[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 55 (Monday, May 8, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3612-S3615]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. THURMOND (for himself and Mr. Biden):
  S. 2516. A bill to fund task forces to locate and apprehend fugitives 
in Federal, State, and local felony criminal cases and give 
administrative subpoena authority to the United States Marshals 
Service; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


                   fugitive apprehension act of 2000

  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation on 
behalf of myself and Senator Biden that will help address the growing 
problem of fugitives by giving the U.S. Marshals Service tools they 
need to apprehend fugitives from justice. Senator Biden and I have 
worked together many times over the years in support of Federal law 
enforcement.
  Fugitives are those who the courts have found warrant prosecution or 
have already been found guilty, but are attempting to beat the system. 
These are individuals who, by their conduct, have indicated a complete 
lack of respect for our Nation's criminal justice system. This 
situation represents not only an outrage to the rule of law but also a 
threat to the safety and security of Americans. Fugitives from justice 
often continue to commit additional crimes while running free on the 
streets.
  According to some estimates, there are approximately 45,000 fugitives 
from justice in Federal felony cases. The number of serious Federal 
offense warrants received by the U.S. Marshals Service has increased 
each year for the past 4 years. Also, over one-half million fugitives 
in State and local felony cases have been entered into the database of 
the National Crime Information Center or NCIC. This number is up from 
340,000 reported in 1990. Also, the NCIC receives only about 20 percent 
of all outstanding State and local felony warrants in the country. If 
the NCIC estimates are correct, then there could be over 2.5 million 
State local fugitive warrants in felony cases alone. This does not even 
include misdemeanor warrants.
  Mr. President, this is a serious problem. We must do more to address 
the growing threat of fugitives on the State and Federal level. It is 
critical to our fight against crime.
  Task forces have been shown to be successful in tracking fugitives. 
This legislation would create more multi-agency task forces around the 
country to locate and apprehend the enormous number of fugitives 
nationwide. The marshals involved would be directed by headquarters, so 
they would not be diverted to tasks such as courtroom security. Also, 
the task forces would be a joint effort, staffed by U.S. Marshals and 
State and local law enforcement authorities. These task forces would 
share case workload and intelligence to locate and apprehend fugitives 
wanted in their jurisdictions.
  Fugitives are the one investigative priority of the U.S. Marshals 
Service. Because of this expertise, the marshals have been able to 
specialize their personnel and investigative techniques to deal with 
this one critical mission. Conducting an investigation to make a 
criminal case against someone is nothing like trying to find a person 
who does not want to be found. The same techniques used to conduct 
criminal investigations cannot be used successfully in fugitive 
investigations. This puts the majority of law enforcement agencies at a 
disadvantage, especially State and local law enforcement, who are 
forced to put their resources into a wide variety of normal police 
duties. These task forces can help State and local law enforcement 
develop greater expertise in this area so they can be more efficient 
and successful in tracking fugitives.

  Fugitive investigations are very fluid and time sensitive. The 
difference between locating and apprehending a fugitive or missing the 
individual can be merely a matter of minutes.
  The time-sensitive nature of these investigations often creates 
problems under current Federal law. As a general matter, if there is no 
intent to indict the fugitive for escape, which is true in most 
fugitive cases, investigators may not use a grand jury subpoena to 
obtain information on the fugitive. Although investigators can get 
information through application to the court, the time necessary in 
seeking Federal court orders can make the difference between 
apprehension and further flight of the fugitive.
  This bill would remedy this deficiency in the law by providing the 
U.S. Marshals Service administrative subpoena authority in fugitive 
investigations. This subpoena authority is based on the same authority 
current law already provides to the Drug Enforcement Administration in 
drug investigations.

[[Page S3613]]

  In summary, this bill would help bring to justice dangerous fugitives 
that are roaming the streets of America. I hope my colleagues will 
support this important initiative.
  I ask unanimous consent to print into the Record a copy of the bill 
and a section-by-section explanation of its provisions.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2516

       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 ``Fugitive Apprehension Act of 
     2000''.

