[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 82 (Monday, June 22, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H4884-H4891]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE APPROPRIATION AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 
                          1999, 2000, AND 2001

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 3303) to authorize appropriations for the Department of Justice 
for fiscal years 1999, 2000 and 2001; to authorize appropriations for 
fiscal years 1999 and 2000 to carry out certain programs administered 
by the Department of Justice, to amend title 28 of the United States 
Code with respect to the use of funds available to the Department of 
Justice; and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3303

       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 ``Department of Justice 
     Appropriation Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1999, 2000, and 
     2001''.

 TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999, 2000, 
                                AND 2001

                    Subtitle A--Specific Provisions

     SEC. 101. SUMS AUTHORIZED TO BE APPROPRIATED.

       There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 
     1999, 2000, and 2001, to carry out the activities of the 
     Department of Justice (including any bureau, office, board, 
     division, commission, or subdivision thereof), the following 
     sums:
       (1) For General Administration, salaries and expenses: 
     $238,085,000 for fiscal year 1999, $249,989,000 for fiscal 
     year 2000, and $262,489,000 for fiscal year 2001.
       (2) For Administrative Review and Appeals: $144,863,000 for 
     fiscal year 1999, $152,106,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
     $159,712,000 for fiscal year 2001, for administration of 
     pardon and clemency petitions and for immigration related 
     activities.
       (3) For the Office of Inspector General: $34,610,000 for 
     fiscal year 1999, $36,341,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
     $38,158,000 for fiscal year 2001, which shall include--
       (A) not to exceed $10,000 to meet unforeseen emergencies of 
     a confidential character, to be expended under the direction 
     of the Attorney General, and to be accounted for solely on 
     the certificate of the Attorney General; and
       (B) funds for the purchase, lease, maintenance, and 
     operation of motor vehicles without regard to the general 
     purchase price limitation.
       (4) For General Legal Activities: $485,506,000 for fiscal 
     year 1999, $509,781,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
     $535,270,000 for fiscal year 2001, which shall include--
       (A) not less than $4,000,000 for each fiscal year for the 
     investigation and prosecution of denaturalization and 
     deportation cases involving alleged Nazi war criminals; and
       (B) not to exceed $20,000 for each fiscal year to meet 
     unforeseen emergencies of a

[[Page H4885]]

     confidential character to be expended under the direction of 
     the Attorney General and to be accounted for solely on the 
     certificate of the Attorney General.
       (5) For the Antitrust Division: $102,845,000 for fiscal 
     year 1999, $107,987,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
     $113,386,000 for fiscal year 2001.
       (6) For United States Attorneys: $1,106,993,000 for fiscal 
     year 1999, $1,162,343,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
     $1,220,460,000 for fiscal year 2001.
       (7) For the Federal Bureau of Investigation: $3,014,654,000 
     for fiscal year 1999, $3,164,679,000 for fiscal year 2000, 
     and $3,322,913,000 for fiscal year 2001, which shall 
     include--
       (A) not to exceed $14,146,000 for each fiscal year--
       (i) for construction, acquisition, or renovation of 
     buildings (including equipment for such buildings) and sites, 
     by purchase or as otherwise authorized by law;
       (ii) for conversion or extension of federally owned 
     buildings; and
       (iii) for preliminary planning and design of projects;
     to remain available until expended; and
       (B) not to exceed $70,000 for each fiscal year to meet 
     unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character to be 
     expended under the direction of the Attorney General and to 
     be accounted for solely on the certificate of the Attorney 
     General.
       (8) For the United States Marshals Service: $529,143,000 
     for fiscal year 1999, $554,785,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
     $582,525,000 for fiscal year 2001, which shall include--
       (A) not to exceed $6,300,000 for each fiscal year--
       (i) for construction, acquisition, or renovation of 
     buildings (including equipment for such buildings) and sites, 
     by purchase or as otherwise authorized by law;
       (ii) for conversion or extension of federally owned 
     buildings; and
       (iii) for preliminary planning and design of projects;

     to remain available until expended; and
       (B) $10,000,000 for each fiscal year for administrative 
     expenses of the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation 
     System to remain available until expended.
       (9) For the Drug Enforcement Administration: $1,193,102,000 
     for fiscal year 1999, $1,252,358,000 for fiscal year 2000, 
     and $1,314,994,000 for fiscal year 2001, which shall 
     include--
       (A) not to exceed $8,000,000 for each fiscal year--
       (i) for construction, acquisition, or renovation of 
     buildings (including equipment for such buildings) and sites, 
     by purchase or as otherwise authorized by law;
       (ii) for conversion or extension of federally owned 
     buildings; and
       (iii) for preliminary planning and design of projects;

     to remain available until expended;
       (B) not to exceed $70,000 for each fiscal year to meet 
     unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character to be 
     expended under the direction of the Attorney General and to 
     be accounted for solely on the certificate of the Attorney 
     General or the Deputy Attorney General; and
       (C) not to exceed $15,000,000 for each fiscal year for 
     diversion control.
       (10) For the Immigration and Naturalization Service: 
     $2,727,490,000 for fiscal year 1999, $2,839,756,000 for 
     fiscal year 2000, and $2,981,544,000 for fiscal year 2001, 
     which shall include--
       (A) not to exceed $118,170,000 for each fiscal year--
       (i) for construction, acquisition, or renovation of 
     buildings (including equipment for such buildings) and sites, 
     by purchase or as otherwise authorized by law;
       (ii) for conversion or extension of federally owned 
     buildings; and
       (iii) for preliminary planning and design of projects;

