[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.

                          ____________________