     SEC. 2. FUGITIVE APPREHENSION TASK FORCES.

       (a) In General.--The Director of the United States Marshal 
     Service shall establish permanent Fugitive Apprehension Task 
     Forces in areas of the United States as determined by the 
     Director to locate and apprehend fugitives.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the United States Marshal Service to 
     carry out the provisions of this section $32,100,000 for the 
     fiscal year 2001, $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, and 
     $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.

     SEC. 3. ADMINISTRATIVE SUBPOENAS TO APPREHEND FUGITIVES.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 49 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. l075. Administrative subpoenas to apprehend fugitives

       ``(a) In this section--
       ``(1) the term `fugitive' means a person who--
       ``(A) having been indicted under Federal law or having been 
     convicted of committing a felony under Federal law, flees or 
     attempts to flee from or evades or attempts to evade the 
     jurisdiction of the court with jurisdiction over the felony;
       ``(B) having been indicted under State law or having been 
     convicted of committing a felony under State law, flees or 
     attempts to flee from, or evades or attempts to evade, the 
     jurisdiction of the court with jurisdiction over the felony;
       ``(C) escapes from lawful Federal or State custody after 
     having been indicted or having been convicted of committing a 
     felony under Federal or State law; or
       ``(D) is in violation of subparagraph (2) or (3) of the 
     first undesignated paragraph of section 1073;
       ``(2) the term `investigation' means, with respect to a 
     State fugitive described in subparagraph (B) or (C) of 
     paragraph (1), an investigation in which there is reason to 
     believe that the fugitive fled from or evaded, or attempted 
     to flee from or evade, the jurisdiction of the court, or 
     escaped from custody, in or affecting, or using any facility 
     of, interstate or foreign commerce, or as to whom an 
     appropriate law enforcement officer or official of a State or 
     political subdivision has requested the Attorney General to 
     assist in the investigation, and the Attorney General finds 
     that the particular circumstances of the request give rise to 
     a Federal interest sufficient for the exercise of Federal 
     jurisdiction pursuant to section 1075;
       ``(3) the term `State' means a State of the United States, 
     the District of Colombia, and any commonwealth, territory, or 
     possession of the United States; and
       ``(4) the term `relevant or material' means there are 
     articulable facts that show the fugitive's whereabouts may be 
     discerned from the records sought.
       ``(b) In any investigation with respect to the apprehension 
     of a fugitive, the Attorney General may subpoena witnesses 
     for the purpose of the production of any records (including 
     books, papers, documents, electronic data, and other tangible 
     and intangible items that constitute or contain evidence) 
     that the Attorney General finds relevant or material in the 
     investigation. The attendance of witnesses and the production 
     of records may be required from any place in any State or 
     other place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States 
     at any designated place where the witness was served with a 
     subpoena, except that a witness shall not be required to 
     appear more than 500 miles distant from the place where the 
     witness was served. Witnesses summoned under this section 
     shall be paid the same fees and mileage that are paid 
     witnesses in the courts of the United States.
       ``(c) A subpoena issued under this section may be served by 
     any person designated in the subpoena to serve it. Service 
     upon a natural person may be made by personal delivery of the 
     subpoena to that person or by certified mail with return 
     receipt requested. Service may be made upon a domestic or 
     foreign corporation or upon a partnership or other 
     unincorporated association that is subject to suit under a 
     common name, by delivering the subpoena to an officer, to a 
     managing or general agent, or to any other agent authorized 
     by appointment or by law to receive service of process. The 
     affidavit of the person serving the subpoena entered on a 
     true copy thereof by the person serving it shall be proof of 
     service.
       ``(d) In the case of the contumacy by or refusal to obey a 
     subpoena issued to any person, the Attorney General may 
     invoke the aid of any court of the United States within the 
     jurisdiction of which the investigation is carried on or of 
     which the subpoenaed person is an inhabitant, or in which he 
     carries on business or may be found, to compel compliance 
     with the subpoena. The court may issue an order requiring the 
     subpoenaed person to appear before the Attorney General to 
     produce records if so ordered. Any failure to obey the order 
     of the court may be punishable by the court as contempt 
     thereof. All process in any such case may be served in any 
     judicial district in which the person may be found.
       ``(e) This section shall be construed and applied in a 
     manner consistent with section 2703 and with section 1102 of 
     the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3402).
       ``(f) The United States Marshals Service shall report to 
     the Attorney General on a quarterly basis regarding 
     administrative subpoenas issued pursuant to this section. The 
     Attorney General shall transmit the report to Congress.
       ``(g) The Attorney General shall issue guidelines governing 
     the issuance of administrative subpoenas by the United States 
     Marshals Service. Such guidelines shall mandate that 
     administrative subpoenas shall issue only after review and 
     approval of the Director of the Marshals Service or his 
     designee in a position of Assistant Director or higher.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for 
     chapter 49 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

