and the phone 
lines. Modern technology is now making this a place for predators to 
try to get young children involved in conduct that we consider 
reprehensible.
  Mr. Chairman, we are creating new Federal offenses for using the mail 
or any facility or means of interstate commerce, including phone lines 
and the Internet, to contact anyone who is under 18 for the purpose of 
engaging in sexual activity, provided that the sexual activity would 
expose the other person to criminal prosecution. Essentially, what we 
are doing today is making it a Federal offense to use the phones, mail, 
Internet, to contact anyone for the purpose of committing rape, child 
sex abuse, child prostitution, or statutory rape.
  Now, legally it is already a Federal offense to persuade someone to 
cross State lines to engage in sexual activity for which someone can be 
prosecuted. The purpose of these provisions is to eliminate the need 
for prosecutors to prove that the victim was persuaded to travel.
  Another important feature of this bill creates a new Federal offense 
for using the mail or any facility or means of commerce to transfer 
obscene material to a minor. We consider this to be very important. 
Unfortunately, one of the scary prospects of high technology is the 
fact that there is a great deal of obscenity, sexually charged material 
and offensive material, that is too frequently available to young 
people as it is to adults. It is creating a very complicated problem.
  This legislation, primarily authored by the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. McCollum), chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, is intended to 
try to address that.
  Now, there are Federal statutes prohibiting the use of the mail or 
the Internet for interstate transportation of obscenity. But this 
provision would be to reach intra-State transactions as well.

                              {time}  1215

  I was not successful in dissuading the distinguished gentleman from 
Florida from adding new mandatory minimums, but in this case it is hard 
to argue against life imprisonment for a three-time rapist.
  I am hopeful that these provisions will not just be sending a 
message, as is so frequently referred to, but that they actually have 
an effect, an impact upon those who would commit these kinds of 
offenses.
  Now, frequently in the Federal Code rape is a Federal offense if it 
is committed on Federal property. Otherwise, it is a State offense. But 
under these new proposals, anyone with prior Federal or State 
convictions that commits a third such offense, whether or not it would 
have been under Federal jurisdiction, can now be prosecuted in the 
Federal court and could receive a mandatory life sentence.
  The measure before us also establishes a 3-year penalty for using a 
computer to coerce a minor to cross State lines to engage in illegal 
sexual activity.
  So for all of those reasons, I commend favorably this measure to my 
colleagues in the House.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Washington (Ms. Dunn), who is a prime sponsor of this bill and many 
others related to the sexual predator question.
  Ms. DUNN. Mr. Chairman, first I would like to thank the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. McCollum) and our ranking member the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for their very good work on this issue. Their 
continuing commitment to fighting sex crimes against children is very 
commendable.
  I rise today to speak in support of the Child Protection and Sexual 
Predator Punishment Act, a bill that is for families throughout the 
country who are doing everything they can to keep their children safe 
and innocent, but may not be aware of the pedophiles who are cruising 
the Internet. This legislation makes it crystal clear to the most 
heinous of criminals, those who would prey on innocent children, make 
no mistake, you will be punished, and you will be punished to the full 
extent of the law.
  As we approach the 21st century and an age of ever-expanding 
technology, Congress must continue to enact laws that are one step 
ahead of the criminals in a changing, constantly changing environment.
  When my two boys were growing up, I, like most mothers, worried about 
their safety and did everything within my power to protect them from 
harm. Whether I watched as they played outside in their earlier years 
or drove them to and from their soccer practice when they were a little 
older, I was always aware of the dangers of the outside world. I was 
like all the other moms who would tell my kids, do not talk to 
strangers, do not accept rides, do not accept candy from people you do 
not know.
  But I never had to say, be careful of strangers on the Internet. Back 
then it was a novelty to have a personal computer in the house, but 
times have changed, Mr. Chairman. Nowadays, many homes and most schools 
and libraries are equipped with computers and, therefore, with access 
to the information superhighway. That superhighway is a two-way street. 
Children can explore the world, and criminals unfortunately can get 
right into your house.
  Hailing from Washington State, which is home to a flourishing high-
tech industry, I am not surprised that 20 million children will have 
access to the Internet by the year 2002. That is 20 million children 
who will have the opportunity to see images of Neil Armstrong's 
historic first steps on the moon, or to see the actual Titanic, or to 
communicate with other children who are halfway around the globe. That 
part is wonderful.
  But then I read about the 36-year-old Seattle man charged with second 
degree rape, accused of having sex with an 11-year-old girl he met in 
an Internet chat room. Just today in the National Journal there is a 
story about a team of psychologists who, based on a comprehensive poll, 
concluded that ``erotic pursuits are among the most frequent uses of 
the Internet'' and that sex is the most searched word on line. So while 
our children may experience all the wonders of the world with one click 
of the button, the sad truth is they may also eventually fall victim to 
the most horrifying of sex crimes.
  That is why the Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act 
is so critical to families across the country. This bill addresses a 
growing concern for parents whose children are growing up in the 
information age. By severely punishing those who use computers to 
target children for sexual acts or who

[[Page H4493]]

knowingly send children obscenity over the Internet, this bill cracks 
down on cyber-predators and pedophiles. But the bill goes beyond 
punishing those who lure kids over the Internet for sex crimes. Over a 
dozen provisions increase Federal penalties for sex offenders and help 
facilitate Federal investigations of crimes committed against children.
  For example, a Federal child sex offender will not be released prior 
to his trial, and, by sentencing serial rapists to life in prison, the 
bill sends a signal that a civilized society cannot and will not 
tolerate rape.
  The McCollum-Dunn bill tells cyber-predators that the information 
superhighway is not a detour for deviant behavior, but, rather, a dead 
end.
  Our message is clear. We will not stop until every mother and father 
has the peace of mind that their children are safe from sexual 
predators. Again, I thank the chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers), for their thoughtful work. I encourage the support of my 
colleagues in enacting this important and timely bill.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  First, I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum) for his steadfast attention to this very important issue. The 
Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act is crucial in a 
time like this, albeit many of us would wish we did not have to come to 
the floor of the House and promote such legislation.
  But as the previous speaker has mentioned, we are living in both 
difficult times and different times. And our children now become prey, 
they become victims. The sickness of child predators is prevalent. It 
is growing. So many States and so many different cities and 
jurisdictions have tried themselves to track these sexual predators and 
work, if you will, to fight against the siege upon our community.
  It is important that we, on the national level, do two things. One, 
in fact, make it known that there will be no tolerance, in fact zero 
tolerance, for sexual predators in this Nation; and then, secondly, 
that if there are such individuals thinking that they can get away with 
these heinous crimes, they will find serious punishment.
  So I am delighted to be able to join the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum) on issue. This bill is a crucial step in the fight to protect 
our children from crime and violence.
  Crime on the Internet is an especially invasive and terrifying crime. 
Our children can be terrorized while they are seemingly safe inside our 
homes and in our living rooms, in our schools and in front of our 
family computers.
  As a parent, just a few months ago I received a permission slip for 
my 12-year-old. The permission slip from the school asked whether or 
not he could use the Internet in school. One of the items of which I 
would be signing is that the school would not be responsible for any 
obscenity or pornographic images that this 12-year-old might access in 
the course of using the Internet at school. How many of us can counter 
and fathom any kind of horrible situation where our children, in a 
learning environment, are subject to these heinous and ugly-type 
episodes?
  We must increase penalties for those enticing or coercing any child 
under the age of 18 through the Internet to engage in sexual activity. 
This Congress must send a message that this type of criminal activity 
will not be tolerated by the criminal justice system.
  As chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I believe our 
children are our future and must be nurtured, protected and guided. How 
can we protect them? By making sure that those people who are out to 
harm them and exploit them are restricted from their access to our 
children.
  Under current law the Federal Government has the burden of proving 
that a pedophile persuaded, induced, enticed or coerced a child to 
engage in a sexual act. In essence, we really make the child the 
victim, because the government, who must move the case, has this high 
bar to come over.
  However, this new legislation, H.R. 3494, would create a new Federal 
offense to the use of phones, mail or Internet to contact someone for 
the purpose of committing rape, child sex abuse, child prostitution or 
statutory rape. Every day in our community we are seeing episodes where 
someone, an adult, has solicited a child over the computer or over the 
Internet. It would also create a separate new Federal offense for using 
the mail or Internet or knowingly transferring obscene material to a 
minor.
  I introduced an additional amendment to this legislation that would 
further protect our children from the types of predator who may 
currently be lurking behind our family computer screens. This amendment 
would have directed that the Federal Bureau of Investigation conduct a 
study of computer-based technologies and other approaches that would 
help to limit the availability to children of pornographic images 
through electronic media, including the Internet and on-line services.
  My colleague, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), has 
introduced a good amendment that deals with the research and the 
definition of why sexual predators engage in recidivism.
  It is my concern that, with the help of the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. McCollum), who was very much a supporter of my amendment, I am 
extremely disturbed that the Committee on Rules would not see fit to 
have made it in order. I think that in this time where we are working 
in a bipartisan manner, it certainly troubles me that Members of 
goodwill and good faith going to the Committee on Rules with 
legislation that is well needed, my amendment would research, through 
the FBI and the Attorney General's office, it would ensure that there 
would be an adequate study to determine the technology that would help 
us prohibit or inhibit pornographic images on the Internet that are now 
confronting our children. It strikes me as completely confusing why 
this Committee on Rules and its chairman would see fit not to make this 
particular amendment in order.
  H.R. 3494 and additional amendments to this legislation would be a 
start to effectively prevent a predator from initiating a harmful 
relationship with a child for illegal sexual activity and to subjecting 
children to damaging pornographic material that our children can 
currently access.
  In December of 1996, the FBI announced that it had executed search 
warrants in 20 cities as part of an ongoing nationwide investigation 
into the use of computer on-line services and the Internet to lure 
minors into elicit sexual relationships.
  We have all heard far too many horror stories involving child 
pornography and sexual abuse on the Internet. In May in Illinois a 9-
year-old began getting strange phone calls at night. After her parents 
searched the Internet, they discovered that someone had posted Internet 
messages saying that their daughter was sexually active and wanted to 
have sex with other men.
  I do not know how any of us could tolerate this outrageous behavior, 
outrageous attack on our children. The messages included their home 
telephone number and said the child could be reached 24 hours a day.
  Current law does not prevent children from being exposed to sexually 
explicit material on the net, but hopefully this law will allow us to 
prosecute those who seek to commit such damaging and dangerous acts 
against our children.
  My amendment would have sped us along this process because it would 
have allowed the FBI and the Attorney General's office to do their duty 
by researching the kind of technology that could have been utilized in 
keeping in mind the first amendment. How horrendous to have a child's 
home phone number put on the Internet saying that she was sexually 
active and she is only 9 years old. How would we accept that if it was 
one of our children? We must act to protect our young people from the 
scourge of child predators seeking to harm them through Internet 
communication, and we must act now.
  I hope that our colleagues will support this legislation, and I hope 
that our colleagues will see fit to acknowledge the importance of doing 
the research that is so very important to prohibit these heinous acts.
  I would like to engage the chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr.

[[Page H4494]]

McCollum), in a colloquy for, as I have said, I appreciate his 
leadership on this issue. We have worked together in the Subcommittee 
on Crime on issues dealing with children and particularly issues 
confronting children as it relates to sexual predators.
  I would like to ask the chairman and solicit his help in working to 
get the amendment that deals simply with researching the question of 
prohibiting these sexual sort of, if you will, examples of pictures and 
other type of visuals on the Internet and enticements on the Internet 
which my amendment would have provided for a study.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum).

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support her amendment, as she 
knows. I supported it in committee. I urged the Committee on Rules to 
make it in order. I do not know technically why it was not. But I 
certainly will continue to work with her to get it into this 
legislation or in separate legislation. She has my commitment to it. I 
see no problem with the amendment at all. It is a good proposal.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very 
much. I know that we will be looking as this debate proceeds at a 
possible opportunity to work with this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Cunningham), a strong advocate and a strong supporter 
of this legislation.
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, God bless the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. McCollum) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for this 
effort.
  The loss of a child, or even the abuse of a child, I think is the 
most lifelong, hurtful, terrible event that can happen to a family. 
Sexual predators or drunk drivers, a gunshot wound at school, the loss 
of a child. Just think about what the families go through.
  I would like to also mention, we have named too many laws after dead 
children. I think of Megan Kanka and Polly Klaas and Jon Benet Ramsey. 
I want my colleagues to know where all of this started. The gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Deal) who was a Democrat when I first got here and 
the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn) worked on Megan's Law. There 
were absolutely Members in this body that opposed it. And the 
gentlewoman from Washington and the gentleman from Georgia got together 
and dragged me as a wingman to Speaker Foley at the time and demanded 
that we be able to pass this on the floor. It then went to the 
President of the United States and he signed this bill. That is where 
it started. A good idea took off. And recently, Megan's Law underwent 
some changes.
  For example, if a person is a student or in the military and changes 
States, then they were not required to register as a sexual predator. 
So the changes adopted recently by the House have been a good thing.
  I would also like to thank Rick Roberts, a local talk show host in 
San Diego who announces the top 20 sexual predators every week in San 
Diego County. We have got Jerry Sanders with San Diego PD and Sheriff 
Bill Kolender, Dan Lungren who is our Attorney General and Governor 
Pete Wilson who has made it a point to work on Megan's Law and the 
protection of children and our most vulnerable, children, women and our 
seniors.
  Of all of the things in this bill, here are items in this thing that 
protects children. But the one thing that law enforcement has told us 
they need is time. Time in the first hours are very important in saving 
the life of a child. In San Diego, the San Diego PD literally went down 
and caught a sexual predator as he was packing and on his way out the 
door, because they had him, they had his profile, they had him on a 
computer before he could escape, and they found and saved the life of 
that child.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), the gentlewoman from Washington 
(Ms. Dunn), the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) and the people that 
have worked on this for treeing this individual and bringing me along 
as a wingman to work on this type of material. It protects children. It 
protects families. But life imprisonment is not enough for these sexual 
predators.
  I do not know if you have ever had a child. Once, very briefly, I 
lost track of my daughter. I never used to let her out of sight in a 
store. One time she just got out of sight and I did not know where she 
was. I remember the panic, the death thoughts that we had.
  Do not wish this on anyone.
  I would like to thank both members of the Republican and the Democrat 
Party for coming together on this issue. God bless you.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson) who is cochair of the 
Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus.
  Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited 
Children's Caucus, I want to commend the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum) for his leadership on a fine piece of legislation. I do, 
however, want to express my very strong concern that my amendment, the 
Children's Protection from Internet Predators Act of 1998, was not made 
in order by the Committee on Rules.
  My amendment would have authorized $2 million annually, until 2002, 
for the United States Customs Service Child Pornography Enforcement 
program, the International Child Pornography Investigation and 
Coordination Center. Currently ICPICC has only six dedicated agents for 
tracking child porn on the Internet. My amendment would have provided 
funding for an additional 14 agents.
  To help combat the problem of child pornography through the Internet, 
through computer technology, the U.S. Customs Service established the 
ICPICC in April 1996. ICPICC is staffed by special agents with 
expertise in both child pornography and computers.
  There is a need to adequately direct Federal resources toward 
attacking the problem of child exploitation over the Net. The U.S. 
Customs Service has long been recognized by law enforcement and the 
international community for its knowledge and skill in investigating 
cases of child pornography and child exploitation.
  Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that all members of the 
Committee on Rules expressed support for my amendment, so it should 
have been made in order, but it was not. My amendment would have 
strengthened this bill and provided means to track these criminals and 
more specifically to make arrests.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask this body, is $2 million too much to spend to 
protect our children? I am sure Members will agree that this would have 
been a small price to pay to reduce the exploitation of our children.
  I have offered my amendment as a freestanding bill, and I urge the 
leadership to take a strong look at my legislation. I indeed support 
this good bill by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum).
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Weller).
  (Mr. WELLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
3494, the Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act. I 
particularly want to commend the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) 
and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for their bipartisan 
efforts in bringing this important legislation to the floor, 
legislation designed to protect children from the weirdos, the wackos 
and slimeballs who use the latest technology to prey on children and 
their families.
  This legislation contains language that resulted from legislation I 
introduced late last year, H.R. 2815, the Protecting Children from 
Internet Predators Act. I very much thank the gentleman from Florida 
for working with us to clarify the language and include it in this 
legislation during subcommittee markup.
  I would like to explain today why this provision is so very 
important, not only to the people in my district but all across our 
country. This past summer a family in my district, the Boehle

[[Page H4495]]

family from Joliet, Illinois, began receiving phone calls at all hours 
of the day and night, strange adult men asking for their 9-year-old 
little girl by name. After receiving more and more phone calls, the 
father discovered that someone had posted messages on the Internet 
posing as his 9-year-old daughter. The messages implied that she was 
sexually active with her father, that she wanted to have sex with other 
grown men, and that she had photos for sale. These messages were posted 
on boards targeted to pedophiles. They included her full name, her home 
phone number, and her hometown. Obviously it was a result of these 
messages that they began receiving the disturbing phone calls. Think 
about it. How would any parent feel if this happened to your own 
family?
  When Mrs. Boehle read, with horror, the messages that were posted 
about her daughter, she called the police. They told her that nothing 
could be done, that there was no law against this type of action. She 
contacted the FBI, they worked for 3 weeks to try to find a law they 
could use to prosecute the perpetrator, and they came up empty. The 
police told the Boehles to move, to leave town, for their own safety. 
While there was nothing that could be done legally, they knew that any 
pedophile who read these messages could find their home and find their 
daughter. Due to this imminent, grave danger, they disrupted and 
uprooted their lives, selling their home, leaving their church and 
schools and moving out of their home community.
  When Mrs. Boehle contacted me early last fall, I introduced 
legislation to make this type of action illegal and put in place 
penalties. Working closely with the gentleman from Florida as well as 
Federal, State and local law enforcement, this legislation makes it 
illegal to use the Internet to transmit identifying information of a 
child to encourage, offer, or solicit sex or sexual activity.
  Let us remember, this person posted this little girl's full name, 
phone number and hometown while posing as her and asking people to 
contact her for sex. It is unbelievable that this is not already 
illegal. However, as technology advances, we need to bring our laws up 
to speed. Passage of this legislation will protect others. I believe it 
deserves bipartisan support.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers) for their leadership.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer) who is also a member 
of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus and serves with great 
leadership in this body.
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman from Texas knows, we serve 
together on the Children's Caucus as well, and I want to congratulate 
her for her leadership there. I congratulate the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. McCollum) for this bill, H.R. 3494, the Child Protection and 
Sexual Predator Punishment Act. I rise in strong support of that piece 
of legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, in my prior life, I was a district attorney in Alabama 
from 1980 until 1990. In 1980 through our criminal justice system 
there, we took four cases involving victimization of children in sexual 
situations into the criminal justice system. Unfortunately when I left 
there in 1990, we had hundreds of cases that we took into the criminal 
justice system that involved child victims of sexual abuse. The 
criminal justice system has not been equipped to deal with this very 
difficult subject matter. We needed to reach out and bond with one 
another. We needed to reach out and establish bridges to the mental 
health communities to make sure that the State level, the Federal 
level, the local level were working effectively and to make sure that 
in today's world, today's technologies, that we were doing everything 
that we needed to do in order to prevent these kind of offenses from 
occurring.
  Unfortunately, prosecutors react to cases that have already occurred. 
The gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) has an amendment that I 
assume will be accepted, or I hope will be accepted, that authorizes 
the National Institute of Justice to conduct a study of sexual 
predators. We need that information. We need that helping hand. We are 
punishing these offenders, we are sending them to institutions, they 
are staying there for a brief period of time, and they are coming back 
into our communities and they are re-offending against children. We 
need to know what works and what does not work. We need to know what 
resources can be available for children, what resources we can take 
advantage of in order to hopefully rehabilitate some of these people 
that will be preying on our children. But we cannot make this system 
tough enough. We cannot punish these offenders enough. We have got to 
put them away. We have got to protect our children.
  The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Franks) will speak about an 
amendment in a few minutes as well. I have enjoyed working with him as 
a cochair of the Caucus for Missing and Exploited Children. I was on 
that national board for a number of years while I was district 
attorney. There are people all over this country that are reaching out 
saying that we need to work better together to protect our children. 
This is a growing problem in our local communities.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill. I can only say, 
I hope we can put more money where our mouth is. I hope that we can 
eventually not just tell these agencies what we want them to do but 
give them a helping hand, give them the funding that they need, give 
them the legislation that they need, give us the studies that we need 
in order to better protect our communities and our children. Again, I 
congratulate the chairman of the committee and say this is a good piece 
of legislation. I hope to work with him down the line to make sure that 
we fill in the gaps and make this even stronger.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Franks).
  (Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, as cochairman of the Missing 
and Exploited Children's Caucus, I want to congratulate the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. McCollum), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and 
the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn) for bringing this bill 
forward. But even more importantly, as the father of 7-month-old Kelly 
Amanda, I want to thank them for their excellent work on this bill. 
Nothing is more important to a parent than the safety and security of 
their child.
  I want to touch on just one important provision of this bill. Twenty-
five years ago, 7-year-old Joan D'Alessandro left her home in 
Hillsdale, New Jersey, to deliver Girl Scout cookies to a neighbor. 
Three days later that neighbor, a 26-year-old school teacher, confessed 
to sexually molesting and killing little Joan.
  But for the D'Alessandro family, the nightmare was far from over. For 
the past 12 years, they have had to live with the very real prospect 
that one day very soon their daughter's killer will walk out of jail a 
free man. He has twice been eligible for parole. Recently a New Jersey 
appeals court ordered yet another parole hearing.
  Rosemarie D'Alessandro has fought back against this terrible 
injustice. She has been the driving force behind a provision in this 
bill that would mandate a sentence of no less than life imprisonment 
with no opportunity for early release for anyone who commits a serious 
violent felony which results in the death of a child. I want it to be 
absolutely clear that this provision will still enable Federal 
prosecutors to seek the death penalty in all those cases where it is 
permitted under current law.
  Joan's law sends a clear signal that Americans will not tolerate the 
killing of innocent children. If a criminal takes the life of a child 
during the commission of a serious violent crime, that criminal will 
die in jail.

                              {time}  1245

  No family should ever have to endure the double tragedy of losing a 
child to a heinous act of violence and then watching their child's 
killer walk out of prison a free man.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
might consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the speakers that have recognized the necessity 
of

[[Page H4496]]

this legislation, and I would simply like to close by indicating that 
there are three provisions in here that I think are crucial. As I heard 
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Franks) speak of great tragedy, so 
many of us can cite incidences in our neighborhoods or in our cities or 
in our States that we much rather not discuss, and I am reminded of the 
time I was on the city council in Houston when a 3-year-old was 
sexually molested and then killed by a recently released sexual 
predator who continued to deny to the very end. And not only did that 
occur, but they had to have two trials. One of the trials wound up with 
a hung jury, and so it put the family through that crisis again. In 
fact, I hope that this legislation, when passed, will be a tribute to 
that little life that was unnecessarily lost.
  And so the provision in this bill that clarifies that Federal 
kidnapping investigations do not require a 24-hour waiting period and 
can be initiated immediately is crucial. How many times we have 
frustrated the law enforcement officers who have wanted to go out 
immediately once they have determined that there has been an abduction. 
This bill clarifies that. It also permits the government to seek 
pretrial detention of someone accused of a Federal rape and child sex 
abuse or child pornography. That means that individual is not out and 
able to attack others. And then, of course, it directs the Justice 
Department to establish a special center to investigate child 
abductions, child homicides and serial homicides.
  These particular provisions in this legislation are extremely crucial 
for untying the hands of our law enforcement officers and, of course, 
paying really a tragic tribute to those lives that we have lost and 
hoping that we will have this kind of legislation to prevent future 
loss.
  Mr. Chairman, I have no additional speakers at this time, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema).
  Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Chairman, I rise here in strong support of this 
legislation and really to focus on an important part of this bill that 
is known as Joan's Law. First, however, I want to stress the importance 
of the total bill and that we must strongly punish this obscene 
behavior of predators, and I want my colleagues to know, be assured, 
that knowledgeable professionals in the field, psychiatrists, 
psychologists, all know of the implicit, persisting compulsive behavior 
that leads to this type of violence against children.
  But right now I want to rise in memory of Joan D'Alessandro. As the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Franks) has mentioned, we already have a 
law in New Jersey in memory of Joan, who was sexually assaulted and 
murdered in 1973. Her family has suffered through all these years, but 
we have gotten that law in New Jersey, and now with this legislation we 
will extend that right to protect the children in all 50 States.
  But I want to particularly commend Rosemary D'Alessandro, the mother 
of Joan, who had to endure this inhumane threat to her peace of mind, 
but also to thank her so that other families will no longer have to 
endure the emotional travesty that the D'Alessandro family has endured. 
This legislation protects those families, but of greatest importance is 
that we are now going to say to the children of our country that they 
will no longer have to be fearful in their neighborhoods or in their 
shopping centers of released sexual predators preying on them. But I do 
this in memory of not only Joan, but in the name of Mrs. D'Alessandro 
without whom this reform either in New Jersey or across the Nation 
would not have been realized. She has protected children for all times 
from these predators.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of HR 3494--the Child 
Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act of 1998. I would like to 
thank the Committee and Mr. Franks, who have joined me in this 
endeavor.
  There is no greater resource in the nation than our children. And 
whenever a child is harmed or injured by violent crime it is a tragedy. 
But that tragedy is made even worse when it could have been prevented.
  This bill's purpose is to strongly punish the obscene behavior of 
sexual predators who prey on children. Knowledgeable professionals in 
the field--psychiatrists, psychologists--all know the implicit 
persistent compulsive behavior that leads to this type of violence 
against children.
  But I rise here today to focus on an important part of this bill and 
its incorporation of New Jersey's Joan's Law and in honor of the memory 
of Joan D'Alessandro. Joan's Law mandates a prison term of life without 
parole for a person who causes the death of a child during the 
commission of a violent crime. It was named after Joan D'Alessandro--an 
innocent seven year old girl from Hillsdale, New Jersey who was 
sexually assaulted and murdered in 1973.
  We have a responsibility to protect the most volnerable people in our 
society--our children. The state of New Jersey has led the way. Now 
Congress must protect children in ALL fifty states.
  The purpose of life without parole is twofold. First, someone who 
kills a child does not deserve Ever to step outside prison again. And 
second, it will provide families who lost innocent children with the 
knowledge and emotional relief that they will not have to relive the 
horror of losing their child every few years at endless parole 
hearings.
  Rosemarie D'Alessandro, Joan's mother, has had to endure this 
inhumane threat to her peace of mind. But thanks to her, other families 
will no longer endure such emotional travesty. This legislation 
protects those families and of greatest importance are the children who 
will no longer have to be fearful in their very own neighborhoods and 
shopping centers.
  Thanks to the bill, families who have suffered the worst tragedy 
known to parents--the loss of a child--will at least have the comfort 
of knowing the murderer will never be released from prison.
  I strongly urge passage of this important family protection bill in 
the name of Mrs. D'Alessandro without whom this reform--protecting 
children could never have been achieved.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Bono) for the purposes of debate.
  Mrs. BONO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support the Child Protection 
Sexual Predator Punishment Act of 1998 and to urge its adoption by the 
House. As a longtime computer user, I am very aware of the many 
benefits the Internet presents. It allows people to communicate, learn, 
appreciate art and music, and collaborate across great distances. 
However as a parent of two young children, I am disturbed by what we 
have learned.
  Personally I can say that my children already use computers and take 
advantage of the World Wide Web. As we move into the 21st century and 
the high technology future, America's children will not have a choice. 
They will be expected to use computers at a young age to get ahead.
  Unfortunately the growing problem of child stalkers and predators is 
all too real and alarming. The situation will only increase as 
computers find their way into more homes. We know that children will 
always find a way onto the computer; for example, their schools or the 
home of a friend, so we must make sure cyberspace is a safe place.
  The evidence of the type of dangerous, sick behavior of predators 
presented to the Committee on the Judiciary is an issue that we must 
confront and develop intelligent approaches to protect our Nation's 
youth. Congress has a role of protecting our most precious resource, 
our children. The Subcommittee on Crime did it the right way, holding 
much more hearings and listening to an array of experts.
  The Internet and computers pose very difficult and novel questions 
for lawmakers, as I am sure the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Coble) and the rest of the intellectual property community know. Yet, I 
urge each Member to support this bill that will help make the Internet 
a safer environment for family and legitimate users.
  In closing I want to commend the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) for developing a 
well crafted, narrowly tailored solution to an extremely serious 
problem. They can count on my support to help monitor this issue and 
revisit it, if necessary, in the future.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Bachus).
  Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum) for yielding this time to me.

