[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 167 (Wednesday, December 5, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12448-S12456]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. DASCHLE (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
S. 1766. A bill to provide for the energy security of the Nation, and
for other purposes; read the first time.
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the
comprehensive energy bill that is being introduced today.
As we all know, there has been a great deal of discussion this year
about the nation's energy situation. The increasing volatility in
gasoline and diesel prices and the growing tension in the world from
the terrorist attacks have affected all of us. There is a clear need
for energy policies that ensure long term planning, homeland security,
fuel diversity and a focus on new technologies.
To this end, I am very pleased that a comprehensive energy bill has
been introduced in the Senate by my South Dakota colleague, Senator Tom
Daschle. The bill is the result of many months of hard work by the
Majority Leader and the chairmen of the committees of jurisdiction,
including Senator Jeff Bingaman, the chairman of the Energy Committee,
of which I am a member. They have listened to the concerns of both
those who run our energy systems and our constituents in crafting the
legislation. The result is a balanced and thorough product that
addresses most of the major segments of the energy system and looks
ahead to the needs of future.
The bill covers a number of important areas, including incentives to
increase oil and gas production and the nation's supplies of
traditional fuels, streamlining of electricity systems and regulations,
important environmental and conservation measures, and provisions to
increase efficiency of vehicles and appliances.
One of the key provisions in the bill is the inclusion of a renewable
fuels standard. Earlier this year, I introduced a bill with Senator
Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, the Renewable Fuels for Energy Security Act of
2001 (S. 1006), to ensure future growth for ethanol and biodiesel
through the creation of a new renewable fuels content standard in all
motor fuel produced and used in the U.S. I am pleased the framework of
this bill is included in the comprehensive energy legislation.
Today, ethanol and biodiesel comprise less than one percent of all
transportation fuel in the United States. 1.8 billion gallons is
currently produced in the U.S. The energy bill's language
[[Page S12449]]
would require that five billions gallons of transportation fuel be
comprised of renewable fuel by 2012--nearly a tripling of the current
ethanol and renewable fuel production.
There are great benefits of ethanol and renewable fuels for the
environment and the economies of rural communities. We have many
ethanol plants in South Dakota and more are being planned. These
farmer-owned ethanol plants in South Dakota, and in neighboring states,
demonstrate the hard work and commitment to serve a growing market for
clean domestic fuels.
Based on current projections, construction of new plants will
generate $900 million in capital investment and tens of thousands of
construction jobs to rural communities. For corn farmers, the price of
corn is expected to rise between 20 and 30 cents per bushel. Farmers
will have the opportunity to invest in these ethanol plants to capture
a greater piece of the ``value chain.''
Combine this with the provisions of the energy bill and the potential
economic impact for South Dakota is tremendous. Today, 3 ethanol plants
in South Dakota (Broins in Scotland and Heartland Grain Fuels in
Aberdeen and Huron) produce nearly 30 million gallons per year. With
the enactment of a renewable fuels standard, the production in South
Dakota could grow substantially, with at least 2000 farmers owning
ethanol plants and producing 200 million gallons of ethanol per year or
more.
An important but under-emphasized fuel is biodiesel, which is chiefly
produced from excess soybean oil. We all know that soybean prices are
hovering near historic lows. Biodiesel production is small but has been
growing steadily. The renewable fuels standard would greatly increase
the prospects for biodiesel production and benefit soybean farmers from
South Dakota and other states.
Moreover, the enactment of a renewable fuels standards would greatly
increase the nation's energy security. Greater usage of renewable fuels
would displace the level of foreign oil that we currently use. During
these difficult times, it is imperative that we find ways to improve
the nation's energy security and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
A renewable fuels standard would go a long way towards achieving this
goal.
The House passed an energy bill without any provisions for a
renewable fuels standard. Moreover, the House looks backward by
focusing too heavily on tax breaks for traditional fuel supplies
without enough encouragement for new technologies and provisions that
will reduce our dependency on foreign oil. The Senate bill achieves the
right balance for the nation's future. I commend Senators Daschle and
Bingaman for their efforts and look forward to enacting the bill.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Bingaman and
Senator Daschle for their leadership on the introduction of a
comprehensive energy bill today, the Energy Policy Act of 2001. This
bill has many components, and it required a great deal of coordination
and effort to compile pieces that address issues that cut across
committee lines. I appreciate their efforts in this regard.
As chairman of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, I am particularly pleased to see several areas of
coverage in the bill. This bill incorporates many climate science and
technology provisions from a bill Senators Kerry, Stevens, Inouye,
Akaka, and I recently introduced, S. 1716, the Global Climate Change
Act of 2001. These provisions will improve our climate monitoring,
measurement, research, and technology so that we are better able to
discern climate change, understand its patterns, and manage its
effects. In addition, it contains provisions that would establish a
service to provide expert, unbiased technology advice to Congress,
which we have sorely lacked since the Office of Technology Assessment
was abolished in 1995.
In addition, there is a placeholder in the bill for a CAFE provision.
In 1975, I co-sponsored the legislation that became the current CAFE
law. I was also very involved in efforts during the 101st and 102nd
Congresses to increase CAFE standards. I am pleased to report that the
Commerce Committee is again taking up the issue of fuel economy
standards. In fact, we will be holding a hearing on this topic tomorrow
morning.
The Committee is embarking on a process to develop a strong and
technically feasible CAFE proposal that will strengthen our domestic
and economic security. Such a provision must achieve oil savings to
reduce our petroleum consumption and dependence on imported oil. It
also must ensure that our automotive industry remains technically
competitive. This is quite a challenge, but it is an issue that must be
addressed.
The CAFE measures originally arose out of concern for the nation's
energy security following the oil crisis of the early 1970s. When the
U.S. first pursued CAFE, imported oil accounted for 36 percent of the
nation's oil use; today imported oil accounts for 56 percent of U.S.
oil use. Twenty-eight percent of our nation's total oil consumption is
used in the transportation sector.
Since CAFE was implemented in 1975, we have seen an approximate
doubling in the fuel economy of the nation's vehicle fleet. In 2000
alone, we saved over 3 million barrels of oil per day because of the
fuel economy gains made since the mid-1970s. Clearly, a comprehensive
energy policy must incorporate provisions to reduce energy use in the
transportation sector--a goal that I believe can best be achieved by
using technological advances to boost the fuel economy of passenger
vehicles.
I appreciate that Senator Bingaman and Senator Daschle recognized the
complexity of CAFE issues. I look forward to reporting back in a few
months with a solid piece of legislation, compiled through the entire
Commerce Committee, to fill the current placeholder in the energy bill.
______
By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself and Mr. McCain):
S. 1767. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide
that certain service in the American Field Service ambulance corps
shall be considered active duty for the purposes of all laws
administered by the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it's a privilege to join Senator McCain
in introducing the American Field Service Recognition Act to correct
the long-standing injustice suffered by these courageous World War II
veterans who saved the lives of so many American and Allied service
members, but who have long been denied the veterans benefits that they
need and deserve.
The American Field Service was a corps of nearly 2200 Americans, who
drove ambulances into combat zones where American and Allied troops
fought between 1939 and 1945. Twenty-seven were killed, seventy-one
were wounded, and at least twenty-three were captured during that time.
