[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 139 (Wednesday, October 7, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H9993-H9998]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          IDENTITY THEFT AND ASSUMPTION DETERRENCE ACT OF 1998

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 4151) to amend chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, 
relating to identity fraud, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 4151

       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 ``Identity Theft and 
     Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998''.

     SEC. 2. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO ENACT THIS LEGISLATION.

       The constitutional authority upon which this Act rests is 
     the power of Congress to regulate commerce with foreign 
     nations and among the several States, and the authority to 
     make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for 
     carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution 
     in the Government of the United States or in any department 
     or officer thereof, as set forth in article I, section 8 of 
     the United States Constitution.

     SEC. 3. IDENTITY THEFT.

       (a) Establishment of Offense.--Section 1028(a) of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (6), by adding ``or'' at the end;
       (3) in the flush matter following paragraph (6), by 
     striking ``or attempts to do so,''; and
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following:
       ``(7) knowingly transfers or uses, without lawful 
     authority, a means of identification of another person with 
     the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, any unlawful 
     activity that constitutes a violation of Federal law, or that 
     constitutes a felony under any applicable State or local 
     law;''.
       (b) Penalties.--Section 1028(b) of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by adding ``or'' at the end; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) an offense under paragraph (7) of such subsection 
     that involves the transfer or use of 1 or more means of 
     identification if, as a result of the offense, any individual 
     committing the offense obtains anything of value aggregating 
     $1,000 or more during any 1-year period;'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or transfer of an 
     identification document or'' and inserting ``, transfer, or 
     use of a means of identification, an identification document, 
     or a''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``or (7)'' after 
     ``(3)'';
       (3) by amending paragraph (3) to read as follows:
       ``(3) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more 
     than 20 years, or both, if the offense is committed--
       ``(A) to facilitate a drug trafficking crime (as defined in 
     section 929(a)(2));
       ``(B) in connection with a crime of violence (as defined in 
     section 924(c)(3)); or
       ``(C) after a prior conviction under this section becomes 
     final;'';
       (4) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (5) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and
       (6) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
       ``(5) in the case of any offense under subsection (a), 
     forfeiture to the United States of any personal property used 
     or intended to be used to commit the offense; and''.
       (c) Circumstances.--Section 1028(c) of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking paragraph (3) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(3) either--
       ``(A) the production, transfer, possession, or use 
     prohibited by this section is in or affects interstate or 
     foreign commerce; or
       ``(B) the means of identification, identification document, 
     false identification document, or document-making implement 
     is transported in the mail in the course of the production, 
     transfer, possession, or use prohibited by this section.''.
       (d) Definitions.--Subsection (d) of section 1028 of title 
     18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) In this section--
       ``(1) the term `document-making implement' means any 
     implement, impression, electronic device, or computer 
     hardware or software, that is specifically configured or 
     primarily used for making an identification document, a false 
     identification document, or another document-making 
     implement;
       ``(2) the term `identification document' means a document 
     made or issued by or under the authority of the United States 
     Government, a State, political subdivision of a State, a 
     foreign government, political subdivision of a foreign 
     government, an international governmental or an international 
     quasi-governmental organization which, when completed with 
     information concerning a particular individual, is of a type 
     intended or commonly accepted for the purpose of 
     identification of individuals;
       ``(3) the term `means of identification' means any name or 
     number that may be used, alone or in conjunction with any 
     other information, to identify a specific individual, 
     including any--
       ``(A) name, social security number, date of birth, official 
     State or government issued driver's license or identification 
     number, alien registration number, government passport 
     number, employer or taxpayer identification number;
       ``(B) unique biometric data, such as fingerprint, voice 
     print, retina or iris image, or other unique physical 
     representation;
       ``(C) unique electronic identification number, address, or 
     routing code; or
       ``(D) telecommunication identifying information or access 
     device (as defined in section 1029(e));
       ``(4) the term `personal identification card' means an 
     identification document issued by a State or local government 
     solely for the purpose of identification;
       ``(5) the term `produce' includes alter, authenticate, or 
     assemble; and
       ``(6) the term `State' includes any State of the United 
     States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
     Rico, and any other commonwealth, possession, or territory of 
     the United States.''.
       (e) Attempt and Conspiracy.--Section 1028 of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(f) Attempt and Conspiracy.--Any person who attempts or 
     conspires to commit any offense under this section shall be 
     subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the 
     offense, the commission of which was the object of the 
     attempt or conspiracy.''.
       (f) Forfeiture Procedures.--Section 1028 of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(g) Forfeiture Procedures.--The forfeiture of property 
     under this section, including any seizure and disposition of 
     the property and any related judicial or administrative 
     proceeding, shall be governed by the provisions of section 
     413 (other than subsection (d) of that section) of the 
     Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 
     (21 U.S.C. 853).''.
       (g) Rule of Construction.--Section 1028 of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) Rule of Construction.--For purpose of subsection 
     (a)(7), a single identification document or false 
     identification document that contains 1 or more means of 
     identification shall be construed to be 1 means of 
     identification.''.
       (h) Conforming Amendments.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in the heading for section 1028, by adding ``and 
     information'' at the end; and
       (2) in the table of sections at the beginning of the 
     chapter, in the item relating to section 1028, by adding 
     ``and information'' at the end.