[[Page H4497]]

  When we consider an issue like child pornography, we need to 
understand that issue. A recent poll showed that most people in the 
United States know little about child pornography and understand little 
about it. They are surprised when they learn that child pornography is 
the tool of choice used by child molesters and pedophiles to entice 
young children into sexual activity. They also are unaware that most 
sexual pedophiles, sexual predators, possess child pornography that is 
usually on their person or found in their homes. They also, in fact, 
ask very often how does child pornography, how is it even created? How 
does it begin?
  Mr. Chairman, we can answer all three of those questions with one 
answer, and that is, and the final report of the Commission on 
Pornography outlined this, why sexual predators use pornography, why 
they always possess it, how child pornography is created. And Dr. 
Shirley O'Brien, there was an attachment of her study on this, and it 
shows that this is how child pornography is created.
  Child pornography is shown to a child by an adult; 2, the adult uses 
the materials to convince the child that the depicted sexual act is 
acceptable, even desirable; 3, the material desensitizes the child, 
lowering his or her inhibitions; 4, some of the sessions progress to 
sexual activities involving the child; 5, photographs or home movies 
are taken of the activity, and finally the nude pornographic material 
is used to lure more child victims and also to keep the victim from 
talking about the experience.
  So, as we discuss this issue, bottom line, let us remember that child 
pornography is used in every community in America to lure children into 
this child abuse.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Granger).
  Ms. GRANGER. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join many of my colleagues 
on both sides of the aisle in support of this very important bill, and 
I want to publicly thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) and 
the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn) for the work they have done 
and put into this legislation.
  We hear much today about family values, but I ask do we really value 
families? The bill I am proud to support today is one which values our 
families by protecting our children.
  The Child Protection Sexual Predator Punishment Act does two 
important things. It protects our children, and it punishes their 
predators. The goal of the bill is simple, to keep pornography out of 
the sight of children and to keep our children out of the reach of 
sexual predators.
  To do this the bill does several important things. First, it 
prohibits knowingly transferring obscene materials to a minor over the 
Internet. Second, the bill increases penalties for using a computer to 
entice a minor to engage in illegal sexual activity. This information 
superhighway must not be allowed to be used by sexual predators as a 
gateway to their prey. Third, the bill increases penalties for sending 
child pornography to any child anywhere by any means. Whether it is on 
the Internet or in person, this bill says child pornography in any form 
is ill-advised and illegal.
  Finally, the bill puts the blame on the criminals and the predators, 
and it puts the law on the side of families and their children. This 
legislation doubles the penalties for repeat sex offenders. It also 
requires the U.S. Sentencing Commission to review and amend the 
sentencing guidelines to increase penalties for sexual abuse offenses. 
In short, it protects our children by punishing their stalkers.
  Why is this strong legislation needed? Because cyberpedophiles have 
discovered that the information superhighway can be a path to a new 
victim. In the last 2 years the FBI and the Customs Service have 
arrested 600 people on Federal charges of trading child pornography on 
the Internet. Even scarier still, many of these predators use 
cyberspace to meet children and ask them out.
  Earlier this year a South Houston teenager ran away to see someone 
she never met before. That night Edward Dub Watson sexually assaulted 
her. And why did she leave home to see this person? Because she talked 
to him on the Internet, and she thought he sounded like a nice person.
  This is the issue we are trying to deal with. It is sick, and it has 
simply got to stop. I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this 
important bill to help protect our young people from those who misuse 
the Internet.
  It has often been said that the opposite of love is not hate, but 
indifference. This legislation says that the indifference stops right 
here and right now. Let us help create the world our children deserve, 
our future demands and our values dictate. Let us pass the Child 
Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act for our children, for our 
families and for our future.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to 
retrieve my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Texas is seeking unanimous consent 
to retrieve 9 minutes previously yielded.
  Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume just to inquire if the gentleman from Florida has an 
additional speaker. Someone was trying to come to the floor.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I do not, just myself to close. That is 
all I have over here on this side.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me see if they arrive, and I will 
simply indicate to the Chair that there are loopholes that this 
legislation is looking to shore up, if my colleagues will, and I 
believe that it is important that, if we talk about this blight on our 
country of sexual predators and protecting children, that this 
legislation answers some of the questions. We are not completed with 
our work after hearing all the recalling of these different tragedies, 
we are just beginning really. We have got to get to a point where 
sexual predators know that they are totally intolerated in this 
country.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to say this debate has been good. The bill we 
have before us today, the sexual predator bill, is one which has been 
long overdue, dealing with serial killers, serial rapists, but, most of 
all, pedophiles who use the Internet.
  It is amazing how many of them go into the chat rooms of this Nation 
and actually engage children. Usually they do this, as I understand it, 
for a considerable period of time, when they pretend often to be other 
children. What they are doing is gaining the confidence of this child, 
without the child realizing it is an adult on the other end, let alone 
a pedophile. Then they will gradually engage in sexually explicit 
conversations, and building up, often times, sending pornographic 
material to that child, and, finally, trying to meet that child out on 
the street somewhere.
  Current laws at the Federal level do not allow for the arrest and the 
conviction of somebody until they have actually induced in some manner 
the child to actually go meet with them somewhere to engage in a sexual 
activity.
  The key portion of this bill, and there are a lot of other things in 
it, is to make sure when there is contact made over the Internet for 
the first time by a predator like this with a child, with the intent to 
engage in sexual activity, whatever that contact is, as long as the 
intent is there to engage in that activity, he can be prosecuted for a 
crime. I think that is an exceedingly important change in this bill. 
There are a lot of other things in here with wide-ranging importance, 
but that is number one, and it is the heart of this bill, to get to the 
Internet problem.
  Mr. WHITE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Representative Franks 
for working with me to improve upon his amendment, which requires 
Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to report to the Attorney General 
when they obtain knowledge of facts or circumstances that appear to 
indicate a violation of child pornography statutes. I believe we are 
working in

[[Page H4498]]

good faith and will continue in our combined efforts to improve this 
language.
  We all want to protect kids from child pornography. There is a lot of 
activity in this area already, and we need to recognize this. ISPs are 
good corporate citizens and are very involved in combating child 
pornography on the Internet. For instance, a ``Zero Tolerance Policy'' 
was adopted after the ``Internet Online Summit: Focus on Children'' on 
December 2, 1997. This policy states, ``When child pornography is 
appropriately brought to our attention and we have control over it, we 
will remove it. Subject to constitutional and statutory privacy 
safeguards, we will cooperate fully with law enforcement officials 
investigating child pornography on the Internet. We will not allow this 
valuable new medium to be exploited by child pornographers and child 
predators.'' This policy has led ISPs across the nation to simply shut 
down, block access to, or remove child pornography from the Internet.
  In addition, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children 
has led in providing a conduit for reporting online evidence of child 
pornography and other crimes. The CyberTipline at <www.missingkids.com/
cybertip> or at 1-800-843-5678, provides every Internet user with the 
opportunity to pass along tips, which are then reported to the 
appropriate law enforcement agencies. It is not necessary for ISPs to 
serve as the conduits for this information to law enforcement when 
there is an existing mechanism in place.
  As we look at the obligations we will be placing on ISPs in this 
legislation, we need to consider some basic principles. The privacy of 
individual Internet users should not be compromised in our efforts to 
ensure ISPs work more closely and consistently with law enforcement. 
The trigger for reporting and what a report consists of should be 
absolutely clear and workable, with minimal burden. ISPs should not be 
seen as the conduit for tips on child pornography, but should focus on 
sharing information they discover. Finally, it is not appropriate for 
ISPs to become gatekeepers of content on the Internet. The Internet 
should continue to be the most vibrant and inclusive medium for the 
exchange of information we know.
  The privacy of individuals should not be compromised. Any change to 
federal privacy law that would allow disclosure of private 
communications to law enforcement without a warrant would be a dramatic 
erosion of Americans' privacy rights in contravention of both the 
Constitution and long-established electronic surveillance laws. This is 
troublesome to say the least. On the other hand, I understand and 
support Mr. Franks' desire to make sure ISPs, when they actively seek 
out and shut down or block access to child pornography, can report that 
information to law enforcement. Since Congress never held hearings on 
this provision, very little public scrutiny has been applied. We must 
spend more time discussing the implications of language that would 
eliminate the requirement to comply with the Electronic Computer 
Privacy Act.

  ISPs should not be seen as the conduit for tips on child pornography. 
There is an existing mechanism for concerned individuals to report tips 
or other evidence to law enforcement. The CyberTipline is very 
accessible. The narrow focus on the bill should be on child pornography 
discovered by the ISP. Multiple efforts to combat child pornography are 
desirable. On the other hand, duplicative efforts are not efficient and 
could result in a loss of valuable investigative time by law 
enforcement agents forced to follow up on the same report received 
through multiple venues.
  The standard for reporting should be absolutely clear and workable. 
ISPs should not be held liable for information of which they are not 
aware. Nor should they inundate law enforcement with information that 
does not appear to violate the law for fear of liability. I believe the 
addition of the knowledge standard is a significant step forward. There 
is still more work we can do to clarify the reporting requirement and I 
look forward to being involved in that discussion.
  We should not mandate that ISPs become gatekeepers of information. It 
is clearly not the intent of this legislation to require ISPs to 
monitor all information flowing over the Internet. It must be 
absolutely clear that the government should not be involved in such a 
scenario. Many ISPs voluntarily seek to remove child pornography, but a 
mandatory requirement with concomitant liability would hold ISPs 
responsible for the content of the World Wide Web. This significantly 
strays from their core responsibility of providing millions of 
consumers access to the Internet.
  I have four children and I am concerned about their safety, and the 
safety of all children, in cyberspace. We can and will do more to 
combat child pornography in this new medium. As we do so, we want to be 
absolutely sure that we are making wise choices about the best way to 
protect our kids and the privacy of adults. We want our solutions to 
work. And we want government to take a back seat to the technological 
solutions that the creative minds who work in the technology industry 
will come up with in the future. Again, I look forward to working with 
my colleagues on further improvements to this bill.
  Mr. HOYER. I rise today in support of H.R. 3494, The Child Protection 
and Sexual Predator Punishment Act of 1988, and the important work that 
the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children is doing to 
locate and recover missing children. In 1990, the Justice Department 
released a study reporting that there are as many as 4,600 abductions 
by non-family members reported to police, 114,600 attempted abductions 
of children by non-family members, and 354,000 children abducted by 
family members annually.
  The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children works in 
cooperation with the United States Department of Justice's Office of 
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention to coordinate the efforts 
of law enforcement, social service agencies, elected officials, judges, 
prosecutors, educators and the public and private sectors to prevent 
these heinous crimes against children. The Fiscal Year 1998 Treasury, 
Postal Service and General government Appropriations Conference Report 
contained $571,000 for the Exploited Child Unit of the National Center 
for Missing and Exploited Children. In my role as Ranking Member of the 
Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and General Government 
Appropriations, I will, once again, this year be supporting funding for 
this most important organization.
  Mr. Chairman, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children 
is doing critical work throughout the country to ensure the safety of 
our Nation's children. I urge my colleagues to vote for the bill and to 
support the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, although the Sherman amendment is well 
intentioned, I voted against it because of the real danger it will 
undermine efforts at the local level to identify sexual offenders. This 
amendment, which establishes a national hotline to access the FBI's 
database of sexual predators, is opposed by the Department of Justice, 
the FBI, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. 
There are a number of problems inherent to a national name-check 
system. Such a system could result in many misidentification and cause 
the government and any misidentified individuals much embarrassment and 
unnecessary complications in their lives. Perhaps more serious is the 
possibility of failing to identify a convicted sexual predator, 
providing a false sense of security for the American public. This 
amendment only complicate local efforts to deal with sexual predators.
  Mr. POSHARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my strong support 
for H.R. 3493, the ``Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment 
Act,'' a critical measure to protect America's children from the 
dangers that lurk on the Intenet. The McCollum-Dunn bill increases 
federal penalties for sexual predators and defines new sex crimes 
against children, ensuring that our criminal code keeps pace with 
rapidly-expanding technology. This measure provides the tools we need 
to keep our children safe while allowing them to take advantage of all 
the benefits of the information superhighway.
  We live in an age of incredible access to vast amounts of 
information, and the Internet is quickly becoming an integral part of 
our lives. For our children, this represents a wonderful opportunity to 
gain knowledge and enhance their educational experiences. 
Unfortunately, it also represents a terrifying new way for some in our 
society to prey on innocent children. Increasingly, pedophiles and 
sexual predators are using the anonymity of the Internet to lure 
children into dangerous situations. Given the estimates that 20 million 
children will have access to the Internet by the year 2000, it is clear 
that urgent action is needed to combat this situation.
  In addition, Mr. Chairman, I would like to register my support for 
the amendment offered by Representative Conyers regarding violence 
against women. Domestic violence is one of the most disturbing and 
pervasive problems in our society, and I commend my colleague from 
Michigan for his efforts on behalf of women throughout this country who 
should not be forced to live in fear of emotional and physical abuse to 
themselves and their children.
  I hope my colleagues will join with me today in sending a strong 
message to sexual predators that we will not tolerate the abuse of our

[[Page H4499]]

children any longer. The Internet is quickly causing community 
boundaries to disappear, and we have learned that it is no longer 
enough to focus our efforts on the local level. We must ensure that 
children are safe not only at home and at school, but also as they 
continue to explore the exciting new world of cyber-space. H.R. 3494 
provides the strong protections required to combat the unconscionable 
and indefensible actions of pedophiles and sexual predators, wherever 
they may occur, and I will proudly vote for its passage.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the Child 
Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act of 1998. This bill, if 
passed, will further expand the authority of this country's national 
police force and further ``justify'' the federal Justice Department's 
intrusion into mail, telephone and Internet communications.
  Mr. Chairman, today the Congress will collectively move our nation 
yet another step closer to a national police state by further expanding 
the notion of federal crimes and paving the way for a deluge of federal 
criminal justice activity. Of course, it is much easier to ride the 
current wave of federally ``criminalizing'' all human malfeasance in 
the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a 
Constitutional oath which prescribes a process by which the nation is 
protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism. Who, 
after all, and especially in an election year, wants to be amongst 
those members of Congress who are portrayed as soft on child-related 
sexual crime irrespective of the procedural transgressions and 
individual or civil liberties one tramples in their zealous approach.
  In the name of the politically popular cause of protecting children 
against sex crimes, the Members of Congress will vote on whether to 
move the Nation further down the path of centralized-Government 
implosion by appropriating yet more Federal taxpayer money and 
brandishing more U.S. prosecutors at whatever problem happens to be 
brought to the floor by any Members of Congress hoping to gain 
political favor with those embracing some politically popular cause. 
The Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act of 1998 is no 
exception.
  Who, after all, can stand on the house floor and oppose a bill which 
is argued to make the world safer for children with respect to crimes? 
It is a sad commentary when members of this body only embrace or even 
mention federalism when it serves their own political purposes and, at 
the same time, consciously ignore federalism's implications for these 
politically popular causes. It seems to no longer even matter whether 
governmental programs actually accomplish their intended goals or have 
any realistic hope of solving problems. No longer does the end even 
justify the means. All that now seems to matter is that Congress pass a 
new law.
  Crimes committed against children (as well as adults) are a problem 
that should concern all Americans. As a doctor of obstetrics I have 
enjoyed the privilege of bringing more than 3,000 new lives into the 
world. I know there are few things more tragic than crimes committed 
against young people. In fact, the types of crimes this bill attempts 
to federally punish are among the most despicable criminal acts 
committed. Undoubtedly, strong measures and penalties need to be 
imposed to deter and punish these criminal actors. Nevertheless, the 
threshold question in Congress must always be: ``under what authority 
do we act?'' Should we cease to concern ourselves about the 
Constitution in all that we do and moved by emotion speak only of vague 
theoretical outcomes?
  Any federal usurpation of criminal law, no matter how flexible, 
violates the 10th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The 10th 
amendment limits the Federal Government to those functions explicitly 
enumerated in the Constitution. Other than in these few areas, the 
States are sovereign. Therefore the Federal Government has no authority 
to federalize crimes whether committed against children, women, or some 
specific race. Additionally, ours is an individual Bill of Rights 
rather than a system of rights dependent upon to which group (gender, 
race, or age) one happens to belong.
  The drafters of the Bill of Rights knew quite well that it would be 
impossible for a central government to successfully manage crime 
prevention programs for as large and diverse a country as America. The 
founders also understood that centralized federal involvement in crime 
prevention and control was dangerous and would lead to a loss of 
precious liberty. The bill's implication of federal monitoring of 
conversation on phone lines, the Internet, and U.S. mail is frightening 
and opens the door to unlimited government snooping.
  Some will argue that federal legislation is necessary because 
communications cross state lines. Fortunately, the Constitution 
provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of state 
sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. 
The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit 
clause allow states to exact judgments from those who violate their 
state laws. The Constitution even allows the federal government to 
legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow states to 
enforce their substantive laws without the federal government imposing 
its substantive edicts on the states. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 
makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one state to 
another and in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this.
  I too find most despicable the criminal acts this bill attempts to 
make federal crimes, but under the U.S. Constitution criminal law 
jurisdiction lies with the States. This is why I oppose yet another 
step toward a national police state. And because I fear the bill's 
implications regarding federal monitoring of voice, mail and data 
communications, I cannot support H.R. 3494.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I stand today in strong support of the 
Conyers Amendment. The provisions in this amendment will strengthen the 
Child Protection & Sexual Predator Punishment Act and help us continue 
our work to combat domestic violence.
  Every nine seconds, as we stand here on the House floor, another 
woman will be physically abused. Three-quarters of these women will be 
assaulted by someone they know. It is impossible for us to know how 
many cases of this appalling crime go unreported.
  The Violence Against Women Act has helped us to combat this problem 
by providing grants to states to help set up rape crisis hotlines, 
counseling programs, and professional training for police officers to 
help them recognize and deal with domestic violence.
  The Conyers Amendment will strengthen the Violence Against Women Act. 
It contains provisions to help limit the effects of violence on 
children, to help prevent sexual assault from ever happening, and to 
protect women who have been the victims of domestic violence.
  Mr. Speaker, when we pass the Child Protection and Sexual Predator 
Punishment Act, Congress will be taking a tremendous step to protect 
our children from harm that could come to them over the Internet.
  We must also pass the Conyers Amendment, to protect them and their 
mothers from harm at home. Let's commit ourselves to ending domestic 
violence so that women and children are safe in their own homes. Vote 
yes on the Conyers Amendment.
  Mr. PACKARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3494, the 
``Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act of 1998.''
  Our nation's children are our most precious resource. H.R. 3494 will 
ensure that children are protected from pedophiles and sexual predators 
while continuing to protect them as they expand their minds and explore 
the Internet. The Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act 
will toughen penalties for sexual predators, ensuring that they are 
held accountable for their actions.
  This bill will not only make our Internet safe for our children's 
young minds, but safer for their young lives. The stories of children 
being lured away from their homes and parents to be murdered by 
pedophiles are haunting. Nearly two-thirds of the prisoners serving 
time for rape and sexual assault victimized children, and almost one 
third of those victims were less than 11 years old. These are alarming 
numbers.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3494. We must show these 
offenders that we will not stand for the abuse and murder of our 
nation's children.
  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, I'm proud to rise in support of this 
legislation today. I'm especially pleased with the lengths to which 
this bill goes in punishing those who utilize the Internet to prey on 
our children.
  The great need for protecting children from Internet-based crimes was 
reinforced to me last fall when Deborah Boehle (Bay-Lee), the mother of 
a 9-year-old girl, met with me in my Batavia, IL, office.
  Mrs. Boehle explained to me the hardship which her family endured 
because of an incident on the Internet, and which then led her to move 
her family into my district from their home in Juliet, IL.
  At the time, my colleague, Jerry Weller was moving quickly to address 
this incident legislatively, and I am proud that I was able to work 
with him and Chairman McCollum in addressing this ever-increasing 
problem.
  The culmination of those efforts is this legislation which 
establishes fines, and sets prison sentences of up to 5 years for 
individuals using the Internet to facilitate the contact of a minor for 
illegal sexual activity.
  Just like those who recklessly drive on our roadways and pose a 
danger to the traveling public, we have to pull over and lock up those 
criminals who are abusing the information superhighway. Although the 
Internet is by and large used for well-intentioned purposes, we have to 
be mindful of those twisted individuals who want to use it as a vehicle 
to threaten our children and their families.
  As we've seen in northern Illinois, crimes against our kids over the 
Internet can and do

[[Page H4500]]

happen. It's for that reason it's so essential we update our laws for 
the information age. Although there are no legislative fixes for the 
anxiety and anguish the Boehle's have suffered, I'm hopeful that this 
legislation will prevent future crimes against kids over the Internet, 
and keep other families from having to experience the same heartache 
and hardship that the Boehle's have had to endure.
  Ms. DeGETTE. I believe H.R. 3494, the Child Protection and Sexual 
Predator Punishment Act, is a good bill and will dramatically improve 
our ability to protect children from sexual predators who use the 
Internet and other forms of communication to target children.
  I am concerned, however, by the inclusion of Representative Sherman's 
amendment to this important bill. While I believe the intention of the 
amendment is laudable. I believe it could have negative implications. 
First, I am concerned that the amendment would undermine the 
effectiveness of Megan's law. I support Megan's law and in fact, was an 
original cosponsor of Megan's law in Colorado. States have spent 
significant time and resources promulgating laws to appropriately 
notify communities of sexual predators. I am concerned that this 
amendment would undermine that effort. I am also concerned that this 
amendment infringes on individual privacy rights.
  I believe this issue merits further attention by Congress. Yet until 
we have hearings on this issue and hear more from the Department of 
Justice, we should not move forward hastily.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute printed in the bill is considered as an original bill for 
the purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule and is considered 
read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:

                               H.R. 3494

       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 ``Child Protection and Sexual 
     Predator Punishment Act of 1998''.

    TITLE I--PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL PREDATORS AND COMPUTER 
                              PORNOGRAPHY

     SEC. 101. CONTACTING MINORS FOR SEXUAL PURPOSES.

       Section 2422 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of 
     interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special 
     maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States--
       ``(1) knowingly contacts an individual who has not attained 
     the age of 18 years; or
       ``(2) knowingly contacts an individual, who has been 
     represented to the person making the contact as not having 
     attained the age of 18 years;

     for the purposes of engaging in any sexual activity, with a 
     person who has not attained the age of 18 years, for which 
     any person may be criminally prosecuted, or attempts to do 
     so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more 
     than 5 years, or both. It is a defense to a prosecution for 
     an offense under this section that the sexual activity is 
     prosecutable only because of the age of the individual 
     contacted, the individual contacted had attained the age of 
     12 years, and the defendant was not more than 4 years older 
     than the individual contacted.''.

     SEC. 102. TRANSFER OF OBSCENE MATERIAL TO MINORS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 71 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 1470. Transfer of obscene material to minors

       ``Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of 
     interstate or foreign commerce--
       ``(1) knowingly transfers obscene matter to an individual 
     who has not attained the age of 18 years, or attempts to do 
     so; or
       ``(2) knowingly transfers obscene matter to an individual 
     who has been represented to the transferor as not having 
     attained the age of 18 years;

     shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 
     years, or both.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 71 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``1470. Transfer of obscene material to minors.''.

     SEC. 103. INCREASED PRISON SENTENCES FOR ENTICEMENT OF 
                   MINORS.

       Section 2422 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end ``If the 
     individual had not attained the age of 18 years at the time 
     of the offense, the maximum imprisonment for an offense under 
     this subsection is 10 years.''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``10'' and inserting 
     ``15''.

     SEC. 104. ADDITIONAL JURISDICTIONAL BASE FOR PROSECUTION OF 
                   PRODUCTION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.

       (a) Use of a Child.--Subsection (a) of section 2251 of 
     title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``if 
     such visual depiction was produced with materials that had 
     been mailed, shipped, or transported in interstate or foreign 
     commerce by any means, including a computer,'' before ``or 
     if''.
       (b) Allowing Use of a Child.--Subsection (b) of section 
     2251 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     ``, if such visual depiction was produced with materials that 
     had been mailed, shipped, or transported in interstate or 
     foreign commerce by any means, including a computer,'' before 
     ``or if''.

     SEC. 105. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR CERTAIN ACTIVITIES RELATING 
                   TO MATERIAL INVOLVING THE SEXUAL EXPLOITATION 
                   OF MINORS OR CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND TECHNICAL 
                   CORRECTION.

       (a) Increased Penalties in Section 2252.--Section 2252(b) 
     of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in each of paragraphs (1) and (2), by striking ``or 
     chapter 109A'' and inserting ``, chapter 109A, or chapter 
     117''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``the offense consisted 
     of the possession of 50 or more items of the sort described 
     in subsection (a)(4) or'' after ``if''.
       (b) Increased Penalties in Section 2251(d).--Section 
     2251(d) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``or chapter 109A'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``, chapter 109A, or chapter 117''.
       (c) Increased Penalties in Section 2252A.--Section 
     2252A(b)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting ``the offense consisted of the possession of 50 or 
     more images of the sort described in subsection (a)(4) or'' 
     after ``if ''.
       (d) Technical Correction.--Section 2252(a) of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended so that paragraph (4) reads as 
     follows:
       ``(4) either--
       ``(A) in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction 
     of the United States, or on any land or building owned by, 
     leased to, or otherwise used by or under the control of the 
     Government of the United States, or in the Indian country (as 
     defined in section 1151 of this title), knowingly possesses--
       ``(i) 3 or more books, magazines, periodicals, computer 
     disks, films, video tapes, or other matter that contain any 
     visual depiction, if--

       ``(I) the producing of such visual depiction involves the 
     use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
       ``(II) such visual depiction is of such conduct; or

       ``(ii) any book, magazine, periodical, computer disk, film, 
     videotape, computer disk, or any other material that contains 
     3 or more visual depictions, if--

       ``(I) the producing of each visual depiction involves the 
     use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
       ``(II) each visual depiction is of such conduct; or

       ``(B) knowingly possesses--
       ``(i) 3 or more books, magazines, periodicals, computer 
     disks, films, video tapes, or other matter that contain any 
     visual depiction that has been mailed, or has been shipped or 
     transported in interstate or foreign commerce, or which was 
     produced using materials which have been mailed or so shipped 
     or transported, by any means including by computer, if--

       ``(I) the producing of such visual depiction involves the 
     use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
       ``(II) such visual depiction is of such conduct; or

       ``(ii) any book, magazine, periodical, computer disk, film, 
     videotape, computer disk, or any other material that contains 
     3 or more visual depictions, if--

       ``(I) the producing of each visual depiction involves the 
     use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
       ``(II) each visual depiction is of such conduct;''.

     SEC. 106. CRIMINAL FORFEITURE FOR SOLICITATION OF MINORS AND 
                   INTERSTATE PROSTITUTION.

       Section 2253(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting ``, or who is convicted of an offense under 
     section 2421, 2422, 2423, 2252A, or 2260 of this title,'' 
     after ``2252 of this chapter'' in the matter preceding 
     paragraph (1).

     SEC. 107. PRETRIAL DETENTION OF CHILD SEX OFFENDERS.

       Subparagraph (C) of section 3156(a)(4) of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(C) any felony under chapter 109A, 110, or 117; and''

     SEC. 108. INCREASED PRISON SENTENCES.

       Subsection (b) of section 2422 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: ``If in 
     the course of committing the offense under this subsection, 
     the defendant used a computer to transmit a communication to 
     the minor, the minimum term of imprisonment for the offense 
     under this subsection is 3 years.''.

     SEC. 109. REPEAT OFFENDERS IN TRANSPORTATION OFFENSE.

       (a) Generally.--Chapter 117 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 2425. Repeat offenders

       ``(a) The maximum term of imprisonment for a violation of 
     this chapter after a prior sex offense conviction shall be 
     twice the term otherwise provided by this chapter.
       ``(b) As used in this section, the term `prior sex offense 
     conviction' means a conviction for an offense--

[[Page H4501]]

       ``(1) under this chapter or chapter 109A or 110; or
       ``(2) under State law for an offense consisting of conduct 
     that would have been an offense under a chapter referred to 
     in paragraph (1) if the conduct had occurred within the 
     special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United 
     States or in any Territory or Possession of the United 
     States.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 117 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2425. Repeat offenders.''.

     SEC. 110. DEFINITION AND ADDITION OF ATTEMPT OFFENSE.

       (a) Definition.--
       (1) Generally.--Chapter 117 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 2426. Definition for chapter

       ``For the purposes of this chapter, sexual activity for 
     which any person can be charged with a criminal offense 
     includes the production of child pornography, as defined in 
     section 2256(8).''.
       (2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 117 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2426. Definition for chapter.''.

       (b) Attempt Offense.--Section 2422(a) of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended by inserting ``or attempts to do 
     so,'' after ``criminal offense,''.

     SEC. 111. USE OF INTERSTATE FACILITIES TO TRANSMIT 
                   IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ABOUT A MINOR FOR 
                   CRIMINAL SEXUAL PURPOSES.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 110 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 2260A. Use of interstate facilities to transmit 
       information about a minor

       ``Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of 
     interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special 
     maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, 
     knowingly transmits, prints, publishes, or reproduces, or 
     causes to be transmitted, printed, published, or reproduced, 
     the name, address, telephone number, electronic mail address, 
     or other identifying information of an individual who has not 
     attained the age of 18 years for the purposes of 
     facilitating, encouraging, offering, or soliciting any person 
     to engage in any sexual activity for which any person may be 
     criminally prosecuted, or attempts to do so, shall be fined 
     under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or 
     both.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``2260A. Use of interstate facilities to transmit information about a 
              minor.''.

                  TITLE II--PUNISHING SEXUAL PREDATORS

     SEC. 201. SENTENCING ENHANCEMENT IN SECTION 2423 CASES.

       (a) In General.--Pursuant to its authority under section 
     994(p) of title 28, United States Code, the United States 
     Sentencing Commission shall review and amend the sentencing 
     guidelines to provide a sentencing enhancement for any 
     offense listed in section 2423 of title 18, United States 
     Code.
       (b) Instruction to Commission.--The Sentencing Commission 
     shall ensure that the sentences, guidelines, and policy 
     statements for offenders convicted of offenses described in 
     subsection (a) are appropriately severe and reasonably 
     consistent with other relevant directives and with other 
     guidelines.

     SEC. 202. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR TRANSPORTATION OF MINORS OR 
                   ASSUMED MINORS FOR ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY AND 
                   RELATED CRIMES.

       Section 2423 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     Sec. ``2423. Transportation of minors and assumed minors

       ``(a) Transportation With Intent To Engage in Criminal 
     Sexual Activity.--A person who knowingly--
       ``(1) transports an individual who has not attained the age 
     of 18 years; or
       ``(2) transports an individual who has been represented to 
     the person doing that transportation as not having attained 
     the age of 18 years;

     in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or 
     Possession of the United States, with intent that the 
     individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity 
     for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, 
     shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 
     15 years, or both.
       ``(b) Travel With Intent To Engage in Sexual Act With a 
     Juvenile.--A person who travels in interstate commerce, or 
     conspires to do so, or a United States citizen or an alien 
     admitted for permanent residence in the United States who 
     travels in foreign commerce, or conspires to do so, for the 
     purpose of engaging in any sexual activity, with another 
     person who has not attained the age of 18 years or who has 
     been represented to the traveler or conspirator as not having 
     attained the age of 18 years, for which any person can be 
     charged with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this 
     title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both.''.

     SEC. 203. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR ABUSIVE SEXUAL CONTACT.

       Section 2244 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Offenses Involving Young Children.--If the sexual 
     contact that violates this section is with an individual who 
     has not attained the age of 12 years, the maximum term of 
     imprisonment that may be imposed for the offense shall be 
     twice that otherwise provided in this section.''.

     SEC. 204. PUNISHMENT FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS.

       Section 2241 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (d) the following:
       ``(e) Punishment for Repeat Offenders.--(1) Whoever has 
     twice previously been convicted of a serious State or Federal 
     sex crime and who--
       ``(A) violates this section; or
       ``(B) in a circumstance described in paragraph (2) of this 
     subsection, engages in conduct that would have violated this 
     section if the conduct had occurred in the special maritime 
     and territorial jurisdiction of the United States;

     shall be imprisoned for life.
       ``(2) The circumstance referred to in paragraph (1) of this 
     subsection is that--
       ``(A) the person engaging in such conduct traveled in 
     interstate or foreign commerce or used the mail or any 
     facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce in 
     furtherance of the offense; or
       ``(B) such conduct occurs in or affects interstate or 
     foreign commerce and would have violated this section if the 
     conduct had occurred in the special maritime and territorial 
     jurisdiction of the United States.
       ``(f) Serious State or Federal Sex Crime.--For the purposes 
     of subsections (e) and (f), the term serious State or Federal 
     sex crime means a State or Federal offense for conduct 
     which--
       ``(1) is an offense under this section or section 2242 of 
     this title; or
       ``(2) would have been an offense under either of such 
     sections if the offense had occurred in the special maritime 
     or territorial jurisdiction of the United States.''.

     SEC. 205. REPEAT OFFENDERS IN SEXUAL ABUSE CASES.

       Section 2247 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2247. Repeat offenders

       ``(a) The maximum term of imprisonment for a violation of 
     this chapter after a prior sex offense conviction shall be 
     twice the term otherwise provided by this chapter.
       ``(b) As used in this section, the term `prior sex offense 
     conviction' has the meaning given that term in section 
     2425.''.

