[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 124 (Friday, October 6, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H9029-H9048]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 3244, VICTIMS OF TRAFFICKING AND VIOLENCE 
                         PROTECTION ACT OF 2000

  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on 
Rules, I call up House Resolution 613 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 613

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 3244) to combat trafficking of persons, especially 
     into the sex trade, slavery, and slavery-like conditions, in 
     the United States and countries around the world through 
     prevention, through prosecution and enforcement against 
     traffickers, and through protection and assistance to victims 
     of trafficking. All points of order against the conference 
     report and against its consideration are waived. The 
     conference report shall be considered as read.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. 
Pryce) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I 
yield the customary 30 minutes to my colleague and friend, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Slaughter), pending which I yield 
myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of the 
resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 613 is a rule waiving all points of 
order against the consideration of the conference report to accompany 
H.R. 3244, the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 
2000.
  H.R. 3244 was passed by the House earlier this year on May 9 by voice 
vote. On September 27, our colleagues in the other body considered and 
passed this important legislation with an amendment by unanimous 
consent.
  I would like to congratulate the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Smith) for introducing the legislation and for his steadfast support of 
human rights around the world.
  I also would like to thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman 
Gilman); the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson), the ranking 
member; and all the conferees for their efforts.
  Finally, I would like to extend a special thanks to my colleague and 
friend, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), for all her work 
to fight violence against women; and I wish to congratulate her on the 
reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
  The conference report includes three divisions: division A includes 
the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000; division B, I am 
pleased to inform my colleagues, includes the Violence Against Women 
Act of 2000; and division C consists of three other important anti-
crime measures.
  Division B reauthorizes through fiscal year 2005 the Violence Against 
Women Act, or VAWA, which expired just last week.
  As a former prosecutor and judge who served on the Domestic Violence 
Task Force back in my hometown of Columbus, Ohio, I have seen firsthand 
the ravages of domestic violence.
  As such, I am firmly committed to doing all that I can to put an end 
to domestic violence and to ensure that victims have access to high-
quality treatment, protective services, and ultimate justice.
  The Department of Justice estimates that violence against women has 
decreased by 21 percent since this law was passed in 1994. By acting 
today, we will provide the needed protection to American women from the 
violence that seeks to destroy their lives; and, hopefully, these 
numbers will continue to decrease.
  Specifically, the legislation authorizes $3 billion over the next 5 
years to fund programs that support State and local efforts to shelter 
battered women, train police and court officials in domestic abuse 
cases, and provide counseling service as well as a hotline for battered 
women.
  In addition, it enacts a number of new programs. It authorizes $10 
million in grants for disabled victims of gender-motivated crimes and 
requires shelters to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
  Mr. Speaker, additional funding is authorized to train emergency 
medical personnel in treating sexually abused patients, and it 
establishes procedures for handling evidence in rape cases.
  The bill also ensures that the Legal Services Corporation grantees 
can help victims of sexual abuse obtain the needed assistance in civil 
cases against their attackers, and needed funding is provided for 
transitional housing assistance to women and their children when 
escaping domestic abuse.
  Finally, this legislation doubles the amount authorized for the 
Violence Against Women Act over the next 5

[[Page H9030]]

years and extends the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund.
  Mr. Speaker, women who suffer from violence need our help and 
assistance. They need to know that there is someone to turn to and 
someplace safe to go to escape from the violence which they too often 
suffer.
  This reauthorization fills that need and sends a strong message that 
someone cares and that help is there.
  Mr. Speaker, division A of this important legislation includes H.R. 
3244, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. This legislation combats 
the trafficking of persons into the sex trade, slavery, and slavery-
like conditions in the United States and many other countries around 
the world.
  Through prevention, prosecution and enforcement against traffickers, 
as well as protection and assistance for victims of trafficking, this 
important legislation fairly allocates resources, modifies existing 
law, and increases international cooperation to decrease the global 
trade of men, women, and children.
  According to the Department of State, between one and two million 
women and children are trafficked each year worldwide into forced 
labor, domestic servitude, or sexual exploitation. Incredible in this 
day and age.
  Of these, approximately 50,000 individuals are trafficked to the 
United States each year. This is a major criminal enterprise generating 
billions of dollars annually. Trafficking is now considered the third 
largest source of profits for organized crime, behind only drugs and 
guns.

                              {time}  1200

  Victims of trafficking are first acquired in a number of different 
ways. Some are forcibly kidnapped and taken out of their own countries. 
Others are deceived with offers of good work or a better life. But no 
matter how they are taken, trafficking victims are universally subject 
to cruel mental and physical abuse, including beatings, rape, 
starvation, forced drug use, confinement and seclusion. Many victims 
suffer mental breakdowns and are exposed to sexually transmitted 
diseases. Ultimately, many cannot survive these harsh conditions.
  H.R. 3244 works to prevent trafficking through measures to increase 
awareness and enhance economic opportunity for potential victims of 
trafficking as a method to deter them from becoming victims in the 
first place. Further, this legislation urges countries to prohibit and 
punish severe forms of trafficking and establishes minimum standards 
applicable to countries that have a significant trafficking problem and 
assistance for programs and activities designed to meet the standards.
  For those who are unfortunate enough to have been trafficking 
victims, the legislation establishes programs and initiatives to assist 
in their safe integration, reintegration, or resettlement. For victims 
located in the United States, the bill provides protection while in 
Federal custody and amends current law to grant nonimmigrant visas to 
victims who would face a significant possibility of retribution or 
other harm if they were forced to leave. In addition, we make those 
funds seized from traffickers available for victims' restitution and 
victims assistance programs.
  Mr. Speaker, finally, division C includes three other important 
provisions which all passed the House earlier this year. The first 
bill, Aimee's Law, passed in July. That requires the Attorney General 
to transfer Federal law enforcement assistance funds from any State 
that convicted a person of a first offense of murder, rape or a 
dangerous sexual offense to the State that ultimately convicts that 
same person of a subsequent offense. In other words, Aimee's Law 
encourages States to keep murderers, rapists and child molesters behind 
bars and hold them financially accountable if they do not to the States 
that end up having to incarcerate on the second offense.
  The second bill, the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, also 
passed the House in July. It provides assistance to American victims of 
terrorism and allows those victims who prevail in court to collect 
against the frozen assets of terrorist countries. It is designed to 
send a strong message to terrorists and their state sponsors and will 
allow victims of past terrorist acts to finally receive some level of 
justice.
  Finally, the third bill, the Twenty-First Amendment Enforcement Act, 
passed the House in August. It grants States that have the authority to 
regulate interstate sale of alcohol within their borders the right to 
do so.
  Mr. Speaker, this law is straightforward and noncontroversial. Its 
adoption will allow the House to consider and pass this important 
conference report. I urge all my colleagues to support both the rule 
and these essential provisions which seek to protect women, end 
violence, and fight crime.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio for 
yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, this resolution waives all points of 
order against the conference report on H.R. 3244 and against its 
consideration.
  Mr. Speaker, in June 1994, I first introduced legislation addressing 
the growing problem of Burmese women and children being sold to work in 
the thriving sex industry in Thailand. This legislation responded to 
reports indicating that thousands of Burmese women and girls were being 
trafficked into Thailand with false promises of good-paying jobs in 
restaurants or factories and then forced to work in brothels under 
slavery-like conditions. Some of the victims were as young as 5 years 
old.
  As I learned more about this issue, it became clear that it was not 
limited to one particular region of the world. In fact, in the wake of 
the discovery of a prostitution ring of trafficked women in Florida and 
the Carolinas, as well as a group of Thai garment workers held captive 
in California, I soon realized that this was an issue that must be 
dealt with in our own backyard as well.
  Six years later I am proud to be standing here today to support this 
important legislation. H.R. 3244 sets forth policies not only to 
monitor but to eliminate trafficking here in the United States and 
abroad. More importantly, it does so in a way that punishes the true 
perpetrators, the traffickers themselves, while at the same time taking 
the necessary steps to protect the victims of this heinous crime. 
Finally, it uses our Nation's considerable influence throughout the 
world to put pressure on other nations to adopt policies that will 
hopefully lead to an end this abhorrent practice.
  The bill recognizes the fact that trafficking is not exclusively a 
crime of sexual exploitation. Taken independently, this action is an 
egregious practice in and of itself. It is also important, however, to 
be aware that people are being illegally smuggled across borders to 
work in sweatshops, domestic servitude or other slavery-like 
conditions.
  Mr. Speaker, developing this initiative has been a long and arduous 
process. At the beginning of this endeavor many of the groups involved 
had different approaches to defining and dealing with this issue. In 
addition, we also had to deal with a State Department that was less 
than cooperative when dealing with the Congress. Nevertheless, we are 
here today because this is an issue that is important enough to cross 
both partisan and personality divides.
  Mr. Speaker, the conference report also reauthorizes the Violence 
Against Women Act. I am proud to have a long history of activism on 
domestic violence issues. Fifteen years ago our greatest challenge was 
convincing Americans that domestic violence was a real problem. Many 
women knew only too well that we were in the midst of a deadly 
epidemic, but the culture of silence that surrounded the issue made it 
difficult for them to speak out or to get help. Being a victim of 
domestic violence was a source of fear and shame. Many women were 
trapped in these situations without any means of escape. Furthermore, 
domestic violence tended to be trivialized by law enforcement, by the 
judicial system, by health care providers and sometimes even by 
friends, family or neighbors.
  We have come a long way in the 15 years since I began working on 
these issues. The single most important thing that Congress did to 
effect a

[[Page H9031]]

change was pass the Violence Against Women Act. The Violence Against 
Women Act catapulted domestic violence onto the national agenda, 
providing Federal support for programs like shelters for battered women 
and their children, education for law enforcement officers and judges, 
and resources mostly for prevention and education. I am proud to have 
been the author of provisions of VAWA that protected battered immigrant 
women who were often trapped in abusive relationships by the threat of 
deportation. VAWA transformed the national landscape for victims of 
domestic violence. Today, a woman in an abusive relationship has 
options, a place to live, help with court proceedings, assistance for 
herself and her children, and protection from her batterer.
  Nevertheless, we still have a long way to go. Too many women still 
die at the hands of an abusive spouse or boyfriend. Protective orders 
can be ineffective. Going on welfare is far from an ideal choice even 
as a temporary step. Convictions against batterers remain infrequent 
and penalties can be extremely light. It is imperative that Congress 
reauthorize these vital programs.
  Also included in this conference report are miscellaneous provisions 
relating to Aimee's Law, assistance to victims of terrorism and the 
Twenty-First Amendment Act regarding Internet alcohol sales.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes 
to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) my distinguished colleague 
from the Committee on Rules.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Committee on 
Rules, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce), for not only working on 
this issue but also my other colleague, the gentlewoman from New York 
(Ms. Slaughter), for her work on this important issue.
  Mr. Speaker, today we are talking about the conference report on the 
Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000. In particular, we are 
trying to draw attention to the importance of what the Violence Against 
Women Act of 2000 is all about.
  Mr. Speaker, for quite some time I have been engaged in trying to 
work with women's centers in Dallas, Texas, who every day are a part of 
the lives of thousands of women who are taken advantage of in marriage, 
taken advantage of not only because of the frailties that they have as 
the caregivers for children, women who are responsible for making sure 
that a family works together and stays together and many times are in a 
marriage that is very difficult.
  The Violence Against Women Act of 2000 is important because it once 
again enunciates by the House of Representatives that this is a crime 
that is taking place all across America, violence against women, that 
we will not tolerate. Most importantly, the gentlewoman from Ohio is 
speaking up about the importance of the issue so that it is not hidden 
in the work that Congress does. It is important that we support not 
only this conference report but that we recognize that America and the 
importance that we put on solving this national epidemic are brought to 
the forefront, the importance of Congress and the importance of a 
public policy that we have.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman from Ohio is not only a leader in our 
Congress but she is a leader for women in this area. I salute her and 
applaud her for the hard work that she has put in on this act.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott).
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this 
time. I rise in opposition to the rule. While the provisions relating 
to addressing sex trafficking and violence against women are 
essentially noncontroversial and should be enacted, this does not apply 
to section 2001 of the bill which includes the controversial Aimee's 
Law. I am aware of the political adage that no good politician will 
vote against a crime bill named after somebody, but I thought that 
before we vote on this rule that we want to think about some 
evaluations of Aimee's Law.
  The bill is onerous, impractical and unworkable. It is worse than an 
unfunded mandate. It is certain to generate a morass of bureaucracy. It 
is enormously costly. And the probable public safety impact of the bill 
will be zero.
  These are not my words but the words of the National Governors 
Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the Council 
of State Governments, the United States Department of Justice, and a 
noted criminologist. Despite all of these critical descriptions, the 
bill comes before us on the suspension calendar hooked up with 
noncontroversial items. Ask your governors and State legislators 
whether or not they believe that it will help victims of crime or 
simply allow Members to take credit for passing a good sound bite while 
avoiding doing anything the experts say will actually reduce crime, 
that is, investing in prevention programs.
  Supporters of Aimee's Law say that it will prevent murderers, rapists 
and child molesters from committing second offenses. It requires the 
Attorney General to transfer a portion of one State's Federal money to 
another State each time a murderer or rapist released from the first 
State commits such an offense in the second State, unless the first 
State has either truth-in-sentencing or the person is sentenced to an 
above average time to be served. That above average can change from 
year to year. Since truth-in-sentencing and determinate sentencing are 
recent sentencing practices and there is no limit on how far back you 
have to go to find prior convictions, trying to determine the 
information necessary to implement this provision will be a 
bureaucratic nightmare for the Attorney General and the States. So the 
fact is that the provision has a lot more to do with requiring 
bureaucratic processing and exchanging Federal funds than it has to do 
with preventing crime.
  Aside from the impracticality of implementing this provision, even if 
the bureaucratic exchanges could occur, the net result will probably be 
a wash between States passing money back and forth. Further, States 
concerned about the fiscal impact of the bill or those wishing to cash 
in on it can play games. For instance, plea bargaining a high charge 
with a low sentence so that you can get the money rather than a lower 
charge like manslaughter with a higher sentence and you can cash in and 
get the money.
  The fact is that no State without truth-in-sentencing will implement 
truth-in-sentencing as a result of this bill. That is because truth-in-
sentencing in Virginia costs billions of dollars and no State will 
incur that kind of expense to avoid a few hundred thousand dollars that 
this bill might actually cost them.
  All in all, the rule perpetuates sound-bite politics at its worst. It 
tacks on to two noncontroversial provisions; a provision which creates 
a bureaucratic nightmare for the States and the Federal Government by 
second-guessing the sentences on crimes that have already occurred with 
no discernible effect on the crime rate.