The AFS members were volunteers who wanted to contribute to the war
effort, but many were ineligible for service in the U.S. Armed Forces
because of their age or their physical disability. The AFS received
substantial support from the American government and its personnel were
assigned in the theaters of North Africa, Western Europe, and India-
Burma. During the war, the AFS evacuated approximately 700,000 wounded
on these fronts.
Their application under a 1970's law for veterans' benefits was
finally, but only partially, approved in 1990. The request for
eligibility was that each AFS driver must have served under direct U.S.
Army command during prescribed periods of time. The result was to
exclude AFS drivers who served in France and North Africa before
January 1943, half of the drivers who served in Italy, and all who
served in the India-Burma Theater. Overall, because of this narrow
interpretation of the law, fifty percent of the drivers who served
under fire were denied benefits given to other drivers who served in
other combat regions.
Sadly, AFS drivers are passing away at an increasingly rapid rate.
There are currently 631 living drivers from World War II on the AFS
roster, and 198 of them are still ineligible for benefits, including
six who have recently passed away without access to VA medical care.
Clearly, these courageous veterans, such as Clifford Bissler of Stuart,
FL, who lost a leg and received two Purple Hearts for his service in
the India-Burma Theater, deserve the help and recognition that this
legislation will bring.
[[Page S12450]]
In 1943, President Roosevelt wrote to the leader of AFS and said of
the drivers, ``In serving our allies, they serve America.'' It is long,
long past time for Congress to finally recognize the contributions of
all of these dedicated Americans who served during World War II,
granting them the veteran's benefits and assistance that they very much
need and deserve. If you would like to cosponsor this bill, please
contact us or have your staff contact Duane Seward at 224-2008.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. Boxer):
S. 1768. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
implement the Calfed Bay-Delta Program; to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to
authorize the CALFED Bay Delta Program. I am pleased that Senator Boxer
has agreed to co-sponsor this bill with me. The bill that I am
introducing today is also supported by Senator Bingaman, the chairman
of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. He has committed
to helping move this bill through his committee and hopefully through
the Senate.
The most important thing about this new bill is that it fully
authorizes the CALFED Record of Decision and all the projects
associated with it with Federal costs of less than $10 million. Any
projects of more than $10 million that are ready to be constructed will
be reported to the authorizing committees in a package every 2 years.
This bill authorizes $2.4 billion to cover the one-third Federal
share of the CALFED program. The State and water users will each be
responsible for the other two-thirds.
California's population is 35 million today and could reach 50
million within the next 20 years. There simply is not enough water in
the system to meet the future demand. CALFED is the best hope we have
to increase our water supply, preserve the environment and protect
against a water emergency. I don't believe we can wait any longer.
Mrs. BOXER. I am very pleased to be joining Senator Feinstein today
in the introduction of a bill that will help address California's water
needs. We have worked closely together on this effort over the last
year and I believe that this bill will help the CALFED program move
forward in the right direction.
In California, as in many parts of the West, water is our lifeblood.
For decades, water allocation was conducted through endless appeals and
lawsuits, and divisive ballot initiatives. Such battles were painful
and, they prevented us from finding real solutions to our state's very
real water problems.
In 1994, a new state-federal partnership program called CALFED
promised a better way--a plan to provide reliable, clean water to
farms, businesses, and millions of Californians while at the same time
restoring our fish, wildlife and environment. What has made CALFED work
is that it employs a consensus approach that balances the needs of
these various interests.
This bill stays true to that balanced approach. It authorizes the
continuation of the CALFED program over the next 5 years and provides
for a federal contribution of $2.4 billion over that time period. The
bill requires that the CALFED program goals of protecting drinking
water quality, restoring ecological health, improving water supply
reliability, and protecting Delta levees progress in a balanced manner.
The bill describes a detailed set of reports that should be provided to
Congress prior to approving any project costing over $10 million. This
reporting process is designed to ensure that major projects are not
approved until the environmental and economic impacts are clearly
understood.
I believe CALFED offers the best hope for ending California's
intractable water wars. This bill will ensure that the CALFED program
can continue its good work.
______
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 1769. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Army to carry out a
project for flood protection and ecosystem restoration for Sacramento,
California, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and
Public Works.
Mrs. BOXER. S. 1769, Mr. President, I am introducing a bill to
improve flood protection in Sacramento. This is a companion bill to one
that Representative Matsui is introducing today in the House.
Currently, Sacramento only has an 85-year flood protection. This bill
would raise the existing walls of Folsom Dam by 7 feet, which would
improve flood protection to 213 years. Without this improvement, $40
billion of property, including the California State Capitol, 6 major
hospitals, 26 nursing home facilities, over 100 schools, three major
freeway systems, and approximately 160,000 homes and apartments, are at
risk of a devastating flood.
For a city of its size, Sacramento falls shockingly below the 400
year-level of flood protection enjoyed by other river cities such as
St. Louis, Tacoma, Dallas, and Kansas City. The Folsom mini raise is
the critical next step in providing Sacramento with an adequate level
of flood protection.
Next year, the Environment and Public Works Committee, of which I am
a member, will reauthorize the Water Resources and Development Act. I
hope this bill will be included as part that legislation.
______
By Mr. LEAHY:
S. 1770. A bill to implement the International Convention for the
Suppression of Terrorist Bombings to strengthen criminal laws relating
to attacks on places of public use, to implement the International
Convention of the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, to combat
terrorism and defend the Nation against terrorist acts, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Terrorist Bombing
Convention Implementation Act of 2001 and the Suppression of the
Financing of Terrorism Convention Implementation Act of 2001. This bill
would bring the United States into indisputable and immediate
compliance with two important international conventions, which were
signed by the United States and transmitted to the U.S. Senate for
ratification by President Clinton. Both Conventions were entered into
after the terrorist bombings at the United States embassies in Kenya
and Tanzania. The bill also contains a provision which would enhance
the ability of law enforcement authorities to work with their foreign
counterparts in fighting sophisticated international criminal
organizations by sharing wiretap information when appropriate.
The International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist
Bombings, ``Bombing Convention'', was adopted by the United Nations
General Assembly in December 1997 and signed by the United States in
January 1998. In September 1999, it was transmitted to the Senate by
President Clinton for ratification.
The International Convention for the Suppression of Financing
Terrorism, ``Financing Convention'', was adopted by the United Nations
General Assembly in December 1999 and signed by the United States in
January 2000. In October 2000, it was transmitted to the Senate by
President Clinton for ratification.
Under the chairmanship of Senator Biden, the Foreign Relations
Committee has moved expeditiously to report these conventions to the
full Senate. Once ratified, they should be swiftly implemented. The
passage of the proposed implementing legislation which I introduce
today would ensure that the United States is in immediate compliance
with these international obligations relating to terrorism.