     SEC. 206. CIVIL REMEDY FOR PERSONAL INJURIES RESULTING FROM 
                   CERTAIN SEX CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN.

       Section 2255(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``2251 or 2252'' and inserting ``2241(c), 2243, 
     2251, 2252, 2421, 2422, or 2423''.

     SEC. 207. ELIMINATION OF REDUNDANCY AND AMBIGUITIES.

       (a) Redundancy.--Section 2243(a) of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking ``crosses a State line with 
     intent to engage in a sexual act with a person who has not 
     attained the age of 12 years, or''.
       (b) Making Consistent Language on Age Differential.--
     Section 2241(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``younger than that person'' and inserting 
     ``younger than the person so engaging''.
       (c) Definition of State.--Section 2246 of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon; and
       (2) by adding a new paragraph as follows:
       ``(6) the term `State' means a State of the United States, 
     the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, possession, 
     or territory of the United States.''.

     SEC. 208. DEATH OR LIFE IN PRISON FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES WHOSE 
                   VICTIMS ARE CHILDREN.

       Section 3559 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Death or Imprisonment for Crimes Against Children.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person who is 
     convicted of a Federal offense that is a serious violent 
     felony (as defined in subsection (c)) or a violation of 
     section 2251 shall, unless the sentence of death is imposed, 
     be sentenced to imprisonment for life, if the victim of the 
     offense is under 14 years of age, the victim dies as a result 
     of the offense, and the defendant, in the course of the 
     offense, engages in conduct described in section 
     3591(a)(2).''.

 TITLE III--FEDERAL INVESTIGATIONS OF SEX CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN AND 
                             SERIAL KILLERS

     SEC. 301. ADMINISTRATIVE SUBPOENAS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 203 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 3064. Administrative subpoenas

       ``(a) Authorization of Use.--In an investigation of an 
     alleged violation of section 2241(c), 2243, 2421, 2422, or 
     2423 of this title where a victim is an individual who has 
     not attained the age of 18 years, the Attorney General may 
     subpoena witnesses, compel the production of any records 
     (including books, papers, documents, electronic data, and 
     other tangible things which constitute or contain evidence) 
     which the Attorney General finds relevant or material to the 
     investigation. The attendance of witnesses and the production 
     of records may be required from any place in any State or in 
     any territory or other place subject to the jurisdiction of 
     the United States at any designated place of hearing, except 
     that a witness shall not be required to appear at any hearing 
     more than 500 miles distant from the place where the witness 
     was served with a subpoena. Witnesses summoned under this 
     section shall be paid the same fees and commissions that are 
     paid witnesses in the courts of the United States.
       ``(b) Service.--A subpoena issued under this section may be 
     served by any person designated in the subpoena to serve it. 
     Service upon a natural person may be made by personal 
     delivery of the subpoena to that person or by certified mail 
     with return receipt requested. Service may be

[[Page H4502]]

     made upon a domestic or foreign corporation or upon a 
     partnership or other unincorporated association which is 
     subject to suit under a common name, by delivering the 
     subpoena to an officer, to a managing or general agent, or 
     any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to 
     receive service of process. The affidavit of the person 
     serving the subpoena entered on a true copy thereof by the 
     person serving it shall be proof of service.
       ``(c) Enforcement.--In the case of contumacy by or the 
     refusal to obey a subpoena issued to any person under this 
     section, the Attorney General may invoke the aid of any court 
     of the United States within the jurisdiction of which the 
     investigation is carried on, or of which the person is an 
     inhabitant or in which the person carries on business or may 
     be found, to compel compliance with the subpoena. The court 
     may issue an order requiring the subpoenaed person to appear 
     before the Attorney General to produce records, if so 
     ordered, or to give testimony regarding the matter under 
     investigation. Any failure to obey the order of the court may 
     be punished by the court as contempt thereof. All process in 
     any such case may be served in any judicial district in which 
     such person may be found.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 203 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``3064. Administrative subpoenas.''.

     SEC. 302. KIDNAPPING.

       (a) 24-Hour Rule.--Section 1201(b) of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 
     ``However, the fact that the presumption under this section 
     has not yet taken effect does not preclude a Federal 
     investigation of a possible violation of this section before 
     the twenty-four hour period has ended.''.
       (b) Jurisdictional Elements.--Section 1201(a) of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (4); and
       (2) by adding after paragraph (5) the following:
       ``(6) the mail or any facility or means of interstate or 
     foreign commerce is used in furtherance of the offense; or
       ``(7) the offense affects interstate or foreign commerce, 
     or would do so if the offense were consummated;''.
       (c) Clarification of Element of Offense.--Section 1201(a) 
     of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``, 
     regardless of whether such person was alive when transported 
     across a State boundary provided the person was alive when 
     the transportation began'' before the semicolon at the end of 
     paragraph (1);

     SEC. 303. AUTHORITY TO INVESTIGATE SERIAL KILLINGS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 33 of title 28, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 537 the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 540B. Investigation of serial killings

       ``(a) The Attorney General and the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation may investigate serial killings in violation of 
     the laws of a State or political subdivision, when such 
     investigation is requested by the head of a law enforcement 
     agency with investigative or prosecutive jurisdiction over 
     the offense.
       ``(b) For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) the term `serial killings' means a series of 3 or 
     more killings, at least one of which was committed within the 
     United States, having common characteristics such as to 
     suggest the reasonable possibility that the crimes were 
     committed by the same actor or actors;
       ``(2) the term `killing' means conduct that would 
     constitute an offense under section 1111 of title 18, United 
     States Code, if Federal jurisdiction existed; and
       ``(3) the term `State' means a State of the United States, 
     the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or 
     possession of the United States.''.
       (b) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 33 of 
     title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at end the 
     following new item:

``540B. Investigation of serial killings.''.

     SEC. 304. MORGAN P. HARDIMAN CHILD ABDUCTION AND SERIAL 
                   MURDER INVESTIGATIVE RESOURCES CENTER.

       (a) Establishment.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall 
     establish a Child Abduction and Serial Murder Investigative 
     Resources Center to be known as the ``Morgan P. Hardiman 
     Child Abduction and Serial Murder Investigative Resources 
     Center'' (hereinafter in this section referred to as the 
     ``CASMIRC'').
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to establish a 
     Federal Bureau of Investigation Child Abduction and Serial 
     Murder Investigative Resources Center managed by the FBI's 
     Critical Incident Response Group's National Center for the 
     Analysis of Violent Crime (NCAVC) and multidisciplinary 
     resource teams in FBI field offices to provide investigative 
     support through the coordination and provision of Federal law 
     enforcement resources, training, and application of other 
     multidisciplinary expertise, to assist Federal, State, and 
     local authorities in matters involving child abductions, 
     mysterious disappearance of children, child homicide, and 
     serial murder across the country. The CASMIRC shall be co-
     located with the NCAVC.
       (c) Duties of the CASMIRC.--The CASMIRC shall perform such 
     duties as the Attorney General deems appropriate to carry out 
     the purposes of the CASMIRC, including but not limited to--
       (1) identifying, developing, researching, acquiring, and 
     refining multidisciplinary information and specialities to 
     provide for the most current expertise available to advance 
     investigative knowledge and practices used in child 
     abduction, mysterious disappearance of children, child 
     homicide, and serial murder investigations;
       (2) providing advice and coordinating the application of 
     current and emerging technical, forensic, and other Federal 
     assistance to Federal, State, and local authorities in child 
     abduction, mysterious disappearances of children, child 
     homicide, and serial murder investigations;
       (3) providing investigative support, research findings, and 
     violent crime analysis to Federal, State, and local 
     authorities in child abduction, mysterious disappearances of 
     children, child homicide, and serial murder investigations;
       (4) providing, if requested by a Federal, State, or local 
     law enforcement agency, on site consultation and advice in 
     child abduction, mysterious disappearances of children, child 
     homicide and serial murder investigations;
       (5) coordinating the application of resources of pertinent 
     Federal law enforcement agencies, and other Federal entities 
     including, but not limited to, the United States Customs 
     Service, the Secret Service, the Postal Inspection Service, 
     and the United States Marshals Service, as appropriate, and 
     with the concurrence of the agency head to support Federal, 
     State, and local law enforcement involved in child abduction, 
     mysterious disappearance of a child, child homicide, and 
     serial murder investigations;
       (6) conducting ongoing research related to child 
     abductions, mysterious disappearances of children, child 
     homicides, and serial murder, including identification and 
     investigative application of current and emerging 
     technologies, identification of investigative searching 
     technologies and methods for physically locating abducted 
     children, investigative use of offender behavioral assessment 
     and analysis concepts, gathering statistics and information 
     necessary for case identification, trend analysis, and case 
     linkages to advance the investigative effectiveness of 
     outstanding abducted children cases, develop investigative 
     systems to identify and track serious serial offenders that 
     repeatedly victimize children for comparison to unsolved 
     cases, and other investigative research pertinent to child 
     abduction, mysterious disappearance of a child, child 
     homicide, and serial murder covered in this section;
       (7) working under the Federal Bureau of Investigation's 
     NCAVC in coordination with the National Center For Missing 
     and Exploited Children (NCMEC) and the Office of Juvenile 
     Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to provide 
     appropriate training to Federal, State, and local law 
     enforcement in matters regarding child abductions, mysterious 
     disappearances of children, child homicides; and
       (8) establishing a centralized repository based upon case 
     data reflecting child abductions, mysterious disappearances 
     of children, child homicides and serial murder submitted by 
     State and local agencies, and an automated system for the 
     efficient collection, retrieval, analysis, and reporting of 
     information regarding CASMIRC investigative resources, 
     research, and requests for and provision of investigative 
     support services.
       (d) Appointment of Personnel to the CASMIRC.--
       (1) Selection of members of the casmirc and participating 
     state and local law enforcement personnel.--The Director of 
     the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall appoint the members 
     of the CASMIRC. The CASMIRC shall be staffed with FBI 
     personnel and other necessary personnel selected for their 
     expertise that would enable them to assist in the research, 
     data collection, and analysis, and provision of investigative 
     support in child abduction, mysterious disappearance of 
     children, child homicide and serial murder investigations. 
     The Director may, with concurrence of the appropriate State 
     or local agency, also appoint State and local law enforcement 
     personnel to work with the CASMIRC.
       (2) Status.--Each member of the CASMIRC (and each 
     individual from any State or local law enforcement agency 
     appointed to work with the CASMIRC) shall remain as an 
     employee of that member's or individual's respective agency 
     for all purposes (including the purpose of performance 
     review), and service with the CASMIRC shall be without 
     interruption or loss of civil service privilege or status and 
     shall be on a nonreimbursable basis, except where appropriate 
     to reimburse State and local law enforcement for overtime 
     costs for an individual appointed to work with the resource 
     team. Additionally, reimbursement of travel and per diem 
     expenses will occur for State and local law enforcement 
     participation in resident fellowship programs at the NCAVC 
     when offered.
       (3) Training.--CASMIRC personnel, under the guidance of the 
     Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Center for the 
     Analysis of Violent Crime and in consultation with the NCMEC, 
     shall develop a specialized course of instruction devoted to 
     training members of the CASMIRC consistent with the purpose 
     of this section. The CASMIRC shall also work with the NCMEC 
     and OJJDP to develop a course of instruction for State and 
     local law enforcement personnel to facilitate the 
     dissemination of the most current multidisciplinary expertise 
     in the investigation of child abductions, mysterious 
     disappearances of children, child homicides, and serial 
     murder of children.
       (e) Report to Congress.--One year after the establishment 
     of the CASMIRC, the Attorney General shall provide a report 
     to Congress that describes the goals and activities of the 
     CASMIRC. The report shall also contain information regarding 
     the number and qualifications of the members appointed to the 
     CASMIRC, provision for equipment, administrative support, and 
     office space for the CASMIRC, and projected resource needs 
     for the CASMIRC.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriation.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may 
     be necessary for fiscal year 1999 and each of the two 
     succeeding fiscal years.

[[Page H4503]]

       (g) Conforming Repeal.--Subtitle C of title XVII of the 
     Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 
     U.S.C. 5776a et seq.) is repealed.

      TITLE IV--RESTRICTED ACCESS TO INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE

     SEC. 401. PRISONER ACCESS.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no agency, 
     officer, or employee of the United States shall implement, or 
     provide any financial assistance to, any Federal program or 
     Federal activity in which a Federal prisoner is allowed 
     access to any interactive computer service without the 
     supervision of an official of the Government.

     SEC. 402. RECOMMENDED PROHIBITION.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) a Minnesota State prisoner, serving 23 years for 
     molesting teenage girls, worked for a nonprofit work and 
     education program inside the prison, through which the 
     prisoner had unsupervised access to the Internet;
       (2) the prisoner, through his unsupervised access to the 
     Internet, trafficked in child pornography over the Internet;
       (3) Federal law enforcement authorities caught the prisoner 
     with a computer disk containing 280 pictures of juveniles 
     engaged in sexually explicit conduct;
       (4) a jury found the prisoner guilty of conspiring to trade 
     in child pornography and possessing child pornography;
       (5) the United States District Court for the District of 
     Minnesota sentenced the prisoner to 87 months in Federal 
     prison, to be served upon the completion of his 23-year State 
     prison term; and
       (6) there has been an explosion in the use of the Internet 
     in the United States, further placing our Nation's children 
     at risk of harm and exploitation at the hands of predators on 
     the Internet and increasing the ease of trafficking in child 
     pornography.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--Congress strongly urges State 
     Governors, State legislators, and State prison administrators 
     to prohibit unsupervised access to the Internet by State 
     prisoners.

     SEC. 403. SURVEY.

       (a) Survey.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall conduct a 
     survey of the States to determine to what extent each State 
     allows prisoners access to any interactive computer service 
     and whether such access is supervised by a prison official.
       (b) Report.--The Attorney General shall submit a report to 
     Congress of the findings of the survey conducted pursuant to 
     subsection (a).
       (c) Definition.--For the purposes of this section, the term 
     ``State'' means each of the 50 States and the District of 
     Columbia.

  The CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the committee amendment in the nature 
of a substitute is in order unless printed in House Report 105-576. 
Each amendment may be offered only in the order specified, may be 
offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered 
read, debatable for the time specified in the report, equally divided 
and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject 
to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
question.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for 
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5 
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately 
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first 
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in House 
Report 105-576.


                  Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Riley

  Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Riley:
       Page 5, line 23, strike ``Technical Correction'' and insert 
     ``Modification of Possession Offense''.
       Page 6, beginning in line 7, strike ``possesses'' and all 
     that follows through line 4 on page 8 and insert the 
     following:
     possesses a book, magazine, periodical, computer disk, film, 
     video tape, or any other matter that contains a visual 
     depiction of sexually explicit conduct and the production of 
     which involves the use of a minor engaging in that conduct; 
     or
       ``(B) knowingly possesses a book, magazine, periodical, 
     computer disk, film, video tape, or any other matter that--
       ``(i) has been mailed, or has been shipped or transported 
     by any means, including computer, in interstate or foreign 
     commerce, or which was produced using materials which were 
     mailed or so shipped or transported; and
       ``(ii) contains a visual depiction of sexually explicit 
     conduct and the production of which involves the use of a 
     minor engaging in that conduct;''.
       (e) Child Pornography Possession Offense.--Section 
     2252A(a)(5) of title 18, United States Code, is amended in 
     each of subparagraphs (A) and (B), by striking ``3 or more 
     images of'' and inserting ``an image of''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 465, the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Riley) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Riley).
  Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3694 and would like to 
commend the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) for introducing this 
very important legislation that will go a long way in protecting the 
children from sexual predators. However, the gentleman from Alabama 
(Mr. Bachus) and I are offering an amendment that will eliminate a 
loophole in the current law that currently allows individuals to 
legally possess child pornography. Unfortunately, this loophole was not 
addressed in H.R. 3494.
  Mr. Chairman, under existing Federal law, an individual can only be 
prosecuted for possessing child pornography if they have three or more 
books, magazines, periodicals, films, videotapes or any other matter 
which contain a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually 
explicit conduct. Unfortunately, that means a pedophile can legally 
possess a book or magazine with literally hundreds of pictures of 
children being sexually abused. Worse yet, it is also possible that 
these predators can legally possess two videotapes up to several hours 
long featuring children being molested.
  Mr. Chairman, the current law is disgraceful, and this amendment will 
correct it. Given the devastating effects that child pornography is 
known to have on all of its victims, I do not believe that anyone can 
justify its production, justify its distribution or its possession.
  Simply put, child pornography is nothing more than a frozen record of 
the sexual victimization of a child. There should be no exception for 
anyone to possess any amount of child pornography, just as there is no 
exception for the possession of any amount of cocaine or heroin. We in 
this Congress must not pass up this opportunity to do what is right for 
our Nation's children. If we do, we will be contributing to the sexual 
abuse and the exploitation of the most vulnerable and the most innocent 
members of our society.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to 
claim the time in opposition, though I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is 
recognized for five minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment, which makes it clear that the 
possession of child pornography is a crime. There is simply no 
legitimate reason for anyone to possess any amount of child 
pornography, and that is what this amendment says.
  There is nothing sadder or more outrageous than the depiction of 
children involved in sexually explicit conduct. We in the Congress must 
do everything in our power to prevent the creation, dissemination and 
possession of such materials. I believe that this amendment furthers 
this goal, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. 
Rivers).
  Ms. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, as a cosponsor of H.R. 3185, the Riley-
Bachus Abolishing Child Pornography Act, I rise in support of this 
amendment, which contains elements of this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an important step for Congress to take. Both 
bodies and the President must send an unambiguous message of absolute 
zero tolerance for sexual exploitation of children. This is not a first 
amendment issue; this is about the safety of our children. Pedophiles 
have no right to sex with minors or photographic depictions of such 
acts. Such behavior is a horrible crime and an irreparable crime 
against children. It robs them of their innocence and it shatters their 
trust in our ability to protect them.
  I urge support for this amendment.
  Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Bachus).
  Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to thank the 
gentlewoman from Michigan and the gentlewoman from Texas for their 
remarks,

[[Page H4504]]

and I would like to associate myself with those remarks.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment addresses something that is wrong and 
does what is right.
  What is wrong? Present Federal law, which says it is legal to possess 
one or two pieces of child pornography, but not three or more. Now, 
that was said to be the result of a compromise with civil libertarians, 
but I would say that it was an insane compromise with the devil, a 
compromise which exposes every American child to pedophiles and child 
predators who lurk in every American community, armed with items of 
child pornography. Let us also say that any item of child pornography, 
one item, is the ultimate example and evidence of the ultimate child 
abuse.
  What is the right thing to do? The right thing to do is full 
protection for American children against these predators, zero 
tolerance for this perversion. We have seen pictures from Paducah, 
Jonesboro, Pearl, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and Oregon, cruel examples 
of children gunned down, of lives lost. Less graphic, but equally 
destructive and disturbing and more widespread, is that we have allowed 
under the Federal law pedophiles and child predators in every community 
of our country to legally possess child pornography and to use this 
child pornography to destroy our youth. That is wrong.
  Therefore, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Riley) and I have offered 
this amendment. The amendment is right, and I urge each Member to do 
what is right and vote yes on the Riley amendment.
  Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Washington (Ms. Dunn).
  Ms. DUNN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Riley-Bachus 
amendment, because stopping the sexual exploitation of our children 
simply cannot be thoroughly achieved without it. As impossible and 
amazing as it seems, current law actually allows individuals to possess 
up to two items of child pornography. It means that somebody can own 
two magazines or two videotapes containing thousands of pictures 
depicting children engaged in explicit sexual conduct. I have no idea 
where this came from. I did not know it was part of the law. I think it 
is appalling.
  We have got the opportunity now and we must act now to ensure that 
possession of any child pornography be made illegal. That is why it is 
important for this amendment and it is so crucial.
  It is also time, Mr. Chairman, that we set the record straight with 
child pornographers and pedophiles. The sexual exploitation of our 
children will not be tolerated in any way, shape or form.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me congratulate the gentleman for this very 
important amendment. I agree with the previous speaker; we are 
absolutely appalled that sick people or criminal-minded people would 
take innocent children and abuse them by capturing pictures and 
utilizing these on the Internet or for sale. This is important 
legislation. I think I heard one quote, ``One pornographic picture of a 
child is one too many.'' So we congratulate the gentleman on this 
legislation and amendment. I ask my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. 
Riley), and ask unanimous consent that he may control it.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum), the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I just want to comment, the gentleman has 
offered a fine amendment. It is a zero tolerance amendment. It gets the 
law squared away where it should be, and there should be no confusion 
after this. So I strongly support the gentleman's amendment, and 
appreciate the gentleman authoring it. It has been very positive.
  Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, let me just say that I think this is a 
bill that is past due. It has been brought before this floor a couple 
of times before. For whatever reason, at that time it was not passed. 
But I think in this day, when you have the ability to download off of 
the Internet, we all know it is hard to take a computer to a 
playground, but we have to get to the point where we keep a pedophile 
or a sexual predator from taking an individual picture and going to a 
school playground. This amendment will do this. We will have zero 
tolerance for the first time in history in this country, and I urge all 
Members on both sides to please support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired.
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Riley).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed 
in House Report 105-576.


                Amendment No. 2 Offered by Ms. Slaughter

  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 2 offered by Ms. Slaughter:
       Page 11, after the matter following line 13, insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 112. STUDY OF PERSISTENT SEXUAL OFFENDERS.

       The National Institute of Justice, either directly or 
     through grant, shall carry out a study of persistent sexual 
     predators. Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, such Institute shall report to 
     Congress and the President the results of such study. Such 
     report shall include--
       (1) a synthesis of current research in psychology, 
     sociology, law, criminal justice, and other fields regarding 
     persistent sexual offenders, including--
       (A) common characteristics of such offenders;
       (B) recidivism rates for such offenders;
       (C) treatment techniques and their effectiveness;
       (D) responses of offenders to treatment and deterrence; and
       (E) the possibility of early intervention to prevent people 
     from becoming sexual predators; and
       (2) an agenda for future research in this area.

                              {time}  1315

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Blunt). Pursuant to House Resolution 
465, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) and a Member opposed 
each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter).
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, it has been a joy working with the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum) and with his staff on this critical issue. I 
have spent about 4 years here in Congress working on what to do about 
child protection against sexual predators, and I am so pleased that the 
provisions that are already in this bill will answer this.
  I think it is a very important step that we have taken here today to 
address what is really a national epidemic of serial rape. I 
specifically want to call attention to the section of the bill which 
calls for imprisonment of rapists with two prior rape convictions in 
either State or Federal court.
  These provisions regarding serial rapists are based on similar 
provisions in the bill that we had passed in last Congress by a vote in 
the House of 411 to 4. Unfortunately, it languished in the Senate.
  I thank the chairman again for allowing the full House to consider 
this important issue. When this bill passes and becomes law, I hope 
that we will see the last time that we are naming laws in this country 
after dead children.
  This amendment today is not controversial and also stems from the 
previous bill that we had. It authorizes the National Institute of 
Justice to conduct a study of persistent sexual predators and to report 
to Congress on the results. The report will include a synthesis of 
current research regarding persistent sexual offenders, including the 
common characteristics of such offenders, the recidivism rate for such 
offenses, the treatment techniques and

[[Page H4505]]

their effectiveness, responses of offenders to treatment and 
deterrence, the possibility of early intervention, which is most 
important to prevent people from becoming sexual predators and thereby 
preventing people from becoming their victims, and also an agenda for 
future research in this area.
  I would note that the measure has 63 bipartisan cosponsors and 
endorsements by more than a dozen organizations, including the National 
Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the Jacob Watterling 
Foundation, the Vanished Children's Alliance, the National Federation 
of Republican Women, LOCK, the National Coalition Against Sexual 
Assault, the Klaas Foundation for Children, the International Union of 
Police Associations, and the Jimmy Ryce Center for Victims of Predatory 
Abduction.
  Sadly, Mr. Chairman, this is an issue that simply will not go away. A 
survey of criminal activity throughout our country during the past few 
weeks reveals a familiar pattern: Police arrest a rape suspect only to 
find out that he has a laundry list of prior convictions. In Oakland, a 
convicted felon was arrested for raping a 74-year-old woman in a pre-
dawn attack. He is also accused of raping a 50-year-old woman twice, 
once on February 7 and again on March 26. With prior convictions for 
everything from burglary to false imprisonment, this man was a walking 
time bomb.
  A few years back, in my own district of Rochester, New York, a 
chronic felon named Edward Laraby attacked a 16-year-old girl walking 
along Monroe Avenue, one of our main streets. My community was 
horrified to learn that Mr. Laraby's previous convictions were numerous 
and included raping a 15-year-old at knife point while wearing a ski 
mask in 1973, raping a 17-year-old at knife point in 1980, attacking a 
woman and her child along the Erie Canal walking path in 1983.
  During the past several years, I worked closely with law enforcement 
officials, prison psychologists, and victims rights groups to determine 
what can be done to protect our communities from these sexual 
predators. There is strong agreement that serial rapists are a unique 
brand of criminal. In fact, many experts conclude that the sociopathic 
behavior can never be cured.
  But we need to know more. Too many walking time bombs are on our 
streets. Constituents deserve to be protected from society's worst 
offender, the repeat sexual predator.
  This is what we know about them: A small number of hardened felons 
make up this group. Their crimes are vicious, and their sentence is 
short.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to support the gentlewoman's 
amendment, and I have a statement that I would like to add in support 
of it. I want to commend the gentlewoman for all of the years in the 
Congress and before the Congress and outside of the Congress in which 
she has worked on this subject with such great vigor and success.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I thank the gentleman from Michigan very much.
  Mr. CONYERS. I commend the gentlewoman for the amendment.
  I support this amendment authorizing the National Institute of 
Justice to conduct a study of persistent sexual predators and report to 
Congress on the results. People who commit sex crimes have a higher 
recidivism rate than those who commit other crimes and we need to know 
why.
  The effect of sex crimes on their victims is devastating. Such crimes 
often leave life-long scars. Yet despite the devastation caused by 
these crimes, and despite the fact that we know sex crime perpetrators 
are very likely to repeat their crimes, remarkably little research has 
been conducted.
  This is an area that would clearly benefit from further research. If 
we could learn why sex crimes perpetrators are so likely to repeat 
their crimes, and what types of people are most likely to become sexual 
predators, perhaps with early intervention, we could prevent some of 
those individuals from becoming criminals. More importantly, perhaps we 
could learn how to stop some sex crimes from occurring at all.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, the serial rapists' crimes are vicious. 
The sentence is short. The average rape sentence is just 10.5 years; 
and the average time served in jail is only half of that, 5 years.
  The Department of Justice statistics show that 60 percent of 
convicted sex offenders are on parole or probation. Moreover, 
preliminary data shows that the recidivism rates of sex offenders are 
astonishingly high. Released rapists are 10 times more likely to repeat 
their crime than any other criminal.
  We all share a conviction that no man, woman, or child should have to 
live in fear of serial rapists or habitual child molesters. Honest 
citizens should be able to walk safely into their garages at night.
  I urge my colleagues' support of this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I do not oppose this amendment; but 
unless there is somebody here in opposition, I ask unanimous consent to 
claim the time that would otherwise be in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment. I think the gentlewoman is to 
be commended. She congratulated me. I am really very pleased with the 
work product the gentlewoman did, not only on this amendment that 
authorizes a study that needs to be done by the National Institute of 
Justice that she has described very adequately, but she is a principal 
author of the bill which we liberally plagiarized, I guess is the best 
way to put it, and put provisions in the underlying bill.
  If it were not for the work product and suggestions of the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), we would not have a serial 
rapist provisions in the law today. I want to thank the gentlewoman and 
compliment her for that and for the work that the gentlewoman did in 
making that possible.
  We did modify it somewhat from the gentlewoman's original intent 
because I had concerns, and others did, about the possibility we were 
going a little too far in terms of invading State jurisdictions, but we 
got a good product out of it. I think the gentlewoman thinks we did. I 
know she does. I want to compliment the gentlewoman on that score.
  I certainly want to support this report. The report is going to 
include a synthesis of current research regarding persistent sexual 
offenders. I think this is important that we know what their 
characteristics are, we know what the recidivism rates are, and so on, 
things again that she described that I am not going back into today. 
But it is important to have that information, and I strongly support 
this study. Again, I compliment the gentlewoman for it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 3 printed in House Report 195-576.


          Amendment No. 3 Offered By Mr. Franks of New Jersey

  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

  Amendment No. 3 printed in House Report 105-576 offered by Mr. Franks 
of New Jersey:
       Page 11, after the matter following line 13, insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 112. REPORTING OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY BY ELECTRONIC 
                   COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS.