[[Page H9994]]

     SEC. 4. AMENDMENT OF FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES FOR 
                   OFFENSES UNDER SECTION 1028.

       (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 Federal 
     sentencing guidelines and the policy statements of the 
     Commission, as appropriate, to provide an appropriate penalty 
     for each offense under section 1028 of title 18, United 
     States Code, as amended by this Act.
       (b) Factors for Consideration.--In carrying out subsection 
     (a), the United States Sentencing Commission shall consider, 
     with respect to each offense described in subsection (a)--
       (1) the extent to which the number of victims (as defined 
     in section 3663A(a) of title 18, United States Code) involved 
     in the offense, including harm to reputation, inconvenience, 
     and other difficulties resulting from the offense, is an 
     adequate measure for establishing penalties under the Federal 
     sentencing guidelines;
       (2) the number of means of identification, identification 
     documents, or false identification documents (as those terms 
     are defined in section 1028(d) of title 18, United States 
     Code, as amended by this Act) involved in the offense, is an 
     adequate measure for establishing penalties under the Federal 
     sentencing guidelines;
       (3) the extent to which the value of the loss to any 
     individual caused by the offense is an adequate measure for 
     establishing penalties under the Federal sentencing 
     guidelines;
       (4) the range of conduct covered by the offense;
       (5) the extent to which sentencing enhancements within the 
     Federal sentencing guidelines and the court's authority to 
     sentence above the applicable guideline range are adequate to 
     ensure punishment at or near the maximum penalty for the most 
     egregious conduct covered by the offense;
       (6) the extent to which Federal sentencing guidelines 
     sentences for the offense have been constrained by statutory 
     maximum penalties;
       (7) the extent to which Federal sentencing guidelines for 
     the offense adequately achieve the purposes of sentencing set 
     forth in section 3553(a)(2) of title 18, United States Code; 
     and
       (8) any other factor that the United States Sentencing 
     Commission considers to be appropriate.

     SEC. 5. CENTRALIZED COMPLAINT AND CONSUMER EDUCATION SERVICE 
                   FOR VICTIMS OF IDENTITY THEFT.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission shall 
     establish procedures to--
       (1) log and acknowledge the receipt of complaints by 
     individuals who certify that they have a reasonable belief 
     that 1 or more of their means of identification (as defined 
     in section 1028 of title 18, United States Code, as amended 
     by this Act) have been assumed, stolen, or otherwise 
     unlawfully acquired in violation of section 1028 of title 18, 
     United States Code, as amended by this Act;
       (2) provide informational materials to individuals 
     described in paragraph (1); and
       (3) refer complaints described in paragraph (1) to 
     appropriate entities, which may include referral to--
       (A) the 3 major national consumer reporting agencies; and
       (B) appropriate law enforcement agencies for potential law 
     enforcement action.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out 
     this section.

     SEC. 6. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE.

       (a) Technical Correction Relating to Criminal Forfeiture 
     Procedures.--Section 982(b)(1) of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows: ``(1) The forfeiture of 
     property under this section, including any seizure and 
     disposition of the property and any related judicial or 
     administrative proceeding, shall be governed by the 
     provisions of section 413 (other than subsection (d) of that 
     section) of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and 
     Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 853).''.
       (b) Economic Espionage and Theft of Trade Secrets as 
     Predicate Offenses For Wire Interception.--Section 2516(1)(a) 
     of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     ``chapter 90 (relating to protection of trade secrets),'' 
     after ``to espionage),''.