     to remain available until expended;
       (B) not to exceed $50,000 for each fiscal year to meet 
     unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character to be 
     expended under the direction of the Attorney General and to 
     be accounted for solely on the certificate of the Attorney 
     General; and
       (C) not to exceed $4,000,000 for each fiscal year to 
     establish and operate--
       (i) a district office in Memphis, Tennessee, for the States 
     of Tennessee, Arkansas, and Kentucky, and the portion of the 
     State of Mississippi north of the city of Jackson;
       (ii) a district office in San Jose, California, for the 
     counties of Monterey, Santa Clara, San Benito, and Santa Cruz 
     of the State of California;
       (iii) a suboffice in Nashville, Tennessee, for the counties 
     of Anderson, Blount, Campbell, Cannon, Carter, Cheatham, 
     Claiborne, Clay, Cocke, Cumberland, Davidson, DeKalb, 
     Dickson, Fentress, Grainger, Greene, Hamblen, Hancock, 
     Hawkins, Houston, Humphreys, Jackson, Jefferson, Johnson, 
     Knox, Loudon, Macon, Monroe, Montgomery, Morgan, Overton, 
     Pickett, Putnam, Roane, Robertson, Rutherford, Scott, Sevier, 
     Smith, Stewart, Sullivan, Sumner, Trousdale, Unicoi, Union, 
     Washington, White, Williamson, and Wilson of the State of 
     Tennessee; and
       (iv) a district office in Charlotte, North Carolina, for 
     the States of North Carolina and South Carolina.
       (11) For Fees and Expenses of Witnesses: $95,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 1999, $99,750,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
     $104,738,000 for fiscal year 2001, which shall remain 
     available until expended and which shall include not to 
     exceed $6,000,000 for each fiscal year for planning, 
     construction, renovation, maintenance, remodeling, and repair 
     of buildings, and the purchase of equipment incidental 
     thereto, for protected witness safesites.
       (12) For Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement: 
     $304,014,000 for fiscal year 1999, $319,215,000 for fiscal 
     year 2000, and $335,176,000 for fiscal year 2001, for 
     expenses not otherwise provided for, for the investigation 
     and prosecution of individuals involved in organized crime 
     drug trafficking, except that any funds obligated from 
     appropriations authorized by this paragraph may be used under 
     authorities available to the organizations reimbursed from 
     such funds.
       (13) For the Federal Prison System, including the National 
     Institute of Corrections: $4,508,480,000 for fiscal year 
     1999, $4,733,900,000 for fiscal year 2000, and $4,970,595,000 
     for fiscal year 2001.
       (14) For the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission: 
     $1,335,000 for fiscal year 1999, $1,402,000 for fiscal year 
     2000, and $1,472,000 for fiscal year 2001.
       (15) For the Community Relations Service: $8,899,000 for 
     fiscal year 1999, $9,344,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
     $9,812,000 for fiscal year 2001.
       (16) For the Assets Forfeiture Fund: $23,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 1999, $24,150,000 for fiscal year 2000, and $25,358,000 
     for fiscal year 2001, as may be necessary for the payment of 
     expenses as authorized by section 524 of title 28, United 
     States Code.
       (17) For Support of United States Prisoners in Non-Federal 
     Institutions: $450,858,000 for fiscal year 1999, $473,401,000 
     for fiscal year 2000, and $497,072,000 for fiscal year 2001, 
     which shall remain available until expended. Such sums may be 
     expended to reimburse appropriate health care providers for 
     the care, diagnosis, and treatment of United States prisoners 
     and individuals adjudicated in Federal courts as not guilty 
     by reason of insanity, but only at rates that do not exceed 
     the actual cost of such care, diagnosis, and treatment. Not 
     to exceed $20,000,000 for each fiscal year shall remain 
     available until expended for the purpose of entering into 
     contracts for only the reasonable and actual cost to assist 
     the government of any State, territory, or political 
     subdivision thereof for purposes of renovating, constructing, 
     and equipping any facility that confines Federal detainees, 
     in accordance with regulations to be issued by the Attorney 
     General comparable to the regulations issued under section 
     4006 of title 18, United States Code.
       (18) For the United States Parole Commission: $7,621,000 
     for fiscal year 1999, $8,002,000 for fiscal year 2000, and 
     $8,402,000 for fiscal year 2001.

     SEC. 102. FEDERAL PRISON INDUSTRIES.

       Notwithstanding section 4129 of title 18, United States 
     Code, not to exceed $3,266,000 for fiscal year 1999, and not 
     to exceed $3,429,000 for fiscal year 2000, and not to exceed 
     $3,601,000 for fiscal year 2001, of the funds available to 
     Federal Prison Industries may be used for--
       (1) administrative expenses; and
       (2) services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United 
     States Code;

     to be computed on an accrual basis in accordance with the 
     current prescribed accounting system of Federal Prison 
     Industries. Such funds shall be exclusive of depreciation, 
     payment of claims, and expenditures that such accounting 
     system requires to be capitalized or charged to the cost of 
     commodities acquired or produced (including selling and 
     shipping expenses) and expenses incurred in connection with 
     acquisition, construction, operation, maintenance, 
     improvement, protection, or disposition of facilities and 
     other property of Federal Prison Industries.

                     Subtitle B--General Provisions

     SEC. 151. APPOINTMENT OF ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT UNITED STATES 
                   ATTORNEYS; REDUCTION OF CERTAIN LITIGATION 
                   POSITIONS.

       (a) Appointments Required.--Not later than September 30, 
     2000, the Attorney General may exercise authority under 
     section 542 of title 28, United States Code, to appoint 200 
     assistant United States attorneys in addition to the number 
     of assistant United States attorneys serving on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.
       (b) Selection of Appointees.--Individuals first appointed 
     under subsection (a) shall be appointed from among attorneys 
     who are incumbents of 200 full-time litigation positions in 
     divisions of the Department of Justice and whose official 
     duty station is at the seat of Government.
       (c) Termination of Positions.--Each of the 200 litigation 
     positions that become vacant by reason of an appointment made 
     in accordance with subsections (a) and (b) shall be 
     terminated at the time the vacancy arises.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for fiscal 
     years 1999 and 2000 to carry out this section.

        TITLE II--AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR PROGRAMS

     SEC. 201. AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT 
                   ACT OF 1994.

       (a) Expeditious Deportation for Denied Asylum Applicants.--
     Section 130005(c) of the Violent Crime Control and Law 
     Enforcement Act of 1994 (8 U.S.C. 1158 note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3) by striking ``and'' at the end,

[[Page H4886]]

       (2) in paragraph (4) by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon, and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) $90,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
       ``(6) $90,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.''.
       (b) Amendments to Violence Against Women Act of 1994.--
     Section 40114 of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 
     (Public Law 103-322; 108 Stat 1910) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2) by striking ``and'' at the end,
       (2) in paragraph (3) by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon, and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) $500,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
       ``(5) $500,000 for fiscal year 2000.''.
       (c) Improving Border Controls.--Section 130006(a) of the 
     Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (8 
     U.S.C. 1101 note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3) by striking ``and'' at the end,
       (2) in paragraph (4) by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon, and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
       ``(6) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.''.
       (d) Expanded Special Deportation Proceedings.--Section 
     130007(d) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement 
     Act of 1994 (8 U.S.C. 1252 note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3) by striking ``and'' at the end.
       (2) in paragraph (4) by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon, and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
       ``(6) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.''.
       (e) Training Programs.--Section 40152(c) of the Violent 
     Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 
     13941(c)) is amended by striking paragraphs (1) and (2), and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(1) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
       ``(2) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.''.
       (f) Missing Alzheimer's Disease Patient Alert Program.--
     Section 240001(d) of the Violent Crime Control and Law 
     Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14181(d)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2) by striking ``and'' at the end,
       (2) in paragraph (3) by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon, and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) $900,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
       ``(5) $900,000 for fiscal year 2000.''.
       (g) Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Program.--Section 
     220002(h) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement 
     Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14171(h)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2) by striking ``and'' at the end,
       (2) in paragraph (3) by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon, and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) $750,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
       ``(5) $750,000 for fiscal year 2000.''.
       (h) Rural Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Enforcement 
     Assistance Act.--Section 40295(c)(1) of the Violent Crime 
     Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 
     13971(c)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``and'' at the end,
       (2) in subparagraph (C) by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting a semicolon, and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
       ``(E) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.''.

     SEC. 202. AMENDMENTS TO THE ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH 
                   PENALTY ACT OF 1996.