       Whoever, while engaged in providing an electronic 
     communication service or a remote computing service to the 
     public, through a facility or means of interstate or foreign 
     commerce, learns of the creation, distribution, production, 
     or transfer of child pornography (as defined in section 
     2256), shall as soon as reasonably possible make a report of 
     that child pornography to an agency or agencies designated by 
     the Attorney General. The Attorney General shall make a 
     designation of the agency or agencies described in the 
     preceding sentence not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this paragraph. A person who fails to make a 
     report required under this section

[[Page H4506]]

     shall be fined not more than $100,000. A term used in this 
     section has the same meaning given that term when used in 
     section 226(a) of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 
     13031(a)).
       (b) Exception to Prohibition on Disclosure.--Section 
     2702(b)(6) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(6) to a law enforcement agency--
       ``(A) if such contents--
       ``(i) were inadvertently obtained by the service provider; 
     and
       ``(ii) appear to pertain to the commission of a crime; or
       ``(B) if required by the Child Protection and Sexual 
     Predator Punishment Act of 1998.''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 465, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Franks) and a Member in opposition each 
will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Franks).
  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the Information Superhighway has dramatically changed 
the way that our society communicates. Today it is hard too find a 
school, a library, or even a business that does not have access to the 
Internet.
  Today, fully 60 million Americans have access to this wonderful tool. 
For our children, the trip to the library to look up information for a 
homework assignment has been replaced by turning on the family computer 
and surfing the net.
  While the wealth of information that our kids can find on the 
Internet continues to amaze us, this extraordinary technology, when put 
in the wrong hands, has a dark and threatening side.
  In recent years, the Internet has become a major avenue of child 
exploitation as kiddie porn operators have begun peddling their smut in 
cyberspace. The challenge that we face is to make sure that law 
enforcement has the ability to fight this serious new threat to our 
children's safety.
  The amendment that I am offering would require the providers of 
Internet services, such as America Online, Prodigy and CompuServe, 
often called OSPs, to report evidence of child pornography to law 
enforcement authorities. They also would have to turn over to police 
any evidence that would substantiate this alleged crime.
  With this vital information in hand, law enforcement could move 
quickly to investigate and, in appropriate circumstances, arrest and 
prosecute those sick individuals who exploit our children for profit.
  Importantly, this amendment would protect Internet service providers 
from any criminal or civil liability if they, in good faith, contact 
law enforcement to report suspected child pornography.
  This amendment has been endorsed by a number of organizations that 
are dedicated to protecting children, including the National Law Center 
for Children and Families.
  Enough is enough. I want it clearly understood that this amendment in 
no way requires any new or additional monitoring by ISPs. It merely 
requires them to report any complaints of child pornography that they 
receive from customers or any evidence that they uncover during their 
own internal routine monitoring. The requirement is similar to one that 
we now impose on photo-development labs when they discover evidence of 
child exploitation.
  I appreciate the fact that most Internet service providers act 
responsibly and respond to complaints of suspected kiddie porn by 
immediately removing the offender from the system. But under current 
law, they are not required to report these instances to law enforcement 
authorities for prosecution. As a result, these peddlers of child porn 
are free to move to a new service provider or reregister under a 
different name.
  The current law simply must be changed. Today these Internet service 
providers are actually prohibited from divulging to law enforcement the 
contents of communication that could indicate criminal activity unless 
it was obtained inadvertently. In effect, peddlers of kiddie porn are 
given free rein to exploit our children into cyberspace.
  Abuse of our children cannot be tolerated on the Internet. We all 
need to work together, law enforcement, Internet service providers, 
legislators, and parents to make sure the Internet is an exciting 
avenue of discovery for our children and not a source of exploitation.
  This amendment would give law enforcement a powerful new tool in 
combating child pornography in cyberspace. I urge support of this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does any Member seek the time in 
opposition? Is the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) opposed to the 
amendment?
  Mr. CONYERS. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) 
is recognized for 10 minutes.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  The reason that this is not a clear opposition is because I want to 
be in support of the amendment. As the gentleman from New Jersey knows, 
there is one little problem that is being worked out, and we are in the 
process of working it out, as the author of the amendment knows. I 
think we can accomplish that end.
  First of all, I think the purpose of the amendment is laudatory. On-
line liability by providers is a complex problem. One of the things we 
are doing in the Committee on the Judiciary is sorting out who is 
responsible for all of these new kinds of problems that may lead to 
liability, legal liability; and that is what is presented here.
  We have been working on intellectual property considerations with the 
subcommittee. I might add that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum) is involved deeply in this as well as myself in terms of on-
line copyright liability. So there has been negotiation, compromise, 
give-and-take, to reach a compromise which allows such liability, but 
only after certain conditions are met.
  Example: The pending OSP bill requires actual knowledge before a 
liability can ensue. Unfortunately, as the gentleman has written this 
amendment, it does not meet that test. It is a test that may be 
considered too vague. We are trying to work that language out.
  So it is my understanding that there is such an effort that is 
continuing as we speak, and we would agree to a unanimous consent 
request to alter the amendment if this agreement is reached. On that 
basis, I would be delighted to reserve the balance of my time, hoping 
that this can be worked out.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  First, Mr. Chairman, I want to say I appreciate the cooperation and 
help of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers). I am confident that 
in the next few moments we can bring this to fruition and work it out.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum).
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  First of all, I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Franks) for his work product on this. We have been working with him in 
the committee for many weeks to try to come up with something which 
would be acceptable to the concerns of the online service providers, 
the Internet service providers, as well as to the concerns he wants to 
address. He has been extraordinarily accommodating in this regard.
  Second, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Franks) authored one of 
the key provisions in this bill already that is in the underlying bill 
that creates a life sentence for individuals who commit a serious crime 
against a child in which death of the child results. I want to 
compliment him for doing that. I am very pleased that we were able to 
incorporate his initiative in the underlying legislation today. I think 
it is a good provision.
  I also want to support, as does the gentleman from Michigan, the 
underlying amendment here today. I intend to do that. I did not rise to 
oppose it, but I understand that we are, even as we speak, working on 
some perfecting legislation that the gentleman may ask unanimous 
consent for.
  But let me say at the beginning that a lot of progress has been made 
in this

[[Page H4507]]

regard. We are attempting here today in this amendment of the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Franks) to have a provision that requires the 
Internet service provider to report child pornography to law 
enforcement.
  I think that is a good provision. We do need to have those reports. 
Otherwise there is no way we are going to be able to to get at this. 
The only way that is going to be done is if they actually have 
knowledge.
  They are worried about the term ``knowledge,'' and to what degree 
that knowledge is going to be, and so forth. Each step of the way we 
have been trying to work that out. They have also been worried about 
the fact that initially they have started with criminal provisions, the 
gentleman from New Jersey, and now we have gone to civil liability. I 
think that is very important, too, that we have done that as well.
  However, I would like to ask a question as a result of this to make 
sure that some of the reporting requirements are as easy as we think 
they are. If an Internet service provider such as America Online 
receives a report of child pornography on one of its websites, could a 
system be devised which would allow America Online to simply forward 
that information through an e-mail to the FBI, say, or would the 
service provider be required to make a phone call, file a report, or 
how would that work? Could e-mail be used?
  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McCOLLUM. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman. E-mail is what we 
anticipated as being the principal vehicle to communicate this 
information.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. I think that is exceedingly important, because we want 
to make this as simple as possible. The ISPs have said to us they 
communicate electronically, they need to be able to make that report 
electronically. I appreciate it.
  The vagueness we have talked about is the question of learning of the 
existence, exactly what that means, of child pornography; what it looks 
like. I am sure, quite frankly, that the Attorney General is going to 
have to clarify some of this in his ultimate guidelines he issues.
  Does the gentleman contemplate that the Attorney General will have to 
issue some guidelines clarifying and spelling out in more specificity 
than the gentleman's proposal does what exactly they are looking for in 
learning of the existence of child pornography?
  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me, after talking 
to a large number of these parties in interest concerning this 
amendment, that all of them would like to see further guidance from the 
Attorney General in terms of being more specific about establishing 
guidelines for what it is that would trigger the reporting requirement.
  I absolutely envision the Attorney General making those 
recommendations to help provide meaningful guidance to ISPs.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I certainly want to support the 
gentleman's amendment. As I had said him, I fully intend to. I know 
work is in progress here. If for some reason it is not accomplished by 
the time we get to the point where we have to vote on the amendment, I 
am going to support the amendment, knowing we are going to correct that 
and add these changes in conference ultimately, but it is still 
preferable if we have that.
  Again, I compliment the gentleman on his work product, and all the 
efforts he has done.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, could I ask the subcommittee chair and the author of 
the amendment that we allow this to go through, with the understanding 
that we will have a conference? It is likely we will not get anything 
in time here to make the corrections.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I certainly would do that, although it 
appears as literally the gentleman is speaking we are now getting the 
typed copy of the corrections the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Franks) wants to satisfy the gentleman's and my concerns.
  In the work of Congress, by the way, as the gentleman from Michigan 
knows, Members work like this. We amend products and we work right 
through, and staff work right through the time that we debate these 
amendments, a lot of times.
  We are probably getting a better demonstration of that for civics 
classes out here than we get in most bills. But while Members debate 
these bills, lots of other people who toil hours and hours on these 
matters are back there doing things in handwriting, which is what this 
is. And we have done it any number of times that way, just usually do 
not have it quite coming up to the hour this much.
  I say to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Franks), I think he now 
has an amendment at the desk he would like to offer. I would certainly 
sit down and yield back to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), 
and hopefully he will yield to allow the gentleman to do that.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  We do have this civics class hot-off-the-press information, 
handwritten. It looks like it is a step in the right direction. I hate 
to report for Civics 101 that we cannot find who on our staff worked on 
the compromise, so tell me, what do I do now?
  We agreed to the good faith bona fides of both the author and the 
subcommittee chair with whom we worked, and I think the question has 
been flagged sufficiently, that if we need to go back and look into it, 
I am sure that particularly my colleague on the Committee on the 
Judiciary will help us revisit this, if it is necessary.
  Mr. Chairman, I have withdrawn my reservations about the measure, and 
based on this new compromise language which I hope the gentleman will 
find acceptable, I will support the amendment.
  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, first let me express my 
heartfelt gratitude to the gentleman from Michigan and the subcommittee 
chair for their extraordinary cooperation. This has been a difficult 
and complicated matter to discuss. It has been ongoing for literally 
hours, but just came to fruition during the course of this floor 
debate.


   Amendment No. 3, As Modified, Offered by Mr. Franks of New Jersey

  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that 
my amendment be modified with the modification I have now placed at the 
desk.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment, as 
modified.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment No. 3, as modified, offered by Mr. Franks of New 
     Jersey:

       Page 11, after the matter following line 13, insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 112. REPORTING OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY BY ELECTRONIC 
                   COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS.

       Whoever, while engaged in providing an electronic 
     communication service or a remote computing service to the 
     public, through a facility or means of interstate or foreign 
     commerce obtains knowledge of facts or circumstances from 
     which a violation of sections 2251, 2251A, 2252, or 2252A of 
     title 18, United States Code, involving child pornography as 
     defined in section 2256 of such title is apparent shall, as 
     soon as reasonably possible make a report of such facts or 
     circumstances to an agency or agencies designated by the 
     Attorney General. The Attorney General shall make a 
     designation of the agency or agencies described in the 
     preceding sentence not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this paragraph. A person who fails to make a 
     report required under this section shall be fined not more 
     than $100,000. A term used in this section has the same 
     meaning given that term when used in section 226(a) of the 
     Crime Control Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13031(a)).
       (b) Exception to Prohibition on Disclosure.--Section 
     2702(b)(6) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(6) to a law enforcement agency--
       ``(A) if such contents--
       ``(i) were inadvertently obtained by the service provider; 
     and
       ``(ii) appear to pertain to the commission of a crime; or
       ``(B) if required by the Child Protection and Sexual 
     Predator Punishment Act of 1998.
       ``(c) Civil liability.--No provider or user of an 
     electronic communication service or a remote computing 
     service to the public shall be held liable on account of any 
     action taken in good faith to comply with this section.

[[Page H4508]]

       (D) A Report may include information or material developed 
     by an electronic communication service or a remote computing 
     service but the government may not require a remote computing 
     service or electronic communication service include such 
     information or material in said report.''.

  Mr. FRANKS of New Jersey (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask 
unanimous consent that the amendment, as modified, be considered as 
read and printed in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
New Jersey?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the modification to the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from New Jersey?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The amendment is modified.
  Is there further debate?
  The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Franks).
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed 
in House Report 105-576.


                Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Ackerman

  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 4 printed in House Report 105-576 offered by 
     Mr. Ackerman:
       Add at the end the following new title:

           TITLE V--ENHANCED PENALTIES FOR VULNERABLE VICTIMS

     SEC. 501. ENHANCED PENALTIES FOR VULNERABLE VICTIMS.

       Section 240002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law 
     Enforcement Act of 1994 is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 240002. ENHANCED PENALTIES FOR VULNERABLE VICTIMS.

       ``(a) In General.--The United States Sentencing Commission 
     shall amend the Federal sentencing guidelines to provide a 
     sentencing enhancement of not less than 5 levels above the 
     offense level otherwise provided for a crime of violence, if 
     the crime of violence is against an elderly person or other 
     vulnerable person.
       ``(b) Definitions.--As used in this section--
       ``(1) the term `crime of violence' has the meaning given 
     that term in section 16 of title 18, United States Code;
       ``(2) the term `elderly person' means a person who is 65 
     years of age or older; and
       ``(3) the term `vulnerable person' means a person whom the 
     defendant knew or should have known was unusually vulnerable 
     due to age, physical or mental condition, or otherwise 
     particularly susceptible to the criminal conduct, or is a 
     victim of an offense under section 2241(e) of title 18, 
     United States Code.''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 465, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman).
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we are here today debating legislation to increase 
protections for a vulnerable population, our children. The amendment 
that I offered gives us the opportunity to fulfill our additional 
responsibility to strengthening protections for other vulnerable 
populations; notably, the elderly and the disabled. They, too, are 
especially vulnerable to being victimized by violent criminals. They, 
too, are often preyed upon by sick, despicable individuals who rob them 
of their innocence and their security.
  Those criminals who rape, rob, or assault the elderly and the 
mentally or physically disabled should be appropriately punished as 
well. My amendment makes a strong statement. It speaks loud and clear 
to seniors and the disabled: We will severely punish criminals who seek 
you out because of your vulnerability.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment does not require mandatory sentences, nor 
does it remove the court's discretion, but it makes these crimes crimes 
of a higher magnitude.
  Crime is a concern to all of us. Violent crime such as rape, robbery, 
and assault, is of grave concern, and violent crime against the elderly 
and the disabled adds to our outrage. We are outraged because 
vulnerable victims, whether they be children, the elderly, or the 
disabled, cannot defend themselves from violent acts.
  When criminals inflict physical injuries on the vulnerable, the 
wounds take longer to heal, the bones take longer to mend, and the 
scars are permanent. It is more difficult for them to reintegrate into 
society once more. I urge all of our colleagues to stand up for the 
most vulnerable among us, the children, as well as our seniors and 
disabled, and to support this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does any Member seek time in opposition?
  Mr. CONYERS. I am opposed to the amendment, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) 
is recognized for 5 minutes in opposition to the amendment.
  (Mr. CONYERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I say to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman), 
this is the problem we have in criminal law, is that every time 
something sensitive happens somebody jumps up and says, let us put more 
sentencing on it, let us add to the penalty. Many times the persons 
asking to raise the penalty do not even know what the penalty is.
  I have been on the committee all my career. The gentleman and I have 
worked together all the gentleman's career. We support each other year 
in and year out, and yet, the gentleman never consulted me or my staff 
about this at all, at all. On Monday, on Monday we got a copy of what 
the gentleman was going to do, with no consultation.
  Here is the problem, since the gentleman waited until this point to 
put it on. The problem is, what kind of increases? We create a 
sentencing commission to advise us, and then we come back and pass laws 
telling them what they had better do. Therein lies the problem.
  We never had any hearings. The gentleman never came before any 
committee of the Committee on the Judiciary. The gentleman wrote a law, 
let us increase it. How much should we increase it? Well, I do not 
know. How much? And then another person will come along, perhaps a 
distinguished Member of the body, who will say, let us rachet it up 
some more. Then what do we do then? And someone else comes along and 
says, the Ackerman ratchet and the other ratchet is not enough, let us 
ratchet it up one more time. So what do I do? So we get into this 
spiral of who is the toughest on disabled victims of crime.
  I am getting a little sick of that. Why does the the gentleman not 
send it through the right process, and maybe there is a great logic 
residing somewhere on this that I will support it, but I cannot just 
support every Member sitting in his office deciding there ought to be 
some more sentencing imposed on a crime that they consider particularly 
heinous.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I am sorry if the gentleman has some concern about not 
being notified, but I assure the gentleman that this amendment was sent 
over to the gentleman's staff, that there were discussions between my 
staff and the gentleman's staff on it. I know of the gentleman's 
concern, but we submitted this during the course of the appropriate 
process. The rule permits the amendment. We submitted it to the 
Committee on Rules. They made it in order.
  I do not come here frivolously. I do not offer very many of these 
amendments. I think this is probably the first time in 16 years that I 
have served in this House of Representatives that I have offered this 
kind of an amendment. But I think that this is a very, very serious 
amendment. It speaks to an issue within our society that I do not 
believe has been appropriately addressed.
  The crimes against senior citizens and mentally and physically 
disabled in our country are very serious. This just expresses the 
concern of Congress by making this a crime of a higher magnitude. It 
does not mandatorily impose a sentence or increase of sentence on 
anybody.
  As the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) knows, 
there

[[Page H4509]]

are many factors considered in the imposition of a sentence by the 
commission. This is but one of them. All of the others the gentleman is 
very much aware of. This just says that this goes from a crime in the 
nature of somewhere 20th down on the totem pole to one that is much, 
much more important.

                              {time}  1345

  And calls this to the attention of the commission as one of the 
multiple of factors that they should take into consideration.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman 
and I know he is sincere. Does my friend from New York know how much 
ratcheting goes on in his amendment?
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Yes, I do.
  Mr. CONYERS. How much?
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, this will increase the penalties an 
average, the category by an average of 50 percent.
  Mr. CONYERS. Five levels.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is correct.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, would the gentleman object to hearings on 
this matter?
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I certainly would not object to hearings 
on this matter.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, again reclaiming my time, would the 
gentleman kindly withdraw the amendment? I will give him and his staff 
every courtesy and consideration in terms of increasing the penalty 
levels on this. I promise.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would again yield, with 
the gentleman's assurance, I have always found the gentleman to be a 
gentleman indeed, I would be willing to withdraw the amendment with 
that assurance.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I give it to the gentleman and I thank him 
very profoundly.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Blunt). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Chambliss). It is now in order to 
consider amendment No. 5 printed in House Report 105-576.


                  Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Bass.

  Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Bass:
       Add at the end the following new title:

          TITLE V--SEX OFFENDER MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

     SEC. 501. GRANTS TO STATES TO OFFSET COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH 
                   THE JACOB WETTERLING CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN 
                   AND SEXUALLY VIOLENT OFFENDER REGISTRATION ACT.

       (a) In General.--Section 170101 of the Violent Crime 
     Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14071) is 
     amended by--
       (1) redesignating the second subsection (g) as subsection 
     (h); and
       (2) adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(i) Grants to States to Comply with the Wetterling Act.--
       ``(1) Program authorized.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Director of the Bureau of Justice 
     Assistance shall award a grant to each eligible State to 
     offset costs directly associated with complying with the 
     Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent 
     Offender Registration Act. Such grant program shall be known 
     as the ``Sex Offender Management Assistance Program (SOMA)''.
       ``(ii) Uses of funds.--Grants awarded under this subsection 
     shall be--
       ``(I) distributed directly to the State for distribution to 
     State and local entities; and
       ``(II) used for training, salaries, equipment, materials, 
     and other costs directly associated with complying with the 
     Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent 
     Offender Registration Act.
       ``(2) Eligibility.--
       ``(i) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this subsection, the chief executive of a State shall, on an 
     annual basis, submit an application to the Director of the 
     Bureau of Justice Assistance (in such form and containing 
     such information as the Director may reasonably require) 
     assuring that--
       ``(I) the State complies with (or made a good faith effort 
     to comply with) the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children 
     and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act; and
       ``(II) where applicable, the State has penalties comparable 
     to or greater than Federal penalties for crimes listed in 
     such Act.
       ``The Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance may 
     waive the requirement of subclause (II) if a State 
     demonstrates an overriding need for assistance under this 
     subsection.
       ``(ii) Regulations.--
       ``(I) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, the Director shall promulgate 
     regulations to implement this subsection (including the 
     information that must be included and the requirements that 
     the States must meet) in submitting the applications required 
     under this subsection. In allocating funds under this 
     subsection, the Director may consider the annual number of 
     sex offenders registered in each eligible state's monitoring 
     and notification programs.
       ``(II) Certain training programs.--Prior to implementing 
     this subsection, the Director of the Bureau of Justice 
     Assistance shall study the feasibility of incorporating into 
     the SOMA program the activities of any technical assistance 
     or training program established as a result of section 40152 
     of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 
     (Public Law 103-322). In a case in which incorporating such 
     activities into the SOMA program will eliminate duplication 
     of efforts or administrative costs, the Director shall take 
     administrative actions, as allowable, and make 
     recommendations to Congress to incorporate such activities 
     into the SOMA program prior to implementing the SOMA 
     program.''.
       (b) Study.--The Director of the Bureau of Justice 
     Assistance shall conduct a study to assess the efficacy of 
     the SOMA program and submit recommendations to Congress not 
     later than March 1, 2000.
       (c) Authorization for Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out subsection (i) of section 
     170101 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act 
     of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14211), $25,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 1999 and 2000.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
New Hampshire (Mr. Bass) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass).
  Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3494 and I want to thank the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) for having taken bold leadership 
in this area. As the father of a 6-year-old daughter, Lucy, who is just 
beginning to become familiar with the Internet, and having witnessed 
the horror of a rape and murder last year in New Hampshire of a 6-year-
old girl, and subsequent to that the rape, mutilation, and murder of a 
10-year-old boy, the crime occurred in Massachusetts, he was murdered 
in New Hampshire, and he wound up in Maine, I can tell my colleagues 
that we cannot do enough to prevent these kinds of atrocities from 
being committed against the children in our country.
  H.R. 3494 is the latest in a number of important steps that Congress 
has taken to protect our children from sexual predators and an effort 
that in many ways began with the enactment of the Jacob Wetterling Act 
and subsequent amendments, including Megan's Law. And it is in the 
spirit of this comprehensive approach that I offer my amendment which 
would create the Sex Offender Management Assistance Program, which 
would provide flexible block grants to States to offset costs directly 
associated with meeting the Federal requirements for sex offender 
registration and community notification programs.
  Mr. Chairman, it authorizes for appropriation $25 million for fiscal 
year 1999 and $25 million for fiscal year 2000. It would help States 
fund needs such as training, salaries, equipment, and other necessary 
costs associated with compliance with the law.
  States that have been making good faith efforts to comply with the 
Federal requirements would be able to receive funds under this new 
program.
  I am, as I said a minute ago, a strong supporter of the Jacob 
Wetterling Act and Megan's Law, which last year we waived the 
compliance requirements for 2 years. Now, many States around the 
country are struggling to comply not only with the regulations but the 
cost of this. If they do not comply by October of next year, fiscal 
year 1999, they will be subject to a 10 percent penalty for 
appropriations under the Byrne Grant program.

[[Page H4510]]

  These costs of compliance can be significant. In New Hampshire, for 
example, we are looking at a cost somewhere around $300,000, and we are 
a very small State. But other States, such as New York and California 
and Florida and so forth, will face costs that will be considerably 
greater than that.
  If the goals of the Wetterling Act are important enough to merit 
financial penalties, as is envisioned in the Byrne Act penalties, then 
I think they are important enough to merit the modest financial 
assistance that would be provided by my amendment.
  I would hope, Mr. Chairman, that the Committee can adopt this 
amendment. I think it is important in the process of making sure that 
these important laws that we passed in the last Congress are properly 
applied in the States and done so in such a fashion to make it possible 
to have them work nationwide.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, though I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Bass amendment 
and commend the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Washington (Ms. Dunn).
  Ms. DUNN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Bass amendment. This 
amendment would assist States in meeting the requirements of the sex 
offender registration and notification laws that my colleagues and I 
passed in previous Congresses.
  While the registration and notification programs in my home State of 
Washington are exceptional, because that is where the idea of Megan's 
Law began and that is where the specific community notification program 
began, the resources to implement the programs are very scarce.
  Mr. Chairman, during a recent trip home, I had the opportunity to 
meet with some police chiefs in my district. They are doing everything 
they can, Mr. Chairman, to ensure that released sexual predators are 
registered and that the communities into which they move are properly 
notified. But at the same time that I recognize their efforts, such as 
the recent two-week sweep where a special task force caught and 
arrested 23 unregistered sexual predators, I must also recognize that 
they need additional resources.
  That is why the Bass amendment is so important. I think with this 
amendment, States will be able to offset some of their costs with 
flexible grants. I support the Bass amendment.
  Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 6 printed in House Report 105-576.


                  Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Foley

  Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Foley:
       Add at the end the following:

   TITLE V--FACILITATING FINGERPRINT CHECKS TO PROTECT CHILDREN FROM 
                 SEXUAL PREDATORS AND VIOLENT CRIMINALS

     SEC. 501. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Volunteers for Children 
     Act''.

     SEC. 502. ACCESS TO CRIMINAL FINGERPRINT BACKGROUND CHECKS.

       (a) State Agency.--Section 3(a) of the National Child 
     Protection Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 5119a(a)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) In the absence of State procedures referred to in 
     paragraph (1), youth-serving volunteer organizations and 
     institutions may contact an authorized agency of the State to 
     request national criminal fingerprint background checks. 
     Entities requesting background checks under this paragraph 
     shall follow the guidelines in subsection (b) and procedures, 
     if any, for requesting national criminal fingerprint 
     background checks established by the State in which they are 
     located.
       (b) Federal Law.--Section 3(b)(5) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     5119a(b)(5)) is amended by inserting before the period at the 
     end the following: ``, except that this paragraph does not 
     apply to any request by youth-serving volunteer organizations 
     and institutions for national criminal fingerprint background 
     checks pursuant to subsection (a)(3)''.
       (c) Authorization.--Section 4(b)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     5119b(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``1994, 1995, 1996, and 
     1997'' and inserting ``1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Foley) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley).
  Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentlewoman 
from Washington (Ms. Dunn) for bringing this bill to the floor. It is 
an important bill in our efforts to eliminate child molestation and 
sexual abuse.
  Mr. Chairman, I also deeply appreciate the support of my amendment. 
The amendment is based on the Volunteers for Children Act that I 
introduced last year to give volunteer organizations access, if they 
want it, to FBI national fingerprint checks so that they can make sure 
they are not inadvertently hiring sexual predators to tend their young 
charges.
  Mr. Chairman, organizations like the Boys and Girls Clubs have been 
asking for this access, because fingerprint checks are virtually the 
only way they can know whether a person who shows up in the community 
to volunteer around children has a criminal background in another 
State.
  In fact, last year a report by the General Accounting Office put it 
this way: ``National fingerprint-based background checks may be the 
only effective way to readily identify the potentially worst abusers of 
children; that is, the pedophiles who change their names and move from 
State to State to continue their sexually perversive patterns of 
behavior.''
  I deeply appreciate the strong support that has been given to the 
Volunteers for Children's amendment by the chairman and members of the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida 
(Mrs. Fowler).
  Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3494, the 
Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act, and the Foley 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is very simple. It will provide youth-
serving volunteer organizations such as the Boys and Girls Clubs with 
access to Federal fingerprint checks. This will allow these 
organizations to provide a safe place for the children they serve.
  Although we all wish that our communities were places where everybody 
knows everybody, unfortunately, that is not true in today's transient 
and mobile society. That is why it is so important for the 
organizations which serve our most vulnerable citizens to be able to 
ensure that their volunteers are not criminals.
  This amendment will merely provide access to important information 
that is directly related to providing the safest possible environment 
for children served by volunteer organizations.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my fellow Members to support this amendment. It 
is a good idea for volunteer organizations, a good idea for 
communities, and a good idea for America's children.
  Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Washington (Ms. Dunn), the vice chairman of the conference.
  Ms. DUNN. Mr. Chairman, first I would like to commend the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Foley) for his work on the Volunteers for Children 
Act. In our ongoing war against sexual offenders and child abusers, one 
of our most powerful weapons is information. Empowering volunteer 
groups with information about would-be volunteers who have criminal 
histories is a crucial step in preventing an unforeseen incident. 
Volunteer groups should be able to benefit today's youth without fear 
that the children they serve may be harmed.
  As one of the many Members who worked on Megan's Law during the past 
few years, as well as sex offender registration laws, I realize how 
critical information is in helping to prevent crimes against children. 
The Volunteers for Children Act enables youth-

[[Page H4511]]

serving volunteer organizations to help ensure the safety of those 
children they serve by providing them with access to FBI information on 
would-be volunteers.
  The Foley amendment allows, but it does not mandate, volunteer 
organizations to request FBI background checks on each of their 
volunteers.
  Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment because individuals who 
volunteer their time to youth groups like the Boys and Girls Club of 
King County in Washington State, come in direct, often unsupervised 
contact with thousands of youngsters, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year. 
Although most volunteers offer their time and their assistance 
unselfishly and with great generosity, we can never be too careful when 
it comes to protecting our children.
  That is why I support the act proposed by the gentleman from Florida. 
I think he is offering a great amendment. I encourage him on this 
amendment, and I encourage each of my colleagues to support the Foley 
amendment.
  Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition to the amendment, though I rise in support of the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment and Democrats 
support this amendment, which allows youth-serving volunteer 
organizations to request access to FBI criminal fingerprint background 
checks.
  I believe it is enormously important for such organizations to be 
able to assure themselves that volunteers who show up to provide good 
work for the Nation's youth do not prey upon those very same children. 
There is nothing more important than maintaining the safety of the 
children of our Nation, and I support this amendment.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. LOFGREN. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say, on the gentlewoman's 
time, and I have not spoken because of the limited time the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Foley) has had over here, but I strongly support this 
amendment too.
  The gentleman appeared in front of our subcommittee and made an 
eloquent case for his amendment a few weeks ago. I think that everybody 
who is involved with a volunteer organization like this around the 
country is going to be relieved by the fact that the Foley amendment is 
adopted.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Alabama (Mr. Cramer).
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Foley 
amendment. I was an original cosponsor of this bill which is now the 
subject matter of this amendment.
  While all States have approved laws providing background checks for 
school personnel or day care workers, only about six give access to 
that information to youth-serving nonprofit volunteer organization. It 
is very important that we cover that loophole.
  So I applaud this amendment. I applaud the subject matter here today, 
and I have enjoyed working with the gentleman from Florida in regard to 
this end result.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), a member of the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lofgren) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, this is extremely important, this particular amendment. 
Coming from local government, we in Houston consider ourselves a leader 
on this issue because we had huge recreational programs, which most 
cities have, and one of the concerns we raised was those volunteers who 
participated in the recreational programs.
  This amendment will allow nonprofit groups who do so much for our 
children and work with our children, including the Boy Scouts and Girl 
Scouts, to have access to the FBI computer system.

                              {time}  1400

  I think that we could certainly find that this will be not only 
instructive, but it will give them some relief, because one of the 
concerns we had in local government was the burden of trying to 
determine the many wonderful volunteers, and I know that in most 
instances we will find that these are sincere and wonderful people, but 
in that one instance where we can save a life, we are much 
appreciative.
  With that, I add my support to this amendment.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Let me again thank my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum), and the folks on the other side of the aisle for their 
extremely hard work on this, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson), 
chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's caucus, 
the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), cochairman, and all the 
organizations that stood with us to support this: Boys and Girls Clubs, 
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children; Girl Scouts Kids 
Safe; the Marc Klass Foundation; the John Walsh Foundation; the Florida 
Catholic Conference; Child Help; the National Foundation to Prevent 
Child Sexual Abuse, and its founder Jody Gorran, who first brought to 
my attention the need for this bill; Robbie Callaway from the Boys and 
Girls Clubs of America, and Liz Nicolson, my staff director, for her 
hard work on this initiative; and all those who joined together in the 
protection of our children. I appreciate their involvement; I 
appreciate their hard work. I thank the Members of this House for their 
support of my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Blunt). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 7 printed in House Report 105-576.


                Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Gutknecht

  Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 7 offered by Mr. Gutknecht:
       Add at the end the following new title:

                      TITLE V--MODEL NOTIFICATION

     SEC. 501. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) States are now required to release certain relevant 
     information to protect the public from sexually violent 
     offenders.
       (2) Many States have not established guidelines regarding 
     the notification and release of a sexually violent offender.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that each State should enact legislation based on the model 
     notification process described in sections 502 through 514.

     SEC. 502. ESTABLISHMENT OF ADVISORY BOARD FOR RISK 
                   ASSESSMENT.