     SEC. 7. REDACTION OF ETHICS REPORTS FILED BY JUDICIAL 
                   OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES.

       Section 105(b) of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 
     U.S.C. App) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3)(A) This section does not require the immediate and 
     unconditional availability of reports filed by an individual 
     described in section 109(8) or 109(10) of this Act if a 
     finding is made by the Judicial Conference, in consultation 
     with United States Marshall Service, that revealing personal 
     and sensitive information could endanger that individual.
       ``(B) A report may be redacted pursuant to this paragraph 
     only--
       ``(i) to the extent necessary to protect the individual who 
     filed the report; and
       ``(ii) for as long as the danger to such individual exists.
       ``(C) The Administrative Office of the United States Courts 
     shall submit to the Committees on the Judiciary of the House 
     of Representatives and of the Senate an annual report with 
     respect to the operation of this paragraph including--
       ``(i) the total number of reports redacted pursuant to this 
     paragraph;
       ``(ii) the total number of individuals whose reports have 
     been redacted pursuant to this paragraph; and
       ``(iii) the types of threats against individuals whose 
     reports are redacted, if appropriate.
       ``(D) The Judicial Conference, in consultation with the 
     Department of Justice, shall issue regulations setting forth 
     the circumstances under which redaction is appropriate under 
     this paragraph and the procedures for redaction.
       ``(E) This paragraph shall expire on December 31, 2001, and 
     apply to filings through calendar year 2001.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. McCollum) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum).


                             General Leave

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the 
bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, H.R. 4151, the Identity Theft and Assumption 
Deterrence Act of 1998, amends the fraud chapter of title 18 of the 
United States Code to create a new crime prohibiting the unlawful use 
of personal identifying information, such as names, Social Security 
numbers and credit card numbers. This bill was introduced by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg) and originally cosponsored by a 
number of Members from both sides of the aisle.
  Madam Speaker, identity fraud involves the misappropriation of 
another person's personal identifying information. Criminals use this 
information to establish credit in their name, run up debts on the 
another person's account, or take over existing financial accounts. 
According to a 1998 GAO study, the consequences of this crime are 
enormous. One national credit union reported that two-thirds of the 
500,000 annual consumer inquiries it receives involve identity fraud. 
MasterCard has reported that its member banks lose almost $400 million 
annually to identity theft. The Secret Service, which investigates only 
a small portion of identity theft cases under the existing wire and 
mail fraud statutes, reported that cases it investigated in 1997 
involved over $745 million in losses.
  Madam Speaker, unfortunately, only a portion of identity fraud cases 
are investigated and prosecuted. At present, while the use of false 
identity documents is a crime, the gathering, use and sale of personal 
identifying information is not. Because of this gap in the law, law 
enforcement agencies can only investigate the fraud that occurs after 
stolen identity information is used, and as many of these individual 
crimes involve relatively small amounts, they are often too small to 
justify the use of valuable investigative and prosecutorial resources.
  The Secret Service has informed the Committee on the Judiciary that 
if the transfer of personal identifiers were a crime, they would be 
able to prosecute those persons who traffic in this information and in 
many cases prevent the fraud that is later committed by those who buy 
this information from those who sell it.
  H.R. 4151 gives law enforcement agencies the authority to investigate 
these crimes. It amends section 1029 of title 18 to make it a crime to 
unlawfully transfer or use a means of personal identification.
  I want to point out that only an unlawful use or transfer is 
prohibited. The statute will still allow banks, credit card companies 
and credit bureaus to conduct their business as they always have.
  This bill is similar to a bill that passed the other body by 
unanimous consent. It is supported by a number of groups including Visa 
USA, the American Bankers Association, the American Society for 
Industrial Security, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the 
Electronic Privacy Information Center. I particularly again want to 
thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg) for his leadership

[[Page H9995]]

in this important area, and I urge all of my colleagues to support the 
bill.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  I rise to support this legislation, but offer some reservations in 
the process. H.R. 4151, the identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence 
Act, was never considered by the House Committee on the Judiciary. I 
might add that this failure in process is not the most appropriate way 
to meet our legislative responsibilities.
  Nevertheless, I will say that if there is ever extreme hardship on a 
person, it is their loss of identity, Social Security, theft of their 
credit cards through the mail system, and other intrusions on their 
privacy.