                              {time}  1215

  Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I urge that the rule be defeated, so that 
we can remove this provision and get on with well thought-out 
legislation which will actually reduce crime and help victims.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2\1/2\ 
minutes to my friend, the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. 
Kelly), who has worked so hard on many of these provisions.
  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and the underlying 
bill, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act Conference Report.
  The package of legislation we have before us is critically important 
to the lives of millions of people across the world and here at home. 
Passage of this package will have a tremendously positive effect on the 
quality of life for millions of people across the world.
  Just over a week ago, I joined my good friend, the gentlewoman from 
Maryland (Mrs. Morella), here on the floor to urge support for H.R. 
1248, the Violence Against Women Act of 1999. Today, we have yet 
another opportunity to demonstrate our commitment to this important 
legislation.

[[Page H9032]]

  While the Justice Department has estimated that since the start of 
the VAWA programs in 1994, domestic violence has dropped by almost 21 
percent, this epidemic is not over yet. Still today, one in three girls 
age 16 to 19 will be abused by their boyfriends, and it is estimated 
that approximately 3 million children witness domestic abuse in their 
homes.
  The legislation we have before us today will take a serious step 
towards breaking this cycle of violence and providing a better future, 
not only for the millions of women who have come to rely upon the 
services provided under VAWA, but also for the millions of teens and 
children who will now have access to services and will see that 
violence is not necessarily a way of life.
  I would also like to take a moment to note that this legislation 
includes a measure I introduced in Congress to strengthen the Federal 
anti-stalking statute, the Stalking Prevention and Victim Protection 
Act. This bill, which passed the House unanimously last November, 
strengthens current law, which stipulates that one must travel across 
State lines in order to commit a Federal stalking offense. My measure 
acknowledges that stalking can be perpetrated through other mediums, 
such as over the telephone, through the mail, or over the Internet.
  Today we again have the opportunity to help millions of people feel a 
little safer, knowing that we are here, that we are listening, and that 
we will once again fulfill our promise and continue to supply the 
resources to help them escape from abuse and end the cycle of violence.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my friend, the gentlewoman from 
Maryland (Mrs. Morella), for her tireless efforts on behalf of these 
men and women. I would like to thank my friend, the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and my friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
McCollum), who helped move this legislation forward.
  I urge my colleagues to help me in supporting this rule and the 
underlying bill.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Nadler).
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I am very gratified to see that the Violence 
Against Women Act is finally here on the floor in a conference report 
so that we are going to pass it. For reasons I stated on the floor 
before and many others have said today, reauthorization of the Violence 
Against Women Act is a tremendously important thing to do. I am unhappy 
that it is grouped with four completely unrelated other bills in this 
one bill, some of which I would vote for, and some against.
  It is grouped with part of the sex trafficking act. We all want to 
put an end to sex trafficking. That is a good provision.
  Victims of terrorism, to make it easier for victims to sue, a very 
good provision. It has nothing to do with the other bill, but it is a 
very good provision.
  But then we have two other bills that are not too good. We have the 
Internet Alcohol Act, which is a commercial dispute between rival 
groups and should not be in this bill; and we have Aimee's Law, an 
extremely foolish political sound bite, which will have no impact 
except to cost States money and to create more bureaucracy.
  Let us look at how ridiculous Aimee's Law, at least the version of 
Aimee's Law we have here, is. What this says is if someone is convicted 
of murder, rape or dangerous sexual offenses in one State, serves a 
jail term, and is subsequently released and then commits a similar 
crime in another State, the first State has to pay all the costs of 
incarceration and legal proceedings in the second State if the first 
State is a bad State.
  What do we mean by a bad State? If the individual had served less 
than 85 percent of the term of imprisonment; or, if the individual had 
served more than 85 percent of the maximum sentence, if the average 
term of imprisonment imposed by the State for these kinds of offenses 
is less than the average term imposed for that offense in all States?
  In other words, State A imposes an average sentence of 25 years. The 
national average is 27 years. Well, obviously State A had better 
improve its law. That is what we are saying. State A now changes its 
law to 28 years. That changes the average, and some other States change 
the average. State A is a bad State again, and it is going to be 
penalized if someone after serving 28 years goes out and commits 
another crime in a different State.
  Now, you have got a moving target here. I do not think the drafters 
of this act thought through, and since I do not think there was a 
committee vote on this bill, there was no opportunity for amendments, 
it never was properly debated. And what ever happened to our concern 
for States to be able to write their own criminal justice laws? Here we 
are telling them, you had better keep ratcheting up your terms of 
imprisonment, no matter what you think is right, to match everybody 
else's, lest we charge you.
  Now, it is not going to have a major practical effect, because the 
fact is that it is very rare for people to be convicted in a second 
State, but it is foolish and ought not be in this bill.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley).
  Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentlewoman from Ohio for 
her leadership in bringing this rule to the floor.
  I suggest to the gentleman from New York, when he makes statements 
like ``this is a foolish bill,'' Aimee's Law, I would ask him to read 
the text of the bill, because I guess if your family or friends or 
someone close to you had been murdered, raped or molested, you would 
not think this was such a foolish exercise. In fact, these are some of 
the crimes that have the highest degree of recidivism, and in fact in 
Florida we have suffered from people being released from prison and 
then coming to perpetrate the same murder and rape on innocent people 
in our State.
  So I commend the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Salmon) for his 
introduction of Aimee's Law, and I commend my colleagues for its 
passage, because I think it will help tighten, if you will, laws that 
affect people's lives, those who have been raped, some who have been 
murdered, children who have been molested. They need the full 
protection of the law, not protecting those who committed the crime.
  I commend also the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Scarborough) for his 
21st Amendment Enforcement, and I am glad if is part of this bill. 
Hopefully it will lead to less drinking by underage people who may have 
found through the Internet chances to purchase alcohol. I think this is 
a very, very important provision.
  Justice for victims of terrorism, that is extremely important in this 
bill.
  The gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), obviously with Violence 
Against Women, another subject that the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. 
Pryce) has been very involved in, is an essential bill to our society. 
There is far too much prevalence of violence against women, domestic 
disputes; and we have to strengthen the law. We have to provide and 
strengthen services for victims. We have to do more to combat violence 
in families that can lead to the destruction, not only of a person's 
individual life, but the destruction of the children that are forced to 
watch this kind of parental misdeed, if you will.
  Also on the first, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, it is 
again a very important provision of the bill. I think if people read 
through the bill, they would not use words like ``foolish'' or 
``political sound bites,'' but recognize these are indeed very, very 
important issues.
  In fact, in Florida we had a professor at a university that had 
brought a child into this country, lured from his parents, brought here 
strictly for sexual services. He was underage. He was paid money. The 
parents were paid money under the assumption that the child was going 
to be given a better life in America. Regrettably, it was not for a 
better life, it was for sexual exploitation, right in my own community 
of Palm Beach County. Fortunately, the man is in jail. The law has 
dealt with this person. But, regrettably, there is not enough 
internationally being done in other countries to make certain that they 
are enforcing the laws as well.
  So this goes to the heart of both domestic combatting of these 
issues, as well as working with our foreign colleagues, foreign 
governments, in order

[[Page H9033]]

to meet a higher standard, an international standard for elimination of 
the trafficking of individuals.
  So I commend my colleagues to vote for the entirety of this report. I 
think it is a solid bill. Again, I commend the gentlewoman from Ohio 
(Ms. Pryce) for her leadership on this, and I urge my colleagues to 
support it and its passage.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lofgren).
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, there is much that is good in this bill 
before us today. I am particularly gratified that the efforts to fight 
trafficking in the sex trade have been included in this matter, so that 
we can actually get success in the fight against that this year.
  I think the provision of visas for those who are fleeing from their 
oppressors, whether it be sweatshop or sexual abuse, is extremely 
important.
  Obviously, the Violence against Women Act is enormously important. 
And although reasonable people can differ, and I think there is a 
technical issue in the Aimee's Law provision that absolutely must be 
corrected, that I think the ranking member of the committee will raise 
and hopefully will be able to deal with, I also support the Aimee's Law 
concept.
  That is why I am so upset that with all of these good things that we 
would have bipartisan support on, and I think nearly overwhelming 
support, that, for some reason, the provision, the very controversial 
provision, about Internet and wine sales has been included in this 
matter. It does not belong in this package of bills. It is not about 
protecting children from abuse, and it just really is very distressing.
  I have two teenagers, and they are good kids and their friends are 
good kids, and the argument that has been advanced is that we have to 
prohibit the Internet sale of wine to protect children.
  Well, as a mother of two, that is preposterous. If a kid wanted to go 
out and buy alcohol, they are not going to get on the Internet, pay 20 
bucks a bottle for wine in my district, or up in the Napa Valley, wait 
a couple of weeks for it to be delivered, and that is how they are 
doing underage drinking. That is not the way the real world works.
  So, I urge a no vote on the rule in protest for this Internet wine 
sales tax. It is just so distressing that it has been included.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to 
the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the sponsor of 
this legislation.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very good friend for 
yielding and her good work and leadership on this issue.
  I say to my colleagues, this is the result of an enormous amount of 
bipartisanship. The legislation, division A, which deals with 
trafficking of women, we all know now that especially with the break up 
of the Soviet Union and the ascendancy of the Mob, organized crime in 
Moscow, in the Ukraine, and all around the world, is trafficking in 
women and children as never before.
  The estimates are as high as 2 million individuals, mostly women, who 
are being trafficked every year. About 50,000 are coming into the 
United States, and many of those are forced into prostitution.
  Our legislation, and, again I want to thank the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson) who has worked so closely on this, has been 
very bipartisan. It throws the book at those who would commit these 
heinous crimes and make money off the exploitation of women and 
children.
  Our legislation provides $95 million over 2 years for enforcement of 
anti-trafficking provisions. But, again, the life imprisonment aspect 
to it, the protection for the women themselves so they are not put on 
the next plane and sent back to Kiev or St. Petersburg or anywhere else 
where they might be in danger is very important. We try to put sandbags 
of protection around them and to say we will help you, we will give you 
a hand and assistance, and that is what this legislation does.
  There are many other aspects to it. It is a comprehensive bill. We 
have had three hearings in my subcommittee on this issue, and we heard 
from the victims themselves, who talked about how even the NGOs, like 
Miramed in St. Petersburg, which is out there on the cutting edge 
trying to help these women, are under tremendous duress by the Mafia, 
as well as very much underfunded.
  We want all of the world's governments, especially those that are 
countries of origination, to do all that they can to mitigate and 
hopefully end this egregious practice.
  Division B, the Violence against Women Act, provides about $3.3 
billion over 5 years, more than double the current programs, to 
increase law enforcement and expand shelter space and rehab programs 
for battered and abused women.
  There are many, many important grants articulated in the legislation, 
like the $140 million for Violent Crimes Against Women on Campus 
Grants, to ensure that our young women on the college campuses are 
protected to the maximum degree possible, and then $60 million for the 
Safe Havens Project; and, very significantly, the money for the 
shelters is increased by $375 million to a total of $875 million to 
protect battered women and their children.

                              {time}  1230

  There is also legislation, as my colleagues heard, dealing with 
Aimee's Law. Aimee's Law passed overwhelming in this House. It ought to 
be part of this package, and it will hopefully prevent those who have 
high rates of recidivism, the rapists, the murderers so they do not get 
out early to recommit these crimes, because we know that there are 
thousands of those who commit the crimes upon their release.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the rule, and then I hope for support 
of the underlying conference report.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, there are many people to thank 
this morning. I add my appreciation to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers) for his leadership and the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. 
Morella) and to the ranking member and chairman and the gentlewoman 
from Ohio (Ms. Pryce).
  This bill has many good elements. I would argue that we have thrown 
out a fishnet and gotten some elements that I think deserve a lot of 
consideration, and I wish we had not done that. I rise to support the 
concepts in this bill and would hope that we would be able be fix some 
of the elements that need not be included.
  Particularly, let me appreciate the battered immigrant provisions 
that have come from the legislation that the gentlewoman from Illinois 
(Ms. Schakowsky) and the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) and 
myself have sponsored, H.R. 3083. We had a hearing on the bill in the 
committee that I serve on, the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims. 
And I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), my chairman.
  I say to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), I had the 
unfortunate privilege of visiting in Bangladesh, women who were 
battered, as well as women who were sold into slavery, sold for sexual 
activities, and see the children, see the abuse, the depression, the 
mutilation, the injuries that they suffered. So this bill is extremely 
important.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the Committee on International Relations and all 
of those who worked on the human rights aspect to stop that. It is also 
important to recognize that VAWA that gives rights to American women 
finally will reach a point where we can see it reauthorized and have 
the centers open, protect the children who have seen abuse in their 
homes.
  Mr. Speaker, I do want to thank the conference committee for putting 
in the elements dealing with battered immigrant women, because without 
those elements, VAWA did not cover immigrant women; in particular, we 
would find situations where the abuser would hold it over the head of 
the immigrant woman that you can stay here all the time and I can abuse 
you, but you will not have the rights to access relief under VAWA.
  Take, for example, the idea of an abuser saying to the abused that I 
will keep you from being a citizen or legal

[[Page H9034]]

resident, because all you came to do was to come here to this country 
with your children and seek to be a legal resident, and, therefore, I 
will punish you and I will continue to abuse you.
  Mr. Speaker, I am gratified that elements that will allow for self-
petition are included in this legislation and that an abused woman can 
as well seek that.
  Finally, let me say that I hope we can improve some elements of this 
bill. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. 
Slaughter) for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today in my capacity as Ranking 
Member of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims. Inside this 
report is the agreement authorizing VAWA, and some very important 
provisions that deal with Battered Immigrant Women. I joined with 
Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky and Congresswoman Connie Morella to 
sponsor H.R. 3083, The Battered Immigrant Women Protection Act of 1999, 
would provide much needed access to battered immigrant victims of 
domestic violence. Fortunately, many of the provisions of this bill 
were included in this conference report.
  These provisions are important because but for the failure of 
citizens or permanent resident abusers to submit immigration petitions 
for their immigrant spouses and children, the beneficiaries of the 
Battered Immigrant provisions would already have lawful immigration 
status through a family-based visa petition.
  A citizen or permanent resident batterer often manipulates such 
misconceptions by convincing his victim that he will prevail in court 
because he is a male and he has more money. Moreover, a batterer often 
uses his immigration status against his victim as a tool of control, 
threatening to report her to INS or refusing or withdrawing immigration 
petitions that would grant her status.
  I am relieved to stand before the House in order that we might be 
able to consider legislation that will reauthorize the Violence Against 
Women Act (VAWA) before the close of the 106th Congress. This act was 
first passed in 1994, and it marked a turning point in our nation's 
response to family violence, offering states a comprehensive means of 
addressing domestic violence and sexual assault. Although VAWA has 
contributed to a decline in the rates of domestic violence, there is 
still much work to be done.
  We know that more than 3 million women have been abused since 
Congress began considering reauthorization of the VAWA in 1999. If 
Congress does not act by October 13th, VAWA will be lost to those women 
and their children who are victimized by family violence. The sad fact 
is that the victims of violence are not limited to women and in some 
cases men, but it can also extend to their children. It is estimated 
that 9,000 children, in our nation, witness family violence everyday. 
Each year, just about 3.3 million children witness their mothers or 
female caretakers being abused. Further, forty to sixty percent of men 
who abuse women also abuse children.
  Family violence also extends to non-married women. Young women, 
between the age of 16 and 24 in dating relationships experience the 
highest rate of domestic violence and sexual assault. While an average 
of 28 percent of high school and college students experience the 
highest rate of domestic violence and sexual assault. Twenty-six 
percent of pregnant teens reported being physically abused by their 
boyfriends--about half of them said the battering began or intensified 
after he learned of her pregnancy.
  We need to expand VAWA and increase funding to support it. In the 
last six months, calls to the National Domestic Violence Hotline have 
increased from 8,000 to 13,000 calls a month. More women and children 
are seeking the safety of shelters, stretching shelter resources to the 
limits. Protections for young women, who are at the greatest risk of 
dating violence and sexual assault, are also severely lacking.