Both conventions require signatory nations to adopt criminal laws
prohibiting specified terrorist activities in order to create a regime
of universal jurisdiction over certain crimes. Articles 2 and 4 of the
Bombing Convention require signatory countries to criminalize the
delivery, placement, discharge or detonation of explosives and other
lethal devices, ``in, into, or against'' various defined public places
with the intent to kill, cause serious bodily injury, or extensively
damage such public places. The Bombing Convention also requires that
signatories criminalize aiding and abetting, attempting, or conspiring
to commit such crimes.
Articles 2 and 4 of the Financing Convention require signatory
countries to
[[Page S12451]]
criminalize willfully ``providing or collecting'' funds, directly or
indirectly, with knowledge that they are to be used to carry out acts
which either 1. violate nine enumerated existing treaties, or 2. are
aimed at killing or injuring civilians with the purpose of intimidating
a population or compelling a government to do any act. The Financing
Convention also requires that signatories criminalize aiding and
abetting, attempting, or conspiring to commit such crimes. Signatories
must criminalize such acts under Article 2 whether or not ``the funds
were actually used to carry out'' such an offense.
Both conventions require that signatory nations exercise limited
extraterritorial jurisdiction and extradite or prosecute those who
commit such crimes when found inside their borders. The conventions
also require that signatories ensure that, under their domestic laws,
political, religious, ideological, racial or other similar
considerations are not a justification for committing the enumerated
crimes. Thus, signatory nations will not be able to assert such bases
to deny an extradition request for a covered crime. Finally, Article 4
of each convention requires that signatory states make the covered
offenses ``punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account
the grave nature of [the] offenses.''
This proposed implementation legislation, consistent with the House
version of this bill, H.R. 3275, creates two new crimes, one for
bombings and another for financing terrorist acts, that would track
precisely the language in the treaties, and bring the United States
into undisputed compliance. The bill would also provide
extraterritorial jurisdiction as required by the conventions.
Furthermore the bill would create domestic jurisdiction for these
crimes in limited situations where a national interest is implicated,
while excluding jurisdiction over acts where the convention does not
require such jurisdiction and there is no distinct federal interest
served.
The bill, again consistent with the H.R. 3275, also contains
``ancillary provisions'' that would make the two new crimes predicates
for money laundering charges, wiretaps, RICO charges, an 8-year statute
of limitations, include them as ``federal crimes of terrorism,'' and
make civil asset forfeiture available for the new terrorism financing
crime. Existing laws which relate to similar crimes are predicates for
each of these tools, and providing law enforcement with these ancillary
provisions is both consistent and appropriate.
Neither international convention requires a death penalty provision
for any covered crime, and the Department of Justice has provided a
memorandum to Congress, in response to a request for its views, that
such a provision would not be required to bring the United States into
compliance. This should come as no surprise, given international
sentiment opposing the United States' use of the death penalty in other
contexts. Indeed, the inclusion of a death penalty provision in the
implementing legislation for these conventions could lead to
complications in extraditing individuals to the United States from
countries that do not employ the death penalty. Therefore, unlike the
House version of the implementing legislation, the Senate version
contains no new death penalty provision.
Unlike H.R. 3275, the bill does not contain a third crime for
``concealment'' of material support for terrorists. The Department of
Justice has conceded in the memorandum which it provided to Congress
that this provision is not necessary to bring the United States into
compliance with the conventions. Indeed, in the wake of the passage of
similar provisions in the USA Patriot Act, P.L. No. 107-56, such
legislation is not needed. Furthermore, although a similar provision is
currently set forth in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2339A, the House bill provides a
lower mens rea requirement than that law; an important change which was
not highlighted in the Administration materials provided explaining the
proposal.
Finally, the Senate bill contains an important new tool for
international cooperation between law enforcement which is not included
in H.R. 3275. Currently, there is no clear statutory authority which
allows domestic law enforcement agents to share Title III wiretap
information with foreign law enforcement counterparts. This may create
problems when, for example, the DEA wants to alert Colombian
authorities that a cocaine shipment is about to leave a Colombian port
but the information is derived from a Title III wiretap.
This bill would clarify the authority for sharing wiretap derived
information, specifically in the Title III context. The bill provides a
clear mechanism through which law enforcement may share wiretap
information with foreign law enforcement, while at the same time
ensuring that there are appropriate safeguards to protect this
sensitive information against misuse. It adds a subsection to 18 U.S.C.
Sec. 2517, that permits disclosure of wiretap information to foreign
officials (1) with judicial approval, (2) in such a manner and under
such conditions as a court may direct, and (3) consistent with Attorney
General guidelines on how the information may be used to protect
confidentiality. This clarification will provide an additional tool to
investigate international criminal enterprises and to seek the
assistance of foreign law enforcement in our efforts.
For all of these reasons, I am pleased to introduce this legislation
and I urge its swift enactment into law.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record, along with the sectional analysis.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 1770
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
TITLE I--SUPPRESSION OF TERRORIST BOMBINGS
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Terrorist Bombings
Convention Implementation Act of 2001''.
SEC. 102. BOMBING STATUTE.
(a) Offense.--Chapter 113B of title 18, United States Code,
relating to terrorism, is amended by adding at the end
thereof the following new section:
``Sec. 2332f. Bombings of places of public use, government
facilities, public transportation systems and
infrastructure facilities
``(a) Offenses.--
``(1) In general.--Whoever unlawfully delivers, places,
discharges, or detonates an explosive or other lethal device
in, into, or against a place of public use, a state or
government facility, a public transportation system, or an
infrastructure facility--
``(A) with the intent to cause death or serious bodily
injury, or
``(B) with the intent to cause extensive destruction of
such a place, facility, or system, where such destruction
results in or is likely to result in major economic loss,
shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (c).
``(2) Attempts and conspiracies.--Whoever attempts or
conspires to commit an offense under paragraph (1) shall be
punished as prescribed in subsection (c).
``(b) Jurisdiction.--There is jurisdiction over the
offenses in subsection (a) if--
``(1) the offense takes place in the United States and--
``(A) the offense is committed against another state or a
government facility of such state, including its embassy or
other diplomatic or consular premises of that state;
``(B) the offense is committed in an attempt to compel
another state or the United States to do or abstain from
doing any act;
``(C) at the time the offense is committed, it is
committed--
``(i) on board a vessel flying the flag of another state;
``(ii) on board an aircraft which is registered under the
laws of another state; or
``(iii) on board an aircraft which is operated by the
government of another state;
``(D) a perpetrator is found outside the United States;
``(E) a perpetrator is a national of another state or a
stateless person; or
``(F) a victim is a national of another state or a
stateless person;
``(2) the offense takes place outside the United States
and--
``(A) a perpetrator is a national of the United States or
is a stateless person whose habitual residence is in the
United States;
``(B) a victim is a national of the United States;
``(C) a perpetrator is found in the United States;
``(D) the offense is committed in an attempt to compel the
United States to do or abstain from doing any act;
``(E) the offense is committed against a state or
government facility of the United States, including an
embassy or other diplomatic or consular premises of the
United States;
``(F) the offense is committed on board a vessel flying the
flag of the United States or an aircraft which is registered
under the laws of the United States at the time the offense
is committed; or
[[Page S12452]]
``(G) the offense is committed on board an aircraft which
is operated by the United States.
``(c) Penalties.--Whoever violates this section shall be
imprisoned for any term of years or for life.