                              {time}  1045

  We can always be reminded of the gasp of the individual who has found 
out that, unfortunately, they have left a litany of debts, because 
someone has either taken their credit cards or other identifying 
features, found their check numbers, and devastated their bank account.
  Identity theft is a very important problem that deserves our 
attention. Billions of dollars were stolen by identity thieves when 
they steal account numbers, identification documents, and social 
security numbers. For our elderly, it is most devastating. Ofttimes it 
takes a long, frustrating time and thousands of dollars in legal fees 
for people to reconcile credit problems caused by identity thieves. In 
fact, Members will find that their credit may have been devastated, 
their credit record, before they can even determine that something has 
happened.
  Our current Federal criminal code is inadequate in addressing these 
high-tech crimes. Unfortunately, our credit reporting laws and their 
lack of accountability and responsible consumer protection are as 
responsible for these identity theft problems as a thief's running 
credit card scams. We also have a responsibility to address these 
serious concerns.
  I have expressed my reservations about the process, but I will be 
supporting this bill. But I do ask that we continue our work in this 
area by addressing related problems in credit reporting and consumer 
protection.
  H.R. 4151, the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act, was 
never considered by the House Judiciary Committee. This failure in 
process is not the most appropriate way to meet our legislative 
responsibilities.
  Identity theft is a very important problem that deserves our 
attention. Billions of dollars are stolen by identity thieves when they 
steal account numbers, identification documents and social security 
numbers. It oft times takes a long frustrating time and thousands of 
dollars in legal fees for people to reconcile credit problems caused by 
identity thieves. Our current federal criminal code is inadequate in 
addressing these high tech crimes.
  Unfortunately, our credit reporting laws and their lack of 
accountability and responsible consumer protection are as responsible 
for these identity theft problems as the thieves running credit care 
scams. We also have a responsibility to address these serious concerns.
  Despite my reservations about the process, I will support this bill. 
But, I ask that we continue our work in this area by addressing related 
problems in credit reporting and consumer protection.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Shadegg), the prime author of this bill.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4151, the 
Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998.
  Let me begin by thanking the distinguished gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. McCollum), chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, for his strong 
support of this legislation, and the distinguished chairman of the 
Committee on the Judiciary, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), for 
his support, as well.
  I also want to thank my colleagues on the opposite side of the aisle. 
As Members will hear tonight, many have worked very hard to secure 
passage of this legislation, and it is indeed truly bipartisan.
  I also, most importantly, want to thank two of my own constituents, 
Bob and JoAnn Hartle, of Phoenix, Arizona, who were themselves victims 
of identity theft. They took this tragedy in their lives and turned it 
into a positive experience by becoming instrumental in passing the 
first State law in the Nation to criminalize identity theft, and by 
becoming instrumentally involved in passing this legislation.
  Mr. and Mrs. Hartle suffered the devastation of identity theft when a 
convicted felon took Mr. Hartle's identity and then went out and made 
purchases totaling over $110,000. With Mr. Hartle's identity, this 
individual obtained a social security card, a driver's license, 
numerous bank accounts, and credit cards, and did even more. He bought, 
as a matter of fact, trucks, motorcycles, mobile homes, and appliances, 
but, incredibly, it did not stop there.
  Using Mr. Hartle's identity, he obtained a security clearance from 
the Federal Aviation Administration to secure areas of Phoenix Sky 
Harbor International Airport, and beyond that, he used Mr. Hartle's 
service record in Vietnam to obtain a Federal home loan and, 
stunningly, he used Mr. Hartle's clean record to go around the Brady 
gun law, and this previously-convicted felon obtained handguns through 
his theft of Mr. Hartle's identification.
  Mr. and Mrs. Hartle, as a result of this victimization, were forced 
to spend more than 4 years of their lives and more than $15,000 of 
their own money just restoring their credit and reestablishing their 
good name, because at the time that these acts occurred, there were no 
criminal penalties for this conduct. The Hartles were left with no 
meaningful remedy whatsoever.
  Ultimately the individual involved was caught and prosecuted, 
interestingly, for making a false statement to procure a firearm. He 
was sentenced in 1995 and served a brief period of time, having been 
released earlier this year. Most importantly, he was not required to 
and he did not make restitution to the Hartles.
  Tragically, the Hartles' story is far from unique, as I am sure we 
will hear tonight. Identity theft is the fastest growing financial 
crime in America. It is one of the fastest growing crimes of any kind 
in America. There are thousands of Americans victimized by this conduct 
every day.
  Indeed, I think, to the surprise of all of us involved in 
cosponsoring this legislation, after its introduction we were contacted 
by hundreds of our constituents who have come forward and told their 
own stories of victimization, including numerous Capitol Hill staffers 
who have been victimized by this conduct.
  Identity theft ranges from individual instances, like the Hartles', 
involving sometimes small dollar amounts and sometimes large dollar 
amounts, all the way to large organized professional crime rings 
involving multiple States and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
  Indeed, one such crime ring established a fictitious home improvement 
company and then a credit bureau account, and using that credit bureau 
account and a computer link, downloaded over 500 credit reports, and 
then, using that information, stole more than $250,000 from an array of 
victims.
  Incredibly, because there were no laws punishing this conduct, the 
leader of the ring could only be charged with the crime of breach of 
computer security. He was sentenced to only 2 years of probation, no 
jail time, and fined just $500 for the theft of over $250,000. These, 
sadly, are just two examples of the thousands, no, tens of thousands, 
of identity thefts that occur each year.
  H.R. 4151 is critically needed to punish this kind of conduct, which 
wreaks far-ranging emotional and personal financial damage on its 
victims. It is also needed to deter those who are tempted to engage in 
this conduct in the future.
  In 1996, Arizona became the first State to enact criminal penalties 
for this conduct, and this year seven additional States also enacted 
criminal statutes for this conduct: California, Colorado, Georgia, 
Kansas, Mississippi, Wisconsin, and West Virginia.
  H.R. 4151 complements these State laws already in place. It also, 
most importantly, provides Federal law enforcement officials, 
particularly the Secret Service, with the tools to prosecute and 
prevent identity theft.
  In testimony before the Congress, the U.S. Secret Service testified 
that under