       (a) Establishment.--The State shall establish an Advisory 
     Board for Risk Assessment (referred to in this title as the 
     ``Board'') which consists of not less than 5 members 
     appointed by the Chief Executive Officer of the State.
       (b) Duties.--The Board shall comply with the requirements 
     and guidelines established for a State board under section 
     170101 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act 
     of 1994 and the provisions of this title.
       (c) Membership.--Each member shall, by experience or 
     training, have a personal interest or professional expertise 
     in law enforcement, crime prevention, victim advocacy, 
     criminology, psychology, parole, public education, or 
     community relations.
       (d) Term.--The term of office of each member of such Board 
     shall be determined by the Chief Executive Officer of the 
     State in guidelines issued pursuant to this section.
       (e) Vacancy.--Any member chosen to fill a vacancy occurring 
     other than by expiration of a term shall be appointed for the 
     remainder of the unexpired term.
       (f) Chairperson.--The Chief Executive Officer of the State 
     shall designate 1 of the members of the Board as chairperson 
     to serve in such capacity at the pleasure of the Officer or 
     until the member's term of office expires and a successor is 
     designated in accordance with law, whichever occurs first.
       (g) Termination.--Any member of the Board may be removed by 
     the Chief Executive Officer for cause after an opportunity to 
     be heard.
       (h) Quorum.--Except as otherwise provided by law, a 
     majority of the Board shall constitute a quorum for the 
     transaction of all business of the Board.

[[Page H4512]]

     SEC. 503. GUIDELINES FOR TIER DETERMINATION.

       (a) In General.--The Chief Executive Officer of the State 
     or a designee shall develop guidelines and procedures for use 
     by the Board to assess the risk of a repeat offense by such 
     sex offender and the threat posed to the public safety. Such 
     guidelines shall be based upon the following:
       (1) Criminal history factors indicative of high risk of 
     repeat offense, including--
       (A) whether the sex offender has a mental abnormality;
       (B) whether the sex offender's conduct was found to be 
     characterized by repetitive and compulsive behavior, 
     associated with drugs or alcohol;
       (C) whether the sex offender served the maximum term;
       (D) whether the sex offender committed the felony sex 
     offense against a child; and
       (E) the age of the sex offender at the time of the 
     commission of the first sex offense.
       (2) Other factors to be considered in determining risk, 
     including--
       (A) the relationship between such sex offender and the 
     victims;
       (B) whether the offense involved the use of a weapon, 
     violence, or infliction of serious bodily injury;
       (C) the number, date, and nature of prior offenses;
       (D) conditions of release that minimize risk of another 
     offense, including whether the sex offender is under 
     supervision, receiving counseling, therapy or treatment, or 
     residing in a home situation that provides guidance and 
     supervision;
       (E) physical conditions that minimize risk of another 
     offense, including advanced age or debilitating illness;
       (F) whether psychological or psychiatric profiles indicate 
     a risk of recidivism;
       (G) the sex offender's response to treatment;
       (H) recent behavior, including behavior while confined;
       (I) recent threats or gestures against persons or 
     expression of intent to commit additional offenses; and
       (J) review of any victim impact statement.
       (b) Information Transfer.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, any State or local correctional facility, hospital, or 
     institution shall forward relevant information pertaining to 
     a sex offender to be discharged, paroled, or released to the 
     Board for review prior to the release or discharge for 
     consideration by the Board in its recommendations. 
     Information shall include the commitment file, medical file, 
     and treatment file pertaining to such person.
       (2) Confidentiality.--All confidential records provided 
     under paragraph (1) shall remain confidential, unless 
     otherwise ordered by a court, by the lawful custodians of the 
     records, or by another person duly authorized to release such 
     information.

     SEC. 504. BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS.

       The Board shall use the guidelines established pursuant to 
     section 503(a) to recommend to an appropriate court of the 
     State 1 of the following 3 levels of notification:
       (1) Tier i.--If the risk of a repeat offense is low, a tier 
     1 designation shall be given to such sex offender. In such 
     case the designated law enforcement agency having 
     jurisdiction and the law enforcement agency having had 
     jurisdiction at the time of his conviction shall be notified 
     in accordance with section 170101(b)(4) of the Violent Crime 
     Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.
       (2) Tier ii.--If the risk of a repeat offense is moderate, 
     a tier 2 designation shall be given to such sex offender. In 
     such case the designated law enforcement agency having 
     jurisdiction and the law enforcement agency having had 
     jurisdiction at the time of conviction shall be notified and 
     may notify any victim of the proposed release of such 
     offender and any agency, organization, or group, serving 
     individuals who have similar characteristics to the previous 
     victim or victims of such offender. The notification may 
     include the approximate address (by ZIP Code), background 
     information relating to the crime, type of victim targeted, 
     conviction, including release of a photograph of the 
     offender, and any special conditions imposed on the offender.
       (3) Tier iii.--If the risk of a repeat offense is high and 
     there exists a threat to the public safety, a tier 3 
     designation shall be given to such offender. In such case, 
     the appropriate law enforcement agencies shall be notified of 
     such an offender's release and may use the notification 
     procedures described in paragraph (2), except that a precise 
     address may be released and any relevant information 
     necessary to protect the public concerning a specific person 
     required to register under section 170101 of the Violent 
     Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 shall be 
     released.

     SEC. 505. JUDICIAL DETERMINATION.

       (a) Notification Level.--
       (1) In general.--An appropriate court of the State also 
     shall make a determination with respect to the level of 
     notification, after receiving a tier recommendation from the 
     Board. In making the determination, the court shall review 
     any statement by a victim or victims and any materials 
     submitted by the sex offender. The court shall also allow the 
     sex offender to appear and be heard, and inform the sex 
     offender of the right to have counsel appointed if necessary.
       (2) Appeal.--A sex offender may appeal a determination made 
     by the court made under paragraph (1) in accordance with 
     State law.
       (3) Notification and registration.--The filing of the 
     appeal shall not stay the designated law enforcement agency's 
     notification actions unless the court orders otherwise. Such 
     petition, if granted, shall not relieve the petitioner of the 
     duty to register pursuant to section 170101 of the Violent 
     Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 upon conviction 
     of an offense requiring registration in the future.
       (b) Reversal.--Upon the reversal of a conviction of a 
     sexual offense, the court shall order the expungement of any 
     records required to be kept pursuant to this title.

     SEC. 506. PENALTY FOR MISUSE OF REGISTRATION INFORMATION.

       (a) Fine.--Any person who uses information disclosed 
     pursuant to this title in violation of the law shall be fined 
     under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned for not 
     more than 5 years, or both.
       (b) Civil Action.--The State attorney general, a district 
     attorney, or any person aggrieved by information disclosed in 
     violation of the law is authorized to bring a civil action 
     in the appropriate court requesting preventive relief, 
     including an application for a permanent or temporary 
     injunction, restraining order, or other order against the 
     person or group of persons responsible for such action.
       (c) Additional Remedies.--The foregoing remedies shall be 
     independent of any other remedies or procedures that may be 
     available to an aggrieved party under other provisions of 
     law.

     SEC. 507. JUVENILE OFFENDERS.

       (a) In General.--A juvenile residing in a State who has 
     been adjudicated delinquent for any sex offense or attempted 
     sex offense, or who has been convicted of any sex offense or 
     attempted sex offense, or who has been acquitted by reason of 
     insanity for any sex offense or attempted sex offense shall 
     be required to comply with the registration requirements 
     established pursuant to section 170101 of the Violent Crime 
     Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.
       (b) Youth Facility.--Any person who is discharged or 
     paroled from a facility in another State that is equivalent 
     to a Department of the Youth Authority to the custody of such 
     a facility because of the commission or attempted commission 
     of specified sex offenses, is required to register pursuant 
     to section 170101 of the Violent Crime Control and Law 
     Enforcement Act of 1994.

     SEC. 508. OFFICIAL IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY.

       (a) Immunity.--No official, employee, or agency, whether 
     public or private, shall be subject to any civil or criminal 
     liability for damages for any discretionary decision to 
     release relevant and necessary information pursuant to this 
     section, unless it is shown that such official, employee, or 
     agency acted with gross negligence or in bad faith.
       (b) Information Release.--The immunity provided under this 
     section applies to the release of relevant information to 
     other employees or officials or to the general public.
       (c) Failure To Release Information.--Nothing in this 
     section shall be deemed to impose any civil or criminal 
     liability upon or to give rise to a cause of action against 
     any official, employee, or agency, whether public or private, 
     for failing to release information as authorized in this 
     title unless it is shown that such official, employee, or 
     agency acted with gross negligence or in bad faith.

     SEC. 509. IDENTITY OF THE VICTIM.

       Any information identifying the victim by name, birth date, 
     address, or relation to the registrant shall be excluded from 
     public access or dissemination.

     SEC. 510. GENERAL STATE REQUIREMENTS.

       The Chief Executive Officer of a State or designee shall 
     establish reasonable notification requirements under this 
     title, including notification to an offender of any 
     procedures for which the offender is required or is permitted 
     to participate, including the hearing process, appeal rights, 
     and submission of information to the Board.

     SEC. 511. ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR COMMUNITY EDUCATION.

       (a) In General.--The Chief Executive Officer of a State 
     shall appoint a voluntary advisory council to design a policy 
     to assist communities in which a sex offender resides to plan 
     and prepare for such a resident.
       (b) Composition.--Each such advisory council shall include 
     representation from--
       (1) law enforcement;
       (2) law enforcement organizations;
       (3) local corrections agencies;
       (4) victims groups; and
       (5) other interested members of the public.
       (c) Duties.--In developing a policy pursuant to subsection 
     (a), an advisory council should make recommendations that 
     include--
       (1) the method of distributing community notification 
     information;
       (2) methods of educating community residents at public 
     meetings on how they can use such information to enhance 
     their safety and the safety of their family;
       (3) procedures for ensuring that community members are 
     educated regarding the right of the sex offender not to be 
     subjected to harassment or criminal acts; and
       (4) other matters the council considers necessary to ensure 
     the effective and fair administration of the community 
     notification law.

     SEC. 512. EXPUNGEMENT OF OUTDATED INFORMATION.

       In accordance with section 170101 of the Violent Crime 
     Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, the department 
     required to coordinate the sex offender registration program 
     shall compile and update information

[[Page H4513]]

     regarding the offenders. Any offender whose duty to register 
     has expired or who has been relieved of the duty to register 
     shall be removed from any public database.

     SEC. 513. EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

       Nothing in this title shall be construed to prevent law 
     enforcement officers from notifying members of the public of 
     individuals that pose a danger under circumstances that are 
     not described in section 170101 of the Violent Crime Control 
     and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 or under this title.

     SEC. 514. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this title:
       (1) The term ``criminal offense against a victim who is a 
     minor'' means any criminal offense that consists of--
       (A) kidnapping of a minor, except by a parent;
       (B) false imprisonment of a minor, except by a parent;
       (C) criminal sexual conduct toward a minor;
       (D) solicitation of a minor to engage in sexual conduct;
       (E) use of a minor in a sexual performance;
       (F) solicitation of a minor to practice prostitution;
       (G) any conduct that by its nature is a sexual offense 
     against a minor; and
       (H) an attempt to commit an offense described in any of 
     subparagraphs (A) through (H) if the State--
       (i) makes such an attempt a criminal offense; or
       (ii) chooses to include such an offense in those which are 
     criminal offenses against a victim who is a minor for 
     purposes of this section.
     For purposes of this paragraph, conduct which is criminal 
     only because of the age of the victim shall not be considered 
     a criminal offense if the perpetrator is 18 years of age or 
     younger.
       (2) The term ``sexually violent offense'' means any 
     criminal offense that consists of aggravated sexual abuse or 
     sexual abuse (as described in sections 2241 and 2242 of title 
     18, United States Code, or as described in the State criminal 
     code) or an offense that has as its elements engaging in 
     physical contact with another person with intent to commit 
     aggravated sexual abuse or sexual abuse (as described in such 
     sections of title 18, United States Code, or as described in 
     the State criminal code).
       (3) The term ``mental abnormality'' means a congenital or 
     acquired condition of a person that affects the emotional or 
     volitional capacity of the person in a manner that 
     predisposes that person to the commission of criminal sexual 
     acts to a degree that makes the person a menace to the health 
     and safety of other persons.
       (4) The term ``predatory'' means an act directed at a 
     stranger, or a person with whom a relationship has been 
     established or promoted for the primary purpose of 
     victimization.
     Any offense committed in another State, which if committed in 
     the State at issue would be one of the above enumerated 
     offenses, is considered a sexual offense for the purposes of 
     this title.
       (5) The term ``juvenile'' has the meaning given such term 
     under State law.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 465, the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht) and a Member opposed, each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht).
  Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I am honored to join my colleagues to discuss how we 
can better protect and ensure the safety of our Nation's children. I 
can think of no issue that is more important than this one.
  Over 2 years ago, this Congress passed Megan's Law, which requires 
States to develop a program to notify communities when a sexual 
predator is released from prison and moves into their neighborhood. 
While most States are moving forward to implement Megan's Law, we have 
seen that many are facing both legal challenges and confusion as to 
what plan would be both constitutional and effective.
  Because Megan's Law is too important to risk creating any confusion, 
I have introduced a resolution to provide States with a model community 
notification program that they can follow if they choose. Let me 
emphasize, this is in no way a congressional mandate. It is only a 
model which is an amalgamation of successful notification programs of 
11 States, including my home State of Minnesota.
  Very simply, Mr. Chairman, this resolution first encourages States to 
set up an advisory board when a sex offender is released from prison. 
The board will recommend that the sentencing court give him a 
designation based on the degree of likelihood that he will repeat his 
crime. If the risk is low, the individual will be assigned to tier I 
designation and local law enforcement agencies will be notified.
  If the risk of repeat offense is moderate, he will be assigned a tier 
II designation, and law enforcement officials, victims organizations 
and any of the offender's past victims are notified of his address.
  Finally, if the risk of repeat offense is high, the offender is given 
a tier III designation, and the general public is notified of his new 
residence.
  This resolution also encourages States to implement a community 
education program where neighborhoods and law enforcement officers can 
meet together before a convicted sex offender moves into their 
community. This has proved to be very helpful in Minnesota where over 
1,000 members of the general public met at the first of these meetings 
in the Twin Cities last year.
  Let me say that I am very pleased with the support that this bill has 
received here in Congress. This resolution has over 40 cosponsors, 
which is almost evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. I am 
also extremely grateful to have the support of the National Center for 
Missing and Exploited Children, the Klass Foundation for Children, the 
Jacob Wetterling Foundation, and the Boys and Girls Clubs of America. 
In addition, Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa is introducing this 
resolution in the Senate. I hope my colleagues will join us in this 
important effort to help our States protect our kids.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I do not oppose the amendment, but I would 
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Chambliss). Without objection, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I support this amendment, and Democrats support this.
  The amendment does not impose anything on States. It simply 
establishes a set of guidelines for community notification of sex 
offenders.
  This model statute is balanced. It reflects both the need of the 
community to be protected as well as the rights of individuals to 
privacy and the right to be left alone once they have paid their debt 
to society.
  I note further that we have already approved an amendment that will 
direct that additional research be undertaken into the whole area of 
child sexual predators. I am sure that the author of this amendment, 
who is really to be commended for the work that he has put into this, 
will be looking forward to receiving the results so that we may work 
together in a bipartisan basis to update these model statutes as more 
scientific data becomes available to us.
  I commend the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht), as well as 
our colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson), who is a sponsor 
of this proposal on the Democratic side of the aisle, for their 
leadership on this issue.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Lampson).
  Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
the time. I also want to thank my colleague, the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht) for his leadership on this issue and for 
allowing me to join him in this effort.
  When we formed the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus a year 
ago, this was the sort of effort I had in mind. There are a number of 
Members of Congress who have great interest and ideas on these issues 
that we needed to bring together. Together we promote our cause with a 
stronger voice. I appreciate that.
  The trial and resulting conviction of Jesse Timmendequas for the 
murder of Megan Kanka was harrowing for all Americans. The thought that 
someone so violent and dangerous could live across the street from any 
family in America is chilling.
  In Friendswood, Texas, in my district, we are still looking for the 
individual who kidnapped and murdered 12-year-old Laura Kate Smither 
last year. When we do find this individual, there is a strong 
likelihood that we will find someone who has committed a sexual offense 
against a child in the past.
  We can make that assumption based on the research that shows that the 
typical sex offender molests an average of 117 children. It is a sad 
reality that

[[Page H4514]]

community notification is an absolute necessity. Megan's Law was a 
giant step forward, and today we try to fill in the last few remaining 
gaps.
  The model program we have presented is based upon the knowledge we 
have gained from the individual community notification laws passed in 
46 States. I hope that we will have the three-tiered notification 
system in place across the Nation. The recidivism rate is so great 
among those who commit sex crimes against children that we must be 
proactive in our vigilance. We cannot pretend that a sexual offense 
against a child is an isolated act. Most of the time, it is a pattern 
of behavior.
  Families need and deserve our help in keeping their children safe. As 
we talk about Megan's Law and the Wetterling Act, we are reminded of 
the victims of these predators. They reaffirm our resolve to do what we 
can to prevent more tragedies.
  Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum), chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  I want to take the time to congratulate him on the model that he has 
developed. I think the States will be benefited by having this model 
for implementation of Megan's Law. I think his work product continues a 
tradition he has had in the House for some time on issues related to 
child molestation and concerns such as Megan's Law, this bill.
  So my hat is off to the gentleman. I certainly fully support this 
amendment.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), a member of the committee
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman very 
much.
  It is a pleasure that we can always find such common ground on 
important issues dealing with our children. One of the, again, speaking 
on behalf of my prior life, which is local government, the frustration 
of trying to implement a system that would translate into an effective 
notification process and the fact that this legislation gets Congress 
on record of trying to establish the tier-based community notification 
system for notifying communities when sex offenders are released from 
jail is crucial and important and may give some comfort level to our 
law enforcement, our neighborhoods, our schools, when they can have 
such a system so that they can protect, if you will, when these 
predators come into the community.
  We always get these news articles that say, did you know such and 
such has moved in quietly. I think it is extremely important, and in 
tribute to the tragedy of little Megan and in tribute to this law that 
was passed, which we appreciate very much, we thank you for this 
legislation.
  Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I just want to thank the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime. I 
want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson) for all of his 
work, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. This 
amendment is the work product of working together with all of the 
States attorneys general, people from the Justice Department, people on 
the Subcommittee on Crime.
  I want to thank all of them for their work because, as I said at the 
beginning, I can think of no issue that is more important to this 
Congress or to this Nation than protecting the safety of our children. 
This is a good example of, working together on a bipartisan basis, how 
we can make real progress, send a clear signal to the States and those 
who would abuse our children that we are serious about this issue.
  I hope that Members will join me in support of this amendment.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, noting that it is a pleasure to work on a 
bipartisan basis on such an important matter, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 8 printed in House Report 105-576.


                 Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mrs. Kelly

  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 8 offered by Mrs. Kelly:
       Add at the end the following new title:

   TITLE V--CHILD HOSTAGE-TAKING TO EVADE ARREST OR OBSTRUCT JUSTICE

     SEC. 501. CHILD HOSTAGE-TAKING TO EVADE ARREST OR OBSTRUCT 
                   JUSTICE.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 55 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1205. Child hostage-taking to evade arrest or obstruct 
       justice

       ``(a) In General.--Whoever uses force or threatens to use 
     force against any officer or agency of the Federal 
     Government, and seizes or detains, or continues to detain, a 
     child in order to--
       ``(1) obstruct, resist, or oppose any officer of the United 
     States, or other person duly authorized, in serving, or 
     attempting to serve or execute, any legal or judicial writ, 
     process, or warrant of any court of the United States; or
       ``(2) compel any department or agency of the Federal 
     Government to do or to abstain from doing any act;

     or attempts to do so, shall be punished in accordance with 
     subsection (b).
       ``(b) Sentencing.--Any person who violates subsection (a)--
       ``(1) shall be imprisoned not less than 10 years and not 
     more than 25 years;
       ``(2) if injury results to the child as a result of the 
     violation, shall be imprisoned not less than 20 years and not 
     more than 35 years; and
       ``(3) if death results to the child as a result of the 
     violation, shall be subject to the penalty of death or be 
     imprisoned for life.
       ``(c) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     `child' means an individual who has not attained the age of 
     18 years.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     55 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new item:

``1205. Child hostage-taking to evade arrest or obstruct justice.''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 465, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly) and a Member opposed, each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly).
  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise today to introduce an amendment that addresses a problem that 
is increasing in our Nation, children being taken as hostages. Far too 
many scenarios have been documented in which children taken as hostages 
are exposed to violence, emotional trauma or physical harm at the hands 
of adults.
  For example, in New York, a woman's estranged husband took her and 
their three children hostage at the point of a loaded shotgun. He held 
them for nearly 4 hours, and at one point he even allegedly traded his 
7-year-old son for a pack of cigarettes.
  It was only when he threatened to use the children as human shields 
that a SWAT team rescued the children, and that resulted in something 
that was a very difficult situation in my State.
  In Baltimore, a man broke into a second floor apartment, stabbing a 
young mother, holding her 9-month-old child hostage for 2 hours before 
a quick response team could rescue the baby and apprehend the suspect.
  Situations like these are unacceptable and should not be tolerated by 
anyone. All over the country children are being used as pawns by 
violent adults. We in Congress must do our part to help prevent these 
scenarios from developing in the first place. This amendment is based 
on my bipartisan legislation, H.R. 3438, and will give new protections 
to children, our Nation's most precious resource.
  It establishes the strictest punishments for those who would evade 
arrest or obstruct justice by using children as hostages. This 
provision toughens penalties against any person who takes a child, 18 
years of age or younger, hostage in order to resist, compel or oppose 
the Federal Government. Such a person would serve a minimum sentence of 
10 years to a maximum of death depending on the extent of injury to the 
child. A number of States, including California, Illinois and Florida, 
already enforce tougher penalties on people convicted of stealing 
children for their own personal gain.
  Please join me in this important effort to protect the lives and 
well-being

[[Page H4515]]

of our Nation's children. I hope that together we can make our Nation a 
safer place for everyone, especially those in our society least able to 
protect themselves.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition to the amendment, although I do support personally the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Without objection, the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lofgren) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I believe that this amendment makes a statement that is an important 
statement about how we value children. Whereas it is true that it is 
possible under current law for the sentence up to life in prison to be 
imposed, this amendment would require a mandatory minimum sentence 
whenever someone engages in the unconscionable act of using a child as 
a hostage.

                              {time}  1415

  I think that it is important that the United States Government make 
that statement that we will not tolerate the use of children in this 
manner, and that is why I am proud to be a cosponsor of the Kelly bill 
and proud to support her amendment today.
  I am aware, and we may yet have individuals rushing to the Chamber to 
speak, that there are some who in good faith disagree with this 
amendment for the following reasons. There are some Members who do not 
believe in mandatory minimum sentencing, who believe that that is an 
impermissible and inappropriate intrusion into judicial decision-
making. There are some Members who because of their religious faith 
oppose the death penalty. I actually support the death penalty, but I 
respect that there are some whose religious beliefs lead them to a 
contrary conclusion.
  Let us not, however, be confused that even those who might disagree 
with us as to mandatory minimum sentences and as to the death penalty 
do not join with us in ensuring that every wrongdoer in America knows 
that it is beyond human conscience, it is beyond what is acceptable in 
a civilized society to use a child as a hostage. I commend the 
gentlewoman for her amendment. I urge my colleagues to vote ``aye.''
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum).
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time and allowing me to express my strong support for her 
proposal.
  Frankly we had not reviewed this in the committee. Lots of times when 
we do not, you say, ``Boy, there must be some problem, maybe we should 
go and have a hearing,'' blah-blah-blah.
  But when I saw this yesterday and examined it, and it is so clear on 
its face that this is something we need to do, that I immediately said 
to her then and I say it again today publicly, I believe we should put 
this in this bill. Hostage taking of children under these conditions 
that she is trying to address is too important to delay. It is 
straightforward what she is doing. It creates some penalties and 
punishments that are really tough, that I think are deterrents. I 
strongly support this amendment. I believe that it is very, very 
important that we send the message she is sending. I commend her for 
drafting the legislation.
  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Once again, Mr. Chairman, passage of this amendment would give law 
enforcement across the country a new and powerful weapon to fight 
against violent criminals. As I mentioned earlier, there are disturbing 
examples of hostage situations involving children from across the 
country. I hope that my colleagues will join me and pass these new 
protections from crime for America's children.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Duncan). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
number 9 printed in House Report 105-576.


                 Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Sherman

  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 9 offered by Mr. Sherman:
       At the end of the bill, add the following new title:

       TITLE V--PUBLIC ACCESS TO FBI DATABASE ON SEXUAL OFFENDERS

     SEC. 501. ESTABLISHMENT OF TELEPHONE ACCESS FOR THE PUBLIC TO 
                   FBI DATABASE ON SEXUAL OFFENDERS.

       Subtitle A of title XVII of the Violent Crime Control and 
     Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14071 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 170103. TELEPHONE ACCESS FOR THE PUBLIC TO FBI 
                   DATABASE.

       ``(a) Establishment.--(1) The Attorney General shall 
     establish, publicize, and operate a national telephone 
     service by which a person (as defined in subsection (f)(2)) 
     may request the information described in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) The information described in this paragraph is 
     whether an individual (as defined in subsection (f)(3)), 
     other than a victim of an offense that requires registration 
     under this subtitle, is listed in the database established 
     under section 170102.
       ``(b) Prerequisite for Access to Information.--The Attorney 
     General shall not disclose the information described in 
     subsection (a)(2) unless the person seeking such information 
     provides his or her full name, the full name of the 
     individual, and one or more of the following:
       ``(1) The address of the individual's residence.
       ``(2) The individual's Social Security number.
       ``(3) The individual's driver's license number or the 
     number the identification card issued by State or local 
     authorities in lieu of a driver's license.
       ``(4) The individual's date of birth.
       ``(5) Such other information as the Attorney General 
     determines to be appropriate for purposes of identification 
     of the individual.
       ``(c) Notice to Caller.--Prior to disclosing information 
     described in subsection (a)(2), and without charging a fee 
     for the same, the Attorney General shall provide the 
     following general information in the form of a recorded 
     message:
       ``(1) The requirements described in subsection (b).
       ``(2) The fee for the use of the telephone service.
       ``(3) A warning that information received pursuant to such 
     request may not be misused, as described in subsection (e), 
     and notice of the penalties for such misuse of the 
     information.
       ``(4) A warning that the service is not be available to 
     persons under 18 years of age.
       ``(5) Such other information as the Attorney General 
     determines to be appropriate.
       ``(d) Fees for Use of Service.--
       ``(1) Fee for access to information in database.--The 
     Attorney General shall charge a fee for each use of the 
     service for information described in subsection (a) from the 
     service.
       ``(2) Limitation on number of requests.--A person may not 
     make more than two requests for such information per use of 
     the service.
       ``(3) Use of fees to defray expenses of service.--To the 
     extent provided in advance in appropriations Acts, moneys 
     received under paragraph (1) shall be used to pay for the 
     expenses of the operation of the service.
       ``(e) Penalties for Misuse of Information.--
       ``(1) Prohibitions.--Whoever, having obtained information 
     described in subsection (a)(2) from the service, knowingly 
     uses such information--
       ``(A) for any purpose other than to protect a minor at 
     risk; or
       ``(B) with respect to insurance, housing, or any other use 
     that the Attorney General may determine--
       ``(i) is unnecessary for the protection of a minor at risk 
     or;
       ``(ii) which creates a disproportionate prejudicial effect,

     shall be punished as provided in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Civil penalty.--Each person who violates the 
     provisions of paragraph (1) shall be subject to a civil 
     penalty imposed by the Attorney General of not more than 
     $1,000 for each violation.
       ``(f) Definitions.--As used in this section:
       ``(1) Minor at risk.--The term `minor at risk' means a 
     minor, as that term is defined in section 2256(1) of title 
     18, United States Code, who is or may be in danger of 
     becoming a victim of an offense, for which registration is 
     required under this subtitle, by an individual about whom the 
     information described in subsection (a)(2) is sought.
       ``(2) Person.--The term `person' means a person who 
     requests the information described in subsection (a)(2).

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 465, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) and the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr.