  This bill includes provisions similar to the House-passed H.R. 1248 
to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act for five years. The House 
bill authorized more than $3 billion in FY 2001 through FY 2005 for 
programs to combat violence against women, including battered women's 
shelters and services, sexual assault prevention programs and education 
and training for judges.
  The separate VAWA legislation has been merged with H.R. 3244, the 
Conference Report on International Sex Trafficking, a bill intended to 
directs the Justice, Labor and Health and Human Services departments to 
expand assistance to victims of severe forms of trafficking in the 
United States. The measure also allows the Justice Department to make 
grants to local governments and nonprofit organizations to expand 
services for victims of trafficking. most of our nation's citizens may 
still believe that the trafficking of human beings ended with the 
Fourteenth Amendment to our Nation's Constitution, which outlawed the 
practice of slavery.
  This conference report also includes the bill H.R. 2031, which 
addresses concerns regarding the sale of alcohol over the Internet. The 
conference agreement grants state attorneys general authority to bring 
a civil action in federal courts to enforce state laws that outlaw the 
direct sale of alcohol over the Internet. The provision is similar to 
the House-passed H.R. 2031, and to Senate provisions in its version of 
the juvenile justice bill (H.R. 1501).
  In addition this conference report also includes H.R. 894, titled 
Aimee's Law, that requires a state that releases a violent sexual 
offender who commits a similar crime in another state to reimburse the 
second state for costs related to the incarceration, prosecution and 
apprehension of the individual. This provision is similar to provisions 
in the House version of the juvenile justice bill (H.R. 1501).
  This law provides that whenever someone convicted of murder, rape, or 
a dangerous sexual offense is released from prison and commits another 
such offense in another state, the state from which the offender was 
released will be liable for the cost of apprehension, prosecution, 
incarceration, and the victim's damages (i.e., up to $100,000 for each 
victim).
  The Attorney General is also directed to pay these costs and damages 
from the Federal Law Enforcement Assistance Funds which the state of 
origin. The costs and damage provisions, which are paid out of federal 
law enforcement assistance funds, are designed to leverage states into 
passing tougher sentences regarding these crimes or risk losing federal 
funds.
  I have concerns that this bill is premised on a ``Sense of Congress'' 
that anyone convicted of these crimes should be sentenced to death or 
life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
  Before taking such drastic actions, I believe that we need to better 
define the criminal offenses of which one may be convicted. I suggest 
that we work to narrow the definition of which crimes trigger 
punishment.
  However, I realize, as do most Americans that prevention is the best 
strategy and if this type of law would provide the appropriate 
disincentive for potential murderers or rapists, I must also recognize 
this benefit.
  As expressed in the Subcommittee Crime hearings, this law, under the 
definition of Dangerous Sexual Offense in H.R. 894,  does not require 
any age difference between victim and offender on which to base an 
assumption of predation.

  Consequently, unlike other laws that make no such distinction, there 
is more potential for this bill to have an impact on the sexual abuse 
of American children.
  As a parent, I sympathize with proponents of this bill that want 
adequate punishment against those convicted of sexual assault, rape or 
murder. As a mother, a member of Congress and founder of the 
Congressional Children's Caucus, I cannot in good faith support the 
maintenance of laws that create loopholes for sexual predators.
  Every 19 seconds a girl or women is raped, every 70 seconds a child 
is molested and every 70 seconds a child or adult is murdered. Yet, 
despite these horrific statistics, the average time served in prison 
for rape is 5 years and the average time served in prison for molesting 
a child is less than 4 years.
  We cannot tolerate the perpetuation of violent crimes against women 
and children any longer! This bill provides states the financial 
incentive to enact effective legislation that will keep repeat violent 
offenders behind bars.
  We cannot allow states to continue to act irresponsibly in the 
prosecution of sexual predators. We all need to work together to help 
spare families the needless tragedy of having to put to rest their 
children because the state failed to effectively prosecute a sexual 
predator.
  I am horrified by the story of Aimee Willard, for which this law is 
named. I hope that no family will ever have to suffer through such a 
tragedy again, but unfortunately I know that this is not true.
  I ask that my colleagues put aside their politics and think about the 
children and families that have been affected because of a lack of 
adequate enforcement of the laws. Our children need protection now.
  Last, this conference report also includes language intended to 
address the needs of the Victims of Terrorism by allowing victims of 
terrorism or their families in the United States to recover judgments 
against countries listed by the State Department as sponsors of 
terrorism. (Currently, the frozen assets of nations that allegedly 
support terrorism are protected from U.S. court judgments if the 
president declares it in the national security interest to leave them 
untouched.) Under the agreement, the president would have the authority 
to differentiate, on an asset-by-asset basis, the premises of foreign 
diplomatic missions, but not commercial property or rental proceeds 
from diplomatic property eligible to be protected.
  I would hope that we will remember that one of the most deadly 
terrorist attacks to occur in

[[Page H9035]]

this country was not caused by a foreign government or international 
group, but by people who thought of themselves as American patriots, I 
am referring to the Oklahoma City bombing, which killed 167 men, women 
and infants. I applaud any effort to make those responsible for 
terrorism, which results in loss of life or property civilly and 
criminally responsible for their actions. However, I would caution not 
to join those who believe that by virtue of the fact that someone is 
born outside of the United States that some how their act of terrorism 
is much more grievous than one that is carried out by a fellow American 
citizen. For this reason, I support this effort, but I would also 
encourage this body to make those of our citizens convicted to 
terrorist acts be equally held criminally and civilly liable for their 
actions.
  All of the measures, which are included in this conference report are 
important to the American people, it is unfortunate that they could not 
have been considered individually.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Salmon), the author of 
Aimee's Law.
  Mr. SALMON. Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank the author of 
the bill here on the House, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) 
for all of his support for Aimee's Law.
  I would like to thank him for putting together such a wonderful piece 
of legislation in the first place, because this is all about victims. 
It is about victims who are slave traded. It is about victims, women 
who are harmed across the country in many, many different ways. It is 
about little children who are victims.
  I would like to speak specifically about Aimee's Law. I would like to 
go back down to memory lane 3 years ago when I introduced this bill. I 
had a dinner with several victims rights advocates: Fred Goldman whose 
son Ron was murdered, with Mary Vincent who was kidnapped when she was 
15 years old while she was walking along the road. She was raped and 
had her arms chopped off. She walked for 2 miles to safety and survived 
to testify against her perpetrator who, by the way, was let out of 
prison and then killed a mother of 5.
  I remember Mika Moulton whose little boy was stabbed 66 times and 
left in a shallow grave; that in and of itself is heinous enough, but 
the fact that this boy, this young man that did this to her son was let 
out of prison for killing a 5-year-old girl and raping her with a stick 
ought to make your blood curdle.
  The fact is 14,000 rapes, murders and molestations occur every year, 
and they are 100 percent preventable. We heard some people on the other 
side of the aisle who have some heartburn about this. Let us make 
government be accountable.
  These are not just statistics. These are people who are dying. These 
are people being raped. These are children being molested. We have an 
opportunity to do something about it to make the States be accountable 
if they let someone out of prison who poses a threat to society, then 
there should be a price to pay, and that is what this is about.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. 
Slaughter) for yielding the time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Salmon 
for his work, and I just wanted to ask a question in colloquy. Am I 
correct that it is the intent of the Congress that Aimee's Law shall 
apply prospectively; that is, only if offenders whose first sentence 
for a covered offense occurred on or after the effective date of this 
law, which is January 1, 2002?
  Mr. SALMON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. SALMON. Mr. Speaker, as it is currently drafted, that is my 
understanding, yes.
  Mr. CONYERS. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Roemer).
  (Mr. ROEMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, at this time of day, all across this great 
country from San Diego to New York, from Wisconsin to Louisiana, our 
parents, our grandparents, our aunts and uncles are concerned about the 
same thing, and that is the safety of our children in our schools; 
whether those children are in classrooms or playgrounds, inner-city or 
rural schools, our parents share this concern about their safety.
  I want to point out, I hope, a noncontroversial part of this bill and 
salute the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Conyers), for a provision that mirrors a bill that the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Rothman) and I introduced called the 
Secure Our Schools Act, that will provide $30 million each year for 3 
years for a total of $90 million to help our schools be safe and 
secure, especially in light of the gun violence that has taken place in 
our schools over the last 3 years.
  The beauty of this bill is that this provides Federal resources to 
our local schools but lets the local school determine what to spend 
this money on. Should they spend it on a metal detector? Yes, they 
could. And could they spend it on a handheld metal device for security? 
Yes, they could. Security training for teachers, police officers, 
students? Yes, that is an allowable expense.
  These are competitive grants issued for the Department of Justice and 
the Attorney General to help our parents and grandparents and aunts and 
uncles make sure that they feel good about the safety and security of 
our schools. This is a good partnership for our government to enter 
into. I am proud of this provision and proud to support this provision 
in this law.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in support of H.R. 
3244 and most of the provisions of this conference report. I want to 
thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce) and the gentlewoman from 
New York (Ms. Slaughter), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), 
and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson) and thank the 
gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) and the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Conyers), the ranking member, for their diligence in crafting this 
report, which includes several important provisions that will literally 
save the lives of women and girls around the world.
  When I had the privilege of traveling with the President to India, I 
saw little girls who had been sold into the sex industry. No child 
should be subjected to such horrors. We know that the Violence Against 
Women Act has saved lives and helped to rebuild even more. And I am 
grateful that my provisions to expand legal protections for battered 
immigrant women and children and to fund transitional housing for 
domestic abuse victims were included in the report.
  The 1996 immigration laws made some changes that forced many 
immigrant women to remain in dangerous situations, putting themselves 
and their children at great risk. Today we have the opportunity to end 
this injustice. With the passage of this conference report, immigrant 
women will be empowered to move away from their abusers. They will have 
the additional legal protections along with access to critical 
transitional housing services that will enable them to alleviate the 
abuse and break the cycle of violence.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this conference 
report.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Maloney).
  (Mrs. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Slaughter) for her leadership and yielding the time to 
me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule because it couples many 
unrelated nongermane provisions to two underlying bills that are 
tremendously important, the Violence Against Women Act and the 
antitrafficking bill. These bills will literally save lives, and they 
have been a top priority this year of the bipartisan women's caucus.
  In this month alone, approximately 75,000 women will become victims 
of beatings, and in many cases their children will be attacked as well. 
The Violence Against Women Act has been,

[[Page H9036]]

and must, remain a powerful tool in the fight against domestic 
violence, stalking and sexual assault. Domestic violence is the number 
one health risk for women between the ages of 15 and 44, and close to a 
third of all the women murdered in America are killed by their husbands 
or boyfriends.
  This conference report authorizes more than $3 billion over the next 
5 years to combat violence in our families and homes and schools 
through September 2000, from the first VAWA grant. My home State of New 
York received over $97 million in funding, but you cannot measure the 
value of that funding unless you look into the eyes of a child who has 
witnessed the violence in the home. There is no cost too great for 
preventing this tragedy.
  The Violence Against Women Act will do many good things. It has a hot 
line, and in New York City alone, in 1999, over 169,000 calls were 
received. I am very pleased that two provisions were added to the bill 
from my Older American's Protection from Violence Act, H.R. 2590.
  My bill specifically allows VAWA programs to help older and disabled 
women, and they were included in this bill, specifically a grant 
program to address domestic violence among older women and the 
disabled. It is a proud day. I compliment all who have worked to make 
this pass to stop the Violence Against Women Act.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, in closing, let me remind my colleagues that this 
conference report includes essential provisions in our fight to halt 
the trafficking of individuals, end family violence, deter terrorism 
and fight crime.
  The House has already passed these initiatives separately. This 
conference report will allow us to send this package to the President 
for his signature. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the straightforward 
rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground 
that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum 
is not present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 356, 
nays 28, not voting 49, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 517]

                               YEAS--356

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Dickey
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Menendez
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--28

     Clayton
     Conyers
     DeGette
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Gordon
     Hulshof
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jones (OH)
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Lofgren
     Maloney (NY)
     Minge
     Murtha
     Nethercutt
     Oberstar
     Ose
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pombo
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Scott
     Thompson (CA)
     Watt (NC)
     Woolsey
     Wu

                             NOT VOTING--49

     Ackerman
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barton
     Berman
     Blumenauer
     Callahan
     Campbell
     Carson
     Clay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Eshoo
     Forbes
     Franks (NJ)
     Goss
     Hansen
     Hefley
     Hutchinson
     Isakson
     Jenkins
     King (NY)
     Klink
     Kolbe
     Lazio
     Lewis (GA)
     McCollum
     McIntosh
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Metcalf
     Miller (FL)
     Paul
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickett
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Shuster
     Smith (TX)
     Spence
     Stark
     Strickland
     Talent
     Thompson (MS)
     Vento
     Waters
     Waxman
     Weldon (PA)
     Wise

                              {time}  1302

  Ms. DeGETTE, Mrs. CLAYTON, Ms. LEE, Mr. WU and Ms. PELOSI changed 
their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 613, I call up 
the conference report on the bill (H.R. 3244) to combat trafficking of 
persons, especially into the sex trade, slavery, and slavery-like 
conditions in the United States and countries around the world through 
prevention, through prosecution and enforcement against traffickers, 
and through protection and assistance to victims of trafficking.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Pursuant to House Resolution 
613, the conference report is considered as having been read.
  (For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of 
October 5, 2000 at page H8855.)
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) and 
the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson) each will control 30 
minute.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).