``1075. Administrative subpoenas to apprehend fugitives.''.
                                  ____


     Section-by-Section Analysis--Fugitive Apprehension act of 2000

     Section 1. Short title
       The title is the ``Fugitive Apprehension Act of 2000.''
     Section 2. Fugitive apprehension task forces
       The purpose of this provision is to assist Federal, state 
     and local law enforcement authorities by forming several 
     multiagency task forces around the country to locate and 
     apprehend fugitives wanted by their jurisdictions.
       The bill would authorize to be appropriated to the U.S. 
     Marshal Service funds to establish new permanent Fugitive 
     Apprehension Task Forces and supplement task forces already 
     operating in areas throughout the United States. The task 
     forces would be totally dedicated to locating and 
     apprehending fugitives under the direction of a National 
     Director and not under a specific District to insure that 
     they are not utilized for other USMS missions.
     Section 3. Administrative subpoena authority
       As a general matter, under Federal law, if there is no 
     intent to seek Federal indictment--as is true in a great 
     majority of fugitive apprehension investigations--law 
     enforcement officers may not use a grand jury subpoena to 
     obtain information relevant to a fugitive investigation. 
     Indeed, to do so would constitute abuse of the grand jury 
     process. Although there are some mechanisms to obtain this 
     information through application to the court, time spent by 
     law enforcement seeking state and federal court orders to 
     obtain the release of information can make the difference 
     between apprehension or further flight of a fugitive.
       This provision would remedy the current deficiency in the 
     law by providing for administrative subpoena authority in 
     fugitive investigations. The provision is based on the 
     administrative subpoena authority provided in title 21, 
     United States Code, Section 876, which authorizes the 
     Attorney General to issue administrative subpoenas in 
     controlled substance related criminal investigations and 
     administrative proceedings. However, this provision 
     incorporates significant restrictions on its use in order to 
     satisfy concerns over an expansion in the use of 
     administrative subpoenas.
       First, this is more narrowly tailored than Title 21, United 
     States Code, Section 876. The proposed section 1075 
     authorizes the Attorney General to obtain only documents in 
     response to the subpoena, not testimony.
       Second, the statute is limited in its application to 
     fugitives in Federal and state felony cases, not just those 
     suspected of committing crimes. The authority would only 
     apply to those who had been indicted.
       Third, the statute strictly controls any delegation of the 
     Attorney General's authority to issue such subpoenas, by 
     requiring that any such delegation be accomplished only 
     through formal Attorney General guidelines that would be 
     subject to scrutiny. These guidelines would require that an 
     official at the level of Assistant Director in the Marshals 
     Service must approve any such subpoena.
       Fourth, the statute requires that before a subpoena can be 
     issued, the Attorney General must find that the records 
     sought are ``relevant or material,'' i.e., there are 
     ``articulable facts'' that show the fugitive's whereabouts 
     may be discerned from the records sought.
       Fifth, the statute makes clear that an administrative 
     subpoena issued under this section does not ``trump'' 
     protections accorded records under existing statutes, such as 
     electronic records whose production is covered by section 
     2703 of Title 18 and financial records whose production is 
     covered by section 3402 of Title 12. Rather, this statute is 
     to be construed and applied consistent with such existing 
     statutes.
       Sixth, the statute requires the Marshals Service to report 
     to the Attorney General quarterly regarding the number of 
     administrative subpoenas issued, and this report will be 
     submitted to the Congress.