[[Page H9996]]

current law, `` * * * law enforcement must wait for an overt fraudulent 
act or creation of a fraudulent document before it can intercede in a 
case * * * involving identity {theft . Establishing identity theft as a 
criminal violation would enable law enforcement to prevent the fraud 
before it starts. It would'', in the Secret Service's words, ``be a 
proactive answer to what is now being handled in a reactive manner.''
  To understand the dimension of this activity, we simply have to look 
at one national credit bureau, where in 1997, over two-thirds of the 
reports to that credit bureau were about identity theft, a total of 
over 300,000 reports in one year. The cost of this activity is 
monumental to victims, to financial institutions, and to taxpayers. 
Those costs have skyrocketed this year more than $2 billion.
  H.R. 4151 prohibits the transfer and use of personal identification 
information such as a person's personal name, their home address, their 
social security number, and other information to acquire the 
individual's identity. It will enable law enforcement to investigate 
and apprehend these crimes before they occur, before the individual has 
obtained credit cards, checking accounts, home loans, or purchased 
vehicles, furniture, or appliances, or even handguns, or, in the case 
of Bob Hartle, obtained security passes to go to secure areas.
  This is incredibly important and critical legislation which will 
prevent thousands of dollars of financial loss in the future. More 
importantly, it will prevent future victims from having to endure the 
months, perhaps even years, of trying to clear their credit and reclaim 
their good names.
  Identity theft is a critically important crime. This is essential 
needed legislation. It enacts stiff penalties for identity theft and 
even stiffer penalties for trafficking in someone's identity when the 
offense is connected with drug offenses or violent crimes.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, which has truly 
bipartisan support.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  I would add my appreciation to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Shadegg) for his good work. There are so many people this kind of 
identity theft impacts, and certainly I want to acknowledge the Members 
on this side of the aisle, the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) and 
the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Clement), who had great interest and 
worked very hard on this.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
(Ms. DeLauro), who was very instrumental and worked long months and 
years to bring this legislation to this point.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas for 
yielding time to me.
  I am grateful for the rapid work the gentleman from Florida (Chairman 
McCollum) and the Committee on the Judiciary did to bring this 
important legislation to the floor. I was very pleased to have the 
opportunity to work with the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg), the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Clement), and the gentleman from Vermont 
(Mr. Sanders) on creating what is a new and improved and a bipartisan 
piece of legislation to combat identity fraud.
  I rise in support of the McCollum substitute amendment to H.R. 4151, 
the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act, which makes technical 
modifications to the bill.
  As Members have heard from my colleague, the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Shadegg), identity theft is growing. It is a harmful crime. It 
hurts the economy, it destroys consumer credit, and it places a burden 
on consumers to keep their identities under lock and key.
  It took a nightmare story from my own constituent, Denice, and Denice 
does not want her last name known because she continues to be 
frightened by what has happened to her and her family, to bring the 
issue of identity fraud to my attention.
  Denice contacted me 2 years ago and told me her story. Thieves had 
used her stolen identification to access credit in her name in Rhode 
Island and again in Utah. The thieves made more than $2,000 in 
purchases and rented several apartments.
  Denice has worked for more than 2 years to clear her good name and 
credit through multiple contacts with credit reporting agencies and an 
attorney. This identity fraud case has cost her a tremendous amount of 
time and huge sums of money.