[[Page H4516]]

McCollum) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Sherman-Fox amendment, an 
amendment which is based on H.R. 2194 which was submitted to this House 
last year. That bill, which has not been heard by the House, secured 
the cosponsorship of over 13 Republican Members and over 20 Democratic 
Members.
  The purpose of this amendment is to allow parents who are the first 
line of defense that every child has against sexual predators to get 
the information that they need to protect their children from convicted 
sexual predators. Ever since Megan's Law was adopted and ever since 
that case came to the national fore, there has been a national 
consensus that parents need information about sexual predators, 
convicted sexual criminals who may come into contact with their 
children. The question is, what is the best way to effectuate that? One 
method, and not a method used in this particular amendment, is 
community notification. This works in small and closely knit 
communities where a town of a few thousand people, or even a community 
of tens of thousands of people may become aware that a particular 
individual is a sexual predator. However, we also have large cities in 
this country where it is impossible to notify the entire city that a 
particular person is dangerous. Even if a community within Los Angeles 
County is notified, a sexual predator may choose to operate at an 
amusement park in one part of Los Angeles County or seek a job as a 
child care worker in another part of Los Angeles County. A sexual 
predator may be convicted in one State but may move to a large city in 
another State.
  We in California have devised an excellent system to deal with those 
sexual predators who choose to lose themselves in big cities, who may 
be known by their neighbors but are not known by those at the amusement 
park across town or the child care center across town. That system is 
known as the California Sexual Predator Hotline. It is administered by 
California Attorney General Dan Lungren whose office has indicated that 
they support this amendment.
  The way it works is that a database is maintained in Sacramento. 
Parents who are concerned about their children, those who employ child 
care workers at schools, et cetera, can call that line to determine 
whether a particular individual is identified as a convicted sexual 
predator.
  There are two problems with the California line. First, it only tells 
you if an individual has been convicted in California. Second, it is 
available to protect only California children. What this amendment 
does, at no cost to the Federal Government except a small setup charge 
at the beginning, at no cost to the Federal Government, is it solves 
these problems. It provides us with a national database and it is 
available to parents across this country.
  For that reason, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of amendment 
number 9, the Sherman-Fox amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Fox).
  Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise today as a cosponsor of 
this amendment to the Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment 
Act of 1998 to establish a national hotline to facilitate public access 
to the FBI database on sexual offenders.
  I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the 
distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), chairman of the 
subcommittee, for bringing this bill to the floor and thank him for 
bringing this critical issue to the attention of the body. This is 
sound legislation that will be of great benefit to this country. 
Through this amendment, I believe that we will strengthen what will 
already go a long way to protecting families.
  The most precious resource we have in this country are our children. 
Unfortunately, they are also our most vulnerable. This amendment would 
empower parents by providing them with the tools that they need to 
protect their children from elements in our society that wish to do 
them harm.
  This amendment protects our children by providing better access to 
public information. It will help parents reduce the risk of their 
children becoming victims of sexual predators through a national 
hotline. It will build on the success of hotlines established in 
California and New York because it will provide information on sex 
offenders in their State as well as in other States. The hotline is 
budget neutral, financed by callers and costing the Federal Government 
virtually nothing. Individuals will be limited to two inquiries per 
call, so someone will not be able to abuse the hotline or tie it up by 
making requests about everything that is happening but that is not 
relevant. Callers must provide their full name and the full name of the 
person they are inquiring about. No one will be able to call up and 
just ask if there are any sex offenders in the area. It is modeled 
after a very successful line already in operation in California which 
is supported by their Attorney General. It is endorsed by KIDS SAFE as 
a valuable tool for protecting children.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this measure that will 
provide peace of mind to American families across our Nation. I would 
like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman), the 
cosponsor of this amendment, for yielding me this time. I appreciate 
his leadership on this.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, at first blush this seems like a very fair amendment. 
It seems like it would be something anybody would want to do. 
Unfortunately, it flies in the face of an existing program that is 
already out there. Many of the people who are operating the kind of law 
that we have today for notification, parental notification of sexual 
offenders who have been released from prison believe that it would 
undermine that program, primarily because it would establish a national 
hotline whereas the program that exists today in the States where it is 
a State program, with a registry for sex offenders and a multi-tiered 
notification process where the sheriffs, police and others in certain 
cases are notified when a sex offender is released from prison and he 
goes back into that area. In certain cases not only are they notified 
but they then have an obligation to go out into the community and to 
notify the community. They have manners and means of making sure in 
that setting precisely who it is that they are telling the community 
about who is dangerous, and there is a set process for that. The 
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has expressed 
opposition to the Sherman proposal, citing that it prefers the local 
approach in which the local law enforcement does what I have just 
described, to notify targeted members of the community who are likely 
to encounter the sex offender as many States are currently doing under 
Megan's Law.
  The reason why again this would undermine this effort in my judgment 
is based primarily on the fact that if you have this national system of 
calling in a hotline, you are going to wind up with lots of folks in 
those States saying, ``Well, why should I go through the State process? 
Why do we need that?'' And the fear, which I think is justified, we 
have not had maybe as many hearings on this as we would like, but I 
believe this from what I am hearing from the folks who are critical of 
it is, the fear is that the States will stop doing the detailed type of 
notification multi-tiered process that has now been established and 
has, I might say, withstood constitutional tests up to this point. 
There has been a lot of litigation over the Megan's Law sexual predator 
notification when somebody is released from prison going back into the 
community. We have not had the same type of constitutional challenge, 
at least not to my knowledge, to clarify whether there may be problems 
with the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman's) proposed approach.
  What is involved in the current case is a multi-tiered notification 
program. It involves going door to door actually by law enforcement to 
notify people in a community where this sexual offender has been 
released and is going to live. Only those people are going to be 
notified who have a need to know. Other people are not going to be. If 
we were to take up the national call-in approach that is here, one of 
the things

[[Page H4517]]

that I envision as a problem with it is that somebody could call up 
trying to find out if John Smith has ever been released or whatever 
from prison, and where is he living now. There might be lots of 
different John Smiths. Maybe one spells his name J-o-n or otherwise. 
The hotline approach is based upon identification by name only, and a 
confusion could result where somebody who is perfectly innocent could 
be identified by mistake over the telephone in the hotline as to who 
they are. That is also a problem in terms of our desire to protect 
people's rights and privacy as much as possible and not to provide them 
with a situation in which they could be not only embarrassed publicly 
but damaged by this process.
  I realize that this program has been tried in California. It has not 
had horrors like that occur, but it does raise the specter of that 
possibility which the current notification system does not because 
there is careful screening, there are police and sheriffs who go 
through this process, they know absolutely who it is who is coming into 
their community by fingerprint and other identification, and then they 
proceed to do specific neighborhood notifications rather than having 
this hotline proposal.
  While I understand perfectly well what the gentleman wants to do and 
I know that he would believe this and argue that this is complementary 
to the existing State registry and notification systems and is well 
intended for that purpose, I have to unfortunately conclude that based 
on information I have that the risk to the existing programs is too 
great to support this amendment, and that instead I am fearful that it 
will do damage to those programs.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Lofgren).
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, as a Californian I have a great deal of 
appreciation for the amendment that the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Sherman) has proposed, and actually when I saw his amendment, the first 
thing I thought was, great, I want to support that amendment, it is 
important to empower the parents, it has worked well in California, and 
I commend him and his coauthor for having the grit to pursue this.
  Having said that, I do believe that we need some further research on 
this concept.
  As I reviewed the concerns expressed by the Department of Justice, 
one thing in particular did catch my attention, which was the need to 
do fingerprint checks to make sure that there is a positive ID rather 
than, as my colleagues know, somebody who has got the same name and the 
concern expressed that we might get negative information back, and 
actually the guy could be a very serious problem because of the nature 
of the data.
  So I, with a great deal of reluctance, am suggesting that we not 
approve this amendment today, but I am very hopeful and would actually 
plead and ask the gentleman to schedule some hearings to see whether we 
could not perfect and pursue and explore this because this is a 
wonderful tool in California for parents. And if we could overcome some 
of the issues that have been expressed in the defects that he has 
rightly pointed out, perhaps we could be very happy with the result.
  And so I join with the gentleman in indicating that I cannot support 
this today, but I do commend the authors of the amendment for their 
great passion for the well-being of children and their parents and 
would love to work with the chairman of the committee as we pursue it, 
as I think all the Californians on the committee would do.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I would just simply state to the 
gentlewoman that I certainly intend to continue to work with the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) if that is the case.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
this time to me.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Sherman-Fox amendment. This 
amendment will ensure that a hotline is established so that our 
children are protected from the evil and ill-intentioned hands of 
sexual predators.
  California has taken this progressive step, and its attorney general 
reports that thanks to this hotline, which has received a great 
percentage of hits and calls in which the sexual molesters identified 
positively. There have been almost 500 hits thus far. Even though 
California State law requires a sexual predator to register upon moving 
in the State, there are not, as in the reality, many States' 
enforcement provisions that will guarantee that he registers before he 
is to strike again. This hotline, as proposed by the Sherman-Fox 
amendment would grant access to registration records in other States so 
that children are protected from those sexual molesters who have failed 
to register.
  It is clear, Mr. Chairman, from the success in California that this 
hotline will aid in protecting our children from sexual predators and 
their horrible acts, and I implore my colleagues to support the 
Sherman-Fox amendment so that America's children will be safe.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox).
  Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding this time to me, and I have great respect for the chairman of 
this subcommittee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) who has 
worked long and hard to make sure that we have passed laws here in the 
House that will protect children, seniors and families from all kinds 
of problems, especially sexual predators.
  As a former prosecutor myself, assistant district attorney from 
Pennsylvania, I know well that when we have multiple systems for 
protecting individuals, whether it be for Megan's Law, other State 
statutes, other Federal statutes, we need the composite to make sure 
that we have a safety net so that no sexual predator who has been 
convicted in this country will not have a community and a law 
enforcement team out there to tell unsuspecting neighbors about what 
could go on. So I believe that Mr. Sherman's amendment goes a long way 
in amplifying and underscoring the importance of existing laws, and 
rather than being something that is an impediment, it is actually going 
to boost all efforts to have more knowledge to the public, less sexual 
predators infecting the neighborhood and more public safety in the 
United States.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) the ranking member on the full 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the subcommittee chairman, the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) for yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Chairman, it is hard to oppose this amendment, but I think it is 
necessary that we follow the lead of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum) and have a little bit more careful hearing about it. I mean, 
there have been no hearings on this. The gentleman agrees that there 
will be hearings. He has assured the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Lofgren), and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) has never 
disappointed us yet, his word has been his been his bond throughout his 
career.
  But in all due honesty, I say to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Sherman) I can name some other things that we maybe ought to have 
hotlines for criminals on, too. So, as my colleague knows, if we are 
turning into the hotline society, let us do it in an orderly fashion. I 
mean, this is something that may have merit, but to walk up on the 
floor and throw this on our 434 colleagues might not be as orderly. And 
guess what? Some of us that are not sure about this may end up 
supporting the gentleman.
  So for that reason, as my colleagues know, we have two options. One, 
we can desperately inform Members when they come through for a vote on 
this and ask about it, and some side will win and one side will lose, 
or the gentleman could in his usually gentlemanly fashion withdraw the 
amendment and allow the ordinary processes that the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum) has agreed to proceed.

[[Page H4518]]

  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) 
for that purpose.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the distinguished gentleman's 
remarks, but I submitted this as a bill virtually a year ago. In that 
time we have sent out several dear colleagues, we have secured nearly 
40 cosponsorships, and I believe that I have done everything in a 
reasonable manner.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 20 seconds to simply 
continue the sentence and say:
  When a Member submits a bill, secures bipartisan cosponsorship, 
informs the Members of the House, works on it for almost a year, it is 
not appropriate to say that I am trying to short-circuit the process 
and ask for a quick decision.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Sherman) has expired.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Michigan.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the response, and I am 
pleased to know it has been a year of working on it, but that does not 
take the place of hearings. We can send each other letters, as my 
colleagues know, every day in the week, but the point of the matter is 
they have to be Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime 
hearings.
  Now it is not that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) is 
sitting around with not much to do, but he has assured the gentleman of 
hearings. I pledge to help the gentleman get hearings. We will go see 
the chairman, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), we will go to the 
Speaker, we will do everything we can for the gentleman, but let us not 
pass legislation like this.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of the time to 
myself.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida is recognized 
for 1\1/2\ minutes, and he has the right to close.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I will yield in any event to myself, and 
thank the Chair very much for pointing this out.
  I have to continue to oppose this amendment. I think that it is a 
well-meaning amendment. Unfortunately the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Sherman) has not had the hearings, as the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Conyers) has said. We will conduct those if this amendment is not 
successful at some time to give everybody an opportunity to hear the 
issue. In fact, we probably ought to revisit the procedures of Megan's 
law and the registry in an oversight format in any event. But I think 
this is an untimely amendment.
  We have had expressions of great concern from the Center For Missing 
and Exploited Children that by adopting this amendment, we will 
undermine the State registry programs whereby today we have a tiered, 
orderly way for those States to participate, to go through the process 
when some sex offenders are released from prison of notifying people in 
the community where that person goes. We know it works, we know it is 
being tested, and, so far, successfully, in the courts. It is something 
that, if we adopted this amendment today to have a national call-in, 
check-in hotline system, might well disappear because people would say 
in those States, what the heck, the Federal Government is going to pay 
for this and do it; why should we?
  And yet those involved with it believe this multitiered law 
enforcement hands-on approach of notification and fully knowing who it 
is is the better approach than simply saying to the general citizenry 
of the country, ``When you hear about somebody getting released, you 
can make a hotline telephone call to find out.''
  If indeed it were complementary, that is, just a supplement to 
existing law, and did not negatively impact the other, it might be 
something we consider. That is why holding a hearing, debating this 
further, might be meritorious. But adopting it today, knowing there is 
risk that we would undermine the existing, well-working, well thought 
out Megan's Law program of notifying communities of sex offenders would 
be a mistake, and I strongly urge a no vote on the Sherman amendment.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox).
  Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, the fact is we have hotlines 
in this country for almost every imaginable purpose, but what could be 
more important than have a hotline to protect our children?
  And the fact is if we can have more than one method to make sure we 
protect our children under Megan's Law and under the Sherman amendment, 
I think we do the right thing today and pass the Sherman amendment. It 
will only add to the bill and make it better, not make it worse.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from California is recognized 
for 1 minute.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, earlier today I was in contact with the 
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. They have informed 
me that while they do not, cannot currently support this amendment, 
they gave me no indication that they opposed it, and a year ago they 
gave me a letter simply saying they do not support it. They are trying 
to evaluate their situation now in light of additional arguments I gave 
them.
  But the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox) is absolutely right. We 
need more than one system.
  There is nothing in this national system that undermines the local 
system, and that is why those in California involved in informing 
children, involving parents that their children face a risk, the Kids 
Safe Organization and everyone else who got us the State hotline, 
prefers and strongly supports the idea of a national hotline. People 
all over America should be able to determine whether somebody applying 
to work in their child care center, which may be 10 miles, 20 miles 
from where that individual lives, has been convicted of a sexual 
predatory offense anywhere in the United States.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 465, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) 
will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment number 10 printed in House 
Report 105-576.

                              {time}  1445


                Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Conyers

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Conyers:
       Add at the end the following (and conform the table of 
     contents accordingly):

  TITLE V--CONTINUING THE COMMITMENT OF THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT

 Subtitle A--Law Enforcement and Prosecution Grants To Combat Violence 
                             Against Women

     SEC. 501. PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM AND GRANTS.

       (a) General Program Purpose.--The purpose of this subtitle 
     is to assist States, Indian tribal governments, and units of 
     local government to develop and strengthen effective law 
     enforcement and prosecution strategies to combat violent 
     crimes against women.
       (b) Purposes for Which Grants May Be Used.--Grants under 
     this subtitle shall provide personnel, training, technical 
     assistance, data collection and other equipment for the more 
     widespread apprehension, prosecution, and adjudication of 
     persons committing violent crimes against women, and 
     specifically, for the purposes of--
       (1) training law enforcement officers and prosecutors to 
     more effectively identify and respond to violent crimes 
     against women, including the crimes of sexual assault and 
     domestic violence;
       (2) developing, training, or expanding units of law 
     enforcement officers and prosecutors specifically targeting 
     violent crimes against women, including the crimes of sexual 
     assault and domestic violence;
       (3) developing and implementing more effective police and 
     prosecution policies, protocols, orders, and services 
     specifically devoted to preventing, identifying, and 
     responding to violent crimes against women, including the 
     crimes of sexual assault and domestic violence;

[[Page H4519]]

       (4) developing, installing, or expanding data collection 
     and communication systems, including computerized systems, 
     linking police, prosecutors, and courts or for the purpose of 
     identifying and tracking arrests, protection orders, 
     violations of protection orders, prosecutions, and 
     convictions for violent crimes against women, including the 
     crimes of sexual assault and domestic violence;
       (5) developing, enlarging, or strengthening programs 
     addressing stalking;
       (6) developing, enlarging, or strengthening programs 
     addressing the needs and circumstances of Indian tribes in 
     dealing with violent crimes against women, including the 
     crimes of sexual assault and domestic violence; and
       (7) developing, enlarging, or strengthening State court 
     programs, including training for State, local, and tribal 
     judges and court personnel, addressing violent crimes against 
     women, including sexual assault, domestic violence, and 
     stalking.

     SEC. 502. STATE GRANTS.

       (a) General Grants.--The Attorney General may make grants 
     to States, for use by States, units of local government, and 
     Indian tribal governments for the purposes described in 
     section 501(b).
       (b) Amounts.--Of the amounts appropriated for the purposes 
     of this subtitle--
       (1) 4 percent shall be available for grants to Indian 
     tribal governments;
       (2) $500,000 shall be available for grants to applicants in 
     each State; and
       (3) the remaining funds shall be available for grants to 
     applicants in each State in an amount that bears the same 
     ratio to the amount of remaining funds as the population of 
     the State bears to the population of all of the States that 
     results from a distribution among the States on the basis of 
     each State's population in relation to the population of all 
     States (not including populations of Indian tribes).
       (c) Qualification.--Upon satisfying the terms of subsection 
     (d), any State shall be qualified for funds provided under 
     this subtitle upon certification that--
       (1) the funds shall be used for any of the purposes 
     described in section 501(b);
       (2) grantees and subgrantees shall develop a plan for 
     implementation and shall consult and coordinate with 
     nonprofit, nongovernmental victim services programs, 
     including sexual assault and domestic violence victim 
     services programs;
       (3) up to 30 percent shall be allocated to law enforcement, 
     up to 30 percent to prosecution grants, and at least 10 
     percent to State court systems; and
       (4) any Federal funds received under this subtitle shall be 
     used to supplement, not supplant, non-Federal funds that 
     would otherwise be available for activities funded under this 
     subtitle.
       (d) Application Requirements.--Each application shall 
     include the certifications of qualification required by 
     subsection (c). An application shall include--
       (1) documentation from the prosecution and law enforcement 
     programs to be assisted, demonstrating--
       (A) need for the grant funds;
       (B) intended use of the grant funds;
       (C) expected results from the use of grant funds; and
       (D) demographic characteristics of the populations to be 
     served, including age, marital status, disability, race, 
     ethnicity, and language background;
       (2) proof of compliance with the requirements for the 
     payment of forensic medical exams provided in section 505; 
     and
       (3) proof of compliance with the requirements for paying 
     filing and service fees for domestic violence cases provided 
     in section 506.
       (e) Disbursement.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the receipt 
     of an application under this subtitle, the Attorney General 
     shall--
       (A) disburse the appropriate sums provided for under this 
     subtitle; or
       (B) inform the applicant why the application does not 
     conform to the requirements of this section.
       (2) Regulations.--In disbursing monies under this subtitle, 
     the Attorney General shall issue regulations to ensure that 
     States will--
       (A) give priority to areas of varying geographic size with 
     the greatest showing of need based on the availability of 
     existing domestic violence and sexual assault programs in the 
     population and geographic area to be served in relation to 
     the availability of such programs in other such populations 
     and geographic areas;
       (B) determine the amount of subgrants based on the 
     population and geographic area to be served;
       (C) equitably distribute monies on a geographic basis 
     including nonurban and rural areas of various geographic 
     sizes;
       (D) recognize and address the needs of underserved 
     populations; and
       (E)(i) if, at the end of the 9th month of any fiscal year 
     for which funds are appropriated under section 507, the 
     amounts made available are unspent or unobligated, such 
     unspent or unobligated funds shall be reallotted to the 
     current fiscal year recipients in the victim services area 
     pursuant to section 502(c)(3)) proportionate to their 
     original allotment for the current fiscal year; and
       (ii) for the first 2 fiscal years following the effective 
     date of this Act, the Attorney General may waive the 
     qualification requirements of section 502(c), at the request 
     of the State and with the support of law enforcement and 
     prosecution grantees currently funded under this section, if 
     the reallocation of funds among law enforcement, prosecution, 
     victims' services, and State court systems mandated by this 
     subtitle adversely impacts victims of sexual assault, 
     domestic violence, and stalking, due to the reduction of 
     funds to programs and services funded under this section in 
     the prior fiscal year.
       (f) Federal Share.--The Federal share of a grant made under 
     this subtitle may not exceed 75 percent of the total costs of 
     the projects described in the application submitted.
       (g) Indian Tribes.--Funds appropriated by the Congress for 
     the activities of any agency of an Indian tribal government 
     or of the Bureau of Indian Affairs performing law enforcement 
     functions on any Indian lands may be used to provide the non-
     Federal share of the cost of programs or projects funded 
     under this subtitle.
       (h) Grantee Reporting.--
       (1) In general.--Upon completion of the grant period under 
     this subtitle, a State or Indian tribal grantee shall file a 
     performance report with the Attorney General explaining the 
     activities carried out, which report shall include an 
     assessment of the effectiveness of those activities in 
     achieving the purposes of this subtitle.
       (2) Certification by grantee and subgrantees.--A section of 
     the performance report shall be completed by each grantee and 
     subgrantee that performed the direct services contemplated in 
     the application, certifying performance of direct services 
     under the grant.
       (3) Suspension of funding.--The Attorney General shall 
     suspend funding for an approved application if--
       (A) an applicant fails to submit an annual performance 
     report;
       (B) funds are expended for purposes other than those 
     described in this subtitle; or
       (C) a report under paragraph (1) or accompanying 
     assessments demonstrate to the Attorney General that the 
     program is ineffective or financially unsound.
       (D) for failure to provide documentation, including 
     memoranda of understanding, contract, or other document of 
     any collaborative efforts with other agencies or 
     organizations.

     SEC. 503. DEFINITIONS.

       In this subtitle--
       (1) the term ``domestic violence'' includes felony or 
     misdemeanor crimes of violence committed by a current or 
     former spouse of the victim, by a person with whom the victim 
     shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabitating 
     with or has cohabitated with the victim as a spouse, by a 
     person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the 
     domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction 
     receiving grant monies, or by any other adult person against 
     a victim who is protected from that person's acts under the 
     domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction 
     receiving grant monies;
       (2) the term ``Indian country'' has the meaning stated in 
     section 1151 of title 18, United States Code;
       (3) the term ``Indian tribe'' means a tribe, band, pueblo, 
     nation, or other organized group or community of Indians, 
     including any Alaska Native village or regional or village 
     corporation (as defined in, or established pursuant to, the 
     Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et 
     seq.)), that is recognized as eligible for the special 
     programs and services provided by the United States to 
     Indians because of their status as Indians;
       (4) the term ``law enforcement'' means a public agency 
     charged with policing functions, including any of its 
     component bureaus (such as governmental victim services 
     programs);
       (5) the term ``prosecution'' means any public agency 
     charged with direct responsibility for prosecuting criminal 
     offenders, including such agency's component bureaus (such as 
     governmental victim services programs);
       (6) the term ``sexual assault'' means any conduct 
     proscribed by chapter 109A of title 18, United States Code, 
     whether or not the conduct occurs in the special maritime and 
     territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal 
     prison and includes both assaults committed by offenders who 
     are strangers to the victim and assaults committed by 
     offenders who are known or related by blood or marriage to 
     the victim; and
       (7) the term ``underserved populations'' includes 
     populations underserved because of geographic location (such 
     as rural isolation), underserved racial or ethnic 
     populations, and populations underserved because of special 
     needs, such as language barriers or physical disabilities.

     SEC. 504. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

       (a) Nonmonetary Assistance.--In addition to the assistance 
     provided under this subtitle, the Attorney General may 
     request any Federal agency to use its authorities and the 
     resources granted to it under Federal law (including 
     personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, and managerial, 
     technical, and advisory services) in support of State, 
     tribal, and local assistance efforts.
       (b) Reporting.--Not later than 180 days after the end of 
     each fiscal year for which grants are made under this 
     subtitle, the Attorney General shall submit to the Committee 
     on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate a report that 
     includes, for each State and for each grantee Indian tribe--

[[Page H4520]]

       (1) the number of grants made and funds distributed under 
     this subtitle;
       (2) a summary of the purposes for which those grants were 
     provided and an evaluation of their progress;
       (3) a statistical summary of persons served, detailing the 
     nature of victimization, and providing data on age, sex, 
     relationship of victim to offender, geographic distribution, 
     race, ethnicity, language, and disability; and
       (4) an evaluation of the effectiveness of programs funded 
     under this subtitle.
       (c) Regulations or Guidelines.--Not later than 120 days 
     after the date of enactment of this subtitle, the Attorney 
     General shall publish proposed regulations or guidelines 
     implementing this subtitle. Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of enactment, the Attorney General shall publish final 
     regulations or guidelines implementing this subtitle.

     SEC. 505. RAPE EXAM PAYMENTS.

       (a) Restriction of Funds.--
       (1) In general.--A State, Indian tribal government, or unit 
     of local government, shall not be entitled to funds under 
     this subtitle unless the State, Indian tribal government, 
     unit of local government, or another governmental entity 
     incurs the full out-of-pocket cost of forensic medical exams 
     described in subsection (b) for victims of sexual assault.
       (2) Redistribution.--Funds withheld from a State or unit of 
     local government under paragraph (1) shall be distributed to 
     other States or units of local government pro rata. Funds 
     withheld from an Indian tribal government under paragraph (1) 
     shall be distributed to other Indian tribal governments pro 
     rata.
       (b) Medical Costs.--A State, Indian tribal government, or 
     unit of local government shall be deemed to incur the full 
     out-of-pocket cost of forensic medical exams for victims of 
     sexual assault if any government entity--
       (1) provides such exams to victims free of charge to the 
     victim;
       (2) arranges for victims to obtain such exams free of 
     charge to the victims; or
       (3) reimburses victims for the cost of such exams if--
       (A) the reimbursement covers the full cost of such exams, 
     without any deductible requirement or limit on the amount of 
     a reimbursement;
       (B) the reimbursing governmental entity permits victims to 
     apply for reimbursement for not less than one year from the 
     date of the exam;
       (C) the reimbursing governmental entity provides 
     reimbursement not later than 90 days after written 
     notification of the victim's expense; and
       (D) the State, Indian tribal government, unit of local 
     government, or reimbursing governmental entity provides 
     information at the time of the exam to all victims, including 
     victims with limited or no English proficiency, regarding how 
     to obtain reimbursement.

     SEC. 506. FILING COSTS FOR CRIMINAL CHARGES.

       (a) In General.--A State, Indian tribal government, or unit 
     of local government, shall not be entitled to funds under 
     this subtitle unless the State, Indian tribal government, or 
     unit of local government--
       (1) certifies that its laws, policies, and practices do not 
     require, in connection with the prosecution of any 
     misdemeanor or felony domestic violence offense, that the 
     abused bear the costs associated with the filing of criminal 
     charges against the domestic violence offender, or the costs 
     associated with the issuance or service of a warrant, 
     protection order, or witness subpoena; or
       (2) gives the Attorney General assurances that its laws, 
     policies and practices will be in compliance with the 
     requirements of paragraph (1) within the later of--
       (A) the period ending on the date on which the next session 
     of the State legislature ends; or
       (B) 2 years.
       (b) Redistribution.--Funds withheld from a State, unit of 
     local government, or Indian tribal government under 
     subsection (a) shall be distributed to other States, units of 
     local government, and Indian tribal government, respectively, 
     pro rata.

     SEC. 507. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     subtitle $185,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001, 2002, 
     and 2003.

            Subtitle B--Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies

     SEC. 511. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

       (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this subtitle is to encourage 
     States, Indian tribal governments, and units of local 
     government to treat domestic violence as a serious violation 
     of criminal law.
       (b) Grant Authority.--The Attorney General may make grants 
     to eligible States, Indian tribal governments, or units of 
     local government for the following purposes:
       (1) To implement mandatory arrest or proarrest programs and 
     policies in police departments, including mandatory arrest 
     programs and policies for protection order violations.
       (2) To develop policies and training in police departments 
     to improve tracking of cases involving domestic violence.
       (3) To centralize and coordinate police enforcement, 
     prosecution, or judicial responsibility for domestic violence 
     cases in groups or units of police officers, prosecutors, or 
     judges.
       (4) To coordinate computer tracking systems to ensure 
     communication between police, prosecutors, and both criminal 
     and family courts.
       (5) To educate judges in criminal and other courts about 
     domestic violence and to improve judicial handling of such 
     cases.
       (c) Eligibility.--Eligible grantees are States, Indian 
     tribal governments, or units of local government that--
       (1) certify that their laws or official policies--
       (A) encourage or mandate arrests of domestic violence 
     offenders based on probable cause that an offense has been 
     committed; and
       (B) encourage or mandate arrest of domestic violence 
     offenders who violate the terms of a valid and outstanding 
     protection order;
       (2) demonstrate that their laws, policies, or practices and 
     their training programs discourage dual arrests of offender 
     and victim;
       (3) certify that their laws, policies, or practices 
     prohibit issuance of mutual restraining orders of protection 
     except in cases where both spouses file a claim and the court 
     makes detailed findings of fact indicating that both spouses 
     acted primarily as aggressors and that neither spouse acted 
     primarily in self-defense; and
       (4) certify that their laws, policies, or practices do not 
     require, in connection with the prosecution of any 
     misdemeanor or felony domestic violence offense, that the 
     abused bear the costs associated with the filing of criminal 
     charges or the service of such charges on an abuser, or that 
     the abused bear the costs associated with the issuance or 
     service of a warrant, protection order, or witness subpoena.

     SEC. 512. APPLICATIONS.

       (a) Application.--An eligible grantee shall submit an 
     application to the Attorney General that--
       (1) contains a certification by the chief executive officer 
     of the State, Indian tribal government, or local government 
     entity that the conditions of section 511(c) are met or will 
     be met within the later of--
       (A) the period ending on the date on which the next session 
     of the State or Indian tribal legislature ends; or
       (B) 2 years of the date of enactment of this Act;
       (2) describes plans to further the purposes stated in 
     section 511(a);
       (3) identifies the agency or office or groups of agencies 
     or offices responsible for carrying out the program; and
       (4) includes documentation from nonprofit, private sexual 
     assault and domestic violence programs demonstrating their 
     participation in developing the application, and identifying 
     such programs in which such groups will be consulted for 
     development and implementation.
       (b) Priority.--In awarding grants under this subtitle, the 
     Attorney General shall give priority to applicants that--
       (1) do not currently provide for centralized handling of 
     cases involving domestic violence by police, prosecutors, and 
     courts; and
       (2) demonstrate a commitment to strong enforcement of laws, 
     and prosecution of cases, involving domestic violence.

     SEC. 513. REPORTS.

       Each grantee receiving funds under this subtitle shall 
     submit a report to the Attorney General evaluating the 
     effectiveness of projects developed with funds provided under 
     this subtitle and containing such additional information as 
     the Attorney General may prescribe.

     SEC. 514. REGULATIONS OR GUIDELINES.

       Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Attorney General shall publish proposed regulations 
     or guidelines implementing this subtitle. Not later than 180 
     days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney 
     General shall publish final regulations or guidelines 
     implementing this subtitle.

     SEC. 515. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this subtitle--
       (1) the term `domestic violence' includes acts or threats 
     of violence, not including acts of self-defense, committed by 
     a current or former spouse of the victim, by a person with 
     whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is 
     cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the victim, by a 
     person who is or has been in a continuing social relationship 
     of a romantic or intimate nature with the victim, by a person 
     similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the 
     domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction, or by 
     any other person against a victim who is protected from that 
     person's acts under the domestic or family violence laws of 
     the jurisdiction; and
       (2) the term ``protection order'' includes any injunction 
     issued for the purpose of preventing violent or threatening 
     acts of domestic violence, including temporary and final 
     orders issued by civil or criminal courts (other than support 
     or child custody orders or provisions) whether obtained by 
     filing an independent action or as a pendente lite order in 
     another proceeding.

     SEC. 516. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     subtitle--
       (1) $63,000,000 for fiscal year 1999;
       (2) $67,000,000 for fiscal year 2000;
       (3) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;
       (4) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2002; and
       (5) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.

         TITLE VI--LIMITING THE EFFECTS OF VIOLENCE ON CHILDREN

     SEC. 601. DEFENSE TO CRIMINAL CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE OR 
                   PARENTAL ABDUCTION CHARGE.

       Section 1073 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``Whoever moves''

[[Page H4521]]

     and inserting ``(a) Whoever moves'' and by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(b) For any charge of parental abduction, of custodial 
     interference, or of felony criminal contempt of court related 
     to an underlying child custody or visitation determination, 
     that would otherwise provide a basis for prosecution under 
     this section, it shall be a defense to such prosecution that 
     the individual against whom this section is invoked--
       ``(1) acted pursuant to the provisions of a court order 
     valid when and where issued--
       ``(A) which granted the defendant legal custody or 
     visitation rights;
       ``(B) which was obtained in compliance with section 1738A 
     of title 28;
       ``(C) which is not inconsistent with such section or with 
     the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act as 
     promulgated by the Uniform Law Commissioners; and
       ``(D) which was in effect at the time the defendant left 
     the State;
       ``(2) was fleeing an incident or pattern of domestic 
     violence or sexual assault of the child, which had been 
     previously reported to law enforcement authorities; or
       ``(3) would otherwise have a defense under the terms of the 
     International Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (18 U.S.C. 
     1204).
       ``(c) The Attorney General shall issue guidance to assist 
     the United States Attorneys and the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation in determining when to decline to initiate or 
     to terminate an investigation or prosecution under subsection 
     (b) due to the potential availability of any defense.''.