[[Page S3614]]

       This provision would help bring to justice the larger 
     number of federal fugitives whom the government has already 
     decided merit prosecution insofar as they have been 
     charged with and or convicted of a Federal felony offense 
     or have escaped after having been convicted of such an 
     offense. By their conduct, these individuals have 
     indicated a complete lack of respect for our nation's 
     criminal justice system. As to these fugitives, the 
     government does not need proof that they have moved in 
     interstate commerce prior to issuing a subpoena.
       The provision also would allow Federal law enforcement 
     officials to issue an administrative subpoena to assist state 
     law enforcement officials in apprehending state fugitives 
     when they affect interstate commerce or when there is a 
     request for assistance from the appropriate state official, 
     and the Attorney General finds that the request gives rise to 
     a Federal interest sufficient to warrant the exercise of 
     Federal jurisdiction under section 1705. This portion of the 
     statute is modeled on similar provisions in Title 28 U.S.C. 
     sections 540 and 540a. It responds to the need of state 
     officials to use the unique, nationwide detection and 
     enforcement capabilities of Federal law enforcement agencies 
     in apprehending fugitives, many of whom cross state lines to 
     avoid capture. It also recognizes the importance of, and 
     provides additional support for, ongoing cooperation between 
     state and Federal officials in capturing fugitives, 
     particularly in joint Federal/state task forces.
       Under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 566(e)(1)(B), the U.S. 
     Marshal Service has authority to investigate fugitive matters 
     ``as directed by the Attorney General.'' The FBI has 
     authority to investigate fugitive matters (in violation of 
     Title 18 U.S.C. section 1073) under Title 28 U.S.C. section 
     533(1). This bill would neither increase nor decrease the 
     Attorney General's authority under those statutory provisions 
     to direct the activities of the Marshal Service and the FBI.
       Finally, it would provide investigators a mechanism to 
     obtain documentary information in cases alleging a violation 
     under the Unlawful Flight to Avoid Prosecution (UFAP) statute 
     for fugitives fleeing from the testimonial responsibilities 
     or to avoid lawful process, 18 U.S.C. section 1073(2) and 
     (3). For this lower priority category of fugitives, it 
     incorporates by reference the UFAP interstate movement 
     requirement.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ASHCROFT:
  S. 2517. A bill to amend the Individuals with Disabilities Education 
Act and the Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994 to allow school personnel to 
apply appropriate discipline measures to all students in cases 
involving weapons, illegal drugs, and assaults upon teachers, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.


                       school safety act of 2000

  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2517

       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 ``School Safety Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES 
                   EDUCATION ACT.

