[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 165 (Friday, November 19, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S15220-S15221]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 AMENDING TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the 
Senate proceed to the consideration of H.R. 1887, which is at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 1887) to amend title 18, United States Code, 
     to punish the depiction of animal cruelty.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Mr. President, today, I rise in strong 
support of H.R. 1887, legislation that overwhelmingly passed the House 
to ban interstate commerce in videos depicting acts of cruelty against 
animals. Specifically, this legislation would ban the interstate 
shipment of videos that record women, often wearing stiletto heeled 
shoes, slowly crushing live animals to death. Animal victims include 
hamsters, kittens, puppies, and even monkeys. Viewers purchase these 
videos for $15 to $300 and apparently derive some sexual gratification 
from watching these horrifying act of animal cruelty.
  The Humane Society of the United States, which brought this issue to 
the attention of law enforcement agencies, has discovered that there 
are more than 2,000 video titles that include crushing. One such 
business in California has labeled itself Steponit.
  I really have never heard of more bizarre, more perverse, and more 
sickening acts that this. This goes way beyond the bounds of even of 
our most wild imaginations.
  The people in this industry should face serious penalties for their 
sick acts of cruelty. Fines and jail time are appropriate societal 
responses.
  State anti-cruelty statues are not adequate in addressing this 
problem. It has been difficult for enforcement agents to determine when 
the practice occurred, where it occurred, and who has been involved, 
since feet and the crushing of the animals are the only images on the 
video.
  Here is a case where a restriction on interstate commerce in these 
products--in the age of the Internet, which facilitates this trade--is 
absolutely necessary. We have to stop the purveyors of this filth, 
indecency and cruelty.
  This is not the harmless act of few people out of the mainstream. 
This is an extreme antisocial act, where innocent animals are harmed 
for the profits of producers and the mere sexual gratification of 
viewers.
  In additon to the harm that the animals endure, there is an 
additional reason to crack down on this industry. There is a well-
established link between acts of violence against animals and later 
acts of violence perpetrated against people. People sometimes rehearse 
their violence on animals before turning their violent intentions 
against people. The FBI and other law

[[Page S15221]]

enforcement agencies have long recognized this linkage.
  What sort of message do we send to children to allow these videos to 
be commercially traded and then viewed? It has to be desensitizing for 
children and adults to see these destructive images. There surely is a 
major impact on society when people lose their empathy and express 
their violent impulses on a larger social stage.
  Mr. President, H.R. 1887 passed the House by an overwhelming vote of 
372 to 42. I understand that it is currently being held at the desk. It 
is my hope that Senate will stop this industry in its tracks by passing 
this legislation.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I rise in support of H.R. 1887, a bill by 
Representative Gallegly which would prohibit, and set penalties for, 
knowingly creating, selling, or possessing a depiction of animal 
cruelty with the intention of placing that depiction in interstate or 
foreign commerce for commercial gain.
  I would first like to thank the advocacy groups and individuals who 
testified at the House Subcommittee on Crime hearing and helped 
publicize the need for legislation to combat this form of animal 
cruelty. I would also like to thank Senator Hatch, chairman of the 
Senate Judiciary Committee, for his help in the passage of H.R. 1887.
  I recently was informed by Representative Gallegly of a growing 
problem in California involving ``crush'' videos. Much of the material 
graphically features women stepping on and killing a variety of small 
animals. The animals are bound to the floor or other materials and are 
slowly tortured and crushed. When this deplorable practice came to 
light, Representative Gallegly introduced H.R. 1887, which targets the 
market for these disturbing videos.
  While the acts of animal cruelty featured in these videos may violate 
many state animal cruelty laws, they can be difficult to prosecute. For 
example, prosecutors often cannot prove the date when the acts were 
performed or the identity of the individual committing the act of 
cruelty because the person's face is concealed or not filmed.
  The purpose of H.R. 1887 is to prohibit individuals from profiting 
from videos depicting animal cruelty if the act depicted is illegal 
under federal or state law. This bill provides federal law-enforcement 
officials with a tool to prosecute the individuals making profits from 
these videos, which can be sold via the Internet and through catalogs 
for $30 to $100 a piece. Eliminating the videos' commercial incentive 
will hopefully stem the creation of ``crush'' videos.
  This bill is important because many studies have shown that abusing 
animals is often a prosecutor for committing violence against other 
people. H.R. 1887 may not solve that problem, but it will at least 
eliminate the market for a truly reprehensible product.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be 
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the 
table, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The bill (H.R. 1887) was read the third time and passed.

                          ____________________