[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 59 (Wednesday, April 28, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4364-S4366]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. KOHL (for himself and Mr. DeWine):
  S. 903. A bill to facilitate the exchange by law enforcement agencies 
of DNA identification information relating to violent offenders, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


            violent offender dna identification act of 1999

 Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator DeWine to 
introduce the Violent Offender DNA Identification Act of 1999. This 
bipartisan measure will put more criminals behind bars by correcting 
practical and legal shortcomings that leave too much crucial DNA 
evidence unused and too many violent crimes unsolved.

  Currently, all 50 states require DNA samples to be obtained from 
certain convicted offenders, and these samples increasingly can be 
shared through a national DNA database established by Federal law. This 
national database--part of the Combined Database Index System (CODIS)--
enables law enforcement officials to link DNA evidence found at a crime 
scene with any suspect whose DNA is already on file. By identifying 
repeat offenders, this DNA sharing can and does make a difference. 
Already the FBI has recorded over 400 matches through DNA databases, 
helping solve numerous crimes. And in my home state of Wisconsin, 
experience proves that DNA ``sharing'' pays off. We've already had 19 
``hits'' that have assisted more than 20 criminal investigations. In 
fact, just a week

[[Page S4365]]

before the statute of limitations ran out in a multiple rape 
investigation, DNA matching helped identify a serial rapist responsible 
for three rapes in Kenosha and a fourth in Racine. As a result, he's 
currently serving an 80-year sentence. Without DNA databases, suspects 
like this otherwise might never be discovered--or convicted.
  As valuable as this system is, it is not as effective as it could--or 
should--be. The effectiveness of the database is directly related to 
the number of DNA profiles it contains. For every 1,000 new profiles, 
we can expect to find at least one match, and with every new profile 
added, the odds for a match increase. However, there are currently two 
major obstacles to the effective functioning of the database. Our 
measure would correct these problems and make the database far more 
productive.
  First, hundreds of thousands of DNA samples that have already been 
collected still must be analyzed before they can be entered into the 
national database. The FBI estimates that there is a backlog of nearly 
400,000 DNA samples from convicted offenders languishing, unanalyzed, 
in state crime laboratories for simple lack of funding.
  Our measure will reduce the backlog of unanalyzed samples by 
providing the funding necessary to analyze them and put them ``on-
line.'' It provides $30 million over two years to erase the backlog of 
the 400,000 unanalyzed samples and the almost-as-pressing backlog of 
approximately 200,000 more samples that need to be reanalyzed using 
state-of-the-art methods. For example, in Wisconsin, we have almost 
2,000 samples that have not yet been analyzed, and more than 10,000 
that need to be reanalyzed so they can be effectually shared through 
the national database.
  Indeed, easing this backlog was the lead recommendation of the 
National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence appointed by the 
Attorney General. As the Commission explained, ``the power of the CODIS 
program lies in the sheer numbers of convicted offender samples that 
are processed and entered into the database.''
  Second, for some inexplicable reason, we do not collect samples from 
Federal and D.C. offenders. So while the database can identify a 
suspect whose DNA is on file in one of the 50 states, it generally 
won't catch a Federal or D.C. offender. Under current law, that suspect 
will not be identified; his crime may not be solved; and he could get 
off scot-free. We thought we already closed this loophole through 1996 
legislation which provides that the FBI ``may expand [the database] to 
include Federal crimes and crimes committed in the District of 
Columbia,'' but Federal officials claim more express authority is 
necessary. We are not so sure they're right, but there is no need to 
wait any longer.