``(d) Exemptions to Jurisdiction.--This section does not
apply to--
``(1) the activities of armed forces during an armed
conflict, as those terms are understood under the law of war,
which are governed by that law,
``(2) activities undertaken by military forces of a state
in the exercise of their official duties; or
``(3) offenses committed within the United States, where
the alleged offender and the victims are United States
citizens and the alleged offender is found in the United
States, or where jurisdiction is predicated solely on the
nationality of the victims or the alleged offender and the
offense has no substantial effect on interstate or foreign
commerce.
``(e) Definitions.--As used in this section, the term--
``(1) `serious bodily injury' has the meaning given that
term in section 1365(g)(3) of this title;
``(2) `national of the United States' has the meaning given
that term in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22));
``(3) `state or government facility' includes any permanent
or temporary facility or conveyance that is used or occupied
by representatives of a state, members of Government, the
legislature or the judiciary or by officials or employees of
a state or any other public authority or entity or by
employees or officials of an intergovernmental organization
in connection with their official duties;
``(4) `intergovernmental organization' includes
international organization (as defined in section 1116(b)(5)
of this title);
``(5) `infrastructure facility' means any publicly or
privately owned facility providing or distributing services
for the benefit of the public, such as water, sewage, energy,
fuel, or communications;
``(6) `place of public use' means those parts of any
building, land, street, waterway, or other location that are
accessible or open to members of the public, whether
continuously, periodically, or occasionally, and encompasses
any commercial, business, cultural, historical, educational,
religious, governmental, entertainment, recreational, or
similar place that is so accessible or open to the public;
``(7) `public transportation system' means all facilities,
conveyances, and instrumentalities, whether publicly or
privately owned, that are used in or for publicly available
services for the transportation of persons or cargo;
``(8) `explosive' has the meaning given in section 844(j)
of this title insofar that it is designed, or has the
capability, to cause death, serious bodily injury, or
substantial material damage;
``(9) `other legal device' means any weapon or device that
is designed or has the capability to cause death, serious
bodily injury, or substantial damage to property through the
release, dissemination, or impact of toxic chemicals,
biological agents, or toxins (as those terms are defined in
section 178 of this title) or radiation or radioactive
material;
``(10) `military forces of a state' means the armed forces
of a state which are organized, trained, and equipped under
its internal law for the primary purpose of national defense
or security, and persons acting in support of those armed
forces who are under their formal command, control, and
responsibility;
``(11) `armed conflict' does not include internal
disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated, and
sporadic acts of violence, and other acts of a similar
nature; and
``(12) `state' has the same meaning as that term has under
international law, and includes all political subdivisions
thereof.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 113B of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
``2332f. Bombings of places of public use, government facilities,
public transportation systems and infrastructure
facilities.''.
(c) Disclaimer.--Nothing contained in this section is
intended to affect the applicability of any other Federal or
State law which might pertain to the underlying conduct.
SEC. 103. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Section 102 shall take effect on the date that the
International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist
Bombings enters into force for the United States.
TITLE II--SUPPRESSION OF THE FINANCING OF TERRORISM
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Suppression of the
Financing of Terrorism Convention Implementation Act of
2001''.
SEC. 202. TERRORISM FINANCING STATUTE.
(a) In General.--Chapter 113B of title 18, United States
Code, relating to terrorism, is amended by adding at the end
thereof the following new section:
``Sec. 2339C. Prohibitions against the financing of terrorism
``(a) Offenses.--
``(1) In general.--Whoever, in a circumstance described in
subsection (c), by any means, directly or indirectly,
unlawfully and willfully provides or collects funds with the
intention that such funds be used, or with the knowledge that
such funds are to be used, in full or in part, in order to
carry out--
``(A) an act which constitutes an offense within the scope
of a treaty specified in subsection (e)(7), as implemented by
the United States, or
``(B) any other act intended to cause death or serious
bodily injury to a civilian, or to any other person not
taking an active part in the hostilities in a situation of
armed conflict, when the purpose of such act, by its nature
or context, is to intimidate a population, or to compel a
government or an international organization to do or to
abstain from doing any act,
shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (d)(1).
``(2) Attempts and conspiracies.--Whoever attempts or
conspires to commit an offense under paragraph (1) shall be
punished as prescribed in subsection (d)(1).
``(3) Relationship to predicate act.--For an act to
constitute an offense set forth in this subsection, it shall
not be necessary that the funds were actually used to carry
out a predicate act.
``(b) Jurisdiction.--There is jurisdiction over the
offenses in subsection (a) in the following circumstances--
``(1) the offense takes place in the United States and--
``(A) a perpetrator was a national of another state or a
stateless person;
``(B) on board a vessel flying the flag of another state or
an aircraft which is registered under the laws of another
state at the time the offense is committed;
``(C) on board an aircraft which is operated by the
government of another state;
``(D) a perpetrator is found outside the United States;
``(E) was directed toward or resulted in the carrying out
of a predicate act against--
``(i) a national of another state; or
``(ii) another state or a government facility of such
state, including its embassy or other diplomatic or consular
premises of that state;
``(F) was directed toward or resulted in the carrying out
of a predicate act committed in an attempt to compel another
state or international organization to do or abstain from
doing any act; or
``(G) was directed toward or resulted in the carrying out
of a predicate act--
``(i) outside the United States; or
``(ii) within the United States, and either the offense or
the predicate act was conducted in, or the results thereof
affected, interstate or foreign commerce;
``(2) the offense takes place outside the United States
and--
``(A) a perpetrator is a national of the United States or
is a stateless person whose habitual residence is in the
United States;
``(B) a perpetrator is found in the United States; or
``(C) was directed toward or resulted in the carrying out
of a predicate act against--
``(i) any property that is owned, leased, or used by the
United States or by any department or agency of the United
States, including an embassy or other diplomatic or consular
premises of the United States;
``(ii) any person or property within the United States;
``(iii) any national of the United States or the property
of such national; or
``(iv) any property of any legal entity organized under the
laws of the United States, including any of its States,
districts, commonwealths, territories, or possessions;
``(3) the offense is committed on board a vessel flying the
flag of the United States or an aircraft which is registered
under the laws of the United States at the time the offense
is committed;
``(4) the offense is committed on board an aircraft which
is operated by the United States; or
``(5) the offense was directed toward or resulted in the
carrying out of a predicate act committed in an attempt to
compel the United States to do or abstain from doing any act.
``(c) Penalties.--Whoever violates subsection (a) shall be
fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 20
years, or both.