[[Page H9037]]

                             General Leave

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
on the conference report on H.R. 3244.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent, after consulting 
with the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson), the ranking member 
of the other committee, that we cut our time in half, all of us, 
because I have been besieged by Members who have commitments and plane 
tickets; and that is the only reason that I would do that.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the time allotted to all of 
the committees be cut in half.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) that the time be limited to 15 
minutes for the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) and 15 minutes for 
the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson)?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the 
conference report on H.R. 3244, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act 
of 2000.
  I was proud to cosponsor this measure. I am pleased that we have been 
able to steer this important measure all the way through the process 
and on towards the President's desk.
  I especially want to commend two Members of our committee's 
leadership who have made this legislation possible. I commend the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the distinguished chairman of 
our Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, who is 
the lead sponsor of this measure and a tireless proponent. He was 
joined in refining the legislation, pushing it through the process by 
the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson), the distinguished 
ranking Democratic member of our committee.
  As noted in the legislation, millions of people, primarily women and 
children, are trafficked every year across international borders for 
sexual and other exploitive purposes. Approximately 50,000 women and 
children are trafficked into the United States for such purposes every 
year.
  The conference report on this measure contains a number of provisions 
designed to make certain that our government uses its influence around 
the world to stop this trafficking of human beings. In addition, it 
enhances some protections on the U.S. law for victims of trafficking in 
our country.
  Although the administration initially opposed the legislation, I am 
pleased they have now considered their position and ultimately came to 
recognize the necessity for this measure.
  The conferees on the measure were pleased to incorporate a number of 
other pending measures into the conference report.
  Most of these additions have greatly strengthened the conference 
report. Three of these additions are bills that I strongly support, and 
I am pleased to be able to help send them to the President's desk.
  The Violence Against Women's Act, Aimee's Law, and the Justice for 
Victims of Terrorism Act are all included in this conference report, 
and all are important measures that are overwhelmingly supported by the 
House.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the conference report 
on H.R. 3244, the ``Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000.''
  I was proud to cosponsor H.R. 3244, and am pleased that we have been 
able to steer this important measure all the way through the 
legislative process and on toward the President's desk.
  I especially want to commend two members of our Committee whose 
leadership has made this legislation possible. The distinguished 
chairman of our Subcommittee on International Operations and Human 
Rights, the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Smith was the lead sponsor 
of this measure and a tireless proponent of it. He was joined in 
refining the legislation and pushing it through the legislative process 
by the distinguished Ranking Democratic Member of our Committee, the 
gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Gejdenson.
  As noted in the legislation, millions of people, primarily women and 
children, are trafficked every year across international borders for 
sexual or other exploitative purposes. Approximately 50,000 women and 
children are trafficked into the United States for such purposes every 
year.
  The conference report on H.R. 3244 contains a number of provisions 
designed to ensure that the United States Government uses its influence 
around the world to stop this trafficking in human beings. In addition, 
it enhances the protections under U.S. law for victims of trafficking 
in the United States.
  The legislation establishes minimum standards that should be achieved 
in countries with significant trafficking problems in order for them to 
begin eliminating trafficking. The bill authorizes U.S. foreign 
assistance to help countries meet these minimum standards, and provides 
for sanctions against countries that fail to meet the standards. In the 
typical case this threat should provide a powerful incentive to 
countries with trafficking problems to meet the minimum standards.
  Within the United States, the legislation permits certain victims of 
trafficking to remain in the country so that, among other things, they 
can assist in the prosecution of traffickers. Victims of severe forms 
of trafficking are also made eligible for special programs set up for 
crime victims. The legislation also strengthens the criminal penalties 
for trafficking under U.S. law in a number of critical respects.
  Taken together, this is a solidly-crafted piece of legislation that 
addresses an urgent moral and humanitarian problem. Although the 
Administration initially opposed the legislation, I am pleased that 
they reconsidered their position and ultimately came to recognize the 
necessity for this measure.
  The conferees on H.R. 3244 were pleased to incorporate a number of 
other pending measures into the conference report.
  Most of these additions have greatly strengthened the conference 
report.
  Three of these additions are bills that I have strongly supported and 
that I am pleased to be able to help send to the President's desk.
  The Violence Against Women Act, Aimee's Law, and the Justice for 
Victims of Terrorism Act are all included in this conference report, 
and all are important measures that are overwhelmingly supported in the 
House of Representatives.
  For all these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for 
this conference report.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time; and pending that, I 
ask unanimous consent that the balance of my time be controlled by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the distinguished chairman of 
our Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, the 
principle sponsor of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield half of my time to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), and I ask unanimous consent that he be 
permitted to control that time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Connecticut?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise with some reluctance to support the conference 
report because I wanted a clean bill concerning the Trafficking Victims 
and Violence Against Women's Act, both of which passed the House with 
strong bipartisan support.
  So the bill continues funding for important Violence Against Women 
Act programs such as enforcement and prosecution grants to combat 
violence against women, the National Domestic Violence Hotline, 
battered women's shelters and services. But it also takes important 
preliminary steps to address dating violence.
  Now, we would not be here without the organizations that work with us 
in the Congress, and I just wanted to get into the Record: NOW Legal 
Defense and Education Fund, the National Coalition Against Domestic 
Violence, the National Task Force to End Domestic Violence, and the 
Feminists Majority.
  Now, the legislation, I must say, does not go far enough on VAWA, and 
we are going to continue this struggle. It leaves out many critical 
programs that were in the House-passed bill. For example, we have not 
allowed the provisions to more adequately fund rape prevention and 
education programs, civil legal assistance and STOP grants.

[[Page H9038]]

There is less money allocated to victims services.
  The conference falls short. But the bill does the special-interest 
bidding for alcohol wholesalers and effectively allows the shutdown of 
e-commerce by wineries. What, I ask, does this have to do with the 
victims of sex trafficking? Answer: nothing.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise with some reluctance to support the Conference 
Report. I had hoped that we would be voting on a clean bill concerning 
the Trafficking Victims and Violence Against Women Act, both of which 
passed the Houses with strong bipartisan support. Unfortunately, 
something dire happened on the way to the altar.
  Whenever the Republican majority wants to pass legislation to protect 
women, they will only do it half way. On the one hand, the bill before 
us continues funding for important VAWA programs such as law 
enforcement and prosecution grants to combat violence against women, 
the National Domestic Violence Hotline, battered women's shelters and 
services. The bill also takes important preliminary steps to address 
dating violence. For these positive things, I would like to 
particularly note the hard work of Leslie Orloff, Janice Kaguyutan, Pat 
Reuss and Jackie Payne of the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, 
Julie Fulcher of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence and 
all the people at the National Task Force to End Domestic Violence.
  On the other hand, I must report that the legislation does not go far 
enough on VAWA, leaving out many of the critical programs in the House 
passed bill. For example, the Majority refused to include the more 
generous House VAWA provisions to more adequately fund rape prevention 
and education programs, civil legal assistance and STOP grants. I am 
also disturbed that less money is allocated to victims' services, the 
scope of civil legal assistance to be offered is narrowed and the types 
of organizations that qualify to provide assistance is limited.
  The conference report also falls short with regard to the victims of 
sex trafficking. The bill still contains a 5,000 cap on the number of 
victims eligible to receive a ``T'' visa, despite the House's motion to 
instruct the conferees to remove the cap. Moreover, parents of victims 
are not eligible for derivative immigration status despite clear 
evidence that the traffickers will threaten to injure or kill the 
parents living abroad to prevent the victim from assisting in a 
criminal prosecution.
  If this weren't enough, this bill does the special interest bidding 
for the alcohol wholesalers, effectively allowing the shut down of e-
commerce by wineries. What, I ask, does this special interest 
legislation have to do with victims of sex trafficking. Nothing. It's 
just a vehicle to do a special favor for that special interest.
  And the bill incorporates Aimee's law which the National Governors' 
Association and National Conference of State Legislatures both conclude 
``is onerous, impractical, and unworkable.'' Chalk it up for another 
bill that aborts the legislative process. The Judiciary Committee has 
had plenty of time to make such a proposal workable for governors, but 
the Committee has failed again to do so.
  Finally, I must note that this process is an example of how 
legislation should not be conducted. On almost every provision, House 
Democrats were given take it or leave proposals from the Republicans, 
and there was virtually no deliberation by the members. That's a pretty 
bad show.
  So, I will vote yes today, but I would hope we could do a better job 
of protecting battered women and victims of sex trafficking in the 
future.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the distinguished chairman of the 
full Committee on the Judiciary.
  (Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of this 
conference report. As this body is aware, it includes a number of 
important bipartisan pieces of legislation that together advance the 
cause of justice for crime victims and truly offer the prospect of 
improving public safety.
  Among the many items of legislation that are in this conference 
report, the Violence Against Women Act, which is the product of so many 
hours of work by the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), is 
included; and I am very proud that it is, along with several other 
bills, the Rothman bill.
  I rise in strong support of this conference report on H.R. 3244. As 
this body is aware, it includes a number of important, bi-partisan 
pieces of legislation that, together, advance the cause of justice for 
crime victims and truly offer the prospect of improving public safety.
  The underlying bill, the ``Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 
2000,'' addresses one of the enduring and pernicious forms of slavery 
that still blights our time. While Lincoln may have freed the slaves in 
America, there are those today who engage in other forms of slavery on 
persons of many colors. Throughout the world there are criminals who 
smuggle persons into this country, principally women and children, in 
order to force them into sexual slavery, or to work in sweatshops for 
years in order to pay off the exorbitant fees charged by their 
traffickers for their illegal entry.
  This conference report will prevent and punish sex trafficking and 
other forms of trafficking in human beings. As such, it is another step 
forward in the full and complete enforcement of the anti-slavery 
amendments to our Constitution. Twelve years ago, the Supreme Court 
held that our existing anti-slavery statutes only prohibited the use of 
force or the abuse of the legal process to force a person into 
involuntary servitude. But the sad fact is that those who traffic in 
human beings today also use deceptive schemes and other lies, together 
with threats of force to family members in a home country, to coerce 
the victim into labor. This bill will now punish that criminal conduct. 
And it will fill another gap in the law by punishing, for the first 
time, those who traffic in human beings in order to provide the supply 
of labor to those who will enslave them once they arrive on our shores. 
The legislation will also substantially increase the penalties for the 
existing involuntary servitude laws already on the books.
  Mr. Speaker, it is time to do all of these things to put an end to 
all forms of slavery that continue to exist in our country and our 
world.
  Importantly, the conference report also includes the ``Violence 
Against Women Act of 2000,'' which this body passed last Tuesday by a 
vote of 315 to 3. The ``Violence Against Women Act of 2000,'' 
strengthens the ability of local communities to respond effectively to 
the national problem of violence against women, in all of its tragic 
forms, including domestic battery, stalking, rape and murder. This 
legislation continues and builds on our national commitment to support 
comprehensive, community-based efforts to keep these crime victims safe 
and hold offenders accountable.
  The VAWA legislation reauthorizes funding for state and local law 
enforcement agencies as well as for education, prevention, and outreach 
programs. This legislation ensures that VAWA programs will continue to 
aid the prosecution of domestic violence, sexual assault and child 
abuse cases across the country and increases victim services like 
domestic violence shelters for women. Additional initiatives have been 
authorized aimed at preventing domestic violence and sexual assault 
against older and disabled individuals, meeting the civil legal 
assistance and transitional housing needs of victims, and establishing 
a task force to minimize overlapping federal efforts to address 
domestic violence. In short, the legislation is a balanced and 
comprehensive effort to enhance the ability of states and localities to 
prevent and combat violence against women.
  I again want to salute the gentlewoman from Maryland, Mrs. Morella, 
for her leadership on this issue and her tireless efforts to ensure 
that this legislation becomes law.
  This conference report also includes a compromise version of the 
``Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act,'' which is supported by the 
Administration. This legislation ensures that American victims of 
international terrorism will be able to receive their judgements from 
any blocked assets held in the United States. At the same time, the 
legislation provides the President waiver authority to protect national 
security. As a result of this legislation, the Secretary of the 
Treasury will finally satisfy claims brought under the Anti-terrorism 
Act of 1996 of victims who hold final judgements.

  This bill also includes a provision known as Aimee's law, which will 
hold states responsible when they release a convicted felon from their 
prisons who then travels to another state and commits a crime. Under 
this provision, first introduced by the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. 
Salmon, a state that releases a felon from its prisons who then commits 
a crime in another state will be required to reimburse that state for 
the costs it incurs in prosecuting and incarcerating that criminal. 
This provision has twice before passed this House, mostly recently this 
past July, when it passed by voice vote.
  The conference report also includes the ``Secure Our Schools Act,'' 
which authorizes $30 million a year for the next three years for States 
and local governments to improve school security. Funds can be used for 
measures that deter crime, such as metal detectors and lighting, or 
other programs that offer the prospect of significantly improving 
public safety.
  Finally, the conference report includes the ``Twenty-First Amendment 
Enforcement Act,'' aimed at cracking down on the problem of illegal 
intestate shipments of alcohol. It does so by permitting States 
Attorneys General to enter federal district court to enjoin any 
shipping or transporting of alcohol into their state