       (a) Procedural Safeguards.-- Section 615 of the Individuals 
     with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1415) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(n) Discipline by Local Authority with respect to 
     Weapons, Drugs, and Teacher Assaults.--
       ``(1) Authority of school personnel with respect to 
     weapons, drugs, and teacher assaults.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of this title, school personnel may 
     discipline (including expel or suspend) a child with a 
     disability in the same manner in which such personnel may 
     discipline a child without a disability if the child with a 
     disability--
       ``(A) carries or possesses a weapon to or at a school, on 
     school premises, or to or at a school function under the 
     jurisdiction of a State or a local educational agency;
       ``(B) threatens to carry, possess, or use a weapon to or at 
     a school, on school premises, or to or at a school function 
     under the jurisdiction of a State or a local educational 
     agency;
       ``(C) possesses or uses illegal drugs or sells or solicits 
     the sale of a controlled substance while at school, on school 
     premises, or at a school function under the jurisdiction of a 
     State or local educational agency; or
       ``(D) assaults or threatens to assault a teacher, teacher's 
     aid, principal, school counselor, or other school personnel, 
     including independent contractors and volunteers.
       ``(2) Individual determinations.--In carrying out any 
     disciplinary action described in paragraph (1), school 
     personnel have discretion to consider all germane factors in 
     each individual case and modify any disciplinary action on a 
     case-by-case basis.
       ``(3) Defense.--Nothing in paragraph (1) shall be construed 
     to prevent a child with a disability who is disciplined 
     pursuant to the authority provided under paragraph (1) from 
     asserting a defense that the alleged act was unintentional or 
     innocent.
       ``(4) Free appropriate public education.--
       ``(A) Ceasing to provide education.--Notwithstanding 
     section 612(a)(1)(A), or any other provision of this title, a 
     child expelled or suspended under paragraph (1) shall not be 
     entitled to continued educational services, including a free 
     appropriate public education, under this subsection, during 
     the term of such expulsion or suspension, if the State in 
     which the local educational agency responsible for providing 
     educational services to such child does not require a child 
     without a disability to receive educational services after 
     being expelled or suspended.
       ``(B) Providing education.--Notwithstanding subparagraph 
     (A), the local educational agency responsible for providing 
     educational services to a child with a disability who is 
     expelled or suspended under paragraph (1) may choose to 
     continue to provide educational services to such child. If 
     the local educational agency so chooses to continue to 
     provide the services--
       ``(i) nothing in this subsection shall be construed to 
     require the local educational agency to provide such child 
     with a free appropriate public education, or any particular 
     level of service; and
       ``(ii) the location where the local educational agency 
     provides the services shall be left to the discretion of the 
     local educational agency.
       ``(5) Relationship to other requirements.--
       ``(A) Plan requirements.--No agency shall be considered to 
     be in violation of section 612 or 613 because the agency has 
     provided discipline, services, or assistance in accordance 
     with this subsection.
       ``(B) Procedure.--None of the procedural safeguards or 
     disciplinary procedures of this Act shall apply to this 
     subsection, and the relevant procedural safeguards and 
     disciplinary procedures applicable to children without 
     disabilities may be applied to the child with a disability in 
     the same manner in which such safeguards and procedures would 
     be applied to children without disabilities.
       ``(6) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) Threaten to carry, possess, or use a weapon.--The 
     term `threaten to carry, possess, or use a weapon' includes 
     behavior in which a child verbally threatens to kill another 
     person.
       ``(B) Weapon, illegal drug, controlled substance, and 
     assault.--The terms `weapon', `illegal drug', `controlled 
     substance', `assault', `unintentional', and `innocent' have 
     the meanings given such terms under State law.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 615 of the Individuals 
     with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1415) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (f)(1), by striking ``Whenever'' and 
     inserting the following: ``Except as provided in section 
     615(n), whenever''; and
       (2) in subsection (k)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking subparagraph (A) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(A) In any disciplinary situation except for such 
     situations as described in subsection (n), school personnel 
     under this section may order a change in the placement of a 
     child with a disability to an appropriate interim alternative 
     educational setting, another setting, or suspension, for not 
     more than 10 school days (to the extent such alternatives 
     would apply to children without disabilities).'';
       (B) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) Any interim alternative educational setting in which 
     a child is placed under paragraph (1) or (2) shall--
       ``(A) be selected so as to enable the child to continue to 
     participate in the general curriculum, although in another 
     setting, and to continue to receive those services and 
     modifications, including those described in the child's 
     current IEP, that will enable the child to meet the goals set 
     out in that IEP; and
       ``(B) include services and modifications designed to 
     address the behavior described in paragraphs (1) or (2) so 
     that it does not recur.'';
       (C) in paragraph (6)(B)--
       (i) in clause (i), by striking ``(i) In reviewing'' and 
     inserting ``In reviewing''; and
       (ii) by striking clause (ii);
       (D) in paragraph (7)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``paragraph (1)(A)(ii) 
     or'' each place it appears; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) or''; and
       (E) by striking paragraph (10) and inserting the following:
       ``(10) Substantial evidence.--The term `substantial 
     evidence' means beyond a preponderance of the evidence.''.