``(d) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `funds' means assets of every kind, whether
tangible or intangible, movable or immovable, however
acquired, and legal documents or instruments in any form,
including electronic or digital, evidencing title to, or
interest in, such assets, including coin, currency, bank
credits, travelers checks, bank checks, money orders, shares,
securities, bonds, drafts, and letters of credit;
``(2) the term `government facility' means any permanent or
temporary facility or conveyance that is used or occupied by
representatives of a state, members of a government, the
legislature, or the judiciary, or by officials or employees
of a state or any other public authority or entity or by
employees or officials of an intergovernmental organization
in connection with their official duties;
``(3) the term `proceeds' means any funds derived from or
obtained, directly or indirectly, through the commission of
an offense set forth in subsection (a);
``(4) the term `provides' includes giving, donating, and
transmitting;
``(5) the term `collects' includes raising and receiving;
``(6) the term `predicate act' means any act referred to in
subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection (a)(1);
``(7) the term `treaty' means--
[[Page S12453]]
``(A) the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful
Seizure of Aircraft, done at The Hague on December 16, 1970;
``(B) the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts
against the Safety of Civil Aviation, done at Montreal on
September 23, 1971;
``(C) the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of
Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including
Diplomatic Agents, adopted by the General Assembly of the
United Nations on December 14, 1973;
``(D) the International Convention against the Taking of
Hostages, adopted by the General Assembly of the United
Nations on December 17, 1979;
``(E) the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear
Material, adopted at Vienna on March 3, 1980;
``(F) the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of
Violence at Airports Serving International Civil Aviation,
supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, done at
Montreal on February 24, 1988;
``(G) the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts
against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, done at Rome on
March 10, 1988;
``(H) the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts
against the Safety of Fixed Platforms located on the
Continental Shelf, done at Rome on March 10, 1988; or
``(I) the International Convention for the Suppression of
Terrorist Bombings, adopted by the General Assembly of the
United Nations on December 15, 1997;
``(8) the term `intergovernmental organization' includes
international organizations;
``(9) the term `international organization' has the same
meaning as in section 1116(b)(5) of this title;
``(10) the term `armed conflict' does not include internal
disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and
sporadic acts of violence, and other acts of a similar
nature;
``(11) the term `serious bodily injury' has the same
meaning as in section 1365(g)(3) of this title;
``(12) the term `national of the United States' has the
meaning given that term in section 101(a)(22) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)); and
``(13) the term `state' has the same meaning as that term
has under international law, and includes all political
subdivisions thereof.
``(e) Civil Penalty.--In addition to any other criminal,
civil, or administrative liability or penalty, any legal
entity located within the United States or organized under
the laws of the United States, including any of the laws of
its States, districts, commonwealths, territories, or
possessions, shall be liable to the United States for the sum
of at least $10,000, if a person responsible for the
management or control of that legal entity has, in that
capacity, committed an offense set forth in subsection
(a).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 113B of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
``2339C. Prohibitions against the financing of terrorism.''.
(c) Disclaimer.--Nothing contained in this section is
intended to affect the scope or applicability of any other
Federal or State law.
SEC. 203. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Except for paragraphs (1)(D) and (2)(B) of section 2339C(b)
of title 18, United States Code, which shall become effective
on the date that the International Convention for the
Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism enters into force
for the United States, and for the provisions of section
2339C(d)(7)(I) of title 18, United States Code, which shall
become effective on the date that the International
Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing enters
into force for the United States, section 202 shall take
effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
TITLE III--ANCILLARY MEASURES
SEC. 301. ANCILLARY MEASURES.
(a) Wiretap Predicates.--Section 2516(1)(q) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by--
(1) inserting ``2332f,'' after ``2332d,''; and
(2) striking ``or 2339B'' and inserting ``2339B, or
2339C''.
(b) Federal Crime of Terrorism.--Section 2332b(g)(5)(B) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by--
(1) inserting ``2332f (relating to bombing of public places
and facilities),'' after ``2332b (relating to acts of
terrorism transcending national boundaries),''; and
(2) inserting ``2339C (relating to financing of
terrorism,'' before ``or 2340A (relating to torture)''.
(c) Providing Material Support to Terrorists Predicate.--
Section 2339A of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
inserting ``2332f,'' before ``or 2340A''.
(d) Forfeiture of Funds, Proceeds, and Instrumentalities.--
Section 981(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(H) Any property, real or personal, involved in a
violation or attempted violation, or which constitutes or is
derived from proceeds traceable to a violation, of section
2339C of this title.''.
TITLE IV--DISCLOSURE OF INTERCEPTED WIRE, ORAL, OR ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATIONS TO FOREIGN LAW ENFORCEMENT
SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Foreign Law Enforcement
Cooperation Act of 2001''.
SEC. 402. AMENDMENT TO WIRETAP DISCLOSURE STATUTE.
Section 2517 of title 18, United States Code, relating to
the interception of communications, is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(6) Disclosure otherwise prohibited under this chapter of
knowledge of or the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic
communication, or evidence derived therefrom may also be made
when permitted by the court at the request of an attorney for
the government, upon a showing that such information may
disclose a violation of the criminal laws of the United
States or a foreign nation, to an appropriate official of a
foreign nation or subdivision thereof for the purpose of
enforcing such criminal law. If the court orders disclosure
of any matters under this subsection, the disclosure shall be
made in such manner, at such time, and under such conditions
as the court may direct. In making any application under this
subsection, the attorney for the government shall certify
that the official or officials for whom an order permitting
disclosure is sought, have been informed that they may only
make use of the information provided under this subsection
consistent with such guidelines as the Attorney General shall
issue to protect confidentiality.''.
____
Anti-Terrorism Conventions Implementation--Section-by-Section Analysis
TITLE I Suppression of Terrorist Bombings
Title I of this bill implements the International
Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, which
was signed by the United States on January 12, 1998, and was
transmitted to the Senate for its advice and consent to
ratification on September 8, 1999. Twenty-eight States are
currently party to the Convention, which entered into force
internationally on May 23, 2001. The Convention requires
State Parties to combat terrorism by criminalizing certain
attacks on public places committed with explosives or other
lethal devices, including biological, chemical and
radiological devices. The Convention also requires that State
Parties criminalize aiding and abetting, conspiring and
attempting to undertake such terrorist attacks.
Section 101. Short Title
Section 101 provides that title I may be cited as ``The
Terrorist Bombings Convention Implementation Act of 2001.''
Section 102. Bombing Statute
Section 102 adds a new section to the Federal criminal
code, to be codified at 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2332f and entitled
``Bombings of places of public use, government facilities,
public transportation systems and infrastructure
facilities,'' which makes terrorist acts covered by the
Convention a crime. New section 2332f supplements and does
not supplant existing Federal and State laws, and contains
five subsections, which are described below.
Subsection (a) makes it a crime to unlawfully place or
detonate an explosive in certain public places and facilities
with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or
with the intent to cause extensive destruction, where such
destruction results in, or is likely to result in, major
economic loss. Conspiracies and attempts to commit such
crimes are also criminalized. This provision implements
Article 2, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention.
Inclusion of the term ``unlawfully'' in subsection (a),
which is mirrored in Article 2 of the Convention defining the
offenses, is intended to allow what would be considered under
U.S. law as common law defenses. For purposes of subsection
(a), whether a person acts ``unlawfully'' will depend on
whether he is acting within the scope of authority recognized
under and consistent with existing U.S. law, which reflects
international law principles, such as self defense or lawful
use of force by police authorities. This language is not to
be construed as permitting the assertion, as a defense to
prosecution under new section 2332f, that a person
purportedly acted under authority conveyed by any particular
foreign government or official. Such a construction, which
would exempt State-sponsored terrorism, would be clearly at
odds with the purpose of the Convention and this implementing
legislation.