  Our measure closes once and for all this loophole that allows DNA 
samples from Federal (including military) and Washington, D.C. 
offenders to go uncollected. Under our proposal, DNA samples would be 
obtained from any Federal offender--or any D.C. offender under Federal 
custody or supervision--convicted of a violent crime or other 
qualifying offense. And it would require the collection of samples from 
juveniles found delinquent under Federal law for conduct that would 
constitute a violent crime if committed by an adult. Our proposal was 
prepared with the assistance of the FBI, the Administrative Office of 
the U.S. Courts, the Bureau of Prisons, the U.S. Parole Commission, 
agencies within the District of Columbia responsible for supervision of 
released felons, and the Department of Defense.
  Mr. President, modern crime-fighting technology like DNA testing and 
DNA databases make law enforcement much more effective. But in order to 
take full advantage of these valuable resources, we need this measure 
to make the database as comprehensive--and as productive--as possible. 
Violent criminals should not be able to evade arrest simply because a 
state didn't analyze its DNA samples or because an inexcusable loophole 
leaves Federal and D.C. offenders out of the DNA database. This measure 
will ensure that we apprehend violent repeat offenders, regardless of 
whether they originally violated state, Federal or D.C. law. And, by 
collecting more DNA evidence and utilizing the best of DNA technology, 
we also can help exonerate individual suspects whose DNA does not match 
with particular crime scenes.
  The Senate has already made clear that issues like these need to be 
addressed. In this year's Budget, we acknowledged that ``tremendous 
backlogs * * * prevent swift administration of justice and impede 
fundamental individual rights, such as the right to a speedy trial and 
to exculpatory evidence.'' We unanimously concluded that it was the 
Sense of the Senate that ``Congress should consider legislation that 
specifically addresses the backlogs in State and local crime 
laboratories and medical examiner's offices.''
  Mr. President, this measure will help police use modern technology to 
solve crimes and prevent repeat offenders from committing new ones. So 
we look forward to working with our colleagues and with the Department 
of Justice to move this measure forward and help law enforcement keep 
pace with today's criminal.
 Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the 
``Violent Offender DNA Identification Act of 1999,'' with my colleague 
Senator Herb Kohl. Existing anti-crime technology can allow us to solve 
many violent crimes that occur in our communities--but in order for it 
to work, it has to be used.
  I have been a longtime advocate for use of the Combined DNA Indexing 
System (CODIS), a national DNA database, to profile convicted offender 
DNA. In fact, during consideration of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996, I 
proposed a provision under which Federal convicted offenders' DNA would 
be included in CODIS. Unfortunately, the Department of Justice never 
implemented this law, though currently all 50 states collect DNA from 
convicted offenders.
  One of the purposes of this legislation is to expressly require the 
collection of DNA samples from federally convicted felons, and military 
personnel convicted of similar offenses. Collection of convicted 
offender DNA is crucial to solving many of the crimes occurring in our 
communities. Statistics show that many of these violent felons will 
repeat their crimes once they are back in society. Since the Federal 
government does not collect DNA from these felons, however, law 
enforcement's ability to rapidly identify likely suspects is retarded. 
Collection of such data is critical.
  The case of Mrs. Debbie Smith of Virginia underscores the importance 
of collection of DNA from convicted offenders. Debbie Smith was at her 
home in the middle of the day when a masked intruder entered her 
unlocked back door. Her husband, a police lieutenant, was upstairs 
sleeping. The stranger blindfolded Mrs. Smith and took her to a wooded 
area behind her house where he robbed and repeatedly raped her. After 
warning Mrs. Smith not to tell, the assailant let her go. She told her 
husband, who reported the incident, then took her to the hospital where 
evidence was collected for DNA analysis.
  Debbie Smith's rape experience was so terrible that she contemplated 
taking her own life. She continued to live in constant fear until six-
and-a-half years later when a state crime laboratory found a CODIS 
match with an inmate then serving in jail for abduction and robbery. In 
fact, the offender was jailed on another offense one month after raping 
her. There are thousands of other crimes the DNA database can solve. 
With CODIS we can grant countless victims, like Mrs. Smith, peace of 
mind and bring their attackers swiftly to justice.
  We need to do everything we can to make sure law enforcement has 
access to these tools. A major obstacle facing state and local crime 
laboratories are the backlogs of convicted offender samples. The 
Federal Bureau of Investigation estimates that there are about 450,000 
convicted offender samples in state and local laboratories awaiting 
analysis. Increasing demand for DNA analysis in active cases, and 
limited resources, are reducing the ability of state and local crime 
laboratories to analyze their convicted offender backlogs. While I 
introduced, and Congress passed, the Crime Identification Technology 
Act of 1998 to address the long-term needs of crime laboratories, many 
crime laboratories need immediate assistance to address their short-
term backlogs that will help law enforcement solve crime.
  This bill would provide about $30 million, over 4 years, to help 
state and

[[Page S4366]]

local crime laboratories address their convicted offender backlogs. We 
are asking the FBI to work with private, state and local laboratories 
to organize regional laboratories to analysis backlogged State and 
local convicted offender samples. While we have considered many ways to 
address the backlog of convicted offender samples in state and local 
laboratories, we believe that the approach outlined in this legislation 
provides the fastest, most cost-effective and efficient method of 
eliminating the backlog.
  Violent criminals should not be able to evade responsibility simply 
because a state lacks the resources to analyze their DNA samples, or 
because a loophole excludes certain Federal offenders from our national 
database. This legislation would be a huge asset for our local law 
enforcers in their day-to-day fight against crime. I thank Senator Kohl 
for his efforts.
                                 ______