       The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 
     (Public Law 104-132; 110 Stat. 1214) is amended--
       (1) in section 819(b) by striking ``for fiscal'' and all 
     that follows through ``section'', and inserting ``to carry 
     out this section $5,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 and 
     $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2000'', and
       (2) in section 821 by striking ``not more than $10,000,000 
     for fiscal year 1997'' and inserting ``$10,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 1999 and $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2000''.

     SEC. 203. AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER PROPERTY OF MARGINAL VALUE.

       Section 524(c)(9)(B) of title 28, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``year 1997'' and inserting ``years 1999 
     and 2000''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:

     ``Such transfer shall be subject to satisfaction by the 
     recipient involved of any outstanding lien against the 
     property transferred.''.

     SEC. 204. COMMUNICATIONS ASSISTANCE.

       The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (47 
     U.S.C. 1001-1021) is amended--
       (1) in section 108(c)(3) by striking ``on or before January 
     1, 1995'' and inserting ``before October 1, 2000'',
       (2) in section 109--
       (A) in subsection (a)--
       (i) in the heading by striking ``January 1, 1995'' and 
     inserting ``October 1, 2000'', and
       (ii) by striking ``January 1, 1995'' and inserting 
     ``October 1, 2000'',
       (B) in subsection (b)--
       (i) in the heading by striking ``January 1, 1995'' and 
     inserting ``October 1, 2000'',
       (ii) in paragraph (1)--
       (I) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by striking 
     ``January 1, 1995'' and inserting ``October 1, 2000'', and
       (II) in subparagraph (J) by striking ``January 1, 1995'' 
     and inserting ``October 1, 2000'', and
       (iii) in paragraph (2) by striking ``January 1, 1995'' and 
     inserting ``October 1, 2000'', and
       (C) in subsection (d)--
       (i) in the heading by striking ``January 1, 1995'' and 
     inserting ``October 1, 2000'', and
       (ii) by striking ``January 1, 1995'' and inserting 
     ``October 1, 2000'',
       (3) in section 110 by striking ``and 1998'' and inserting 
     ``1998, 1999, and 2000'', and
       (4) in section 111(b) by striking ``on the date that is 4 
     years after the date of enactment of this Act'' and inserting 
     ``October 1, 2000''.

     SEC. 205. CRIMINAL ALIEN ASSISTANCE.

       Section 241(i)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1231(i)(5)) is amended by striking subparagraphs (A) 
     through (F) and inserting the following:
       ``(A) $750,000,000 for fiscal year 1999;
       ``(B) $800,000,000 for fiscal year 2000; and
       ``(C) $850,000,000 for fiscal year 2001.''.

                TITLE III--PERMANENT ENABLING PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. PERMANENT AUTHORITY.

       (a) Amendment.--Chapter 31 of title 28, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 530B. Authority to use available funds

       ``(a) Permitted Uses.--Except to the extent provided 
     otherwise by law applicable to funds available to carry out 
     the activities of the Department of Justice (including any 
     bureau, office, board, division, commission, or subdivision 
     thereof) and in addition to authority provided in subsections 
     (a) and (b) of section 524 of this title, the Attorney 
     General may use such funds as follows:
       ``(1) General permitted uses.--Such funds may be used for 
     the following:
       ``(A) The purchase, lease, maintenance, and operation of 
     passenger motor vehicles, or police-type motor vehicles for 
     law enforcement purposes, without regard to general purchase 
     price limitation for the then current fiscal year.
       ``(B) The purchase of insurance for motor vehicles, boats, 
     and aircraft operated in official Government business in 
     foreign countries.
       ``(C) Services of experts and consultants, including 
     private counsel, as authorized by section 3109 of title 5, 
     and at rates of pay for individuals not to exceed the maximum 
     daily rate payable from time to time under section 5332 of 
     title 5.
       ``(D) Not to exceed $200,000 for each fiscal year for 
     official receptions and representation expenses, in 
     accordance with distributions, procedures, and regulations 
     established by the Attorney General.
       ``(E) Unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character, 
     to be expended under the direction of the Attorney General 
     and accounted for solely on the certificate of the Attorney 
     General.
       ``(F) Miscellaneous and emergency expenses authorized or 
     approved by the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney 
     General, the Associate Attorney General, or the Assistant 
     Attorney General for Administration.
       ``(G) In accordance with procedures established and 
     regulations issued by the Attorney General--
       ``(i) attendance at meetings and seminars;
       ``(ii) conferences and training; and
       ``(iii) advances of public moneys under section 3324 of 
     title 31.
     Travel advances of such funds to law enforcement personnel 
     engaged in undercover activity shall be considered to be 
     public money for purposes of section 3527 of title 31.

       ``(H) For the conduct of its activities, including for 
     contracting with individuals for personal services abroad, 
     except that such individuals shall not be regarded as 
     employees of the United States for the purpose of any law 
     administered by the Office of Personnel Management.
       ``(I) Payment of interpreters and translators who are not 
     citizens of the United States, in accordance with procedures 
     established and regulations issued by the Attorney General.
       ``(2) Specific permitted uses.--
       ``(A) Aircraft and boats.--Funds available for United 
     States Attorneys, for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 
     for the United States Marshals Service, for the Drug 
     Enforcement Administration, and for the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service may be used for the purchase, lease, 
     maintenance, and operation of aircraft and boats, for law 
     enforcement purposes.
       ``(B) Payment of rewards; purchase of evidence.--Funds 
     available for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, for the 
     Drug Enforcement Administration, for the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service, and for the Federal Prison System may 
     be used for the payment of rewards, for the purchase of 
     evidence, and for payment for information in connection with 
     law enforcement.
       ``(C) Purchase of ammunition and firearms; firearms 
     competitions.--Funds available for United States Attorneys, 
     for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, for the United 
     States Marshals Service, for the Drug Enforcement 
     Administration, and for the Immigration and Naturalization 
     Service may be used for--
       ``(i) the purchase of ammunition and firearms; and
       ``(ii) participation in firearms competitions.
       ``(3) Uniforms.--Funds available for the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service and for the Federal Prison System may 
     be used for expenses or allowances for uniforms as authorized 
     by section 5901 of title 5 but without regard to the general 
     purchase price limitation for the then current fiscal year.