With respect to the mens rea provision of subsection (a),
it is sufficient if the intent is to significantly damage the
targeted public place or facility. Further, for the purpose
of subsection (a), when determining whether the act resulted
in, or was likely to result, major economic loss, the
physical damage to the targeted place or facility may be
considered, as well as other types of economic loss
including, but not limited to, the monetary loss or other
adverse effects resulting from the interruption of its
activities. The adverse effects on non-targeted entities and
individuals, the economy and the government may also be
considered in this determination insofar as they are due to
the destruction caused by the unlawful act.
Subsection (b) establishes the jurisdictional bases for the
covered offenses and includes jurisdiction over perpetrators
of offenses abroad who are subsequently found within the
United States. This provision implements a crucial element of
the Convention (Article 8(1)), which requires all State
Parties to either extradite or prosecute perpetrators of
offenses covered by the Convention who are found within the
jurisdiction of a State Party. While current Federal or
[[Page S12454]]
State criminal laws encompass all the activity prohibited by
the Convention that occurs within the United States,
subsection (b)(1) ensures Federal jurisdiction where there is
a unique Federal interest e.g., a foreign government is the
victim of the crime or the offense is committed in an attempt
to compel the United States to do or abstain from doing any
act.
Subsection (c) establishes the penalties for committing the
covered crimes at any term of years or life. This provision
differs from the Administration proposal, which sought to add
a new death penalty provision for this crime, despite the
fact that such a provision is not required for compliance
under the Convention and may create hurdles in seeking
extradition to the United States under this statute.
Subsection (d) sets forth certain exemptions to
jurisdiction as provided by the Convention. Specifically, the
subsection exempts from jurisdiction activities of armed
forces during an armed conflict and activities undertaken by
military forces of a State in the exercise of their official
duties.
Subsection (e) contains definitions of twelve terms that
are used in the new law. Six of those definitions (``State or
government facility,'' ``infrastructure facility,'' ``place
of public use,'' ``public transportation system,'' ``other
lethal device,'' and ``military forces of a State'') are the
same definitions used in the Convention. Four additional
definitions (``serious bodily injury,'' ``explosive,''
``national of the United States,'' and ``intergovernmental
organization'') are definitions that already exist in other
U.S. statutes. One of those definitions (``armed conflict'')
is defined consistent with an international instrument
relating to the law of war, and a U.S. Understanding to the
Convention that is recommended to be made at the time of U.S.
ratification. The final term (``State'') has the same meaning
as that term has under international law.
Section 103. Effective Date
Since the purpose of Title I is to implement the
Convention, section 103 provides that the new criminal
offense created in Section 102 will not become effective
until the date that the Convention enters into force in the
United States. This will ensure immediate compliance of the
United States with its obligations under the Convention.
Title II. Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism
Title II implements the International Convention for the
Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, which was signed
by the United States on January 10, 2000, and was transmitted
to the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification on
October 12, 2000. The Convention is not yet in force
internationally, but will enter into force 30 days after the
deposit of the 22nd instrument of ratification with the U.N.
Secretary-General. Once in force, the Convention requires
State Parties to combat terrorism by criminalizing certain
financial transactions made in furtherance of various
terrorist activities. The Convention also requires that State
Parties criminalize conspiracies and attempts to undertake
such financing.
Section 201. Short title
Section 201 provides that title II may be cited as ``The
Suppression of Financing of Terrorism Convention
Implementation Act of 2001.''
Section 202. Terrorism Financing Statute
Section 202(a) adds a new section to the Federal criminal
code, to be codified at 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2339C and entitled
``Prohibitions against the financing of terrorism,'' which
makes financial acts covered by the Convention a crime. New
section 2339C supplements and does not supplant existing
Federal and State laws, and contains five subsections, which
are described below.
Subsection (a) makes it a crime to provide or collect funds
with the intention or knowledge that such funds are to be
used to carry out certain terrorist acts. Conspiracies and
attempts to commit these crimes are also criminalized. This
subsection implements Article 2, paragraphs 1, 3, 4 and 5 of
the Convention.
Subsection (b) establishes the jurisdictional bases for the
covered offenses under section 2339C(a) and includes
jurisdiction over perpetrators of offenses abroad who are
subsequently found within the United States. This provision
implements a crucial element of the Convention (Article 10),
which requires all State Parties to either extradite or
prosecute perpetrators of offenses covered by the Convention
who are found within the territory of a State Party. The
structure of this provision is designed to accommodate the
structure of the Convention, which sets forth both mandatory
and permissive bases of jurisdiction, and excludes certain
offenses that lack an international nexus. Some portions of
this provision go beyond the jurisdictional bases required or
expressly permitted under the Convention, however, where
expanded jurisdiction is desirable from a policy perspective
because a unique Federal interest is implicated and is
consistent with the Constitution.
Subsection (c) established the penalties for committing the
covered crimes at imprisonment for not more than 20 years, a
fine under title 18, United States Code, or both. This
penalty is consistent with the current penalties for money
laundering offenses. See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1956.
Subsection (d) contains 13 definitions of terms that are
used in the new law. Two of those definitions (``government
facility,'' and ``proceeds'') are the same definitions used
in the Convention. The definition for ``funds'' is identical
to that contained in the Convention with the exception that
coins and currency are expressly mentioned as money. The
definitions for ``provides'' and ``collects'' reflect the
broad scope of the Convention. The definition for ``predicate
acts'' specifies the activity for which the funds were being
provided or collected. These are the acts referred to in
subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 2339C(a)(1). The
definition of ``treaty'' sets forth the nine international
conventions dealing with counter-terrorism found in the Annex
to the Convention. The term ``intergovernmental
organization,'' which is used in the Convention, is
specifically defined to make clear that it contains within
its ambit existing international organizations. The
definitions for ``international organization,'' ``serious
bodily injury.'' and ``national of the United States''
incorporate definitions for those terms that already exist in
other U.S. statues. One of the definitions (``armed
conflict'') is defined consistent with international
instruments relating to the law of war. The final term
(``State'') has the same meaning as that term has under
international law.
Subsection (e) creates a civil penalty of at least $10,000
payable to the United States, against any legal entity in the
United States, if any person responsible for the management
or control of that legal entity has, in that capacity,
committed an offense set forth in subsection (a) of the new
section 2339C. This civil penalty may be imposed regardless
of whether there is a conviction of such person under
subsection (a), and is in addition to any other criminal,
civil, or administrative liability or penalty allowable under
United States law. Subsection (e) fulfills Article 5 of the
Convention.
Section 203. Effective Date
Section 203 provides that those provisions of the Act that
may be implemented immediately shall become effective upon
enactment. However, two jurisdictional provisions will not
become effective until the Financing Convention enters into
force for the United States. Those provisions are the new 18
U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2339C(b)(1)(D) and (2)(B). In addition, new
18 U.S.C. Sec. 2339C(d)(7)(1), which is a definitional
section specifically linked to the Bombing Convention, will
not become effective until that Convention enters into
effect.