                              {time}  2300

  The identity thief who stole her identity is continuing to use her 
identification to access credit in her name. In response to her case, 
and numerous other similar stories brought to my attention, I 
introduced the Identity Piracy Act to fight identity fraud.
  Today, I am pleased to join forces with my colleagues to pass the 
Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act that incorporates 
important changes from the Identity Piracy Act. The bill incorporates 
language from my identity fraud bill that eliminates the dollar 
threshold making identity fraud a Federal crime. Under other identity 
fraud legislation, a thief had to steal both a victim's identity and 
$1,000. The new bill will ensure that the theft of identity is a crime, 
with enhanced penalties for stealing credit, for drug trafficking, and 
for violent crimes.
  Identity fraud is a crime that leaves unsuspecting victims open to 
years of frustration and debt while they try to clear their credit. It 
exposes financial institutions, insurers, and consumers to financial 
losses from stolen credit and other fraud.
  The base of support for passing this legislation is universal. 
Consumer groups, financial service institutions, and privacy rights 
groups all support this legislation. And the chairman identified a 
number of those groups.
  Although ultimately the best weapon to stop crime is awareness and 
prevention, the new legislation that we are voting on tomorrow will be 
another weapon in the arsenal in the fight against identity fraud, and 
I am delighted and pleased and proud to join forces with my colleagues 
on both sides of the aisle to pass this piece of legislation.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
  (Mr. HOSTETTLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. McCollum) chairman of the committee, and the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Shadegg), and I rise in strong support of this bill, a 
piece of legislation which, when discussed, may seem like something 
directly from the Sci-Fi Channel when someone would discuss theft of an 
identity and the assumption of that identity. One would think that was 
something far off in the future, but in many cases in these pieces of 
legislation the anecdotes we have heard, some of them come very close 
to home.
  In fact, earlier this spring, my district scheduler back in 
southwestern Indiana, Erica, experienced this very phenomenon. A person 
in Michigan had purchased information such as social security numbers 
and family information of Erica. The imposter then ordered a credit 
report to learn her credit status. After learning that status, and 
armed with that information, the perpetrator went on a 2-day spending 
spree, opened numerous charge accounts as Erica, and purchased in 
excess of $5,000 in goods, including the purchase of a cell phone.
  The individual was caught only when a clerk noticed that the imposter 
hesitated at providing certain information and the credit card company 
called my district scheduler to verify it.
  Madam Speaker, this is a piece of legislation that is very timely, 
very important, not only to the individuals that are directly impacted 
by it, but our economy as a whole. I commend the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Shadegg) for his work on this very needed piece of bipartisan 
legislation, and I ask my colleagues to vote in favor of it.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Madam Speaker, with that let me add my appreciation 
for all who have worked so hard on this legislation. It is about time 
we protect innocent victims of identity theft and assumption. 
Deterrence is very important, and I would hope our colleagues would 
support it.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H9997]]

  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I submit for the Record the explanatory 
statement on the substitute amendment to this bill:

Explanatory Statement of Rep. Bill McCollum on the Substitute Amendment 
                              to H.R. 4151