[[Page H4887]]

       ``(4) Fees and expenses of witnesses.--Funds available for 
     Fees and Expenses of Witnesses may be used for expenses, 
     mileage, compensation, and per diem in lieu of subsistence, 
     of witnesses as authorized by law (including advances of 
     public money), but no witness may be paid more than 1 
     attendance fee for any 1 calendar day.
       ``(5) Federal bureau of investigation.--(A) Funds available 
     to the Federal Bureau of Investigation may be used for the 
     conduct of its activities, including for--
       ``(i) expenses necessary for the detection and prosecution 
     of crimes against the United States;
       ``(ii) protection of the person of the Attorney General;
       ``(iii) investigations regarding official matters under the 
     control of the Department of Justice and the Department of 
     State, as may be directed by the Attorney General;
       ``(iv) the confidential lease of surveillance sites for law 
     enforcement purposes; and
       ``(v) acquisition, collection, classification, and 
     preservation of identification and other records and their 
     exchange with, and for the official use of, the duly 
     authorized officials of the Federal Government, of States, of 
     cities, and of such other institutions, as authorized by law, 
     such exchange to be subject to cancellation if dissemination 
     is made outside the receiving departments or related 
     agencies.
       ``(B)(i) The Federal Bureau of Investigation may establish 
     and collect fees for the processing of noncriminal employment 
     and licensing fingerprint records. Such fees shall represent 
     the full cost of furnishing the service.
       ``(ii) Such fees collected shall be credited to the 
     Salaries and Expenses, Federal Bureau of Investigation 
     appropriation without regard to section 3302(b) of title 31 
     and, to the extent specified in appropriations Acts, shall be 
     available until expended for salaries and other expenses 
     incurred in processing such records.
       ``(iii) No fee shall be assessed in connection with the 
     processing of requests for criminal history records by 
     criminal justice agencies for criminal justice purposes or 
     for employment in criminal justice agencies.
       ``(6) Immigration and naturalization service.--Funds 
     available for the Immigration and Naturalization Service may 
     be used for the administration and enforcement of laws 
     relating to immigration, naturalization, and alien 
     registration, including for--
       ``(A) acquisition of land as sites for enforcement fences, 
     and construction incidental to such fences;
       ``(B) cash advances to aliens for meals and lodging en 
     route;
       ``(C) refunds of maintenance bills, immigration fines, and 
     other items properly returnable, except deposits of aliens 
     who become public charges and deposits to secure payment of 
     fines and passage money; and
       ``(D) expenses and allowances incurred in tracking lost 
     persons, as required by public exigencies, in aid of State or 
     local law enforcement agencies.
       ``(7) Federal prison system.--Funds available for the 
     Federal Prison System may be used for the conduct of its 
     activities, including for--
       ``(A) the administration, operation, and maintenance of 
     Federal penal and correctional institutions, including inmate 
     medical services and inmate legal services, within the 
     Federal prison system;
       ``(B) planning, acquisition of sites, and construction of 
     new facilities, including--
       ``(i) the purchase and acquisition of facilities, and 
     remodeling and equipping of such facilities, for penal and 
     correctional institutions; and
       ``(ii) the payment of United States prisoners for work 
     performed in the activities described in this subparagraph;

     which shall remain available until expended;
       ``(C) construction of buildings at prison camps and 
     acquisition of land as authorized by section 4010 of title 
     18;
       ``(D) the labor of the United States prisoners performed in 
     the construction, remodeling, renovating, converting, 
     expanding, planning, designing, maintaining, or equipping of 
     prison buildings or facilities; and
       ``(E) the purchase and exchange of farm products and 
     livestock.
       ``(b) Related Provisions.--
       ``(1) Limitation of compensation of individuals employed as 
     attorneys.--None of the funds available to the Attorney 
     General may be used to pay compensation for services provided 
     by an individual employed as an attorney (other than an 
     individual employed to provide services as a foreign 
     attorney in special cases) unless such individual is duly 
     licensed and authorized to practice as an attorney under 
     the law of a State, a territory of the United States, or 
     the District of Columbia.
       ``(2) Reimbursements paid to governmental entities.--Funds 
     available to the Attorney General that are paid as a 
     reimbursement to a governmental unit in the Department of 
     Justice, to another Federal entity, or to a unit of State or 
     local government may be used under the authority applicable 
     to such unit or such entity that receives such 
     reimbursement.''.
       (b) Technical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     31 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

       ``530B. Authority to use available funds.''.

     SEC. 302. PERMANENT AUTHORITY RELATING TO ENFORCEMENT OF 
                   LAWS.

       (a) Amendment.--Chapter 31 of title 28, United States Code, 
     as amended by section 301, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

     ``Sec. 530C. Report on enforcement of laws

       ``(a) Report Required.--The Attorney General shall transmit 
     a report to each House of the Congress in any case in which 
     the Attorney General--
       ``(1) establishes a policy to refrain from enforcing any 
     provision of any Federal statute whose enforcement is the 
     responsibility of the Department of Justice, because of the 
     position of the Attorney General that such provision is not 
     constitutional; or
       ``(2) determines that the Department of Justice will 
     contest, or will refrain from defending, in any judicial, 
     administrative, or other proceeding, any provision of any 
     Federal statute, because of the position of the Attorney 
     General that such provision is not constitutional.
       ``(b) Deadline for Report.--Any report required by 
     subsection (a) shall be transmitted not later than 30 days 
     after the Attorney General establishes the policy specified 
     in subsection (a)(1) or makes the determination specified in 
     subsection (a)(2). Each such report shall--
       ``(1) specify the provision of the Federal statute 
     involved:
       ``(2) include a detailed statement of the reasons for the 
     position of the Attorney General; and
       ``(3) in the case of a determination specified in 
     subsection (a)(2), indicate the nature of the proceeding 
     involved.
       ``(c) Declaration.--In the case of a determination 
     specified in subsection (a)(2), the representative of the 
     Department of Justice participating in the proceeding shall 
     make a declaration in such proceeding that the position of 
     the Attorney General on the constitutionality of the 
     provision of the Federal statute involved is the position of 
     the executive branch of the Federal Government.''.
       ``(b) Technical Amendment.--The table of sections for 
     chapter 31 of title 28, United States Code, as amended by 
     section 301, is amended by adding at the end the following:

       ``530C. Report on enforcement of laws.''.

     SEC. 303. PROTECTION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

       Section 533(2) of title 28, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting ``or the person of the Attorney General'' before 
     the semicolon at the end.

                        TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS

     SEC. 401. REPEALERS.

       (a) Open-Ended Authorization of Appropriations for National 
     Institute of Corrections--Chapter 319 of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking section 4353; and
       (2) in the table of sections for such chapter by striking 
     the item relating to section 4353.
       (b) Open-Ended Authorization of Appropriations for United 
     States Marshals Service.--Section 561 of title 28, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking subsection (i).

     SEC. 402. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.

       Section 542(c)(5) of title 28, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``Fund'' the 2nd place it appears and 
     inserting ``Fund,''.

     SEC. 403. APPLICABILITY OF TITLE III.

       The amendments made by title III shall not apply with 
     respect to funds available for any fiscal year ending before 
     fiscal year 1999.

     SEC. 404. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

       Nothing in this Act or the amendments made by this Act 
     shall be construed to modify or supersede the application or 
     operation of the Public Buildings Act of 1959 (40 U.S.C. 601-
     619).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. 
Faleomavaega) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).