     SEC. 3. AMENDMENT TO THE GUN-FREE SCHOOLS ACT OF 1994.

       Subsection (c) of section 14601 of the Gun-Free Schools Act 
     of 1994 (20 U.S.C. 8921) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) Special rule.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this section, this section shall be subject to section 615(n) 
     of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 
     1415(n)).''.

     SEC. 4. APPLICATION.

       The amendments made by sections 2 and 3 shall not apply to 
     conduct occurring prior to the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN:

[[Page S3615]]

  S. 2518. A bill to provide for the technical integrity of hte FM 
radio band, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation.


                          FM RADIO ACT OF 2000

  Mr. McCain: Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill 
to resolve the controversy that has erupted over the Federal 
Communications Commission's creation of a new, noncommercial low-power 
FM radio service.
  As you undoubtedly known, the FCC's low-power FM rules will allow the 
creation of thousands of new noncommercial FM radio stations with 
coverage of about a mile or so. Although these new stations will give 
churches and community groups new outlets for expression of their 
views, commercial FM broadcasters as well as National Public Radio 
oppose the new service. They argue that the FCC ignored studies showing 
that the new low-power stations would cause harmful interference to the 
reception of existing full-power FM stations.
  Mr. President, legislation before the House of Representatives would 
call a halt to the institution of low-power FM service by requiring 
further independent study of its potential for causing harmful 
interference to full-power stations, and Senator Gregg has introduced 
the same legislation in the Senate. While this would undoubtedly please 
existing FM radio broadcasters, it understandably angers the many 
parties who are anxious to apply for the new low-power licenses. Most 
importantly, it would delay the availability of whatever new 
programming these new low-power licensees might provide, even where the 
station would have caused no actual interference at all had it been 
allowed to operate.
  With all due respect to Senator Gregg and to the supporters of the 
House bill, I think we can reach a fairer result, and the bill I am 
introducing, the FM Radio Act of 2000, is intended to do just that.
  Unlike Senator Gregg's bill, the FM Radio Act would allow the FCC to 
license low-power FM radio stations. the only low-power FM stations 
that would be affected would be those whose transmissions are actually 
causing harmful interference to a full-power radio station. The 
National Academy of Sciences--an expert body independent of the FCC--
would determine which stations are causing such interference and what 
the low-power station must do to alleviate it.
  It gives full-power broadcasters the right to sue any low-power FM 
licensee for causing harmful interference, and stipulates that the 
costs of the suit shall be borne by the losing party. Finally, to make 
sure that the FCC does not relegate the interests of full-power radio 
broadcasters to secondary importance in its eagerness to launch the new 
lower-power FM service, the bill requires the FCC to complete all 
rulemakings necessary to implement full-power stations' transition to 
digital broadcasters no later than June 1, 2001.
  Mr. President, this legislation strikes a fair balance by allowing 
non-interfering low-power FM stations to operate without further delay, 
while affecting only those low-power stations that an independent 
scientific body finds to be causing harmful interference in their 
actual, everyday operations. This is totally consistent with the fact 
that low-power FM is a secondary service which, by law, must cure any 
interference caused to any primary, full-power service. This 
legislation will provide an efficient and impartial means to detect and 
resolve harmful interference. By providing a judicial remedy with costs 
assigned to the losing party, the bill will discourage the creation of 
low-power stations most likely to cause harmful interference even as it 
discourages full-power broadcasters from making unwarranted 
interference claims. And for these reasons it will provide a more 
definitive resolution of opposing interference claims than any number 
of further studies ever could.
  Mr. President, in the interests of would-be new broadcasters, 
existing broadcasters, but, most of all, the listening public, I urge 
the enactment of the FM Radio Act of 2000.

                          ____________________