       The substitute amendment to H.R. 4151 is very similar in 
     substance, and identical in intent, to H.R. 4151 as it was 
     introduced by Mr. Shadegg. The amendment modifies the bill so 
     that its language will be similar to the text of S. 512, a 
     bill on this same subject that passed in the other body by 
     unanimous consent. The text of S. 512, as passed by the other 
     body, incorporated amendments to the Senate bill that were 
     suggested by the Justice Department.
       There are four substantive changes accomplished by the 
     substitute amendment. First, the substitute requires the 
     government to prove that the person who unlawfully transfers 
     or uses a means of identification of another person did so 
     with the intent to commit, or aid and abet, a violation of 
     federal law or any state felony. As introduced, the bill did 
     not require that the government prove the intent behind a 
     defendant's transfer or use of another's identifying 
     information. Second, as amended, the bill deletes the mere 
     possession of personal identifying information from the 
     offense and requires that the government prove an unlawful 
     use or transfer to another person of the personal information 
     in order to prove the crime.
       Third, the House bill as introduced differentiated between 
     transferring the information and using it when determining 
     whether a crime had been committed. It required that the 
     government prove that a defendant transferred five or more 
     means of identification in order to prove the crime had been 
     committed. The substitute amendment eliminates this 
     distinction. I believe that allowing even one person's 
     identity to be sold to another person unlawfully should be 
     punished. We need not wait until the criminal has jeopardized 
     the financial security of five or more people before we act 
     to stop him.
       Fourth, the substitute amends the penalty for committing 
     this new crime in conjunction with a violent crime from that 
     originally set forth in the bill. The substitute will make 
     this penalty the same as that for committing the new crime in 
     conjunction with a drug trafficking crime, thus continuing 
     the usual practice of punishing acts related to violent 
     crimes and serious drug crimes in a similar manner.
       The substitute also amends the Ethics in Government Act 
     provision dealing with the release to the public of financial 
     disclosure statements filed by federal judges. The substitute 
     amendment will allow for some of the personal information in 
     those filings to be redacted when they are released to the 
     public if threats have been made against the judges who have 
     filed those statements.
       Finally, the substitute also makes two purely technical 
     amendments to previously enacted statutes.

  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to support the 
Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act and I am proud to be an 
original cosponsor of this legislation. In order to clearly demonstrate 
the need for this bill, let me lay out a frightening scenario that 
could happen to any of us.
  Imagine getting a bill from a credit card company for thousands of 
dollars that you didn't charge. Then, the next day, getting several 
more bills from other credit card companies, and getting overdue phone 
bills for an address you never lived at, and getting an invoice for a 
car you never bought. This sounds like something out of the Twilight 
Zone, but this nightmare is real. Someone, perhaps someone living in a 
country on the other side of the globe, has stolen your name, your 
financial history, your identity, and used it to run up huge debts--
debts creditors want you to pay.
  Once your identity has been ``stolen,'' you must now spend many hours 
on the phone with credit card companies trying to clear up these 
misunderstandings. You may spend many months or even years with the 
three major credit bureaus trying to clear up your credit record, and 
you may find yourself having trouble getting a loan or a mortgage.
  If someone with a prior criminal record assumes an individual's 
identity and is using that person's name, the victim can be denied jobs 
without knowing why. And, if the victim's credit is in disarray due to 
identity theft, an innocent consumer can be turned down for a car loan 
or mortgage.
  You may spend the rest of your life worrying if this nightmare will 
happen again. But the worst part is that even if you or the law 
enforcement community knows who has committed this act against you, 
there is currently no law to punish the offender or to provide you with 
any compensation for all you've been through.
  Current federal law only prohibits the misuse of false identification 
documents. But with the growth of information that can be found on the 
Internet, identity thieves don't need an actual document. They can go 
on-line and find or purchase your Social Security number, unlisted 
address and phone number, and date of birth, which are often the key 
pieces of information to unlocking the door to your personal financial 
history.
  According to law enforcement authorities, identity theft is one of 
the nation's fastest growing crimes, and it's a crime federal 
authorities need help to combat. A recent GAO study reports that at one 
of the nation's 3 largest credit bureaus, victim inquiries rose from 
35,000 in 1992 to 522,000 in 1997. That's a 15-fold increase. The 
Social Security Administration reported that complaints about stolen 
Social Security numbers, one of the most commonly stolen identifiers, 
doubled from 1996 to 1997. The U.S. Secret Service, which has 
jurisdiction over financial crimes, estimates that actual losses due to 
identity theft were $745 million last year.
  We need to discourage this intrusion of privacy by making it a 
federal crime to take over someone's identity. In order to protect 
Americans from this financially and emotionally devastating crime, 
Reps. Shadegg, DeLauro, Clement, and I introduced H.R. 4151, the 
Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act. This needed legislation 
will make it a federal crime to assume someone else's identity. It also 
establishes a clearinghouse at the Federal Trade Commission for 
identity theft victims to get assistance in clearing their credit 
records. The bill allows victims of identity theft to receive 
restitution from the criminals who steal their identity. Previously, 
they were not entitled to restitution because identity theft was not a 
crime.
  American consumers deserve to have their privacy protected. Identity 
theft can affect anyone at any time. We need to pass the Identity Theft 
and Assumption Deterrence Act to not only throw these identity thieves 
in jail, but also to give victims help with cleaning up their own 
credit records.
  Mr. CLEMENT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for H.R. 
4151, the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act. The measure 
would establish tough penalties for the crime, as well as direct the 
Federal Trade Commission to log reports of identity theft, provide 
information to victims, and refer complaints to appropriate law 
enforcement agencies.
  Identity theft is one of the fastest-growing financial crimes, with 
reports of 2,000 cases occurring each week. Credit-card fraud losses--
the major financial loss in personal-identity thefts--amount to as much 
as $2 billion a year. The act is called identity theft, yet it is not 
illegal. The notion that someone can steal your personal information 
and essentially pretend to be you without penalty is frightening.
  I was first acquainted with this growing problem when one of my 
staffers became a victim of identity theft. The story my staffer told 
me was incredible. Someone stole her name and social security number to 
open up eight credit card accounts and charged over $17,000 in her 
name. This thief switched my staffer's phone service and opened two 
cellular phone accounts. This imposter even had a government agency 
identification badge forged with my staff's name, social security 
number, and address on it.
  But the most incredible part of the story is that my staffer had 
absolutely no recourse. The only crime committed, she was told by 
police, was against the stores where the thief had charged merchandise.
  There is another story of a woman in my home State of Tennessee, Mrs. 
Conjohna Mixon, who was actually arrested and sent to jail because 
someone had stolen her identity and had written worthless checks on a 
phony account. This innocent woman was even brought into court with leg 
shackles. After her release, she had to endure hours of paperwork and 
spend personal time and money because she was a victim. And the 
nightmare didn't end. Two months later, local authorities were still 
threatening this innocent woman with arrest on more bad check warrants.
  One of my constituents, Mr. Paul White, wrote me a letter describing 
how someone had stolen the identify of his 18-year-old son, setting up 
a bank account in Colorado and issuing fraudulent checks. Mr. White 
made the following statement:

