Congressional Record, Volume 144 Issue 75 (Thursday, June 11, 1998)

[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

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.

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.

____________________