[[Page H9039]]

in violation of state law. In short, this balanced provision empowers 
states to ensure compliance with their own laws regulating the sale and 
consumption of alcohol.
  The text of S. 577, the ``21st Amendment Enforcement Act.'' S. 577 is 
the counterpart to H.R. 2031, which was approved by the House Judiciary 
Committee on July 20, 1999, and passed by the House on August 3, 1999. 
This legislation would grant federal court jurisdiction to actions for 
injunctive relief brought by state attorneys' general seeking to 
enforce their state liquor importation and transportation laws.
  Importantly, the bill reflects the respectful comity that exists 
between the federal government and the states. In this bill, Congress 
is granting to the states the privilege of using the forum of the 
federal courts for limited jurisdictional purposes--so, the legislation 
is procedural in nature. Congress is acting under its powers to 
establish the lower federal courts and to define their jurisdiction. 
Congress is not pre-judging or endorsing the validity of the various 
state liquor statutes.
  The sole remedy available under the bill is injunctive relief--no 
damages, no civil fines or criminal penalties can be imposed by the 
federal courts under S. 577. When the Senate Judiciary Committee 
considered this measure in May, it adopted a substitute offered by 
chairman Hatch which included a number of the due process protections 
which were added to the bill when it was considered in the House 
Judiciary Committee. So, for example, the bill requires prior notice to 
the adverse party or parties, applies traditional proof requirements 
for preliminary injunctions and requires that a hearing be held before 
the issuance of any preliminary or permanent injunction occurs. A State 
must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that a violation of State 
law has taken place or is taking place.
  Additionally, Chairman Hatch's substitute includes language in 
subsection 2(e), entitled ``Rules of construction,'' that states that 
the legislation ``shall be construed only to extend the jurisdiction of 
the Federal courts in connection with State law that is a valid 
exercise power vested in the States'' under the 21st amendment, as 
interpreted by the Supreme Court, including interpretations ``in 
conjunction with other provisions of the Constitution.'' Federal 
jurisdiction is also limited to state law that is a valid exercise of 
state power under the first section of the Webb-Kenyon Act, as that 
section is interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. Further, S. 577 is 
not to be construed as granting the states any additional power.
  This rules of construction language is an implicit recognition of the 
Supreme Court decisions made over the last 35 years holding that the 
21st Amendment cannot be read in isolation from other provisions 
contained in the U.S. Constitution. Hostetter v. Idlewild Bon Voyage 
Liquor Corporation, 377 U.S. 324 (1964) (commerce clause); Capital 
Cities Cable, Inc. v. Crisp, 467 U.S. 691, 712 (1984) (supremacy 
clause); Larkin v. Grendel's Den, Inc., 459 U.S. 116, 122 (1982) 
(establishment clause); Department of Revenue v. James Beam Co., 377 
U.S. 341 (1964) (export-import clause); Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190, 
209 (1976) (equal protection); Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 U.S. 
263, 275 (1984) (commerce clause); 44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island, 
517 U.S. 484, 516 (1996) (First Amendment). Again, in enacting this 
jurisdictional statute, Congress is not passing on the advisability or 
the legal validity of the various state laws regulating alcoholic 
beverages. Whether a particular state law on this subject is a valid 
exercise of state power is, and will continue to be, a matter for the 
courts to decide.
  In my view, S. 577 takes a balanced and fair approach. The 21st 
Amendment Enforcement Act will assist the states in the enforcement of 
liquor laws that are genuinely about encouraging temperance. The courts 
will also continue to recognize the inherent police powers of the 
states to prohibit underage drinking. At the same time, this 
legislation preserves Congressional neutrality as to whether or not a 
particular state liquor law is constitutionally valid and should be 
enforced by the federal courts.
  Opponents of this language believe that it undercuts the basis of the 
legislation. The legislation itself is titled as an Act, ``divesting 
intoxicating liquors of their interstate character in certain cases.'' 
Thus, it is the purpose of the Act to, under certain circumstances, 
``burden'' interstate commerce. To them declare in the same Act that it 
does not ''impose an unconstitutional burden'' on that commerce is, 
according to the opponents arguments, a signal of Congressional intent 
to nullify the actual purpose of the Act and to invite litigation 
challenging all State enforcement.
  Mr. Speaker, this is an important conference report, offering the 
prospect of real solutions to real problems. I urge its passage.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would just like to commend the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), all my 
partners on the other side. I thank all the staff tactically on my 
side, Mr. Yeo and Mr. Abramowitz and Alethea Gordon.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Conference Report on H.R. 3244, 
the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, and 
yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the conference 
agreement on H.R. 3244 represents landmark legislation that not only 
seeks to put a stop to the heinous practices of modern-day slavery, but 
also addresses the millions of American women who face violence in 
their lives each year. At so many junctures over the past months, the 
bill appeared headed towards the very full dustbin on the 106th 
Congress, but with tremendous bipartisan work both in this House and in 
the other body, I am happy to report that we are reporting a good bill 
to the House of Representatives. I want to congratulate Representative 
Chris Smith and his staff for their arduous work on this legislation. 
This is the way legislation on foreign policy should work, where 
members from both sides of the aisle and in both chambers working 
together to address in a real, concrete manner, human rights abuses 
that effect the United States, nations around the world, and millions 
of people, particularly vulnerable women and children.
  The original bill was intended to stop the trafficking in persons 
throughout the world. The U.S. Government has reported that up to 
50,000 people, mostly women and children, are trafficked into the 
United States alone. It is simply intolerable that as we begin the 21st 
century, human beings are being trafficked into modern day slavery, 
including thousands of women and children trafficked into the United 
States each year. According to human rights organizations, in a typical 
case, a woman is recruited with promises of a good job in another 
country or province, and lacking better options at home, she agrees to 
migrate. There are also cases in which women are lured with false 
marriage offers or vacation invitations, in which children are bartered 
by their parents for a cash advance and/or promises of future earnings, 
or in which victims are abducted outright. Next an agent makes 
arrangements for the woman's travel and job placement, obtaining the 
necessary travel documentation, contacting employers or job brokers, 
and hiring an escort to accompany the woman on her trip. Once the 
arrangements have been made, the woman is escorted to her destination 
and delivered to an employer or to another intermediary who brokers 
conditions of her employment. Many women learn they have been deceived 
about the nature of the work they will do, most have been lied to about 
the financial arrangements and conditions of their employment, and all 
find themselves in coercive and abusive situations from which escape is 
both difficult and dangerous.
  In New York, hearing impaired men and women were recruited from 
Mexico and brutalized into selling trinkets on the street.
  In the Carolinas, teenage girls were held in slavery and forced to 
work as prostitutes.
  In Chicago, traffickers met Russian and Latvian women at the airport, 
seized their passports and return tickets, beat them and threatened to 
kill their families if they refused to dance nude in a nightclub.
  In Florida, traffickers used alcohol and drugs to lure field workers 
to isolated locations and hold them under cruel conditions of debt 
bondage.
  In New Jersey, a Bangladeshi woman was forced to work 18 to 20 hours 
a day, seven days a week, and after receiving no pay for 3 months, was 
forced to leave upon asking for her backpay and given only for her 
entire work $370, amounting to about 25 cents an hour. She was also 
forced to shovel snow in the sandals she arrived in, and when she got 
sick, they refused to take her to a doctor. They told her not to go out 
on her own, that the police were surely waiting to arrest her.
  In California, a Thai boy who had contracted AIDS through his 
prostitute mother was used as a decoy to try to traffick a woman into 
the United States, trying to make immigration officials believe that 
the two adults accompanying him were his parents.
  Right here in Washington, D.C., we heard cases of a woman who was 
paid virtually nothing and then sexually abused and refused any medical 
treatment.
  One of the most shocking aspects of this problem is that our laws 
often punish the victims, not the international criminal syndicates 
perpetrating these abuses. We need to reverse this situation. A short 
time ago, no one was discussing the trafficking issue. Now, the Clinton 
Administration is negotiating an international protocol to end 
trafficking in human beings, and the Congress is doing its part by 
passing comprehensive legislation.
  A broad coalition from across the political and ideological spectrum 
helped move this issue to the top of the national agenda. They were 
determined to have the United States

[[Page H9040]]

serve as an example for the rest of the world in stopping trafficking 
everywhere. By our action, we can encourage other countries to do more, 
and several countries have already indicated that they are looking at 
U.S. legislation as a model for their own response.
  The legislation reported out of the conference in some ways combines 
many of the best features of the bills passed by the House and the 
other chamber, where the effort was led by Senators Brownback and 
Wellstone. It provides for prevention of trafficking here and abroad, 
protection of victims in the United States by providing a new visa 
category for them, among other things, and punishes traffickers by 
creating new crimes of forced labor, and labor and sex trafficking.
  The bill also includes additional legislation that the conferees felt 
must be moved quickly. In particular, the legislation now includes the 
Violence Against Women Act of 2000. The original Violence Against Women 
Act expired last Thursday, leaving millions of American women without 
protection from the violence that they suffer in their lives. This Act 
reauthorizes through Fiscal Year 2005 the key programs included in the 
original Violence Against Women Act, such as the STOP, Pro-Arrest, 
Rural Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Enforcement, and campus grants; 
battered women's shelters; the National Domestic Violence Hotline; rape 
prevention and education grant programs; and three victims of child 
abuse programs, including the court-appointed special advocate program 
(CASA). It also makes some improvements responding to the experience 
with the original act, including authorizing grants for legal 
assistance for victims of domestic violence, stalking, and sexual 
assault and strengthening and refining the protections for battered 
immigrant women, including a new visa for battered immigrant women. It 
is fitting that this bill address the severe problems of both 
trafficking and of violence against women in the United States.
  The bill also includes terrorism assistance provisions for using 
frozen foreign government assets to pay for U.S. victims of terrorism 
who have judgments against such governments and other assistance for 
victims of terrorism. This provision addresses the need for 
compensation for victims of terrorism such as the family of Alissa 
Flatow, who was killed in a bombing in Jerusalem, the victims of the 
Cuban shootdown of the plane of the ``Brothers of the Rescue'' 
humanitarian organization, Terry Anderson, Joseph Ciccipio and other 
victims.
  Finally, and in my view regrettably, the bill contains a number of 
extraneous provisions that are somewhat controversial, including a 
provision dealing with the sale of alcohol through the internet and 
across state lines. However, these provisions needed to be included for 
the bill to be reported out of the Conference.
  I want to thank the staff of several committees and Members who 
worked endlessly on this legislation: my counsel, David Abramowitz, 
Peter Yeo, and Alethea Gordon from my staff; Joseph Rees, Scott 
Deutchman, Iden Martyn, Glenn Schmitt and Lora Ries, of the House, and 
Charlotte Oldhan-Moore, Jill Hickson, Karen Knutsen, Sharon Payt, Brian 
McKeon, and Mark Lagon of the Senate.
  Overall, I do believe this bill addresses important and real needs of 
women and children here and abroad. I urge the Committee to provide 
this bill with the normal rule relating to conference reports, waiving 
points of order against it.
  I urge my colleagues to support the conference report on H.R. 4344, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Rothman) be permitted to control the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Connecticut?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3244, 
the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.
  An estimated 1 million to 2 million people are trafficked every year 
worldwide; 50,000 to the United States. Trafficking is the third 
largest source of profits for organized crime behind only drugs and 
guns, generating billions of dollars annually.
  This bill contains provisions to strengthen current law to prevent 
unlawful buying and selling of persons, human beings.
  This measure also includes the Violence Against Women Act which has 
provided and will now continue to provide battered women and their 
children a safe haven and much-needed support for their physical and 
their emotional well-being.

                              {time}  1315

  Women and children are depending on passage of this important 
provision within this bill to help stop violent crimes that are too 
often committed against them. H.R. 3244 addresses the devastating 
problems of international sex trafficking, sexual predators, violence 
against women and much more. Violence and abuse against women and 
children will not be tolerated. I urge passage of this very important 
bill.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the inclusion of the 
Violence Against Women Act in the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. I 
want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for supporting 
this effort to do so.
  I remember a Latin phrase meaning after the struggle comes the 
reward. This has been quite a struggle. This is the reward for the 
American people.
  These two bills form a natural alliance by protecting women around 
the globe from being abused, raped, bought, sold or forced against 
their will. We can all celebrate the message being sent to women 
everywhere when we pass this legislation that women's minds and bodies 
are their own. By passing this conference report, we empower millions 
of women around the world to escape from pain and fear.
  This version of the Violence Against Women Act combines the strongest 
programs of both the House and Senate bills. We will never have a bill 
that meets every need of every victim and child, but this bill is the 
strongest commitment that Congress has ever made to fighting domestic 
violence and sexual assault.
  I am proud of the bill. I am proud of the dozens of Members and staff 
who worked tirelessly to maintain the programs and the funding to meet 
the horrifying need of millions of victims to be safe from both 
immediate and long-term danger.
  In this bill we finally recognize the highest risk group for intimate 
partner violence, ages 16 to 24 years old. The House Committee on the 
Judiciary worked with me to include victims of dating violence in three 
desperately needed categories: Services and Training for Officers and 
Prosecutors, or STOP grants; grants to encourage arrest policies; and 
rural State grants.
  With the inclusion of dating violence in the Violence Against Women 
Act, I hope we can begin to recognize that young women are falling prey 
to violent relationships in their earliest dating experiences. If we 
can send them the message that anger and violence is not a sign of 
love, we may prevent thousands of future battered women and children 
from living in fear.
  By passing this bill, we reauthorize the existing Violence Against 
Women Act programs for another 5 years. When it was originally passed 
in 1994, and some of us remember it because we were very much involved 
with it, Congress authorized $1.5 billion. Today, we have more than 
double the available grants to States. We have the STOP grants, we have 
grants to reduce violent crimes against women on campus, we have grants 
essential to protecting victims, the shelters for battered women and 
children, the National Domestic Violence Hot Line, which as we know 
receives 13,000 calls per month, in fact more than that, and a number 
of other provisions. We have increased grants being made available for 
rape prevention and education programs, which will continue to empower 
women with ways to protect themselves from sexual assault.
  I just want this body to know that they can be very proud of passing 
this conference report. It will make a difference. It does not settle 
everything but it will make a big difference.
  I also want to commend the staff people, the Committee on the 
Judiciary, with the chairman, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde); 
the other Members, the ranking member; and all the other Members who 
have worked very hard on it. I want to thank our staffs, especially my 
staff, Kate Dickens who worked indefatigably on this.
  And, lastly, Mr. Speaker, I will be submitting for the Record the 
names of the many organizations and personages who worked so hard and 
who deserve the credit for this bill. The credit and the beneficiaries 
will be the American people.