                             General Leave

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
on H.R. 3303.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3303, 
the Department of Justice Appropriation Authorization Act for fiscal 
years 1999, 2000 and 2001. This important bipartisan legislation, which 
I introduced with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) in March, 
is a comprehensive 3-year authorization of the Justice Department's 
activities and programs.
  On April 29, 1998, the Committee on the Judiciary reported the bill 
as amended by voice vote.
  As you know, authorization is the process by which Congress creates, 
amends and extends programs in response to national needs. It is 
perhaps the most important oversight tool that Congress can employ. 
Through authorization, legislative committees establish program 
objectives and they set

[[Page H4888]]

ceilings on the amounts that may be appropriated for them. Once a 
Federal program has been authorized, the Committee on Appropriations 
recommends the actual budget authority, which allows Federal agencies 
to enter into obligations and actually spend the money that is 
authorized.
  With respect to the Department of Justice, the law requires that all 
money appropriated must first be authorized by an act of Congress. 
Notwithstanding this obligation to authorize, Congress has not properly 
reauthorized the department's activities since 1979. Since that time, 
several attempts have failed, either because of bad timing or because 
the reauthorization bills were loaded with controversial amendments.
  This 19-year failure to properly reauthorize the department has 
forced the appropriations committees in both houses to reauthorize and 
appropriate money. This reauthorization money endeavor is both an 
attempt to improve the efficiency of the department and an opportunity 
to reaffirm the authority and responsibility of the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Let me say, the passage of this bill today does not mean the end of 
the Committee on the Judiciary's oversight of the department. To the 
contrary, it is my intention that, with the assistance of recently 
approved additional staff and resources, the committee will take an 
even closer look at the operations and policies of the department in 
the coming months.
  Let me briefly summarize H.R. 3303. The bill contains four titles.
  Title I authorizes appropriations to carry out the work of the 
various components of the department for fiscal years 1999, 2000 and 
2001. Title I largely adheres to the department's budget request for 
fiscal year 1999 by providing nearly $15.5 billion, and it would 
authorize a 5 percent increase for fiscal years 2000 and 2001.
  The proposed increases for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, though an 
approximation of the department's actual budgetary requirements, are 
the result of consultations with the department and an analysis of the 
historical trend. I have a high degree of confidence that the H.R. 3303 
appropriation authorizations for fiscal years 2000 and 2001 are 
accurate.
  Section 151 of title I would authorize, but not require, the Attorney 
General to transfer 200 lawyers from among the six litigating divisions 
at Justice Department headquarters in Washington, D.C. to the U.S. 
Attorneys. The provision is intended to raise the productivity of 
Washington-based lawyers who litigate criminal and civil cases for the 
department across the Nation by moving them to the field.
  Title II reauthorizes for two additional years a number of successful 
programs whose authorizations will expire at the end of fiscal year 
1998. These reauthorized programs will, for example, expedite the 
deportation of aliens who have been denied asylum, combat violence 
against women, and fund specialized training for and equipment to 
enhance the capability of metropolitan fire and emergency service 
departments to respond to terrorist attacks.
  Section 204 of title II would amend the Communications Assistance for 
Law Enforcement Act, also known as CALEA, by changing the effective 
date for purposes of compliance enforcement and the grandfathering of 
telecommunications carrier equipment facilities and services. This 
amendment does not alter the substance or effect of CALEA, and it 
enjoys widespread bipartisan support.
  Title III would grant permanent authorization for certain inherent 
and non-controversial functions of the department. The department has 
requested permanent authorizing authority in the past, and proposed 
authority has appeared in several reauthorization bills since the last 
reauthorization in 1979.
  Title III largely mirrors the language of these earlier bills, except 
to the extent it has been updated to meet the changing needs of Federal 
law enforcement in the 1990s. I believe the department should have, for 
example, permanent authority to purchase aircraft and police-type motor 
vehicles, as well as firearms, ammunition and uniforms, for its 
employees. This permanent authority would be subject to available 
appropriations.
  Title IV would, among other things, repeal the permanent open-ended 
authorization of the United States Marshals Service. The service's 
permanent authorization is an anomaly among the department's components 
that immunizes it from congressional scrutiny. It should be subject to 
the same oversight that other department components of the departments 
are.
  H.R. 3303 would grant the Marshals Service narrower permanent 
authority in line with the permanent authority to be granted the rest 
of the department.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3303 reaffirms the role of Congress in the 
oversight of the Justice Department. Through this reauthorization 
endeavor and our continuing oversight, we will enhance the department's 
efficiency and increase public confidence in all of its many missions. 
I urge my colleagues to support the passage of this important 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, 
for bringing this legislation to the floor. I do want to state that the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking Democrat of the 
committee, is necessarily not here with us because of transportation 
problems from his home district.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill marks the first time in 19 years that the 
Committee on the Judiciary has sought to reauthorize the Department of 
Justice. In putting this legislation together, the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and I principally relied on the recommendations of 
the Department of Justice. It was a rare opportunity for bipartisan 
participation, and the bill was voted on out of committee by voice 
vote.
  The responsibilities of the Department of Justice are wide-ranging 
and the department, by and large, has done a good job in enforcing laws 
to protect American citizens.

                              {time}  1415

  Not only does the department have the responsibilities of 
apprehending, prosecuting, and incarcerating criminal offenders, it 
must also uphold the civil rights of all Americans, enforce the laws to 
protect the environment, ensure competition of business in the private 
sector by fighting potential monopolies, fight against fraud, 
terrorism, and drug trafficking, and enforce the immigration and 
naturalization laws.
  Mr. Speaker, the department has been extremely successful in reducing 
the incidence of violent crime, particularly in the area of hate 
crimes, in reducing juvenile violence, and enforcing our laws at the 
border to prevent migrant trafficking.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation is an important piece of legislation, 
and certainly deserves the full support of the Members of this House. 
Again, I thank the chairman, the gentleman from Illinois, for his 
leadership on this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3303.
  Mr. Speaker, yield 6 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank our friend from 
American Samoa for stepping in when the Committee on the Judiciary was, 
on our side, temporarily absent. I appreciate his doing this and 
yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I am not going to oppose this bill. I am not going to 
support it very enthusiastically, but I do not expect my lack of 
enthusiasm seriously to disturb anybody at this point. But I do take 
the floor to make the point that I am disappointed that we are making 
so little progress on the reform of the prison industry system.
  We have a paradox in this country. We have strong laws against the 
importation of goods that are made by prison labor overseas, and many 
of the Members who are concerned about human rights point to prison 
labor as an example of a violation of human rights.
  But for some reason that principle appears to dissolve when it hits 
salt