       As I do a great deal of legal work representing a local 
     bank, I am well aware of the increasing incidence of identity 
     fraud in this country and the necessity for federal 
     legislation to outlaw this type of fraudulent activity.

  The people who are being victimized have no recourse under law and 
must sacrifice their own time and money to repair the wrongdoings of 
others against them. This system is not fair, and that is why I urge 
immediate passage of the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act. 
In addition, I call on my colleagues to continue to monitor this crime, 
so that we can be sure that no future identity theft goes unpunished, 
and that every victim is served by the law.
  Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker. It's been called the crime that isn't a 
crime. How can that be? Ask Jessica Grant, a Wisconsin woman whose 
identity was stolen through use of her Social Security number. Her name 
was used by a

[[Page H9998]]

thief to buy two cars and a mobile home. Under her name, the thief 
racked up $60,000 in fraudulent charges. Yet, there was no federal law 
to protect her.
  Or, ask the thousands of consumers across the country whose names, 
Social Security numbers, and personal credit information are pilfered 
every day. This ``crime that isn't a crime'' cost consumers $745 
million in 1997, according to a recent GAO report I requested.
  While Jessica Grant and thousands of individuals have indeed been 
violated, current federal law provides protections only for lenders and 
credit card companies.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support this legislation. Today, there 
is no standard definition of identity theft. There are no fines. No 
prison penalties. No protections for people like Jessica Grant. In 
short, ID theft is not a crime.
  Passage of this legislation addresses two critical aspects of 
identity theft. First the bill would authorize the FTC to acknowledge 
and log reports of this new--and rapidly expanding--category of crime. 
At last, we will learn about the real impact identity theft.
  Second, the bill clearly defines ID theft. People like Jessica Grant 
and prosecutors across the country can pursue these thieves and lock 
`em up.
  While HR 4151 is a positive step there is much more work to be done 
to thwart this growth industry in crime.
  Under my bill, HR 1813, the Personal Information Privacy Act, the 
sale or purchase of a person's personal credit information without the 
express written consent of the owner would be explicitly prohibited. My 
bill, which I will re-introduce in the 106th Congress, also prohibits 
the use of Social Security numbers as a condition of doing business.
  Mr. Speaker, with these two bills we at long last will have the one-
two punch needed to strike back at identity thieves.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Wilson). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4151, 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.

                          ____________________