[[Page H9041]]

  Judiciary Committee staff, Carl Thorsen and Dan Bryant for their long 
hours and dedication to understanding the issue, also Cori Flam for her 
commitment to helping victims. To leadership of their support and 
especially Paul McNulty for his mediation skills.
  Juley Fulcher, Public Policy Director and the staff of the National 
Coalition Against Domestic Violence also Robin Runge and good luck to 
Marlo Cohen, who is thrilled somewhere in a law library.
  Kiersten Stewart, Director of Public Policy and the staff of the 
Family Violence Prevention Fund.
  Lynn Rosenthal, Executive Director and the staff of the National 
Network to End Domestic Violence.
  Leslye Orloff, Director, Immigrant Women's Program, NOW Legal Defense 
and Education Fund.
  Pat Reuss, Vice-President of Government Relations and Jackie Payne at 
NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund.
  Diane Moyer, Director of Public Policy and the staff at Pennsylvania 
Coalition Against Rape.
  Debbie Andrews, Executive Director and staff of RAINN.
  Jody Rabhan, Associate Director and the staff at the National Council 
of Jewish Women.
  The National Organization of Women.
  National Task Force to End Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault and 
to the thousands of advocates, health care professionals, law 
enforcement and judicial personnel, prosecutors for caring so much 
about individuals in need.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).
  (Ms. PELOSI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
legislation, the Violence Against Women Act, and the Sex Trafficking 
Victims Protection Act, H.R. 3244. These provisions are vital to ensure 
women can exercise their rights and to protect women from violence, 
abuse, sexual assault, and sexual predators. Women should feel safe in 
their homes, safe walking in the street, and safe at night. The 
reauthorization of VAWA brings us closer to these goals and will 
improve the health and quality of life of hundreds of thousands of 
women and children and families. The underlying bill will reduce 
illegal and inhumane trafficking in women and children around the world 
and serve to protect and uphold their human rights.
  While I applaud the progress we have made, I am disappointed that the 
Congressional leadership did not bring these related, but separate 
provisions, up independently and I am concerned that leadership took so 
long to debate, vote, and approve these important protections. VAWA was 
introduced at the beginning of this Congress--more than 18 months ago. 
This reauthorizing bill should not have been delayed this late and 
VAWA's authorization should not have expired. In the future, I hope 
other issues of significance of women are treated in a more timely and 
measured manner.
  This bill reauthorizes the programs under the original Violence 
Against Women Act continuing provisions to fund battered women's 
shelters, rape crisis centers and a hotline for domestic violence. It 
builds on that bill and strengthens law enforcement to reduce violence; 
education and training to combat violence; and services to the victims 
of violence. It also helps limit the traumatic effects violence has on 
children who too frequently suffer as silent victims.
  We must work to support America's young women, our future leaders, 
and this bill reaches out to them through efforts to prevent campus sex 
crimes and efforts to prevent teen suicide. In light of the recent 
attention to many immigration issues, I am pleased this bill addresses 
the needs of battered immigrant women and takes protective steps to 
address their plight.
  The Sex Trafficking Victims Protection Act will help end 
trafficking--a terrible modern version of slavery--that rapes, starves, 
physically brutalizes its victims, ultimately victimizing all women. 
Since many victims residing in the U.S. lack U.S. citizenship or 
appropriate documentation, existing U.S. laws are inadequate to protect 
these victims. This bill seeks to end trafficking and ensure 
traffickers are held accountable for their crimes.
  I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this legislation.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 45 seconds to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), as I will the other seven Members that are 
waiting to come up under Judiciary time.
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me this time.
  Let me pay tribute to a lady who will benefit from this legislation, 
Calla, a Guatemalan woman who lived with her fiance, a legal permanent 
resident, for 5 years; and when she asked about getting married so she 
could apply for her own legal residency, he beats her and accuses her 
of only wanting to be with him so she can get her immigration status 
recognized.
  This bill is long overdue. The battered immigrant women provisions 
are necessary. Though I would have wanted to see access to food stamps, 
access to housing, access to other benefits, we must move this bill 
forward, and we must move the programs that provide sexual assault 
prevention programs and education and training of judges. That is a key 
element for providing relief to those abused individuals.
  I would like to thank the Committee on International Relations for 
protecting the victims of terrorism and those subjected to slavery. 
This is a good conference report and I ask for my colleagues to vote 
for it.
  Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to thank the leaders like 
Congressman John Conyers who has been a leader on VAWA issues for 
years, Congressman Sam Gejdenson, the Ranking Member of the 
International Relations Committee for his leadership in being 
instrumental in reaching a compromise on this bill, Congressman Tom 
Lantos, who is a champion on Human Rights around the globe, and his 
true counterpart on the other side, Congressman Chris Smith, who also 
has been a champion of Human Rights, and Congressman Lamar Smith the 
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, who I have been 
able to work very well with throughout the 106th Congress.
  I come to the floor today in my capacity as Ranking Member of the 
Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims. Inside this report is the 
agreement authorizing VAWA, and some very important provisions that 
deal with Battered Immigrant Women. I joined with Congresswoman Jan 
Schakowsky and Congresswoman Connie Morella to sponsor H.R. 3083, The 
Battered Immigrant Women Protection Act of 1999, would provide much 
needed access to battered immigrant victims of domestic violence. 
Fortunately, many of the provisions of this bill were included in this 
conference report.
  The 1994 VAWA requires the victim to be married to a citizen or 
permanent resident and prove battery or extreme cruelty by the abuser. 
There is a provision in this report that eliminates the requirement 
that an immigrant victim has to prove extreme hardship. The spirit and 
intent of the 1994 law was to allow immigrants to safely escape the 
violence and bring their abusers to justice, now this can be done with 
the adoption of this report.
  This Conference Report has language that would provide VAWA relief to 
abused children who subsequently turn 21 as long as they can 
demonstrate that one or more incidents of battery or extreme cruelty 
occurred before they turned 21.
  This conference report gives battered immigrants living abroad new 
access to VAWA immigration relief. Abused children of spouses married 
to members of the U.S. Armed Forces and U.S. government employees 
living abroad are trapped overseas unable to escape and seek 
assistance. Filing a family-based visa petition at an American 
consulate is permissible, while filing VAWA self-petitions are not. 
This Conference Report makes it possible for battered immigrant women 
to file their own petitions. This is a major change.
  This Conference Report now allows battered immigrants to file VAWA 
self-petitions if it is filed within two years of divorce. Divorced 
battered immigrants do not have access to VAWA immigrant relief. There 
are many ``savvy'' abusers who know that if they divorce their abused 
spouse they will cut off their victim's access to VAWA relief. 
Provisions in this report change that.
  I am very disappointed that some missing provisions that were in the 
House bill, H.R. 3083 are not in the Conference Report. They are 
provisions that: exempted fiances from conditional residency 
requirements, a provision that extended VAWA to sons and daughters of 
legal permanent residents who are 21 and would allow them to include 
children in the self-petition; a provision that would have given 
battered immigrants the option of having children follow to join them 
rather than placing them in deportation proceedings; and deeply regret 
that there are no provisions in the report that provide access to food 
stamps to battered aliens; and access to housing, and access to 
benefits that would enable the alien to avoid battery or extreme 
cruelty in the future.

  We need this language because far too often, the pleas for help by 
these immigrant victims are not heard because of language or cultural 
barriers. Moreover, many victims remain silent because the threat of 
deportation

[[Page H9042]]

looms over them and their children. As a result, immigrant women are 
caught in an intersection of immigration, family, and welfare laws that 
do not reflect their needs and life experiences, leaving them 
vulnerable to exploitation with few options for redress. There are real 
human illustrations as to why we need this bill.
  Carla, a Guatemalan woman, has lived with her boyfriend, a legal 
permanent resident for five years. When she asks him about getting 
married so she can apply for her own legal residency, he beats her and 
accuses her of only wanting to be with him so she can get her 
immigration status recognized.
  Such compelling real-life stories illustrate the unique array of 
legal, economic, and social problems battered immigrant women face 
today. Most importantly, when these women are facing desperate times 
and struggles, they have children who are directly impacted. Often 
times when the mothers are in shelters or deported, the children become 
the custody of local child welfare agencies.
  A battered woman, who is not a legal resident, or whose immigration 
status depends completely on her partner, is often isolated by unique 
cultural dynamics which may prevent her from leaving her husband or 
seeking assistance from the American legal system. With the adoption of 
this report, a woman in this position is now provided relief. The 
language in this report will improve the lives of battered immigrants 
and send them on a path to rebuilding their lives and the lives of 
their children. I urge the adoption of this report.
  While the sweeping provisions of Battered Immigrant Women are 
included in this report, there is also the reauthorization of the 
Violence Against Women Act for five years. The money for these programs 
will combat violence against women, including battered women's shelters 
and services, sexual assault prevention programs and education and 
training judges. While I favored the Conyers version in committee, it 
does seem that compromise was reached to include some much needed 
provisions from his bill.
  The Conference Agreement also includes provisions to allow victims of 
terrorism or their families in the United States to recover judgments 
against countries listed by the State Department as sponsors of 
terrorism. Under the agreement, the president would have the authority 
to differentiate, on an asset-by asset basis, the premises of foreign 
diplomatic missions, but not commercial property or rental proceeds 
from diplomatic property eligible to be protected. This is a reasonable 
compromise because I remember that the Administration had some concerns 
and they have been taken care of.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema).
  (Mrs. ROUKEMA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
conference report, and I especially want to thank the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) 
for their valiant leadership. This is long overdue, and all the 
battered women and children in this world need this.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from New Jersey, Mr. 
Smith, for his leadership in bringing these various important items to 
the floor. I strongly support the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, 
the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, Aimee's Law and 21st Century 
Amendment Enforcement Act. These provisions are extremely important to 
women and children in our nation and in the international community.
  What I would particularly like to focus my time on today is the 
reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. I commend 
Mrs. Morella for her diligent leadership to ensure that this important 
legislation is reauthorized before the end of the session.
  H.R. 1248 authorizes $3 billion dollars over the next four years to 
fund various programs that support state and local efforts to shelter 
battered women, train local police and court officials how to handle 
domestic abuse cases, and provide a hotline and counseling services to 
battered women.
  In my district, the fifth district of New Jersey, there are numerous 
state and local efforts to address the problem of domestic violence. I 
want to tell you about four of these programs today. In Hackensack, New 
Jersey, we have the ``Shelter our Sisters'' domestic abuse program. 
This program provides shelter and clothing for battered women of Bergen 
County and their children. In Passaic County, we have the ``Strengthen 
our Sisters'' program which is located in Wanaque, NJ. I visited this 
shelter last spring. Not only do they provide shelter and clothing. As 
part of the services provided, the program includes a beauty parlor 
that is run by battered women from the shelter. This provides the 
ability for the women to have their hair and nails done before looking 
for a job. In Sussex County, Domestic Abuse Services, Inc. (DASI) is an 
organization that has been active for over 16 years. DASI offers a 
variety of services, including individual and group counseling, a 24-
hour hotline, an emergency shelter, a food pantry, a sexual trauma 
resource center, and community education about domestic violence. And 
to summarize, I want to identify Ginny's House in Sussex County, which 
has the heart and soul of angel's helping the little children of our 
county with physical and emotional support.
  These are just a few examples of the innovative things people in my 
district have done to help women who are the victims of domestic abuse. 
I commend these programs for their work assisting women get ``back on 
their feet'' after being the unfortunate victims of abuse.
  Violence against women continues to be a disturbing reality in 
America. Every day, four women die in this country as a result of 
domestic violence, and studies indicate that nearly two to four million 
women are battered each year. In addition, more than 132,000 women are 
raped yearly.
  Six years ago, the Violence Against Women Act became law as part of 
the historic 1994 Crime Bill. VAWA reflected a comprehensive 
understanding of the broad range of strategies needed to change this 
nation's response to violence against women.
  Its passage was a watershed event in the continuing struggle to end 
this type of unnecessary violence. Since the law was passed in 1994, 
the Justice Department estimates that violence against women has 
decreased by 21 percent.
  The bottom line is: as this decrease indicates this comprehensive 
approach to combating domestic violence works. But our work is not done 
until violence against women in our nation is completely eliminated.
  I know that all of us in Congress are deeply concerned about these 
violent crimes that are perpetrated against women. It is a serious 
national problem whether it takes the form of domestic battery, rape 
and murder, or stalking. I believe our ability to respond effectively 
to such violent crimes is an indicator of our commitment to securing 
safe neighborhoods and safe communities. I urge my colleagues to vote 
in support of this important legislation.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Scarborough).
  (Mr. SCARBOROUGH asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. SCARBOROUGH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Smith) for yielding me this time; and I also thank the chairman, 
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), for his important work on this 
bill and including the language from my bill, H.R. 2031, the 21st 
Amendment Enforcement Act. I would also like to thank the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) for cosponsoring this important bill.
  It is important because it stops illegal bootlegging on the Internet 
and the illegal sale of alcohol. This legislation ensures that States 
have the resources they need to enforce their alcohol control laws from 
out-of-State bootleggers and illegal shippers of alcohol.
  It is important to remember that there are no new substantive laws. 
This only allows State attorneys general the ability to seek injunctive 
relief in Federal Court to enforce State laws relating to direct 
shipment of intoxicating liquor. It does not apply to anybody unless 
they are breaking the law.
  It is a comprehensive solution that is carefully crafted to give 
States access to Federal courts to enforce their laws without 
infringing on the use of cutting edge marketing techniques if the 
deliveries and the sales they generate are made illegally.
  This bill is not about the Internet per se. It creates no Internet 
commerce policy nor does it change the States or the Federal 
Government's alcohol policy. If people are playing by the rules, it 
does not apply to them. No new laws, if people play by the rules. But 
if they break the rules, if they sell to children over the Internet or 
engage in illegal bootlegging, that can be and will be stopped now by 
State attorneys general thanks to the 21st Amendment Enforcement Act.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Cardin).
  (Mr. CARDIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, as the ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means, I am particularly 
pleased we were able to work out an