     SEC. 602. FULL FAITH AND CREDIT GIVEN TO CHILD CUSTODY 
                   DETERMINATIONS.

       (a) Section Intent.--Section 1738A(a) of title 28, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 
     ``This section is intended to preempt any inconsistent State 
     law and to apply to every proceeding in the United States or 
     its territories that is not governed by inconsistent aspects 
     of any treaty to which the United States Government is a 
     signatory or has ratified that involves custody and 
     visitation concerning a minor child. Any provisions of a 
     protection order regarding the custody and visitation of a 
     minor child, whether consensual or not, otherwise consistent 
     with section 2265 of title 18 and with this section shall be 
     given full faith and credit by the courts of any State where 
     the party who sought the order seeks enforcement.''.
       (b) Definitions.--Section 1738A(b) of such title is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
       ``(4) `domestic violence' includes acts or threats of 
     violence, not including acts of self defense, committed by a 
     current or former spouse of the victim, by a person with whom 
     the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is 
     cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the victim, by a 
     person who is or has been in a continuing social relationship 
     of a romantic or intimate nature with the victim, by a person 
     similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the 
     domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction, or by 
     any other person against a victim who is protected from that 
     person's acts under the domestic or family violence laws of 
     the jurisdiction;
       ``(5) `sexual assault' means any conduct proscribed by 
     chapter 109A of title 18, United States Code, whether or not 
     the conduct occurs in the special maritime and territorial 
     jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison and 
     includes both assaults committed by offenders who are 
     strangers to the victim and assaults committed by offenders 
     who are known to the victim or related by blood or marriage 
     to the victim;'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) as 
     paragraphs (6), (7), and (8), respectively;
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (9) and by 
     striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (9) (as so redesignated) 
     the following:
       ``(10) `predominant aggressor' means the individual who has 
     been determined to be the principal perpetrator of violence, 
     by factors including--
       ``(A) history of domestic violence;
       ``(B) relative severity of the injuries inflicted on each 
     person;
       ``(C) the likelihood of future injury to each person;
       ``(D) whether one of the persons acted in self-defense; and
       ``(E) the degree to which one of the persons has acted with 
     more deliberate intent to control, isolate, intimidate, 
     emotionally demean, or cause severe pain or injury, or fear 
     of harm to the other or a third person''; and
       (5) by redesignating paragraph (8) as paragraph (11).
       (c) Condition for Custody Determination.--Section 
     1738A(c)(2)(C) of such title is amended--
       (1) by striking ``he'' and inserting ``the child, or a 
     sibling or parent of the child,''; and
       (2) by inserting ``, including acts of domestic violence by 
     the other parent'' after ``abuse''.
       (d) Jurisdiction.--Section 1738A(d) of such title is 
     amended by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, except that after 2 years have passed while a 
     child is living in another State after relocation due to 
     domestic violence or sexual assault of the child, the court 
     of the original State shall decline jurisdiction provided 
     that the courts of the new State would have personal 
     jurisdiction over the other parent under that State's law''.
       (e) Child Custody Determinations.--Section 1738A of such 
     title is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) A court may decline to exercise jurisdiction on 
     behalf of a parent who has engaged in domestic violence as a 
     predominant aggressor, if a court of another State has 
     emergency jurisdiction under subsection (c)(2)(C)(ii). A 
     court may decline to exercise jurisdiction on behalf of a 
     parent who has wrongfully taken the child from a State 
     without justification, or engaged in similar unjustifiable 
     conduct, unless no other State would have jurisdiction under 
     any provision of subsection (c).

                  TITLE VII--SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION

   Subtitle A--Standards, Practice, and Training for Sexual Assault 
                              Examinations

     SEC. 701. SHORT TITLE.

       This subtitle may be cited as the ``Standards, Practice, 
     and Training for Sexual Assault Examinations Act''.

     SEC. 702. STANDARDS, PRACTICE, AND TRAINING FOR SEXUAL 
                   ASSAULT EXAMINATIONS.

       (a) In General.--The Attorney General shall--
       (1) evaluate existing standards of training and practice 
     for licensed health care professionals performing sexual 
     assault forensic examinations and develop a national 
     recommended standard for training;
       (2) recommend sexual assault examination training for all 
     health care students to improve the recognition of injuries 
     suggestive of rape and sexual assault and baseline knowledge 
     of appropriate evidence collection; and
       (3) review existing national, State, and local protocols on 
     sexual assault for forensic examinations, and based on this 
     review, develop a recommended national protocol, and 
     establish a mechanism for its nationwide dissemination.
       (b) Consultation.--The Attorney General shall consult with 
     national, State, and local experts in the area of rape and 
     sexual assault, including but not limited to, rape crisis 
     centers, State sexual assault and domestic violence 
     coalitions and programs, criminal justice, forensic nursing, 
     forensic science, emergency room medicine, law, social 
     services, sex crimes in underserved communities as defined in 
     42 U.S.C. 3796gg-2(7).
       (c) Report.--The Attorney General shall ensure that no 
     later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, a 
     report of the directives in subsection (a) is submitted to 
     Congress.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $200,000 for 
     fiscal year 1999.

  Subtitle B--Prevention of Custodial Sexual Assault by Correctional 
                                 Staff

     SEC. 711. SHORT TITLE.

       This subtitle may be cited as the ``Prevention of Custodial 
     Sexual Assault by Correctional Staff Act''.

     SEC. 712. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) According to an extensive 1996 report by the Women's 
     Rights Project of Human Rights Watch, sexual abuse of women 
     prisoners by correctional officers is a serious problem in 
     our Nation's prisons, jails, and correctional facilities.
       (2) Custodial sexual assault of women by correctional 
     officers includes documented incidents of vaginal, oral, and 
     anal rape.
       (3) Because correctional officers wield near absolute power 
     over female prisoners, officers may abuse that power to 
     sexually assault and abuse female prisoners, as well as 
     engage in constant groping, harassment, and other abuse.

     SEC. 713. ESTABLISHMENT OF PREVENTION PROGRAM.

       (a) Program Guidelines.--
       (1) In general.--The Attorney General shall establish 
     guidelines for States and disseminate such information to the 
     States regarding the prevention of custodial sexual 
     misconduct by correctional staff.
       (2) Requirements.--Such guidelines shall include 
     requirements that--
       (A) prohibit a State department of corrections from hiring 
     correctional staff who have been convicted on criminal 
     charges, or found liable in civil suits, for custodial sexual 
     misconduct; and
       (B) each State department of corrections maintain 
     databases, including the names and identifying information of 
     individuals who have been convicted on criminal charges or 
     found liable in civil suits for custodial sexual misconduct 
     and to check these databases prior to hiring any correctional 
     staff.
       (3) National database.--This information shall also be 
     submitted to the Department of Justice where it will be 
     maintained and updated on a national database.
       (b) Release of Information.--The information collected 
     under subsection (a)(2) shall be treated as private data 
     except that--
       (1) such information may be disclosed to law enforcement 
     agencies for law enforcement purposes;
       (2) such information may be disclosed to government 
     agencies conducting confidential background checks; and
       (3) the designated State law enforcement agency and any 
     local law enforcement agency authorized by the State agency 
     may release relevant information that is necessary to protect 
     prisoners concerning a specific person whose name is included 
     in the database, except that the identity of a victim of

[[Page H4522]]

     an offense that requires information to be maintained under 
     this section shall not be released.
       (c) Immunity for Good Faith Conduct.--Law enforcement 
     agencies, employees of law enforcement agencies, and State 
     officials shall be immune from criminal or civil liability 
     for good faith conduct in releasing information under this 
     section.
       (d) Ineligibility for Funds.--
       (1) In general.--A State that fails to implement the 
     program as described under this section shall not receive 10 
     percent of the funds that would otherwise be allocated to the 
     State under subtitle A of title II of the Violent Crime 
     Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 13701).
       (2) Reallocation.--Any funds that are not allocated for 
     failure to comply with this section shall be reallocated to 
     States that comply with this section.
       (3) Compliance date.--Each State shall have not more than 3 
     years from the date of enactment of this Act in which to 
     implement this section, except that the Attorney General may 
     grant an additional 2 years to a State that is making good 
     faith efforts to implement this section.

     SEC. 714. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this subtitle--
       (1) the term ``correctional staff'' means any employee, 
     contractual employee, volunteer, or agent of a correctional 
     department who is working in any contact position with any 
     prisoners under the jurisdiction of that department; and
       (2) the term ``custodial sexual misconduct'' means any 
     physical contact, directly or through the clothing, with the 
     sexual or intimate parts of a person for the purpose of 
     sexual gratification of either party, when the--
       (A) parties involved are a person in custody of a 
     correctional department and a member of the correctional 
     staff; or
       (B) contact occurs under circumstances of coercion, duress, 
     or threat of force by a member of the correctional staff.

        TITLE VIII--FULL FAITH AND CREDIT FOR PROTECTION ORDERS

     SEC. 801. FULL FAITH AND CREDIT FOR PROTECTION ORDERS.

       (a) Section 2265 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Formula Grant Reduction for Noncompliance.--
       ``(1) Reduction.--The Attorney General shall reduce by 10 
     percent (for redistribution to other participating States 
     that comply with subsections (a) and (b)) the amount a State 
     would receive under subpart 1 of part E of title I of the 
     Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 if such 
     State fails to comply with the requirements of subsections 
     (a), (b), and (c).
       ``(2) Effective date.--The Attorney General may begin to 
     reduce funds described in paragraph (1) on the first day of 
     each fiscal year succeeding the first fiscal year beginning 
     after the date of the enactment of this subsection.
       ``(e) Registration.--Nothing in this section shall require 
     prior filing or registration of a protection order in the 
     enforcing State in order to secure enforcement pursuant to 
     subsection (a). Nothing in this section shall permit a State 
     to notify the party against whom the order has been made that 
     a protection order has been registered and/or filed in that 
     State.''
       ``(f) Notice.--Nothing in this section shall require 
     notification of the party against whom the order was made in 
     order to secure enforcement by a law enforcement officer 
     pursuant to subsection (a).''.
       (b) Definitions.--Section 2266 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``issued pursuant to State divorce and 
     child custody codes'' after ``custody orders''; and
       (2) by adding ``Custody and visitation provisions in 
     protection orders are subject to the mandates of this 
     chapter.'' after ``seeking protection.''.
       (b) Compliance--Full Faith and Credit.--Within 180 days, 
     the Attorney General shall issue regulations to determine 
     whether a State is in compliance with 18 U.S.C. 2265(a), (b), 
     and (c), taking into account the following factors:
       (1) The State's documented good faith efforts to ensure 
     compliance by judicial, law enforcement, and other State 
     officials, including the extent and nature of any training 
     programs, outreach, and other activities.
       (2) The degree to which any case of noncompliance by a 
     State official represents an isolated incident, rather than a 
     pattern of nonenforcement.
       (3) Any barriers to compliance presented by outdated 
     technology, recordkeeping problems, or similar issues, and 
     the State's documented good faith efforts to removing those 
     barriers.

     SEC. 802. GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Attorney General may provide grants to 
     assist States, Indian tribal governments, and units of local 
     government to develop and strengthen effective law 
     enforcement and recordkeeping strategies to assist States, 
     Indian tribal governments, and units of local government to 
     enforce protective orders issued by other States, Indian 
     tribal governments, or units of local government.
       (b) Uses of Funds.--
       (1) In general.--Grants under this section shall provide 
     training and enhanced technology compatible with existing law 
     enforcement systems including the National Crime Information 
     Center to enforce protection orders.
       (2) Uses of funds.--Funds received under this section may 
     be used to train law enforcement, prosecutors, court 
     personnel, and others responsible for the enforcement of 
     protection orders, and to develop, install, or expand data 
     collection and communication systems, including computerized 
     systems, linking police, prosecutors, and courts for the 
     purpose of identifying and tracking protection orders and 
     violations of protection orders and training.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to carry out this section, $5,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003.

 TITLE IX--FEDERAL WITNESS PROTECTION FOR VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

     SEC. 901. WITNESS PROTECTION.

       (a) Generally.--Section 3521(a)(1) of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended by inserting ``or of a victim of an 
     offense set forth in chapter 110A of this title directed at 
     victims of domestic violence,'' after ``other serious 
     offense,''.
       (b) Other Actions.--Section 3521(b)(1) of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended by inserting ``or a victim of 
     domestic violence,'' after ``potential witness,''.
       (c) Guidelines.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Attorney General shall 
     establish guidelines for determining eligibility for the 
     Federal witness protection program of persons who are 
     eligible for that program under the amendment made by 
     subsection (a).

    TITLE X--CIVILIAN JURISDICTION FOR CRIMES OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND 
                           DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

     SEC. 1001. CRIMINAL OFFENSES COMMITTED OUTSIDE THE UNITED 
                   STATES BY PERSONS ACCOMPANYING THE ARMED 
                   FORCES.

       (a) In General.--Title 18, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting after chapter 211 the following new chapter:

``CHAPTER 212--DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT OFFENSES COMMITTED 
                       OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES

``Sec.
``3261. Domestic violence and sexual assault offenses committed by 
              persons formerly serving with, or presently employed by 
              or accompanying, the Armed Forces outside the United 
              States.
``3262. Definitions for chapter.

     ``Sec. 3261. Domestic violence and sexual assault offenses 
       committed by persons formerly serving with, or presently 
       employed by or accompanying, the Armed Forces outside the 
       United States

       ``(a) In General.--Whoever, while serving with, employed 
     by, or accompanying the Armed Forces outside of the United 
     States, engages in conduct that would constitute a 
     misdemeanor or felony domestic violence or sexual assault 
     offense, if the conduct had been engaged in within the 
     special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United 
     States, shall be subject to prosecution in the Federal 
     District Court of the jurisdiction of origin.
       ``(b) Concurrent Jurisdiction.--Nothing contained in this 
     chapter deprives courts-martial, military commissions, 
     provost courts, or other military tribunals of concurrent 
     jurisdiction with respect to offenders or offenses that by 
     statute or by the law of war may be tried by courts-martial, 
     military commissions, provost courts, or other military 
     tribunals.
       ``(c) Action by Foreign Government.--No prosecution may be 
     commenced under this section if a foreign government, in 
     accordance with jurisdiction recognized by the United States, 
     has prosecuted or is prosecuting such person for the conduct 
     constituting such offense, except upon the approval of the 
     Attorney General of the United States or the Deputy Attorney 
     General of the United States (or a person acting in either 
     such capacity), which function of approval shall not be 
     delegated.

     ``Sec. 3262. Definitions for chapter

       ``As used in this chapter--
       ``(1) the term `Armed Forces' has the same meaning as in 
     section 101(a)(4) of title 10;
       ``(2) a person is `employed by the Armed Forces outside of 
     the United States' if the person--
       ``(A) is employed as a civilian employee of the Department 
     of Defense, as a Department of Defense contractor, or as an 
     employee of a Department of Defense contractor;
       ``(B) is present or residing outside of the United States 
     in connection with such employment; and
       ``(C) is not a national of the host nation; and
       ``(3) a person is `accompanying the Armed Forces outside of 
     the United States' if the person--
       ``(A) is a dependent of a member of the armed forces;
       ``(B) is a dependent of a civilian employee of the 
     Department of Defense;
       ``(C) is residing with the member or civilian employee 
     outside of the United States; and
       ``(D) is not a national of the host nation.''
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of chapters at the 
     beginning of part II of title

[[Page H4523]]

     18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to chapter 211 the following:

``212. Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Offenses Committed Outside 
    the United States.......................................3261''.....

     TITLE XI--PREVENTING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IN TRADITIONALLY 
                        UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES

     SEC. 1101. ELDER ABUSE, NEGLECT, AND EXPLOITATION.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) In general.--The terms `elder abuse, neglect, and 
     exploitation', `domestic violence', and `older individual' 
     have the meanings given the terms in section 102 of the Older 
     Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3002).
       (2) Sexual assault.--The term `sexual assault' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 2003 of the Omnibus Crime 
     Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796gg-2).
       (b) Curricula.--The Attorney General shall develop 
     curricula and offer, or provide for the offering of, training 
     programs to assist law enforcement officers and prosecutors 
     in recognizing, addressing, investigating, and prosecuting 
     instances of elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation, 
     including domestic violence, and sexual assault, against 
     older individuals.
       (c) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     such sums as may be necessary to carry out this subtitle.

   TITLE XII--VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN TRAINING FOR HEALTH PROFESSIONS

     SEC. 1201. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Violence Against Women 
     Training for Health Professions Act''.

     SEC. 1202. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT FORENSIC 
                   EVIDENCE.

       (a) In general.--In the case of a health professions, the 
     Attorney General shall award grants and contracts, giving 
     preference to any such entity (if otherwise a qualified 
     applicant for the award involved) that has in effect the 
     requirement that, as a condition of receiving a degree or 
     certificate (as applicable) from the entity, each student 
     have had significant training developed in consultation and 
     collaboration with national, State, and local domestic 
     violence and sexual assault coalitions and programs in 
     carrying out the following functions as a provider of health 
     care:
       (1) Identifying victims of domestic violence and sexual 
     assault, and maintaining complete medical records that 
     include documentation of the examination, treatment given, 
     and referrals made, and recording the location and nature of 
     the victim's injuries.
       (2) Examining and treating such victims, within the scope 
     of the health professional's discipline, training, and 
     practice.
       (b) Relevant health professions entities.--For purposes of 
     paragraph (1), a health professions entity specified in this 
     paragraph is any entity that is a school of medicine, a 
     school of osteopathic medicine, a graduate program in mental 
     health practice, a school of nursing, a program for the 
     training of physician assistants, or a program for the 
     training of allied health professionals.
       (c) Report to congress.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of the enactment of the Violence Against Women Training 
     for Health Professions Act, the Attorney General shall submit 
     to the House of Representatives, and the Senate, a report 
     specifying the health professions entities that are receiving 
     grants or contracts under this section; the number of hours 
     of training required by the entities for purposes of such 
     paragraph; the extent of clinical experience so required; and 
     the types of courses through which the training is being 
     provided, including the extent of involvement of nonprofit 
     nongovernmental domestic violence and sexual assault victims 
     services programs in the training.
       (d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) the term ``domestic violence'' includes acts or threats 
     of violence, not including acts of self defense, committed by 
     a current or former spouse of the victim, by a person with 
     whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is 
     cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the victim, by a 
     person who is or has been in a continuing social relationship 
     of a romantic or intimate nature with the victim, by a person 
     similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the 
     domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction, or by 
     any other person against a victim who is protected from that 
     person's acts under the domestic or family violence laws of 
     the jurisdiction; and
       (2) the term ``sexual assault'' means any conduct 
     proscribed by chapter 109A of title 18, United States Code, 
     whether or not the conduct occurs in the special maritime and 
     territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal 
     prison and includes both assaults committed by offenders who 
     are strangers to the victim and assaults committed by 
     offenders who are known to the victim or related by blood or 
     marriage to the victim.

   TITLE XIII--VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN INTERVENTION, PREVENTION, AND 
                           EDUCATION RESEARCH

     Subtitle A--Violence Against Women Prevention, Detection and 
                         Investigation Research

     SEC. 1301. FINDINGS.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) According to a Panel on Research on Violence Against 
     Women convened by the National Research Council in response 
     to the mandates by the Violence Against Women Act of 1994--
       (A) significant gaps exist in understanding the extent and 
     causes of violence against women and the impact and the 
     effectiveness of education, prevention, and interventions;
       (B) funding for research on violence against women is 
     spread across numerous Federal agencies with no mechanism 
     through which to coordinate these efforts or to link with 
     other federally sponsored research initiatives; and
       (C) research on violence against women would benefit from 
     an infrastructure that supports interdisciplinary efforts and 
     aids in integrating these efforts into practice and policy.
       (2) Despite the increased funding to prevent and respond to 
     violence against women in underserved populations, few 
     studies have examined incidence and prevalence data from the 
     perspective of racial, ethnic, language, age, disability, and 
     other underserved populations. Moreover, little is known 
     about the types of prevention, detection, and investigation 
     strategies that are most effective in underserved 
     populations.
       (3) Most studies currently focus on aspects of domestic 
     violence related to physical abuse. Few studies explore the 
     harm caused by emotional and psychological abuse and the 
     appropriate prevention, detection, and investigation 
     strategies for victims experiencing this form of abuse.
       (4) Violence exposure as a risk factor for disease must be 
     examined for a range of diseases and diagnoses to better 
     understand the correlation between violence and disease 
     including intervening variables.
       (5) Violence against women occurs within the context of a 
     sociocultural environment that should be studied to assist in 
     a greater understanding of those factors that promote and 
     maintain violence against women and to provide a framework 
     for developing and assessing education, prevention, and 
     intervention strategies.

     SEC. 1302. TASK FORCE.

       (a) Purposes.--The Attorney General shall establish a task 
     force to coordinate research on violence against women. The 
     task force shall comprise representation from all Federal 
     agencies that fund such research.
       (b) Uses of Funds.--Funds appropriated under this section 
     shall be used to--
       (1) develop a coordinated strategy to strengthen research 
     focussed on education, prevention, and intervention 
     strategies on violence against women;
       (2) track and report on all Federal research and 
     expenditures on violence against women;
       (3) identify gaps in research and develop criteria for all 
     Federal agencies for evaluating research proposals, taking 
     into account the context within which women live their lives, 
     including the broad social and cultural context as well as 
     individual factors; and
       (4) set priorities for research efforts that explore 
     factors such as race, social, and economic class, geographic 
     location, age, language, sexual orientation, disability, and 
     other factors that result in violent crimes against women.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriation.--There shall be 
     appropriated $500,000 for each of fiscal years 1999, 2000, 
     and 2001 to fulfill the purposes of this section.

     SEC. 1303. PREVENTION, DETECTION, AND INVESITIGATION RESEARCH 
                   GRANTS.

       (a) Purposes.--The Department of Justice shall make grants 
     to entities, including domestic violence and sexual assault 
     organizations, research organizations, and academic 
     institutions, to support research to further the 
     understanding of the causes of violent behavior against women 
     and to evaluate prevention, detection, and investigation 
     programs.
       (b) Use of Funds.--The research conducted under this 
     section shall include, but not be limited to the following 
     areas and others that may be identified by the Task Force 
     established under section 1302 of this title--
       (1) longitudinal research to study the developmental 
     trajectory of violent behavior against women and the way such 
     violence differs from other violent behaviors;
       (2) examination of risk factors for sexual and intimate 
     partner violence for victims and perpetrators, such as 
     poverty, childhood victimization and other traumas;
       (3) examination of short- and long-term efforts of programs 
     designed to prevent sexual and intimate partner violence;
       (4) outcome evaluations of interventions targeted at 
     children and teenagers;
       (5) examination of and documentation of the processes and 
     informal strategies women experience in attempting to manage 
     and end the violence in their lives; and
       (6) development and testing of effective methods of 
     screening and providing services at all points of entry to 
     the health care system, including mental health, emergency 
     medicine, and primary care.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated $6,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 
     1999, 2000, and 2001 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 1304. ADDRESSING GAPS IN RESEARCH.

       (a) Purposes.--The Department of Justice shall make grants 
     to domestic violence and sexual assault organizations, 
     research organizations and academic institutions for the 
     purpose of expanding knowledge about violence against women, 
     with a particular emphasis on exploring such issues as they 
     affect underserved communities.
       (b) Uses of Funds.--Funds appropriated under this section 
     shall be used to examine, but not be limited to, the 
     following areas--

[[Page H4524]]

       (1) development of national- and community-level survey 
     studies to measure the incidence and prevalence of violence 
     against women in underserved populations and the definitions 
     women use to describe their experience of violence;
       (2) qualitative and quantitative research to understand how 
     factors such as race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, age, 
     language, disability, and sexual orientation that result in 
     violent crimes against women;
       (3) study of the availability and accessibility of State 
     and local legal remedies to victims of intimate partner 
     violence within the context of a same sex intimate 
     relationship;
       (4) the use of nonjudicial alternative dispute resolution 
     (such as mediation, negotiation, conciliation, and 
     restorative justice models) in cases where domestic violence 
     is a factor, comparing nonjudicial alternative dispute 
     resolution and traditional judicial methods based upon the 
     quality of representation of the victim, training of 
     mediators or other facilitators, satisfaction of the parties, 
     and outcome of the proceedings, as well as other factors that 
     may be identified; and
       (5) other such research as may be determined by the Task 
     Force established under section 1302 in consultation with 
     domestic violence and sexual assault advocates, coalitions, 
     national experts, and researchers.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $4,500,000 for each of fiscal years 1999, 
     2000, and 2001 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 1305. STUDY.

       The United States Sentencing Commission shall study the 
     following and report to the Congress--
       (1) sentences given to persons incarcerated in Federal and 
     State prison for assault or homicide crimes in which the 
     relationship to the victim was a spouse, former spouse, or 
     intimate partner;
       (2) the effect of illicit drugs and alcohol on domestic 
     violence and the sentences imposed for offenses involving 
     such illicit drugs and alcohol where domestic violence 
     occurred;
       (3) the extent to which acts of domestic violence committed 
     against the defendant, including coercion, may play a role in 
     the commission of an offense;
       (4) analysis delineated by race, gender, type of offense, 
     and any other categories that would be useful for 
     understanding the problem; and
       (5) recommendations with respect to the offenses described 
     in this section particularly any basis for a downward 
     adjustment in any applicable guidelines determination.

     SEC. 1306. STATUS REPORT ON LAWS REGARDING RAPE AND SEXUAL 
                   ASSAULT OFFENSES.

       (a) Study.--The Attorney General, in consultation with 
     national, State, and local domestic violence and sexual 
     assault coalitions and programs, including, nationally 
     recognized experts on sexual assault, such as from the 
     judiciary, the legal profession, psychological associations, 
     and sex offender treatment providers, shall conduct a 
     national study to examine the status of the law with respect 
     to rape and sexual assault offenses and the effectiveness of 
     the implementation of laws in addressing such crimes and 
     protecting their victims. The Attorney General may utilize 
     the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of 
     Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime in carrying out 
     this section.
       (b) Report.--Based on the study required under subsection 
     (a), the Attorney General shall prepare a report, including 
     an analysis of the uniformity of the rape and sexual assault 
     laws including sex offenses committed against children and 
     sex offenses involving penetration of any kind among the 
     States and their effectiveness in prosecuting crimes of rape 
     and sexual assault offenses as follows:
       (1) Definitions of rape and sexual assault, including any 
     marital rape exception and any other exception or downgrading 
     of offense.
       (2) Element of consent and coercive conduct, including 
     deceit.
       (3) Element of physical resistance and affirmative 
     nonconsent as a precondition for conviction.
       (4) Element of force, including penetration requirement as 
     aggravating factor and use of coercion.
       (5) Evidentiary matters--
       (A) inferences--timeliness of complaint under the Model 
     Penal Code;
       (B) post traumatic stress disorder (including rape trauma 
     syndrome) relevancy of scope and admissibility;
       (C) rape shield laws--in camera evidentiary determinations;
       (D) prior bad acts; and
       (E) corroboration requirement and cautionary jury 
     instructions.
       (6) Existence of special rules for rape and sexual assault 
     offenses.
       (7) Use of experts.
       (8) Sentencing--
       (A) plea bargains;
       (B) presentence reports;
       (C) recidivism and remorse;
       (D) adolescents;
       (E) psychological injuries;
       (F) gravity of crime and trauma to victim; and
       (G) race.
       (9) Any personal or professional relationship between the 
     perpetrator and the victim.
       (10) Any recommendations of the Attorney General for 
     reforms to foster uniformity among the States in addressing 
     rape and sexual assault offenses in order to protect victims 
     more effectively while safeguarding due process.
       (c) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``rape and sexual assault offenses'' includes carnal 
     knowledge of a child, abduction with intent to defile, 
     indecent liberties, beastiality, forcible sodomy, sexual 
     penetration with an animate or inanimate object, forced 
     sexual intercourse (labia majora penetration or anus 
     penetration), cunnilingus, fellatio, anallingus, anal 
     intercourse, sexual battery, aggravated sexual battery, and 
     sexual abuse, accomplished by use of force, threats, or 
     intimidation.
       (d) Report.--The Attorney General shall ensure that no 
     later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the study required under subsection (a) is completed and a 
     report describing the findings made is submitted to Congress.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriation.--It is authorized that 
     $200,000 be appropriated to carry out the study required by 
     this section.

     SEC. 1307. RESEARCH CENTERS.