TITLE III. Ancillary Measures
Title III, which is not required by the International
Conventions but will assist in federal enforcement, adds the
new 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2332f and 2339C to several existing
provisions of law.
Section 301. Ancillary Measures
Sections 2332f and 2339C are made predicates under the
wiretap statute (18 U.S.C. Sec. 2516(1)(q)) and under the
statute relating to the provision of material support to
terrorists (18 U.S.C. Sec. 2339A). Sections 2332f and 2339C
are also added to those offenses defined as a ``Federal crime
of terrorism'' under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2332b(g)(5)(B), as
amended by the USA PATRIOT Act. P.L. No. 107-56. In addition,
a provision is added to the civil asset forfeiture statute
that makes this tool available in the case of a violation of
18 U.S.C. Sec. 2339C. These provisions are consistent with
the treatment of similar Federal crimes already in existence.
TITLE IV. Foreign Disclosure of Wiretap Intercepts
This provision, which is not required by the International
Conventions, clarifies that Federal law enforcement
authorities may disclose otherwise confidential wiretap
information to their foreign counterparts with appropriate
judicial approval. This provision is intended to ensure
effective cooperation between domestic and foreign law
enforcement in the investigation and prosecution of
international criminal organizations.
Section 401. Short Title
Section 401 provides that title IV may be cited as ``The
Foreign Law Enforcement Cooperation Act of 2001.''
Section 402. Amendment to Wiretap Statute
Section 402 adds a new subsection to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2517
that governs the disclosure of otherwise confidential
information gathered pursuant to a Title III wiretap. This
provision clarifies the authority of domestic law enforcement
officers to disclose such information as may show a violation
of either domestic or foreign criminal law to foreign law
enforcement officials. The provision requires a court order
prior to making such a disclosure and sets the standards for
the issuance of such an order. It is intended to allow
foreign disclosure only to enforce the criminal laws of
either the United States or the foreign nation. It also
requires that an attorney for the government certify that the
foreign officials who are to receive the wiretap information
have been informed of the Attorney General's guidelines
protecting confidentiality. This provision is intended to
enhance the ability of domestic law enforcement to work with
their foreign counterparts to investigate international
criminal activity at the same time as protecting against
improper use of such wiretap information.
______
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 1773. A bill to designate the Richard J. Guadagno Headquarters and
Visitors Center at Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge, California;
to
[[Page S12455]]
the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today, I am introducing a bill to honor a
California, Richard J. Guadagno, who sadly lost his life on United
Flight 93 when it crashed in Western Pennsylvania on September 11. This
legislation will designate the Headquarters and Visitors Center of the
Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge as the Richard J. Guadagno
Headquarters and Visitors Center. Representative Thompson introduced
this bill in the House.
Mr. Guadagno was the manager of the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife
Refuge and devoted his life to the preservation of wildlife. As refuge
manager at the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge, he lead with a
vision that his colleagues embraced and admired. He always keep the
best interests of the refuge at heart, and he enthusiastically worked
to improve the condition of the refuge. Colleagues in the Fish and
Wildlife Service consistently commended his courage and dedication to
conservation and protecting biological diversity.
Mr. Guadagno began a career in public service as a biologist at the
New Jersey Fish and Game Department and the Great Swamp National
Wildlife Refuge. Before joining the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife
Refuge, he worked at the Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge in
Delaware, Supawna Meadows National Refuge in New Jersey, and the
Baskett Slough and Ankeny National Wildlife Refuges in Oregon.
Richard Guadagno worked his entire life to preserve our Nation's
wildlife. This legislation will ensure that we have a lasting memory of
his work.
______
By Mr. CORZINE (for himself and Mr. Torricelli):
S. 1774. A bill to accord honorary citizenship to the alien victims
of September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States and
to provide for the granting of citizenship to the alien spouses and
children of certain victims of such attacks; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation,
the Terrorist Victim Citizenship Relief Act, that would quickly provide
citizenship relief to hundreds of families adversely affected by the
attacks of September 11, 2001.
Today I am meeting with several of the families of the victims of the
September 11 terrorist attacks to discuss crucial legislation that
would provide them with tax relief in the wake of a national calamity.
They are dealing with a personal anguish that many of us can only
imagine. It is critical that the House of Representatives move swiftly
to pass the tax relief legislation that has already passed the Senate,
by unanimous consent, I might add. But there is more that Congress must
do to account for the shocking and unanticipated failure of the
existing legal framework in the aftermath of September 11. I believe
that the Terrorist Victim Citizenship Relief Act is an important part
of this vitally necessary overhaul.
When American citizens, foreign nationals, and immigrants perished in
the cowardly terrorist acts of September 11, the immigration status of
hundreds of families was thrown into turmoil. The attacks were on
American soil on a major American institution and directed at the
United States. Yet American citizens were not the only victims.
Hundreds of temporary workers and immigrants died shoulder-to-shoulder
with thousands of Americans. Their deaths should be acknowledged and
their families should be honored.
My legislation would bestow honorary citizenship on legal immigrants
and non-immigrants who died in the disaster. This would honor their
spirit and their tremendous sacrifice. Perhaps more important, the bill
would offer citizenship to surviving spouses and children, subject to a
background investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. In the
spirit of fairness and unity, it is appropriate and responsible to
offer the privilege of citizenship to families who lost so much because
of this attack on the United States.
More than 3,000 people lost their lives when four planes crashed on
that fateful September morning. Bodies are still being uncovered, and
the death count has been revised several times. Nationals from some 86
countries perished in the attack, including visitors, non-immigrant
workers, and legal permanent residents.
America was not the only country that suffered losses. There was good
reason the complex was called the World Trade Center. In the September
11 attacks, England lost 75 people, with 60 other British nationals
unaccounted for. India lost more than 100. Germany has 31 confirmed
casualties. Mexico has 19. Colombia has 15. Japan has as many as 21.
Canada, Australia, the Philippines, Ireland, South Africa, and Pakistan
all suffered tragic losses. And there were many more. It would be wrong
to allow the tragic destruction of that fateful day to derail the hopes
of hundreds of immigrant families to secure a better life for
themselves and their children in the United States. And we must
acknowledge the hundreds of families from 86 countries who lost loved
ones in the attack.
In New Jersey, there are dozens of poignant stories of immigrant
families who experienced tragic losses in the World Trade Center
disaster. These innocent people have lost husbands and wives, sons and
daughters, sisters and brothers. Their families have been fractured and
their livelihoods jeopardized. Immigrant families have been forced to
grapple with a bureaucratic nightmare, wading through the myriad of
programs available to the families of victims in an effort to keep
their heads above water. They are often disheartened to learn that,
although their loved ones died in the same attack, non-citizens are
ineligible for many of the programs designed to assist the surviving
families of victims.
Concerns about immigration status have only added to the tremendous
burden immigrant families are already confronting. Take the example of
one New Jersey woman who came to my office seeking assistance. Her
immigration status was directly dependent on the non-immigrant worker
status of her husband who died in the attack. Both of her children were
born in the United States. They are full citizens and are enrolled in
American schools. She wants to continue to raise her children in the
United States. However, under the antiterrorism legislation that
Congress passed this month, this mother of two will be allowed just one
additional year to sort out her affairs before being forced to uproot
her children and return to England.