[[Page H4889]]

water. It is a very important principle for us overseas, but for 
reasons I have not been able to discover, because no one who supports 
the policy will tell me, we ignore it domestically. We employ prison 
labor.
  I am in favor of prisoners being usefully employed. I am in favor of 
whatever rehabilitative effects come from prison labor. But I do not 
understand that part of the rehabilitation of prisoners is sending them 
out to take orders. Prisoners do not do a great deal of marketing. 
Indeed, there have even been concerns to the extent to which they have 
been able to do some telemarketing.
  I say that because I am very much in favor of inmates being given 
useful work, but it does not seem to me that we should be selling their 
product in competition with things made by citizens and others working 
in the free market.
  The current prison labor system not only sends some things out into 
competition, but reserves certain areas of that market for prison labor 
and does not even allow the free market to compete. That seems to me 
wholly inappropriate. We would object if this was done internationally.
  An insistence on reforming these sets of rules which lock out free 
enterprise from the prison labor system in fact unites the National 
Federation of Independent Businesses and the AFL-CIO.
  I have worked with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), and others to try to reform 
that system. I believe we could have a system in which prisoners are 
employed, but in which they do not get this competitive advantage over 
others.
  Indeed, I believe we should be exploring the extent to which we can 
have prisoners make things and give them away, donate them to various 
groups that are insufficiently funded to be in the market. That is, I 
think there is a demand in day care centers, in homeless shelters and 
in other places so that furniture, clothing, curtains, things that are 
made in prison industries could in fact be distributed. I hope we will 
look at this.
  Many of us have been frustrated, and I and others have been pushing 
for a look at this. When this bill came up in committee we raised the 
issue, and offered an amendment tentatively, and withdrew it because we 
were assured by the chairman of the subcommittee there would be some 
progress.
  The progress has been very slow. I am pleased that we now have a 
hearing set up for this week on alternatives. There is a bill that the 
subcommittee chairman has drafted that many of us who have been trying 
to change the system do not like. We have our own version.
  I hope that we will, after this hearing, be able to proceed to some 
committee consideration of this, ultimately getting it to the floor. We 
are late in the year. I do not have high hopes that we are going to 
pass a bill this year, but why should this bill be any different? We 
are not passing a lot of anything this year.
  On the other hand, I would hope we would get a fair enough start in 
this process so we could assure people who are concerned that we are 
serious about that and that, frankly, realistically, early next year we 
would be dealing on the floor with some legislation.
  I see the chairman there. Mr. Speaker, I ask the subcommittee 
chairman, who I see approaching the microphone. I hope he would give me 
some assurance.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman has very cordially been 
involved with us in trying to move a product towards the floor and 
ultimately get a chance for it.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I am 
reaching the point where I am behaving more cordially than I feel.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. If the gentleman will continue to yield, Mr. Speaker, 
we always understand that, I say to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Frank).
  At any rate, as the gentleman well stated, we do have a hearing set 
this Thursday. It would be my hope that when we get back from the 
recess that we will have at least one more hearing, and then mark the 
bill up in subcommittee. I, as the gentleman, do not know the progress 
that will be made all the way through, but it would be nice to have 
that bill through the Committee on the Judiciary, and maybe the whole 
House would be able to vote on a product with the gentleman.
  I share with him, and want to put it on the record, I share with the 
gentleman that the current structure of the Federal prison industries 
is not appropriate. I do not think the mandatory source rule is a good 
idea to continue. I do think we may differ on some of the details, but 
we need to find a way to have prisoners not only meaningfully engaged 
in work, but find some way where labor and small business can 
participate.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman. I wonder if the 
chairman of the full committee might indicate what his view is on what 
the chairman of subcommittee has just said.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. HYDE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I associate myself completely with the remarks of the 
gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the chairman of the full 
committee.
  Mr. Speaker, given the importance of this and the fact that we are 
making some progress, I thank my friend from American Samoa. I look 
forward to our being able to begin the serious process of making some 
changes in the prison system.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3303, the 
Department of Justice Authorization Act. I would like to comment 
briefly on provisions in Section 204 (Communications Assistance).
  The original purpose of the Communications Assistance for Law 
Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA) was to preserve the government's 
ability, pursuant to a court order, to intercept communications which 
utilized advanced telecommunications technology, while protecting the 
privacy of communications and without impeding the introduction of new 
technology, features, and services. CALEA was intended to refine the 
telecommunication's industry's existing duty to cooperate in the 
conduct of electronic surveillance and to establish procedures based on 
public accountability and industry standard-setting.
  CALEA permitted the telecommunications industry itself to develop 
technical standards to implement the requirements of the Act, and 
established a process for the Attorney General to identify law 
enforcement's capacity requirements for electronic surveillance. 
Unfortunately, these standards have been delayed due to a dispute over 
their breadth and scope, and are now under review by the Federal 
Communications Commission (FCC). CALEA also required the FBI, on behalf 
of the Attorney General, to issue its notice of electronic surveillance 
capacity in 1995. However, this notice was not provided to the industry 
until March, 1998.
  The Act requires the federal government to reimburse 
telecommunications carriers for their just and reasonable costs to 
develop and implement the assistance capability requirements of CALEA. 
Existing carrier networks were to be ``grandfathered'' unless the 
government agreed to pay for their retrofitting. Increases in carrier 
network capacity to accommodate law enforcement's electronic 
surveillance needs were to be paid for by the government. To date, 
however, virtually no funds have been expended to implement CALEA.
  Mr. Speaker, delays in the implementation of CALEA have prevented the 
telecommunications industry and law enforcement from complying with its 
provisions. It is appropriate to recognize the effect of the delays of 
the implementation of CALEA by moving both its effective and 
``grandfather'' dates. H.R. 3303 recognizes the reality of the delays 
of implementing this important crime-fighting legislation and gives 
both the telecommunications industry and law enforcement additional 
time to prepare for CALEA's implementation.
  Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Speaker, section 204 of H.R. 3303 contains an 
amendment to the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act 
(Public Law 103-414), commonly referred to as ``CALEA.'' Specifically, 
the provisions would extend the authorization for the Attorney General 
to provide reimbursements to certain telecommunications carriers that 
comply with the provisions of CALEA.
  CALEA was enacted into law at the end of the 103rd Congress. The 
purpose of the law is sound: prevent the curtailment of legal wiretaps 
by our nation's law enforcement community as communications technology 
advances.

[[Page H4890]]