[[Page H9043]]

agreement allowing victims of trafficking access to certain basic 
assistance programs, such as Medicaid, TANF, and food stamps. I am also 
pleased that, in addition to the trafficking bill, we were able to 
include the Violence Against Women Act. It is very important 
legislation, and I am pleased we were able to incorporate it in the 
conference report before us.
  I must point out, though, that I am disappointed we were able to 
include the Child Support Distribution Act that passed overwhelmingly 
by this body and is now laboring in the other body. The gentlewoman 
from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) and I had urged the conference to 
include that particular legislation. We were unable to convince our 
friends in the other body, but I would hope that before we adjourn sine 
die that we will be able to pass that important legislation that would 
send over a billion dollars of increased child support to our Nation's 
poorest children and families.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), who has been working very, 
very hard on the trafficking issue, particularly as a member of the 
Helsinki Commission.
  Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Trafficking 
Victims Protection Act, a bill that my good friend, the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Smith), has worked tirelessly on.
  As Americans, we have always worked for justice and freedom in our 
borders and worldwide, and that is what this bill is all about; justice 
through criminal penalties and victim restitution for those who would 
traffic women and children, and freedom for the victims as the United 
States takes the lead in fighting to end this criminal business around 
the world.
  I want to take a moment to thank Dr. Laura Lederer, Director of the 
Protection Project at Johns Hopkins University. Her work has been vital 
to those working for the victims of sexual trafficking. I hope she is 
able to continue her study. Let me just read her quote. ``Sexual 
trafficking is a huge problem that urgently needs to be addressed. To 
conceptualize how immense the problem is, imagine a city the size of 
Minneapolis or St. Louis, made up entirely of women and children. 
Imagine that those women and children are kidnapped, raped, and forced 
into prostitution. Imagine it happening every year. Then stop 
imagining, because it is happening now and in those numbers.''
  That is why we are voting on the bill today, and I urge my colleagues 
to vote for it.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 45 seconds to the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Lowey).
  (Mrs. LOWEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, last March I was honored to be in Southeast 
Asia. We heard the terrifying stories of trafficking victims and spoke 
with dedicated individuals who have devoted their lives to helping 
those women. Today, we have the opportunity to assure these women and 
children that they are not alone; that the international community 
recognizes their struggle and is committed to putting an end to this 
barbaric practice.
  This legislation devotes critical funds to helping foreign 
governments fight trafficking and assist their victims, and pledges the 
full force of U.S. law to stopping this practice here at home. This is 
an important step, and I support it wholeheartedly.
  I am especially delighted that this conference report contains the 
reauthorization of the landmark Violence Against Women Act. For those 
of us who have been fighting for VAWA, today is a cause for 
celebration.
  But more importantly, this bill represents a major victory for the 
millions of American women who cannot advocate for themselves, women 
who suffer abuse in silence and in shame, women whose lives and liberty 
are jeopardized due to gender-based violence.
  It used to be that victims of domestic violence and sexual assault 
were ostracized by their communities, ignored by law enforcement, and 
even shunned by their own families. But VAWA has played a major role in 
changing that. It significantly bolstered criminal penalties for sex 
offenses, stalking, and domestic violence. And in just six years, VAWA 
has provided over $1.6 billion to support prosecutors, law enforcement, 
courts, shelters, support services, and prevention programs to combat 
violence against women.
  But we have so much work left to do. Experts estimate that 1.5 
million women are victims of gender-based violence every year. An 
estimated one in three adult women experiences at least one physical 
assault by an intimate partner during her lifetime. And women 
throughout America will continue to suffer because they lack access to 
legal representation in obtaining orders of protection, filing divorce 
or custody cases, and disputing discrimination in the workplace.
  I'm so proud that we are at long last sending the Violence Against 
Women Act to the President. I'm also delighted that legislation I 
authored to expand victims' access to legal services has been included 
in this bill. Increasing funding for legal services to $40 million 
annually, improving the training of attorneys, and requiring 
cooperation between legal service providers and victims' organizations 
will all help empower thousands of women to break the cycle of abuse.
  Every woman--whether in our country or abroad--deserves to feel and 
be safe in her home, her workplace, and in her community. For our 
nation's women and women around the world, I urge my colleagues to pass 
this critical bill.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Payne).
  (Mr. PAYNE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3244, a bill on sex 
trafficking on the floor at this time.
  My colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), has held 
several hearings in the Subcommittee on International Operations and 
Human Rights, and I commend him for that and also the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for his interest.
  This act will work to combat trafficking in persons, especially into 
the sex trade, slavery and involuntary servitude in the United States 
and in other countries; it also enacts tough criminal laws against 
buying, selling, either by force, fraud or coercion, or where the 
victim is a minor. It authorizes the rehabilitation and shelter 
programs; it authorizes law enforcement assistance to help foreign 
governments fight trafficking; and encourages the Secretary of State to 
produce an annual list of foreign countries who do not meet minimum 
international standards to eliminate trafficking.
  This has grown tremendously. Some report it at least $7 billion per 
year, second only to drug and international arms trade. The victims are 
young people who have no hope.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of H.R. 3244.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on both 
sides?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Smith) has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining, the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Conyers) has 4 minutes remaining, and the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Rothman) has 4\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Salmon), the author of Aimee's Law.
  Mr. SALMON. Mr. Speaker, at the outset, I would like to clarify my 
response to the colloquy I engaged in with the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Conyers). The version of Aimee's Law contained in H.R. 3244 would 
apply only to individuals convicted of murders, rape, or child 
molestation for a second time after the law takes effect on January 
1st, 2002. I hope that clears up any misunderstanding that I might have 
had or given.

                              {time}  1330

  I would also like to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) 
for his graciousness in including this legislation, which will make a 
real difference in people's lives. Because, Mr. Speaker, 14,000 rapes, 
murders, and molestations occur every year, and they are 100 percent 
preventable. Because if these monsters were not let out of prison, or 
if after let out of prison they had an adequate program for tracking 
these people through their parole program to make sure that the 
violence is not recommitted, lives would be spared, children's 
innocence would be preserved, and women's lives would not be ruined.
  This will make a difference. It will make a difference.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 45 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones).

[[Page H9044]]

  (Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, since I have 45 seconds, I am going 
to forego all the preliminaries and only stand to say, as a former 
prosecutor engaged in the prosecution of domestic violence cases, the 
Violence Against Women Act provided us the opportunity to come together 
and put together a program and protocol in our community to deal with 
violence against women.
  I am very proud to stand in support of this legislation as it extends 
itself to deal with women who are in this country and the victim of 
violence.
  I will again say that I hate the administrative nightmares that are 
aided by the Aimee's law, but it is very important that we make sure 
that we provide prosecutors, State court judges, police officers, and 
Violence Against Women workers with the money they need to do the job 
out on the streets.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.
  (Mr. ROTHMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), for all his fine work in introducing this 
very important legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, my message is very simple. Congress must give local 
school boards the resources they need to keep guns out of their 
classrooms.
  Mr. Speaker, do my colleagues remember the time when guns were 
routinely involved in the airline hijackings? What happened? Airlines 
installed metal detectors. That was 30 years ago.
  Here in the Capitol, after several tragic incidents involving guns, 
the Capitol Police installed metal detectors here.
  Today, when we have elementary schoolchildren bringing guns into 
their schools, and this phenomenon has occurred across the country, it 
is now long beyond time to give local school boards the help they need 
to keep guns out of their schools.
  Therefore, we must pass the Secure Our Schools Act, a bill which I 
introduced along with the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) and 
others, which is part of this conference report.
  Under this bill, Federal matching grants would be provided to any 
school that requests help to pay for metal detectors, security cameras, 
or other security devices, or to train school officials in security 
matters, or to work with local law enforcement officials.
  I am very pleased that this bill, with bipartisan support, 
overwhelmingly passed the House Committee on the Judiciary.
  I would like to take this opportunity to thank our distinguished 
ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), for all his 
assistance and to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde), 
without whom this bill would not be on the floor today.
  In particular, I would like to mention and thank the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) for his invaluable work in reaching across the 
aisle to assure bipartisan support so that America's children are 
protected from guns entering their classrooms.
  Some young constituents of mine, middle school students from Saddle 
Brook, New Jersey, said it best when they wrote to me and said, 
``School is supposed to be a place where we feel safe.''
  Let us give them and their local school boards the resources to keep 
guns out of their schools.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for this conference report.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 45 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) and thank her for the 
excellent work that she has done on this bill.
  (Mrs. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his 
leadership and for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support for the reauthorization of the 
Violence Against Women Act and the International Sexual Trafficking 
Bill. Both of these important bills were top priorities of the 
bipartisan Women's Caucus. I regret that it was packaged with several 
other unrelated, nongermane bills.
  The International Sexual Trafficking Bill is important because not 
only does it take steps to eliminate the sex trafficking industry by 
punishing the predators that exploit women around the world, but it 
also takes steps to protect the victims of sex trafficking.
  The bill sets forth the minimum international standards for the 
elimination of sex trafficking. It establishes criminal and civil 
penalties. And it does many other things.
  I appreciate all of my colleagues' work on this important bill for 
women.
  And by establishing criminal and civil penalties for traffickers this 
bill punishes traffickers for profiting from the victimization of 
women.
  In addition, it authorizes assistance, through non-governmental 
organizations to the native countries of sex trafficked victims to help 
the victims and to take steps to stop the industry.
  The United States is not immune to the problems of trafficking. It is 
estimated that as many as 50,000 women, children, and men are 
trafficked into the U.S. each year. This bill would assist those 
victims by authorizing a new visa for trafficking victims to provide 
protection to the women and children that are brought into the United 
States and forced into prostitution.
  Of course there is more that needs to be done to stop the many human 
rights abuses inflicted on women around the world.
  Attacking the sex trafficking industry is an important step in the 
continued fight for women's rights and freedom around the world.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald).
  (Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend her remarks.)
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 
conference report.
  Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of this Conference Agreement on 
H.R. 3244 and the joint efforts of the House, Senate, and 
Administration to assert our global leadership in halting trafficking 
and gender-specific violence against all persons, particularly women 
and girls around the world. Practices of abduction, coercion, violence 
and exploitation are without a doubt the most reprehensible phenomena 
sweeping the globe today.
  We know that between 1-2 million women and children are trafficked 
annually around the world. Approximately 50,000--100,000 women and 
children are trafficked into the United States each year primarily from 
Southeast Asia and the former Soviet Union. Think about this for a 
moment. In our country, where we have fought to secure women rights for 
nearly a century, we too are plagued by these terrible practices. Women 
and girls suffer extreme physical and mental abuse including rape, 
torture, starvation, imprisonment and sometimes death. Women and 
children trafficked in the sex industry are exposed to deadly disease 
including HIV and AIDS.
  While many of us are prospering in the global economy, still others 
are exploited by traffickers seeking to capitalize on foreign labor 
markets, the disintegrating social networks, and lower status of women. 
Victims are lured into trafficking networks through false promises of 
jobs, good working conditions, high pay and foreign adventure. Yet, 
slave-like conditions in jobs as domestic workers, factory workers, sex 
workers, nannies, waitresses, and service workers mire trafficked women 
and children at the bottom, lock them into the most insecure 
occupations, and leave victims open to ongoing exploitation and 
isolation.
  Trafficking is a grave human rights, economic, migration, and 
transnational crimes issue. In 1998, President Clinton established the 
anti-trafficking strategy of prevention, protection for victims, and 
prosecution and enforcement against traffickers. The President also 
charged the Interagency Council on Women with coordinating the U.S. 
trafficking in women and children policy.

  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3244 will permit the U.S. government to extend our 
efforts to combat trafficking in women and children and ensure a just 
and effective punishment of traffickers and protect their victims. This 
bill directs the Secretary of State to include comprehensive 
information on trafficking in our Country Reports on Human Rights 
Practices. The bill also establishes the ``Interagency Task Force to 
Monitor and Combat Trafficking'' which I applaud. I believe the high 
level appointments to this Task Force, including the Secretary of 
State, Director of USAID, and Attorney General speak to the seriousness 
to which our country takes this issue. H.R. 3244 will help create 
economic alternatives to deter women from traffickers by providing them 
clear choices to improve their economic conditions.

[[Page H9045]]

  H.R. 3244 engages the U.S. government with foreign countries to meet 
minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and establishes a 
policy not to provide nonhumanitarian foreign assistance to countries 
which do not meet these minimum standards. And, this bill targets 
individuals who are known to traffic in persons. The Secretary of State 
is instructed to establish a list of such persons to identify and 
sanction such persons who are significant traffickers in persons. The 
Attorney General is empowered to strengthen the prosecution and 
punishment of traffickers.
  And, finally, this bill puts our money where our hearts and 
commitments are to end this horrible practice by authorizing $15 
million over two years to Health and Human Services, $15 million over 
two years to the Secretary of state; $15 million over two years to the 
Attorney General and $15 million each for victims' assistance and 
foreign countries to meet minimum standards and finally, $15 million 
over two years to the Secretary of Labor to assist victims in the 
United States.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the H.R. 3244 Conference 
Report.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
  (Mr. SHAYS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report.
  The conference report includes H.R. 1248, which reauthorizes the 
Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) for an additional five years.
  As a cosponsor of H.R. 1248, I commend my colleagues Mr. Hyde, Mrs. 
Morella, Mr. Conyers and Mr. McCollum for their tireless efforts to 
bring this vital piece of legislation to the floor.
  The scourge of domestic violence must be ended. Perpetrators of these 
reprehensible crimes must be punished, and victims must have support 
services available to help them transition to a normal life.
  VAWA is a piece of legislation this body can be proud of. This law 
has substantially reduced the levels of violence committed against 
women and children by their spouses and partners.
  Since it was signed into law in 1994, VAWA has strengthened criminal 
laws and provided funding to enhance their enforcement. It has also 
provided a foundation for a successful long term criminal justice 
effort to end violence against women.
  By encouraging collaboration among police, prosecutors and victim 
service providers, VAWA is building a comprehensive community response 
to violence against women across the country.
  VAWA grants have made a difference in the lives of women and their 
families. Authorization for this critical set of programs expires in 
four days. It would simply be irresponsible of this body to fail to 
reauthorize the legislation before adjourning.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
support reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act by voting for H.R. 
3244.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  (Mr. SMITH of New Jersey asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I am very happy that H.R. 3244, 
the Smith-Gejdenson-Brownback-Wellstone Victims of Trafficking and 
Violence Protection Act of 2000, is now poised to be passed and, 
hopefully, will be passed by the Senate and sent to the President for 
signature.
  Interestingly and importantly, it has been endorsed by people like 
Chuck Colson and Gloria Steinem, by the Family Research Council and 
Equality Now, by the Religious Action Center of Reformed Judaism, as 
well as the National Association of Evangelicals.
  In crafting this legislation, we also had the very able assistance of 
impartial experts, such as Gary Haugen of the International Justice 
Mission, which goes out and rescues trafficked women and children one 
by one, and Dr. Laura Lederer of the Protection Project, whose 
painstaking research has been indispensable to ensuring that we have 
the facts about this worldwide criminal enterprise and its victims.
  I also especially want to thank my Staff Director and Chief Counsel 
Grover Joseph Rees, who has been indefatigable in his expertise on a 
myriad of these issues. As former general counsel of the INS, he has 
been indispensable in writing and crafting this legislation.
  I also want to thank David Abramowitz with the Democratic staff, who 
has also done yeoman's work. This is truly bipartisan legislation. I 
also want to express my gratitude to Michael Horowitz of the Hudson 
Institute who has supported this effort from day one.
  H.R. 3244 has attracted such broad support not only because it is 
pro-woman, pro-child, pro-human rights, pro-family values, and anti-
crime, but also because it addresses a problem that cries out for a 
solution. Division A of this conference report, the Trafficking Victims 
Protection Act, focuses on the most severe forms of trafficking in 
human beings: on the buying and selling of children into the 
international sex industry, on sex trafficking of women and children 
alike by force, fraud, or coercion, and on trafficking into slavery and 
involuntary servitude.
  Each year as many as two million innocent victims--of whom the 
overwhelming majority are women and children--are brought by force and/
or fraud into the international commercial sex industry. Efforts by the 
United States government, international organizations, and others to 
stop this brutal practice have thus far proved unsuccessful.
  Part of the problem is that current laws and law enforcement 
strategies--in the United States as in other nations--often punish 
victims more severely than they punish the perpetrators. When a sex-
for-hire establishment is raided, the women (and sometimes children) in 
the brothel are typically deported if they are not citizens of the 
country in which the establishment is located--without reference to 
whether their participation was voluntary or involuntary, and without 
reference to whether they will face retribution or other serious harm 
upon return. This not only inflicts further cruelty on the victims, it 
also leaves nobody to testify against the real criminals, and frightens 
other victims from coming forward.
  This legislation seeks the elimination of slavery, and particularly 
sex slavery, by a comprehensive, balanced approach of prevention, 
prosecution and enforcement, and victim protection. The central 
principle behind the Trafficking Victims Protection Act is that 
criminals who knowingly operate enterprises that profit from sex acts 
involving persons who have been brought across international boundaries 
for such purposes by force or fraud, or who force human beings into 
slavery, should receive punishment commensurate with the penalties for 
kidnapping and forcible rape. This would be not only a just punishment, 
but also a powerful deterrent.
  And the logical corollary of this principle is that we need to treat 
victims of these terrible crimes as victims, who desperately need our 
help and protection. The bill implements these principles by toughening 
up enforcement and by providing protection and assistance for victims.
  Mr. Speaker, I am also very proud that Division B is the Violence 
Against Women Act of 2000, of which I was also a co-sponsor along with 
Henry Hyde, Bill McCollum, Connie Morella and other colleagues from 
both parties. This Act includes provisions to reauthorize federal 
programs that combat violence against women, to strengthen law 
enforcement to reduce violence against women, to strengthen services to 
victims of violence, to limit the effects of violence on children, to 
strengthen education and training to combat violence against women, to 
enact new procedures for the protection of battered immigrant women, 
and to extend the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund.
  Mr. Speaker, we cannot wait one more day to begin saving the millions 
of women and children who are forced every day to submit to the most 
atrocious offenses against their persons and against their dignity as 
human beings. I urge unanimous support for the Victims of Trafficking 
and Violence Protection Act of 2000.
  Mr. RADANOVICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to enter into the record my 
understanding of the Twenty-first Amendment Enforcement Act as 
reflected in the Conference Report concerning Trafficking Victims 
Protection Act of 2000 (H.R. 3244).
  Representative Chris Smith's H.R. 3244 has been in Conference for the 
past several weeks. That Conference concluded with a report that allows 
the Twenty-first Amendment Enforcement Act (S. 577--Hatch) to be added 
to the legislation. I have a strong objection to the addition of this 
legislation, as it is not germane to the underlying, House-passed bill.