       The Attorney General shall establish 3 research centers to 
     support the development of research and training program to 
     focus on violence against women, to provide mechanisms for 
     collaboration between researchers and practitioners, and to 
     provide technical assistance for integrating research into 
     service provision. Each Center shall be organized around a 
     research area such as epidemiology and measurement of 
     violence against women, causes and risk factors, and 
     prevention and intervention evaluation research. At least one 
     of the centers shall be established at an entity other than 
     an academic institution. There are authorized to be 
     appropriated $3,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1999, 
     2000, and 2001 to carry out this section.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 465, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and a Member opposed will each 
control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, in some respects, this may be the most significant 
amendment to this legislation. It has been worked on by many Members 
and many organizations, and I urge its consideration, because it would 
add several important titles to the bill, all designed to combat 
violence against women.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment provides grants to states for law 
enforcement and prosecution to combat violence against women and to 
encourage police departments to initiate pro-arrest policies in 
domestic violence cases. It provides standards, practices and training 
for sexual assault examinations in order to assure that the necessary 
forensic evidence is gathered to prosecute sexual assault cases.
  It has a provision designed to protect children from domestic 
violence and sexual assault, allowing those with legal custody or 
visitation rights to a child to use as a defense to the charge of 
parental kidnapping the fact that the child has been subject to 
domestic violence or sexual assault. In order, however, to maintain 
this defense, the domestic violence must have previously been reported 
to law enforcement authorities.
  The amendment also provides standards and training for sexual assault 
examinations, in order to ensure that such examinations are conducted 
in a uniform and professional manner that best preserves the evidence 
and to improve recognition of injuries suggestive of sexual assault. 
The Attorney General is also directed to develop a recommended protocol 
for these examinations.
  The amendment that is before us now includes a section to prevent 
custodial sexual assault. The problem of custodial sexual assault is an 
extensive one, well-documented by the Women's Rights Project of Human 
Rights Watch. Because correctional officers wield near absolute power 
over female prisoners, officers occasionally abuse that power to 
assault and abuse female inmates. This amendment requires the Attorney 
General to establish guidelines for states to initiate programs to 
prevent such conduct.
  In addition, we provide for reducing states' Byrne grant funding if 
they fail to give full faith and credit to the protections issued by 
other states. In the 1994 Crime Bill, as part of the original Violence 
Against Women Act, we enacted a provision requiring states to enforce 
the protective orders of other states. Notwithstanding, many states 
still refuse to enforce the protective orders of other states.
  What we do in this part of our amendment is put teeth into the 
original law by advising states that if they fail to enforce protective 
orders, they

[[Page H4525]]

will lose money. I think as a result of this section that this problem 
will rapidly disappear. Once states realize that failure to enforce 
protective orders has serious financial consequences, I am confident 
that they will step up their enforcement efforts.
  In another effort to prosecute serious domestic violence offenders, 
this amendment contains a provision to allow the victims of Federal 
domestic violence to enter the Federal Witness Protection Program, if 
necessary. In this way, we ensure victims will be willing to testify 
against those who are the most serious offenders. This is a problem 
that I have had judges comment on more than once, about people who are 
afraid to go to court because they are afraid of the consequences that 
they had been threatened with.
  There are other provisions here that include a section providing 
civilian jurisdiction for sexual assault in domestic violence crimes 
committed outside of the United States by individuals accompanying the 
armed services, and another place where we authorize the Attorney 
General to develop a curricula to train law enforcement officers and 
prosecutors in recognizing, addressing, investigating and prosecuting 
elder abuse, negative and exploitation.
  Mr. Chairman, finally, the last title of the amendment provides 
research for prevention, detection and investigation of violence 
against women, requiring that the United States Sentencing Commission 
study the sentences given domestic violence defendants and to make 
recommendations regarding those sentences, if adjustment is necessary.
  This title would require the Attorney General to, again, conduct a 
study to examine the status of the law with respect to rape and sexual 
assault offenses and the effectiveness of the implementation of 
existing laws in addressing such crimes and protecting victims. Because 
the provisions contained in this are all geared to fighting those who 
prey on women and children, and because this amendment is drawn from 
the Violence against Women Act, which the gentlewoman from Maryland 
(Mrs. Morella) has done an outstanding job in helping us garner over 
100 sponsors for, I urge all Members to support the amendment and vote 
in favor of the only legislation related to violence against women that 
will likely come through this 105th Congress.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I do not oppose this amendment. Unless 
there is another Member in opposition, I ask unanimous consent to claim 
the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) 
is recognized for 30 minutes.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, as I indicated, I do not plan to oppose the Conyers 
amendment, but I do have, as the gentleman knows, serious reservations 
about some of the features in this amendment. I feel the gentleman has 
worked diligently with my team in the subcommittee to work out some of 
the problems that they perceived. Others we may need to address down 
the road in the conference.
  First of all, the Republican side of the aisle, our side, has a 
record on domestic violence and the 1994 Crime Bill's Violence Against 
Women Act that I think is abundantly clear. We have been highly 
supportive of many programs that have become crucial resources to 
battered and abused women throughout the country. By the end of this 
year, the Republican Congress will have spent nearly $1 billion over 
four years on the Violence Against Women Program.
  The Conyers amendment focuses almost entirely on domestic violence 
and elder abuse, but contains no provisions pertaining specifically to 
sexual crimes against children, which is the heart of the underlying 
bill. While domestic violence and elder abuse are very important 
issues, to which Congress has responded in numerous ways over the fast 
fiscal years, H.R. 3494 is focused specifically on sex crimes against 
children.

  Subtitle A of the amendment provides for reauthorization of a 1994 
Violence Against Women Act program which provides grants to states for 
law enforcement and prosecution to combat violence against women. While 
we support the goals of the grant program and the strong enforcement of 
the domestic violence laws, the need to reauthorize the program is not 
imminent. It does not expire until the year 2000. We may want to 
examine the currently existing program to see if it could be improved 
upon between now and then.
  Title 8 will reduce states' Federal crime fighting funds in the Byrne 
Grant Program if they fail to enforce protection orders issued by other 
states, as is currently required by Federal law. While I certainly 
support the goals of the proposal, I am generally opposed to provisions 
which further reduce Byrne Grant penalties for failing to do something 
required by Congress.
  Title 181 allows victims of Federal domestic violence to enter into 
the Federal Witness Protection Program. This program originally was 
established for witnesses for organized crime prosecutions. No 
assessment has been made as to the cost and the ability of the program 
to incorporate this influx of women or families entering into the 
program.
  While I have these concerns that I have expressed about the 
amendment, as I said earlier, the gentleman from Michigan has been very 
accommodating when we worked with his staff to bring the amendment to 
the floor, and, consequently, I will support the amendment in the form 
it is in today, with the understanding we can work out some of these 
concerns further in conference, and I believe the gentleman is 
agreeable to that.
  Mr. Chairman, with that in mind, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), who has worked 
at not only the Federal level, but at the state level as a state 
senator and with national organizations for many years.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I would first rise to commend the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum) for his leadership on the underlying bill. This 
is a critical issue in terms of protecting children. Having been 
involved for the last 20 years in Michigan on the issue of child abuse 
and neglect, I am very aware of the need for this legislation, and 
appreciate the gentleman's leadership.
  I also rise to support the amendment that adds to what I believe is 
an important bill and strengthens it to focus on domestic violence. 
Every 18 seconds in our country, a woman is abused in her home or by 
someone that she knows very closely, and usually there are children 
involved in that situation. So this is a family issue. If we wish to 
stop this cycle of abuse and certain child predators that are familiar 
to the child, we need to focus on the broad issue of domestic violence.
  I am very pleased that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) has 
included H.R. 3910 into this amendment, which is legislation that I 
introduced a month or so ago that focuses on the issue of training. I 
would just emphasize for a moment that this amendment is important as 
we take the next step in protecting women and children from domestic 
violence.
  We have on the books around the country now laws that say domestic 
violence is a crime. We have shelters. I was very pleased in 1979 to 
lead the effort in Lansing, Michigan, to create one of the first two 
domestic violence shelters in Michigan. We have the laws on the books; 
we have the shelters.
  However, we do not see the level of enforcement happening evenly 
across our country because we have not provided the resources to train 
and support law enforcement officers, to provide them with the tools 
they need to work in a team, to provide the resources and the equipment 
that they need, and to be able to allow them to collect data and have 
the technical assistance to be able to fully utilize the laws that are 
on the books.
  The Conyers amendment is critical in guaranteeing that the resources 
are available for our judiciary, our prosecutors, our law enforcement 
agencies, so that the training and the support is

[[Page H4526]]

there, so that the protections that are now on the books for women and 
children can be fully utilized.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe one of the most basic issues affecting us 
today in our society is the issue of violence in the home. If we in our 
communities can band together, if we can provide resources at the 
Federal level so that our local communities can develop the teams that 
they need to enforce, to educate, to be involved, to help our victims, 
and, preferable, to prevent domestic violence before it happens, we 
will save undue costs, immeasurable costs, in other systems, that we 
will not have to employ all across the community to pick up the pieces 
from domestic violence.

                              {time}  1500

  I urge the adoption of the amendment, the inclusion of it as it moves 
through the process. Again, I commend the sponsor of the underlying 
amendment and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for his 
foresight in focusing on domestic violence in this important 
legislation.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Maryland (Mrs. Morella).
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, 
and I thank him also for his leadership as chair of the Subcommittee on 
Crime of the Committee on the Judiciary, and his willingness to support 
allowing the Conyers amendment.
  I rise in strong support of the Conyers amendment. Again, I want to 
thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for the yeoman's work 
he has done championing the fight against domestic violence in all 
regards.
  This is an amendment that has bipartisan support. I also want to 
thank the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow) who has always been 
there, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), and a lot of others, 
the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn) who support very strongly 
what we are doing and can do against domestic violence.
  I am very pleased and very excited about this amendment because it 
adds several critical provisions to the Violence Against Women Act to 
H.R. 3494, and it strengthens the commitment of this Congress to our 
Nation's families, protecting women and children from the crimes of 
domestic violence, child abuse, and sexual assault.
  The legislation will also provide, I am assured, funding for victims 
services. I am pleased the legislation will help train medical 
personnel in treating victims of domestic violence and sexual assault 
legislation that I have introduced.
  Every year, more than 3 million children are exposed to violence in 
their homes. Children who witness such violence then often suffer from 
depression and anxiety. They frequently react in two ways. They either 
learn aggressive behaviors, or they become passive and indifferent. The 
result is often school violence, truancy, street crime, drug abuse, 
teenage pregnancies, and even suicide.
  In a national survey of over 6,000 families, 50 percent of the men 
who assaulted their wives also frequently abused their children. A 1994 
Child Welfare League of America report indicated that children from 
homes where domestic violence occurs are physically abused and/or 
seriously neglected at a rate 15 times the national average.
  The abuse does not always stop at separation and divorce. Sometimes 
it escalates. Custody litigation or the threat of it becomes another 
weapon for the batterer. Shared custody, when there is a history of 
abuse, often sets the stage for continued access to the victim and her 
children.
  Fearing for their own lives and their children's, many battered women 
flee with their children to family, friends, and shelters, many 
crossing over State lines. Many live as fugitives. In desperation, 
these parents defy court visitation and custody orders and, as a 
result, face prosecution by State and Federal authorities on charges of 
kidnapping, custodial interference, and/or contempt of court.
  Today these protected parents have no defense against these criminal 
charges. Currently, some States will consider an affirmative defense 
based on credible evidence of domestic violence or child abuse for 
women fleeing to protect themselves and their children. But there is no 
Federal law guaranteeing that defense.
  Moreover, such a defense would extend the protections for battered 
women and their children that already exist under the International 
Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act.
  Mr. Chairman, the Conyers amendment will protect and save the lives 
of America's women and children. I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield as much time as she may consume to 
the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the author of this amendment, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the distinguished ranking 
minority member on the committee, and I thank the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum) for their work on this important issue.
  I rise in strong support of the Conyers amendment. My colleagues, the 
Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act is a good bill. The 
Conyers amendment will make it even better. Domestic violence strikes 
every 15 seconds in our Nation. Six million women are battered every 
year, 4,000 of them battered to death. These figures are absolutely 
unacceptable. We must ensure that every American household is free from 
the scourge of violence.
  Mr. Chairman, for too long, our Nation turned a blind eye towards 
domestic violence. Thankfully that has begun to change.
  In 1994, this Congress took a significant step forward in the war 
against domestic violence by passing the Violence Against Women Act. 
The amendment offered by the distinguished ranking member today will 
build on this landmark legislation by giving law enforcement additional 
resources to fight violence against women.
  The Conyers amendment, which includes provisions contained in 
recently introduced Violence Against Women Act II will help protect 
women and their children by encouraging local communities to initiate 
pro-arrest policies by educating prosecutors, judges, and medical 
professions about domestic violence and by shielding victims from 
further abuse.
  It will keep children safe by allowing States to refuse to recognize 
a custody order from another State if evidence of domestic violence or 
sexual assault was overlooked in the custody decision. It will improve 
the way we investigate and prosecute sexual assault cases.
  It is my hope, Mr. Chairman, that this House will also pass the other 
important provisions in the Violence Against Women Act II this year, 
provisions that would increase resources to battered women's shelters, 
encourage employers to establish antiviolence protections at work, 
improve student safety, expand prosecution for hate crimes, and 
increase domestic violence victims' access to legal services.
  Once again, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for his 
leadership on this amendment. I thank my colleague, the gentlewoman 
from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) with whom I have worked on this issue for 
a very long time, and we have had some very important results. I thank 
the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow) and all my colleagues who 
have been leaders and understand the importance of domestic violence 
reform.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
for a colloquy with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum).
  In an effort to satisfy the germaneness concerns in title IV of this 
amendment, I deleted a reference to victim services and to change a 
formula for grant distribution.
  The long and short of this discussion is that we want to fully 
encompass all of the program's purposes under the current law, and we 
are hoping that we can keep this in mind because we had to satisfy the 
bottleneck requirement of parliamentary germaneness. That is where this 
discussion goes.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CONYERS. I am pleased to yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I understand the gentleman's concern and 
agree there was no intent to remove the victims services from the grant

[[Page H4527]]

program, which is what the gentleman had to do, as I understand it, to 
get germaneness satisfied. I will be happy to work with the gentleman 
in the conference to restore the reference to victims services as well 
as the original grant distribution formula. I am more than happy to do 
that.
  Mr. CONYERS. I thank the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. I am sorry it did not meet the germaneness requirement.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, how much time remains on our side?
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Chambliss). The gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Conyers) has 15\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. I 
especially thank him for his leadership. I can do that with respect to 
at least some of the bills in his package for the entire Women's Caucus 
because the Women's Caucus has agreed that Title I in the 
reauthorizations of a Violence Against Women Act should all be enacted, 
and two of the gentleman's provisions come from Title I.
  I want this body to know, therefore, that the women of the House do 
want, especially these two provisions, to be enacted. One is subtitle A 
for law enforcement and prosecution grants to States to strengthen law 
enforcement and prosecution strategies to combat violent crimes against 
women. The other are grants to encourage arrest policies.
  We cannot say enough about the need to encourage and implement 
arrests when, in fact, we know that, in very many of these cases, that 
is really the only strategy to prevent violence against women and 
children.
  Beyond these two sections of the gentleman's amendment are a number 
that I personally support, and I believe the great majority of the 
women in the House support, but are not on our list of bills.
  We have already met with the minority leader because the Women's 
Caucus has seven must-pass bills this year that we have overwhelming 
support in our caucus for. We believe since we are a strongly and 
rigorously bipartisan caucus that we have support, therefore, in the 
entire House. I have indicated what the two provisions are from the 
amendment of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
  Let me say for myself and for so many other Members that his 
provision from title 6 limiting the effects of violence on children is 
so important. Perhaps Members saw the piece that was on national 
television this week about an underground that seeks to take children 
who are or have been abducted or have been sexually abused. This 
provision would free a custodial parent from a kidnapping or child 
abduction charge if that parent, of course, has custody.
  I must say the gentleman has chosen carefully the provisions of his 
amendment. It is difficult for me to believe that there is any Member 
of this House who would oppose any of his amendments, and I think only 
a few dollars here and there stand between him and this entire 
amendment.
  I compliment the gentleman for saying he does not oppose the 
gentleman's amendments. Some of them should be slam dunk. Taking 10 
percent of a State's Byrne grant when it fails to support the 
protective order of another State is absolutely essential as one more 
example of why this bill is, for all intents and purposes, a motherhood 
bill. I appreciate the gentleman for bringing it forward.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Conyers amendment 
which seeks to combat the frightening realities of domestic violence. 
Domestic violence robs its victims of their health, their dignity, and 
their personal safety.
  We speak so often in this chamber about the importance of keeping our 
families safe and healthy. I believe that, as well as protecting our 
families from the dangers of the outside world, we must also protect 
them from the violence which may occur inside the home.
  The Conyers amendment continues the efforts begun by the landmark 
Violence Against Women Act of 1994, and I urge my colleagues to vote in 
favor of it.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 4 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Houston, Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), a member of the 
Committee on the Judiciary who has given yeoman service in this area.
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Conyers) has been more than persistent and dedicated on this issue 
and with the joint cooperation, collaboration, and help of the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum).
  It is very vital that I rise to the floor of the House to support the 
Conyers amendment. But when I say vital, it is vital for the survival 
and continuity of the Violence Against Women Act, which is part of that 
act for 1998. But we now have the opportunity to move this forward.
  I think it is keenly important to emphasize what your purpose was and 
why it is so important to move this aspect of the legislation to be 
part of H.R. 3494.
  First of all, it deals with the assistance to local law enforcement 
and Federal law enforcement who are overwhelmed. They tell you they are 
overwhelmed with these insidious crimes. Of course we would like to be 
able to say that we have extinguished these violence acts against 
women, that there is a recognition there that this will not be 
tolerated, but, tragically, that is not the case.

                              {time}  1515

  So the gentleman provides assistance to law enforcement agencies, 
important research. Many times we believe that a crime is only finding 
the perpetrator, locking that person up. Crime has a lot to do with 
researching how best to implement the laws, how best to stop the crime 
from happening.
  The Violence Against Women Act deals with violent acts against women, 
and I am here to say that, unfortunately, those acts have not stopped. 
In fact, they are increasing or still existing. Whether it is a 
domestic violence question, whether it is date rape, whether it is 
another altercation, these kinds of tragedies still occur. I think this 
is an appropriate vehicle for which we can implement these particular 
aspects that are so very important.
  It is well that the gentleman has included the limits on violence on 
children, and one thing that we do not talk a lot about, and that is 
elderly abuse. It is a silent, if you will, action, where maybe the 
person who is taking care of the elderly person is under stress, maybe 
it is a sickly elderly person that has been sick, and that brings 
about, in someone's mind and heart, frustration.
  We know doctors have documented the extensive amount of violence 
against the elderly, sometimes in nursing homes. This is not a blanket 
indictment of nursing homes. Sometimes it is personally in homes. I 
have read stories where they have taken the older child into custody 
because, out of frustration, they have done something. They have 
abused, whether it is physical abuse or actually mental abuse, they 
have abused that elderly person. This deals with elderly abuse, and I 
think it is so very important.
  Prevention of custodial sexual assault by correctional staff, which 
includes the concerns that we have with sexual misconduct in the 
custody of correctional staff.
  Full faith and credit for protective orders. We are very gratified 
that we live in the United States of America, and we hold very sacred 
the sovereign rights of States. In fact, this Congress has many times 
risen to affirm States' rights. But I tell the Members, States' rights 
is not adequate to ensure that Illinois laws to protect women, 
children, and the elderly, are as well respected, particular orders, by 
New York or California or my own State of Texas. So the full faith and 
credit for protective orders are key, as well.
  The Federal witness protection program for victims of domestic 
violence. Many times we will hear stories of women, such as in my own 
Houston area women's center, that works so hard with women who have 
been involved in domestic violence. Most

[[Page H4528]]

women leave in the dark of night, or leave when the spouse is away, 
frightened for themselves. This provides protection for them, sending 
them off into witness protection programs, so the perpetrator can come 
to his own justice without the future intimidation of going after that 
woman and her children.
  I believe, Mr. Chairman, this is a valid amendment, and I would 
simply ask that we quickly pass this, and thank the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for his leadership, and thank the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum) as well for his leadership.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield such time as he may 
consume the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), a former 
prosecutor with a great deal of experience in this area and a member of 
the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, let me begin by congratulating and 
acknowledging the work of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime; the gentlewoman from Maryland 
(Mrs. Morella), whose work in this area is well known nationally; of 
course, my friend, the ranking member of the Committee on the 
Judiciary, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers); and also a 
colleague of mine, a new Member, but clearly someone who understands 
that the issue of domestic violence and the necessity for training in 
terms of police officers, the courts, the probation service, and the 
community at large is essential if we are going to continue to deal 
with the issue of domestic violence in America. That is the gentlewoman 
from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow).
  The ranking member made reference to the fact that, in my former life 
for more than two decades, I was a prosecutor. I am proud to say that 
back in 1978 I initiated the first domestic violence unit in the United 
States. It was not simply out of a concern for women, nor for their 
children. It was because of a recognition that this is not simply a 
woman's issue. It is far more. It talks and speaks to what we are about 
as a community and what we are about as a Nation.
  For far too long we have ignored the fact that women and their 
children were the victims of violence behind closed doors. But it did 
not stop there. When I initiated that effort back in the mid-1970s, it 
was because I happened to have within my jurisdiction, as district 
attorney in the greater Boston area, the maximum security prison in the 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
  It became very clear to me quickly that if we were ever going to do 
anything serious about crime, not just in Massachusetts but in this 
Nation, we had to address the issue of the violent family, because 
believe me, violence is a learned behavior.
  As a result of that responsibility, of investigating and prosecuting 
crimes within that institution, I became very familiar with the social 
history of the inmates that resided in that institution, all male. In 
excess of 95 percent of the men that were incarcerated in that 
institution were the legacy of the violent family. They were either the 
victims of violence or they were witnesses to it.
  They learned at home that violence was the norm and it was 
acceptable. But their conduct did not stop at the threshold of the 
house, it went into the community. They were not there, incarcerated 
for crimes of domestic violence, they were there for the whole range of 
crimes, from drug trafficking to armed robbery to housebreaks to rape 
against strangers. They had learned violence and carried it into our 
communities.
  Domestic violence is the breeding ground, if you will, for all 
categories of crime. So the most important crime initiative that we as 
a Congress can ever, ever institute is to deal with that issue, and 
that is being done today. That is being done on the floor of this House 
by these men and women who recognize that particular fact.
  I congratulate them, and I urge passage.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I will not consume much time. I simply want to conclude 
the debate on the amendment by again reiterating that this side 
supports the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers). We have supported legislation many times over the years that 
is designed to help the situation with violence against women, 
including the Violence Again Women Act.
  While there are some technical matters we still have to work out in 
conference, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), myself, and 
others, when this bill goes with the other body, the amendment in its 
present form is one that I do support to get it there. I think it does 
contain the germ of improving this current status, and it has some 
really good ideas in it, so I urge its adoption.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Announcement by the Chairman pro tempore

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 465, 
proceedings will now resume on amendment No. 9 offered by the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Sherman) on which further proceedings were 
postponed.


                 Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Sherman

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is a demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Sherman) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 247, 
noes 175, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 229]

                               AYES--247

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burton
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cannon
     Capps
     Carson
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clayton
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Cook
     Costello
     Cox
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     DeFazio
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doggett
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Graham
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Minge
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Nadler
     Neal
     Neumann
     Ney
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Redmond
     Reyes
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Schumer
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith, Adam
     Snowbarger
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Sununu
     Talent
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns

[[Page H4529]]


     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)

                               NOES--175

     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (WI)
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Canady
     Cardin
     Castle
     Clay
     Clement
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Conyers
     Cooksey
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Eshoo
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fattah
     Foley
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Gekas
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Goss
     Granger
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hamilton
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hefner
     Hobson
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Kanjorski
     Kasich
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Lee
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Livingston
     Lofgren
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McIntosh
     McKinney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Northup
     Norwood
     Obey
     Owens
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pelosi
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Riggs
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snyder
     Spence
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stokes
     Stump
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thurman
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Wexler
     White
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Becerra
     Berman
     Farr
     Gonzalez
     Hilliard
     Inglis
     Lewis (GA)
     Moakley
     Parker
     Paxon
     Shays

                              {time}  1611

  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD and Mr. COYNE changed their vote from ``aye'' 
to ``no.''
  Messrs. HORN, METCALF, BRYANT, RADANOVICH, HALL of Texas, Mrs. 
CHENOWETH, and Messrs. GOODE, WATKINS, LEWIS of Kentucky, McHUGH, 
STRICKLAND, YOUNG of Alaska, WHITFIELD, GUTIERREZ, STENHOLM, TALENT, 
REDMOND, CRAPO, MASCARA, JONES, McNULTY, TAYLOR of North Carolina, 
SKELTON, POSHARD, COSTELLO, SOLOMON, NEUMANN, LIPINSKI, KILDEE, ENSIGN, 
OBERSTAR, DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado, RILEY, POMEROY, CHABOT, HILL, COX 
of California, HERGER, WYNN, PETERSON of Pennsylvania, ROEMER, Ms. 
DANNER, and Messrs. SHIMKUS, LEVIN, QUINN, Ms. SLAUGHTER, and Messrs. 
WALSH, GIBBONS, KLECZKA, EVANS, Ms. SANCHEZ, Mrs. KELLY, and Messrs. 
FRELINGHUYSEN, PETRI, RODRIGUEZ, MANZULLO, Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri, 
Mr. DOGGETT, Ms. WOOLSEY, and Messrs. NEY, TURNER, HINOJOSA, COOK, 
SKEEN, TOWNS, BENTSEN, CLYBURN, PASCRELL, SMITH of New Jersey, HANSEN, 
SERRANO, BALDACCI, WEYGAND, Mrs. MALONEY of New York, Mr. McINNIS, Mr. 
ALLEN, Mrs. McCARTHY of New York, Mr. WICKER, Ms. CARSON, and Messrs. 
WATTS of Oklahoma, LATHAM, McGOVERN, NUSSLE, Ms. VELAZQUEZ, Ms. PRYCE 
of Ohio, and Messrs. CHAMBLISS, GORDON, DICKEY, YATES, MANTON, ENGLISH 
of Pennsylvania, SAXTON, JOHNSON of Wisconsin, TRAFICANT, Mrs. LOWEY, 
and Messrs. KUCINICH, REYES, FORD, PAYNE, KIM, MARTINEZ, NEAL of 
Massachusetts, MARKEY, ISTOOK, BERRY, OLVER, JENKINS, Ms. RIVERS, and 
Messrs. SMITH of Michigan, RAMSTAD, CALVERT, BARTLETT of Maryland, 
CUNNINGHAM, PRICE of North Carolina, ETHERIDGE, Ms. FURSE, Mrs. 
CLAYTON, and Messrs. SUNUNU, BURTON of Indiana, HOSTETTLER, MEEHAN, 
UPTON, PETERSON of Minnesota, Mrs. CAPPS, and Messrs. PACKARD, BARCIA, 
WAMP, CHRISTENSEN, GRAHAM, ABERCROMBIE, BARRETT of Nebraska, DREIER, 
BUNNING, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, and Messrs. FOSSELLA, GOODLING, 
HOYER, BROWN of Ohio, HOEKSTRA, RYUN, BISHOP, CAMP, GANSKE, Mrs. CUBIN, 
and Messrs. JOHN, HULSHOF, GOODLATTE, TIERNEY, WELDON of Pennsylvania, 
TIAHRT, SAWYER, WISE, CUMMINGS, LUCAS of Oklahoma, PEASE, and Mrs. BONO 
changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Chambliss). The question is on the 
committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, 
was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
LaTourette) having assumed the chair, Mr. Chambliss, Chairman pro 
tempore of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 3494) to amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to 
violent sex crimes against children, and for other purposes, pursuant 
to House Resolution 465, reported the bill back to the House with an 
amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the 
Whole? If not, the question is on the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


         Motion to Recommit Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I am in its present form, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas moves to recommit the bill H.R. 
     3494 to the Committee on the Judiciary with instructions to 
     report the same back to the House forthwith with the 
     following amendment:
       Add at the end the following:

       TITLE V--LIMITING AVAILABILITY OF PORNOGRAPHY ON COMPUTERS

     SEC. 501. LIMITING AVAILABILITY OF PORNOGRAPHY ON COMPUTERS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation and the Attorney General shall begin a study of 
     computer-based technologies and other approaches to the 
     problem of the availability of pornographic material to 
     children on the Internet in order to develop possible 
     amendments to Federal criminal law and other law enforcement 
     techniques to respond to this problem.
       (b) Contents of Study.--The study shall address the 
     following:
       (1) The capabilities of present-day computer-based control 
     technologies for controlling electronic transmission of 
     pornographic images.
       (2) Research needed to develop computer-based control 
     technologies to the point of practical utility for 
     controlling the electronic transmission of pornographic 
     images.
       (3) Any inherent limitations of computer-based control 
     technologies for controlling electronic transmission of 
     pornographic images.
       (4) Operational policies or management techniques needed to 
     ensure the effectiveness of these control technologies for 
     controlling electronic transmission of pornographic images.
       (5) Policy and criminal law and law enforcement options for 
     promoting the deployment of such control technologies and the 
     costs and benefits of such options.
       (6) The possible constitutional limitations or constraints 
     with respect to any of the matters described in paragraphs 
     (1) through (5).
       (c) Final Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this section, the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation shall make a final report of the results of the 
     study to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the 
     Senate. The

[[Page H4530]]

     final report of the study shall set forth the findings, 
     conclusions, and recommendations of the Council and shall be 
     submitted to relevant Government agencies and congressional 
     committees.

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask 
unanimous consent that the motion to recommit be considered as read and 
printed in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Texas?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  1615

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The gentlewoman from Texas 
is recognized for 5 minutes in support of her motion to recommit.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, during the debate of this 
legislation we have found that there are many ways of our children 
being attacked by pornographic images. The motion to recommit instructs 
the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Attorney General to begin a 
study of computer-based technologies and other approaches to the 
problem of the availability of pornographic material to children on the 
Internet in order to develop possible amendments to Federal criminal 
law and other law enforcement techniques to respond to this problem. 
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for their 
leadership on this issue.
  Finally, this motion would address the capabilities of present-day 
computer-based control technologies for controlling electronic 
transmission of pornographic images and our ability to impose 
technological restrictions on the access of these images by children. 
It will also address research needed to develop a computer-based 
control technologies to the point of practical utility for controlling 
the electronic transmission of pornographic images. Our children should 
have continuous access to the Internet, but they should not have to be 
subjected to pornographic images.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and 
thank him for his leadership.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee) and I merely want to say that this is one of the most 
important issues that we have in dealing with children. Pornography on 
the Internet is a very serious problem, and I urge that the 
gentlewoman's motion be agreed to.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Michigan very much again for his leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime of the House Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, this is an amendment that is being 
adopted, and I hope it will be in this motion to recommit that really 
was technically flawed and was not permitted under the rule because of 
the germaneness problem. The gentlewoman has corrected it. It is a 
study that we really would like to do, something I have embraced and 
support the gentlewoman on.
  So I urge a yes vote on the motion to recommit and thank the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for it.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the remainder of 
my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does any Member seek time in opposition to 
the motion to recommit?
  If not, without objection, the previous question is ordered on the 
motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The motion to recommit was agreed to.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the instructions of the House 
in the motion to recommit, I report the bill, H.R. 3494, back to the 
House with an amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment:
       Add at the end the following:

       TITLE V--LIMITING AVAILABILITY OF PORNOGRAPHY ON COMPUTERS

     SEC. 501. LIMITING AVAILABILITY OF PORNOGRAPHY ON COMPUTERS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation and the Attorney General shall begin a study of 
     computer-based technologies and other approaches to the 
     problem of the availability of pornographic material to 
     children on the Internet in order to develop possible 
     amendments to Federal criminal law and other law enforcement 
     techniques to respond to this problem.
       (b) Contents of Study.--The study shall address the 
     following:
       (1) The capabilities of present-day computer-based control 
     technologies for controlling electronic transmission of 
     pornographic images.
       (2) Research needed to develop computer-based control 
     technologies to the point of practical utility for 
     controlling the electronic transmission of pornographic 
     images.
       (3) Any inherent limitations of computer-based control 
     technologies for controlling electronic transmission of 
     pornographic images.
       (4) Operational policies or management techniques needed to 
     ensure the effectiveness of these control technologies for 
     controlling electronic transmission of pornographic images.
       (5) Policy and criminal law and law enforcement options for 
     promoting the deployment of such control technologies and the 
     costs and benefits of such options.
       (6) The possible constitutional limitations or constraints 
     with respect to any of the matters described in paragraphs 
     (1) through (5).
       (c) Final Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this section, the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation shall make a final report of the results of the 
     study to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the 
     Senate. The final report of the study shall set forth the 
     findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Council and 
     shall be submitted to relevant Government agencies and 
     congressional committees.

  Mr. McCOLLUM (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were-- yeas 416, 
nays 0, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 16, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 230]

                               YEAS--416

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green

[[Page H4531]]


     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kim
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryun
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Snyder
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Paul
       

                             NOT VOTING--16

     Becerra
     Berman
     Farr
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Hilliard
     Hutchinson
     Inglis
     Johnson, Sam
     Lewis (GA)
     Meeks (NY)
     Moakley
     Parker
     Paxon
     Shays
     Smith, Adam

                              {time}  1637

  Mr. DELAHUNT changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________