The digital age and digitalization of the telecommunications industry 
makes legal interception of communications more difficult and time 
consuming. In addition, making digital telecommunications equipment 
capable of wiretapping is costly and complex as much of the equipment 
must be altered or modified. CALEA was intended to set up a mechanism 
whereby the Federal government would reimburse telecommunications 
carriers for certain qualifying equipment costs caused by complying 
with the provisions of CALEA.
  It is clear that there has been significant disagreement between 
portions of the U.S. Government and the telecommunications industry 
regarding the implementation of CALEA. I am hopeful that all parties 
can work out any differences. I ask that everyone involved redouble 
their efforts to come to an acceptable resolution. I am hopeful that 
Congress does not have to revisit this issue again, but we will if 
necessary.
  Section 204 is a simple extension of the authorization of the 
Attorney General to provide payments to telecommunications carriers 
with certain qualifications beyond the original statutory deadline. 
Without this provision, much of the initial $500,000 provided for under 
the bill would not be authorized to be disbursed. To date, only about 
$100,000 has been disbursed by the Attorney General. It is important 
that all of the tools designed to foster telecommunications equipment 
compliance with the goals of CALEA be available to the relevant 
parties.
  Under an agreement worked out in the 103rd Congress, jurisdiction 
over issues contained in CALEA are split between the House Committees 
on the Judiciary and Commerce. While title II of CALEA contains 
provisions relating to jurisdiction common to the House Judiciary 
Committee and title III of the law contains provisions common to the 
Commerce Committee's jurisdiction, title I contains provisions that are 
traditionally shared between the two committees. As section 204 is an 
amendment to title I of CALEA, specifically section 110, it falls 
within the shared jurisdiction category.
  I will not object to section 204 of H.R. 3303 and I will not seek a 
referral of the bill to the Commerce Committee because this important 
provision should move forward as quickly as possible. However, I plan 
to continue to closely monitor the implementation of the CALEA 
provisions. Further, the Commerce Committee intends to fully exercise 
its rights and jurisdiction over CALEA matters in the future, 
especially if this issue or other CALEA-related matters need further 
Congressional attention.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the United States Department 
of Justice is the premier law enforcement institution in the world. 
With more than 108,000 employees, the Department has primary 
responsibility for protecting American citizens from crime, ensuring 
the healthy competition of businesses in our free enterprise system, 
safeguarding the consumer, and for enforcing our nation's drug, 
immigration and naturalization laws.
  The Justice Department does an outstanding job in carrying out its 
mission. DOJ's accomplishments are impressive. They have taken us one 
step closer to answering the concerns of all Americans--to make our 
streets safer, eliminate the scourge of drugs, reduce youth violence, 
strengthen our borders against illegal immigration, protect our 
environment, ensure our civil rights, combat violence against women, 
and ensure equal justice for all.
  Last year, the national violent crime rate dropped for the fifth year 
in a row, marking the longest period of decline in 25 years.
  Between 1994 and 1995, violent crime dropped 12.4 percent--the 
largest drop since the Department's survey of such statistics began in 
1973.
  The juvenile violent crime arrest rate increased 69 percent between 
1987 and 1994. Between 1994 and 1996, the violent crime rate decreased 
by 11.9 percent.
  The COPS program has awarded grants to increase the number of police 
on the streets by 57,500, more than halfway to the goal of 100,000 
community police officers by the year 2000.
  The Department of Justice awarded grants totalling $184.6 million for 
Violence Against Women programs and $46 million to 336 communities to 
help make police organizations more responsive to domestic violence.
  The Department of Justice has deported criminal aliens in record 
numbers. Last year, over 37,000 criminal aliens were deported.
  DOJ continues to play a lead role in the enforcement of the nation's 
civil rights laws, which define and prohibit unlawful discrimination in 
a wide rage of areas, including employment, housing, voting, and 
education.
  I am pleased that Chairman Hyde has sought to rekindle the 
relationship between this Committee and the Justice Department and I 
congratulate him on the efforts he has made to work in cooperation with 
DOJ in drafting H.R. 3003, the legislation reauthorizing the Department 
of Justice.
  As I review this legislation there are two points upon which I would 
like to comment. The first is funding for the Department over the next 
three years. The Department of Justice has expanded rapidly over the 
last 15 years. In 1981, DOJ had a budget of $2.3 billion. In response 
to DOJ's growing responsibilities in enforcing the nation's criminal 
and civil laws, the Department's budget request for Fiscal Year 1999 
has increased exceeds $20 billion.
  H.R. 3303 reflects that request and authorizes a 5 percent increase 
in each of the Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001. This will allow the 
Department to expand as necessary to fulfill its role as the nation's 
premier law enforcement agency.
  Secondly, I was pleased to see the reauthorization of the Rural 
Domestic Violence and Child Adult Enforcement Assistance Act. As an 
advocate for women's and children's issues, I strongly support 
reauthorization of these important programs.
  Domestic violence is a horror and tragedy that should have no place 
in our society, but instead it is an all too common reality. Domestic 
violence is a public and personal health problem that affects the lives 
of millions of women and their families. Two million to four million 
women each year become victims of violence at the hands of an 
intimate--a husband, ex-husband, boyfriend, or ex-boyfriend. There is a 
20-30% lifetime risk for a woman to be battered.
  In 1995, almost 1 million children--2,700 a day--were abused or 
neglected. This number was up almost 25 percent since 1990. The number 
of children seriously injured by abuse nearly quadrupled between 1986 
and 1993, according to interviews with child-serving professionals.
  Reauthorizing the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Adult Enforcement 
Assistance Act is critical in our nation's battle to stamp out the 
abuse of these most vulnerable of its citizens.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I am extremely pleased that we were able to 
work in a bipartisan manner to include my amendment to this legislation 
to extend some of the deadlines for telecommunications carriers to 
comply with requirements under the Communications Assistance for Law 
Enforcement Act (CALEA). I offered this amendment at full Judiciary 
Committee markup, where it garnered support from Members on both sides 
of the aisle, but withdrew it with assurances from Crime Subcommittee 
Chairman McCollum that he would introduce and push for enactment of 
legislation to address these and other issues related to CALEA. We have 
yet to see action on CALEA-related legislation, so it is necessary to 
address the matter in this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, the CALEA implementation process has not gone as 
Congress had expected when CALEA was enacted in 1994. While all 
parties--the Administration, the telecommunications industry, and 
privacy and civil liberties organizations--have negotiated in good 
faith, clearly a resolution is not close at hand.
  In fact, the parties have now petitioned the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) to break the impasse.
  Certainly, all involved can share some of the blame, but I do not 
think that the telecommunications industry and our civil liberties 
should be made to suffer for the lack of an agreement. My amendment 
merely creates a ``safety valve'' to remove the pressure from the 
impending October 1 deadline, and recognizes the reality of the delays 
in the negotiating process. The Justice Department has already admitted 
that CALEA-compliant solutions will not be ``available'' from 
manufacturers until 1999-2001, regardless of what transpires. It is not 
fair to punish industry for failing to provide this technology faster 
than even the Justice Department has deemed possible.
  Therefore, like Congressman Barr's bill (H.R. 3321), my amendment 
postpones deadline for compliance with CALEA from this October until 
October 1, 2000. This should provide the parties and the FCC time to 
come to an agreement, and to test and deploy agreed-upon solutions.
  It is also unfair to force industry to pay for recent upgrades made 
to their ``embedded base'' that do not conform to nonexistent CALEA 
standards. The original Act provided that all upgrades made after 
January 1, 1995 would be the responsibility of telecommunications 
carriers, and they would bear the cost of modifying their equipment to 
conform with CALEA after that date. It has obviously been necessary for 
industry to upgrade their equipment in the last three and a half years, 
and no one in Congress believed that so much time would be necessary to 
complete this process. Therefore, it is not appropriate to place the 
cost burden of anticipated equipment modifications on 
telecommunications companies and their customers.
  My amendment, also like the Barr bill, would grandfather in all 
equipment deployed and installed before October 1, 2000. Industry would 
be responsible for retrofitting noncompliant equipment installed after 
that date.
  This is a narrow fix to an immediate and critical problem. If an 
agreement is not