One year is simply not enough to compensate this innocent woman for
the loss of her husband. My legislation would grant her citizenship
immediately, helping her to avoid the burden of removing her children
from the only country they have ever truly known after having just lost
their father. Granting her citizenship is the right thing to do.
But, this woman's story is one of hundreds. My office has received
numerous inquiries from immigrant families concerned that their
immigration status has been undermined by the death of a loved one.
Many families were in the process of preparing the necessary paperwork
to apply for a change in status, only to have their potential sponsor
die alongside thousands of others in the World Trade Center attack.
This legislation would ensure that those families would be allowed to
become American citizens and avoid undue paperwork and heartache.
More than two months have passed since the United States was brutally
attacked. When perpetrating their horrific crime, the terrorists did
not distinguish between immigrants and American citizens or between
undocumented workers and legal permanent residents. They were attacking
the United States, and, in the process, killed thousands, citizens and
non-citizens alike. In death, citizenship was irrelevant. In death,
they were all unified.
The thousands who died did not know it when they went to work, but
they were at the front lines in the next American war. Their deaths are
a tragedy that every civilized human being wishes could be reversed.
Unfortunately, we cannot turn back the clock. However, we can
acknowledge the tremendous loss of hundreds of immigrant families by
allowing them to take on the full rights and responsibilities of
American citizenship.
I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, and ask
unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
[[Page S12456]]
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1774
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Terrorist Victim Citizenship
Relief Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) On September 11, 2001, the United States suffered a
series of attacks which led to the deaths of thousands of
people.
(2) Hundreds of foreign nationals perished in the attacks
on the American institutions on American soil.
(3) At that time, the Immigration and Naturalization
Service was processing applications for adjustment in
immigration status for immigrants who perished in the
attacks.
(4) The immigrant or nonimmigrant status of many immigrant
families depends on the sponsorship of those who perished.
(5) The Immigration and Naturalization Service has publicly
stated that it does not intend to take action against foreign
nationals whose immigration status is in jeopardy as a direct
result of the attack.
(6) Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization
Service James Ziglar stated that ``the Immigration and
Naturalization Service will exercise its discretion toward
families of victims during this time of mourning and
readjustment''.
(7) Only Congress has the authority to change immigration
law to address unanticipated omissions in existing law to
account for the unique circumstances surrounding the events
of September 11, 2001.
SEC. 3. DECEASED ALIEN VICTIMS OF TERRORIST ATTACKS DEEMED TO
BE UNITED STATES CITIZENS.
Notwithstanding title III of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), and except as
provided in section 5, each alien who died as a result of a
September 11, 2001, terrorist attack against the United
States, shall, as of that date, be considered to be an
honorary citizen of the United States if the alien held
lawful status under the immigration laws of the United States
as of that date.
SEC. 4. CITIZENSHIP ACCORDED TO ALIEN SPOUSES AND CHILDREN OF
CERTAIN VICTIMS OF TERRORIST ATTACKS.
Notwithstanding title III of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), and except as
provided in section 5, an alien spouse or child of an
individual who was lawfully present in the United States and
who died as a result of a September 11, 2001, terrorist
attack against the United States shall be entitled to
naturalization as a citizen of the United States upon being
administered the oath of renunciation and allegiance in an
appropriate ceremony pursuant to section 337 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, without regard to the
current status of the alien spouse or child under the
immigration laws of the United States, if the spouse or child
applies to the Attorney General for naturalization not later
than two years after the date of enactment of this Act. The
Attorney General shall record the date of naturalization of
any person granted naturalization under this section as being
September 10, 2001.
SEC. 5. EXCEPTIONS.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, an alien
may not be naturalized as a citizen of the United States, or
afforded honorary citizenship, under this Act if the alien
is--
(1) inadmissible under paragraph (2) or (3) of section
212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, or deportable
under paragraph (2) or (4) of section 237(a) of that Act,
including any terrorist perpetrator of a September 11, 2001,
terrorist attack against the United States; or
(2) a member of the family of a person described in
paragraph (1).
______
By Mr. CORZINE (for himself and Mr. Torricelli):
S. 1776. A bill to provide for the naturalization of Deena Gilbey; to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce private
legislation granting citizenship to Deena Gilbey, a woman profoundly
affected by the disaster of September 11. Since then, Deena has endured
a tremendous hardship, a hardship that has been compounded by mounting
paperwork and an unyielding, dispassionate bureaucratic process.
Without swift congressional action, Deena, a British national, will be
forced to uproot her two children and remove them from the only country
they have ever known just one year from the death of their father.
Deena Gilbey first moved to the United States in July 1993 when Paul,
her husband was transferred from London to the New York office of Euro
Bank. They spent the eight years that followed building a life in the
United States in suburban Chatham Township. They began to raise two
children, Max, 7, and Mason, 3, both of whom were born in the United
States. Although the children are both U.S. citizens, Deena is not and
was present in the county as part of her husband's H1-B work visa. Both
Deena and Paul were attempting to become citizens when disaster struck.
For all Americans, September 11 will be remembered with a deep
sadness. However, that national anguish took on a personal quality for
the Gibleys when the family learned that Paul, like so many others, was
lost beneath the rubble of the World Trade Center.
With the death of Paul, Deena was forced to face up to the difficult
realization that her own lawful status in the United States was in
jeopardy. For the first several weeks after he died, it was unclear
whether Deena would be allowed to leave the country and spend time with
family or even work to support her children. The anti-terrorism bill
that passed the Congress earlier this year was a step in the right
direction. But it did not go far enough. It did not give Deena and
Paul's children the stability they deserve.
The anti-terrorism legislation that passed the Congress earlier this
year allowed Deena to remain in the United States just one additional
year to sort out her affairs. She had just one year to wrap up the life
she and Paul had made together in the United States. She had just one
year to prepare her children for the trauma of moving to a foreign
country and of leaving the only country that had ever been home. One
additional year is simply not enough.
When Paul died in the attack on the World Trade Center, he died with
thousands of Americans. Before that, he contributed to the American
economy for nearly a decade, paying taxes and lending his expertise in
a highly specialized field. On that fateful day, he embodied the
American spirit when he assisted coworkers in escaping the fire and
destruction of ground zero.
Paul Gilbey was killed in a callous and cowardly attack on America.
In the aftermath of this tragic event, we have a responsibility to help
ensure that stability returns to the lives of the children he left
behind.
Giving citizenship to Deena Gilbey is our patriotic responsibility. I
hope this Congress will acknowledge her sacrifice and allow her and her
children to remain in the United States.
I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and ask
unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1776
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. NATURALIZATION OF DEENA GILBEY.
Notwithstanding title III of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) Deena Gilbey shall be
entitled to naturalization as a citizen of the United States
upon being administered the oath of renunciation and
allegiance in an appropriate ceremony pursuant to section 337
of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Upon naturalization
of Deena Gilbey under this Act, the Attorney General shall
record the date of naturalization of Deena Gilbey as being
September 10, 2001.
____________________