[[Page H9046]]

However, as I support my esteemed colleague's efforts, I will vote to 
pass the Conference report.
  As a proud vintner, I object to the association of my industry with 
violence against women, sex trafficking and slavery, and believe that 
S. 577 should not be included for that reason. In addition to my 
objection, The National Association of State Legislatures took action 
opposing S. 577 on a 41-7 vote. Mothers Against Drunk Driving does not 
support Congress' involvement in an internal industry issue under the 
guise of juvenile access to alcohol.
  The proponents of S. 577 argue that the legislation is needed in 
order to avoid distribution of alcoholic beverages to minors. If that 
is indeed their position, the Conference Report should include language 
that limits the provisions of S. 577 to enforcement in cases involving 
minors. It does not; therefore, I believe that the intention of the 
proponents of S. 577 is in fact broader than the rhetoric would 
indicate.
  Previous versions of the Twenty-first Amendment Enforcement Act 
contained provisions that would have allowed states to unfairly 
discriminate against out-of-state sellers for the purposes of economic 
protectionism. Such protectionism would clearly be a violation of the 
Commerce clause of the Constitution; thus, the current version of this 
legislation does not allow for such protectionist acts.
  The Twenty-first Amendment Enforcement Act is simply a jurisdictional 
statute with very narrow and specific purposes. The bill is not 
intended to allow the enforcement of invalid or unconstitutional state 
liquor laws in the federal courts, and is certainly not intended to 
allow states to unfairly discriminate against out of state sellers. The 
legislation does provide the federal courts jurisdiction to injunctive 
relief actions brought by state attorneys general seeking to enforce 
state laws dealing with the importation or transportation of alcoholic 
beverages. We are not today saying that those state laws are valid, 
reasonable or in any manner given import outside of the jurisdiction of 
the state.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe that the Conference has reported a bill that 
confuses, rather than enlightens, the debate within the alcohol 
beverage industry regarding the best mechanism for consumers to obtain 
the products they wish to purchase in a free society. As a stand-alone 
bill, I have worked to make sure that this confusion was not adopted in 
law. However, the procedural actions that resulted in this bill being 
included in the Sex Trafficking conference report make such efforts 
futile, and as I indicated, I will vote to support the report.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I support this conference report, 
which combines a number of law-enforcement measures, including two very 
important measures to protect women around the world and here in the 
United States.
  Worldwide, the conference report takes important steps to make the 
United States a full partner in the international effort to curb 
exploitation of women who are the victims of the international sex 
trade. This is very important because recent favorable international 
developments--including the breakup of the Soviet Union and greater 
freedom of travel--have also had the effect of making it easier for 
this exploitation to occur.
  Here at home, the conference report also authorizes the important 
programs of the Violence Against Women Act, or ``VAWA.'' That is also 
something I strongly support.
  VAWA is very important for Colorado. Through last year, our state 
received almost $15 million in VAWA grants. That money has helped 
assist victims of domestic violence, but it has also done much more.
  In fact, according to a letter from our Attorney General, Ken 
Salazar, and his colleagues from other states, VAWA ``has enabled us to 
maximize the effectiveness of our state programs that have made a 
critical difference in the lives of women and children endangered by 
domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking.''
  VAWA is also important for our country. It has made a difference in 
the lives of millions of women by aiding in the prosecution of cases of 
domestic violence, sexual assault, and child abuse, by increasing 
services for victims and resources for law enforcement personnel, and 
by establishing a National Domestic Violence Hotline.
  Partly as a result, crimes against women have decreased by 27 percent 
since VAWA's enactment.
  But more remains to be done. More women are injured by domestic 
violence each year than by automobile accidents and cancer combined. 
More than one-third of all women using emergency rooms are victims of 
domestic violence. In 1997 more than 250,000 women and children sought 
refuge from domestic violence in women's shelters. More than 300,000 
sexual assaults were perpetrated against women in 1998 alone. And every 
year more than one million women are targeted by stalkers.
  Because I strongly support renewing and strengthening this vital 
measure, I joined in cosponsoring H.R. 1248, the bipartisan VAWA 
reauthorization bill that was also supported by the Administration. The 
House passed that bill last month, and by passing this conference 
report we will take the next step toward its enactment.
  Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support 
of H.R. 3244, the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act 
Conference Report. This life saving legislation for women and girls in 
the United States is a strong, positive example to all nations around 
the world that violence against women and girls is intolerable and must 
end.
  The Violence Against Women Act, first establish in 1994, has been 
successful, and its renewal is essential. The National Organization for 
Women reports that every day four women in this country die as a result 
of domestic violence, and that between two to four million women of all 
races and socioeconomic classes are battered annually in America. The 
Violence Against Women Act reauthorization, which is included in this 
bill, commits over three billion dollars for the next five years to 
assist victims of domestic violence, and seek an end to such behavior 
in our society.
  The plight of battered women is a sad and tragic concern. Fortunately 
in my community, organizations such as Hope House, MOSCA, and Rose 
Brooks are there for women and children in need. This measure will help 
reach women who are not now being served because of current limited 
resources.
  Around the world, the problem of trafficking in women and girls is 
growing. Currently, trafficking is the third largest source of profits 
for organized crime. America has a responsibility to address this 
problem because over 50,000 women are illegally trafficked into our 
country each year. Through prevention and immigration services, this 
measure will aid these women who have been forcibly removed from their 
homes and shipped overseas.
  I urge reauthorization of this vitally important measure to empower 
millions of women worldwide through protection of their bodies and 
spirits. I applaud the numerous women's organizations and fellow co-
sponsors who have worked tirelessly on these issues, and I salute the 
commitment of this Congress to enact this measure.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of 
this measure, and I am delighted that we have found an acceptable 
vehicle to attach a provision to re-authorize the Violence Against 
Women Act. This is an area that deserves continued attention in our 
country, and we must continue to spread the word to reduce the violence 
that occurs every day against American women.
  The agreement in H.R. 3244 will fund programs to combat violence 
against women, including much-needed battered women's shelters and 
services, sexual assault prevention programs and education and training 
for judges. Unfortunately, this is a problem that continues to be 
prevalent in my area and has an impact on the entire community. 
However, H.R. 3244 goes a long way toward curbing the violence that 
affects women victims by assuring access to free shelters. Hopefully, 
this bill will continue as a positive step to reduce the overall 
domestic violence that plagues our communities.
  Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge all of my 
colleagues to vote for H.R. 3244, the Trafficking Victims Protection 
Act, which includes reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
  The Strengthened Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) we will vote on 
today reauthorizes current VAWA grant programs for five years, makes 
targeted improvements, and adds important new programs.
  The bill strengthens law enforcement efforts to reduce violence 
against women, increases services to victims of violence, seeks to 
limit the effects of violence on children, enhances education and 
training to combat violence against women, and provides important new 
protections for battered immigrant women.
  The original VAWA bill authorized $1.5 billion for programs to 
protect women and children from domestic abuse. The bill we will vote 
on today provides $3.4 billion for the 2001-2005 reauthorization 
period.
  The passage of the Violence Against Women Act in 1994 was one of the 
greatest accomplishments of the 103rd Congress and the Clinton 
Administration. Since 1995, VAWA grants have provided a major source of 
funding for national and local programs to reduce rape, stalking, and 
domestic violence. The 1994 Act bolstered the prosecution of child 
abuse, sexual assault, and domestic violence cases; provided services 
for victims by funding shelters and sexual assault crisis centers; 
increased resources for law enforcement and presecutors; and created a 
National Domestic Violence Hotline.
  The VAWA bill we will vote on today provides important new provisions 
to prevent and prosecute dating violence, to help women who

[[Page H9047]]

are trying to escape domestic violence by providing transitional 
housing and legal assistance services, to enforce state and tribal 
protection orders nationwide, to improve services to victims of 
violence, and much more.
  I also strongly support the Trafficking Protection Act, which 
strengthens current law to prevent the unlawful international 
trafficking of women and children, to increase penalties for those who 
engage in this abhorrent practice, and to protect the victims of 
trafficking. This modern form of slavery, which forces women and 
children into prostitution or forced labor must be eliminated.
  I am confident that my colleagues will vote to support H.R. 3244, 
which provides vital protections for women and children and gives us 
the tools we need to prosecute those who prey upon them.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises today in support of the 
conference report for H.R. 3244, the Transportation appropriations bill 
for fiscal year 2001. This Member greatly appreciates the inclusion of 
$3.5 million for the construction of a pedestrian/trolley overpass in 
Lincoln, Nebraska. This request was this Member's highest 
infrastructure priority for fiscal year 2001.
  The City of Lincoln, Nebraska, is seeking Federal assistance for 
transportation improvements associated with the construction of a new 
baseball/softball complex. The construction of the complex, to be built 
on the edge of downtown Lincoln, represents a partnership between the 
City, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL), and private business. 
It will be home of a minor league baseball team, the UN-L baseball and 
softball teams, as well as any number of City of Lincoln recreational 
activities.
  Currently, the most pressing need for the City of Lincoln in the 
completion of this project, is the construction of a pedestrian/trolley 
overpass that would allow for safe and enhanced access to the stadium. 
The reason this bridge is so vital is that it would provide important 
connections between the baseball complex, the popular Haymarket section 
of Lincoln, the City's trails system, the University of Nebraska 
campus, and parking facilities for both the baseball complex and the 
home of the Husker football team, Memorial Stadium. What makes this 
development site unusual and difficult, but the reason it is available, 
is the fact that it is separated from the downtown area by I-180 and 
what is literally one of the world's busiest train routes where huge 
amounts of western coal are moved east, along with large volumes of 
other freight. Therefore, the City of Lincoln plans to use and really 
must use the most innovative techniques to move large numbers of people 
in short periods to this site during events. The approach selected must 
be chosen to allow for enhanced transit, paratransit, bicycle, and 
pedestrian access from the University and the Lincoln community.
  The City of Lincoln has already committed $1 million. The $3.5 
million appropriation in the Transportation appropriations conference 
report is necessary for Lincoln to compete this important project.
  Within the conference report, however, Mr. Speaker, is the .08 blood 
alcohol mandate. Although the conference compromise agreement is better 
than the Senate-passed language, this Member is opposed to all Federal 
mandates on Highway Trust Funds which require either the passage of 
specific state legislation or the loss of Federal highway funds. This 
Member has always opposed any provisions which would limit or reduce 
the Highway Trust Funds or limit the states' ability to use their 
Highway Trust Funds as they choose. Nebraskans and other Americans pay 
their gasoline taxes at the pump and deserve to have them returned for 
highway construction and maintenance and other transportation projects, 
without strings being attached. In short, states should be allocated 
money from the highway trust funds without conditionality being applied 
for any objectives--be those objectives noble or misguided. Of course, 
this Member recognizes that drunk driving remains a serious problem--
and in fact more than twenty-four years ago introduced what he has been 
told was the first bill in the Nebraska Legislature to lower the 
standard to .08 percent; unfortunately, it never made it out of 
committee because of the strenuous opposition of the alcohol lobby. 
This Member believes that under the U.S. Constitution, the 
establishment of the blood alcohol content level as it relates to 
driving is the responsibility of the states, not the Federal 
Government. Nevertheless, despite this very strong concern I believe 
the case for the prompt enactment of this legislation is compelling.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, this Member urges his colleagues to support 
H.R. 3244.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Without objection, the previous 
question is ordered on the conference report.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the conference report.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 371, 
nays 1, not voting 62, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 518]

                               YEAS--371

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Dickey
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Ewing
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker

[[Page H9048]]


     Wilson
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--1

       
     Sanford
       

                             NOT VOTING--62

     Ackerman
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barton
     Berman
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Callahan
     Campbell
     Carson
     Clay
     Cramer
     Danner
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Eshoo
     Everett
     Farr
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Franks (NJ)
     Goodling
     Goss
     Hansen
     Hefley
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Isakson
     Kennedy
     King (NY)
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     McCollum
     McIntosh
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickett
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Shuster
     Smith (TX)
     Spence
     Stark
     Strickland
     Talent
     Thompson (MS)
     Vento
     Waters
     Waxman
     Wise

                              {time}  1401

  So the conference report was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, due to a conflict, I missed rollcall No. 
518. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on adoption of the 
conference report for H.R. 3244, the Trafficking Victims Protection 
Act.
  Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 518, I 
could not be present. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 518, I could not be present. 
Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
  Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 518, I could not be 
present. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. EVERETT. Mr. Speaker, due to sickness in my family and thus the 
need to return home to my district, I was unable to vote on rollcall 
vote No. 518. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on H.R. 
3244, final passage of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000.

                          ____________________