[[Page H4891]]

reached by October 1, industry would be liable for fines and for the 
costs of upgrading much of their equipment. The FBI has been using this 
as a bargaining tool in their discussions with industry and civil 
liberties groups, but this is not the atmosphere in which these 
discussions were supposed to take place.
  This amendment will merely give a reprieve to the negotiators, and 
allow for a full and deliberate resolution of this critical issue. 
Congress will have greater leeway to monitor the FCC's attempts to 
break the impasse and to ratify or alter any proposed compromise. Even 
with enactment of this provision, many other contentious issues will 
remain, but this legislation is not the proper vehicle for resolving 
those issues.
  Mr. Speaker, I am glad that we were able to include my amendment in 
this important legislation, and I look forward to working with my 
colleagues on continued efforts to implement CALEA.
  Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the 
Department of Justice Appropriation Authorization Act for Fiscal Years, 
1999, 2000, and 2001. As the original author of the CALEA 
Implementation Amendment of 1998, H.R. 3321, the Department of Justice 
Appropriation Authorization Act, H.R. 3003, contains language in 
Section 204 which embodied the principles of my bill. I believe it is 
incumbent on us in Congress to recognize the delays that have occurred 
in the implementing of the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement 
Act of 1994 (CALEA), by extending the time for compliance, and to 
clarify the ``grandfathered'' status of existing telecommunication 
network equipment facilities and services during the time period the 
CALEA-compliant technology is developed.
  The purpose of CALEA is to preserve the federal government's ability, 
pursuant to a court order or other lawful authorization, to intercept 
communications involving advanced telecommunication technologies, while 
protecting the privacy of communications and without impeding the 
introduction of new technologies, features, and services. CALEA further 
defined the telecommunication industry's duty to cooperate in the 
conduct of electronic surveillance, and to establish procedures based 
on public accountability and industry standard setting.
  CALEA necessarily involved a balancing of interests of the 
telecommunications industry, law enforcement, and privacy groups. The 
law allowed the telecommunication industry to develop standards to 
implement the requirements of CALEA and establish a process for the 
U.S. Attorney General to identify capacity requirements for electronic 
surveillance. The law required the federal government to reimburse 
carriers their just and reasonable costs incurred in modifying existing 
equipment, services or features necessary to comply with the assistance 
capability requirements of the law. The CALEA law also required the 
federal government pay for delays in the implementation of the law that 
have prevented the telecommunication industry and law enforcement from 
complying with its provisions.
  The development and adoption of industry technical standards have 
been delayed, and these standards are now being challenged before the 
Federal Communications Commission by both law enforcement and privacy 
groups. The release of the federal government's capacity notice for 
electronic surveillance needs was over two and a half years late. It is 
clear form the telecommunication's equipment manufacturers that no 
CALEA-compliant technology will be available for purchase and 
implementation by telecommunication carriers by the effective date, 
currently set for October 25, 1998. Further, since the enactment of 
CALEA, substantial changes have occurred in the telecommunication 
industry, such as the enactment of the Telecommunication Act of 1996, 
which resulted in many new entrants in the industry and other changes 
in the competitive marketplace. Finally, during the four year, 
``transition period'' initially contemplated by Congress for the 
implementation of CALEA, the telecommunication industry has installed 
and continued to deploy technology and equipment which is not compliant 
with assistance capacity requirements of CALEA, since ``CALEA 
technology'' has not been fully developed or designed into such 
equipment.

  Mr. Speaker, House of Representatives Report No. 103-827 makes it 
clear the Federal Government intended to bear the costs of CALEA 
implementation during the four-year transition period between the 
enactment and the effective dates. Congress recognized it was much more 
economical to design new telecommunications switching equipment, 
features, and services the necessary assistance capability 
requirements, rather than to retrofit such equipment, features, and 
services after the fact. Congress recognized some retrofitting would 
nonetheless be necessary, provided that carriers would be in compliance 
with CALEA absent a commitment by law enforcement to reimburse the full 
and reasonable costs of carriers for such modifications to their 
existing equipment.
  The Department of Justice Appropriation Authorization Act recognizes 
during the four year transition virtually no federal government funds 
have been expended to reimburse the telecommunication industry for its 
implementation costs of CALEA. During the first year transition period, 
virtually all telecommunications carrier equipment which has been 
installed or deployed is based on pre-CALEA technology and does not 
include those features necessary to implement the assistance capacity 
requirements of CALEA.
  It is therefore necessary to extend the time of compliance to enable 
the industry to complete the standard setting and development processes 
required to implement CALEA in an economical and efficient fashion, and 
to recognize existing telecommunications carrier equipment, features, 
and services should be grandfathered during the interim.
  On the completion of the development of CALEA compliant-technology, 
the federal government can decide which carrier equipment it chooses to 
retrofit at Federal Government expense and the manufacturers can then 
design CALEA capabilities and services to be deployed in carrier 
networks in the future.
  Thus, it is necessary to move both the effective and the 
``grandfather'' dates of CALEA to recognize the delays in CALEA 
implementation and to ensure its implementation continues as intended 
by Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, it is also necessary to clarify the meaning of several 
terms in the cost reimbursement provisions of CALEA. The use of the 
terms ``installed'' and ``deployed'' in CALEA are intended to make 
clear Congress intended separate and distinct meanings of these terms 
as they are used in CALEA. The term, ``installed,'' refers to equipment 
actually in place and operable to the network of carriers. The term, 
``deployed,'' relates to equipment, facilities or services that are 
commercially available within the telecommunication industry, to be 
utilized by a carrier whether or not equipment, facilities or services 
were actually installed or utilized within the network of the carrier. 
The term, ``deployed,'' is also intended to refer to technology 
available to the industry.
  The use of these terms recognizes Congress clearly intended to 
retrofit the federal government expenses, or grandfather the existing 
networks of carriers to the extent they were installed or deployed 
prior to the development of CALEA-compliant technology based on 
industry standards developed to meet assistance capacity requirements 
of CALEA. The terms, ``significantly upgraded'' or ``otherwise 
undergoes major modifications,'' were intended to mean the carriers' 
obligations to assume the costs of implementing CALEA technology in a 
particular network switch, is not triggered until a particular network 
switch is fundamentally altered, such as by upgrading or replacing it 
with a new fundamentally altered switch technology. For example, 
changing from digital to asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) switching 
technology.
  Thus, once CALEA-compliant technology is developed and can be 
designed into switches deployed in carrier networks, the costs of such 
deployment shift to the industry. Prior to that time, however, existing 
carrier networks are ``grandfathered'' unless retrofitted at federal 
government expense as intended by Congress. In addition, switch 
upgrades or modifications performed by carriers to meet federal or 
state regulatory mandates or other requirements, such as number 
portability requirements, are not to be considered a ``significant 
upgrade'' or a ``major modification'' for purposes of CALEA.
  Mr. Speaker, these provisions should make clear that existing carrier 
networks are grandfathered, unless retrofitted at federal government 
expense. The effective date for compliance with CALEA has been extended 
for approximately two years to provide additional time for industry 
development of CALEA-compliant technology in response to industry 
technical standards to meet the assistance capacity requirements of 
CALEA.
  I support this important legislation and ask my colleagues to support 
the Department of Justice Appropriation Authorization Act, H.R. 3303.
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Nethercutt). The question is on the 
motion offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3303, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.




                          ____________________