[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 113 (Tuesday, September 10, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8458-S8468]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Hutchinson, Mrs. 
        Hutchison, Mr. Sessions, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Thurmond, Mr. 
        Grassley, and Ms. Landrieu):
  S. 2917. A bill to enhance national efforts to investigate, 
prosecute, and prevent crimes against children by increasing 
investigatory tools, criminal penalties, and resources and by extending 
existing laws; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, this summer we were all devastated by the 
repeated news flashes reporting violent crimes against children across 
our Nation. In June, Elizabeth Smart, a 14 year old from my home town 
of Salt Lake City, UT, was kidnapped at gun point from her home. To 
date, neither Elizabeth nor her abductor has been found.
  In July, five-year-old Samantha Runnion was kidnapped while playing 
with a neighborhood friend down the street from her home in Stanton, 
CA. The following day, her body was found along a highway, nearly 50 
miles from her home. California authorities have charged a man, who 
reportedly was acquitted just 2 years ago of molesting two girls under 
the age of 14, with Runnion's abduction, sexual assault and murder.
  Elizabeth Smart and Samantha Runnion are just two, among many, recent 
child victims. The list of tragic cases goes on and on.
  These horrific incidents illustrate the need for comprehensive 
legislation, at both the State and national level, to protect our 
children. We need to ensure that our law enforcement officers have all 
the tools and resources they need to find, prosecute, and punish those 
who commit crimes against our children.
  Earlier this year, with Senators Leahy, Sessions, Hutchinson, 
Brownback, Edwards and DeWine, I introduced S. 2520, the ``PROTECT Act 
of 2002''. This bill plugged a loophole that existed as a result of a 
recent Supreme Court decision which struck down key provisions in the 
``Child Pornography Prevention Act,'' which I authored and Congress 
passed in 1996. Among other things, the PROTECT Act prevents child 
pornographers from escaping prosecution by claiming that their sexually 
explicit material did not involve real children. Where child 
pornography includes persons who appear virtually indistinguishable 
from actual minors, prosecutions can still occur unless a defendant 
shows that the pornography did not involve a minor.
  Today I rise to introduce with my colleagues, Senators Feinstein, 
Hutchinson, Hutchison, Sessions, DeWine, Thurmond and Grassley, the 
``Comprehensive Child Protection Act of 2002,'' which enhances child 
crime prosecutions, investigatory tools, penalties and resources in a 
variety of ways. For the record, I will submit a section by section 
summary of the bill, but allow me to comment briefly on some of the 
bill's specific provisions.
  First, and most significantly, the bill creates a National Crimes 
Against Children Response Center. The recent series of tragic events 
involving child victims has convinced me that we need to take a more 
proactive approach to prevent, deter and prosecute child predators 
of all types, abusers, molesters, pornographers and traffickers. And at 
the same time, we need to provide our children, the vulnerable victims 
of such predators, with the support systems they need to recover fully 
from such horrendous crimes and to assist law enforcement in 
effectively investigating and prosecuting these crimes.

  To this end, our bill directs the Federal Bureau of Investigation to 
establish a National Response Center whose primary mission will be to 
develop a comprehensive and rapid response plan to reported crimes 
involving the victimization of children. While the Center is to be 
established by the FBI in consultation with the Deputy Assistant 
Attorney General for the new Department of Justice Crimes Against 
Children Section created by the bill, it will integrate the resources 
and expertise of other Federal, State, and local law enforcement 
agencies, as well as other child services professionals. By forming and 
training rapid response teams comprised of Federal, State and local 
prosecutors, investigators, victim witness specialists, mental health 
and other child services professionals, the Center will greatly enhance 
our national response and prevention efforts. The combination of 
valuable expertise and resources provided by such multi-jurisdictional 
and multi-disciplinary partnerships will increase the likelihood that 
law enforcement authorities will successfully identify, prosecute and 
punish child predators, and that child services professionals will 
provide child victims with much needed support.
  Second, this legislation tasks the new Crimes Against Children 
Section with creating an Internet site that will consolidate sex 
offender information which States currently release under the Federal 
reporting act. The bill also directs States that have not developed 
Internet sites to do so. The creation of a national Internet site will 
enable concerned citizens to find in one, easily accessible place, 
critical information about sexual predators.
  Currently, all 50 States have statutes that require sex offenders to 
register and share information with the United States Attorney General 
through the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and over 30 States make 
offender information available to the public on the Internet. A 
national Internet site will enhance the public's ability to find and 
access information that is already available in the public record, and 
will protect citizens in states where sex offenders travel or move, 
often to avoid detection. In short, the national Internet site will 
provide parents and other concerned citizens with essential information 
about the whereabouts and backgrounds of child abusers, so they can 
take all necessary steps to protect our Nation's children.
  Third, the bill enhances the ability of federal prosecutors to bring 
and successfully prosecute cases involving children predators in 
several ways:
  The legislation extends the statute of limitations period that 
applies to offenses involving the sexual or physical abuse of children 
by permitting such cases to be brought up until the date the minor 
reaches age 35, as opposed to age 25 as the law currently provides. I 
believe that there should rarely, if ever, be a time when we say to a 
victim who has suffered as a child at the hands of an abuser: you have 
identified your abuser; you have proven the crime; yet the abuser will 
remain free because you, the victim, waited too long to come forward. 
Our criminal justice system should be ready to adjudicate all 
meritorious claims of child abuse. Abusers should not benefit from the 
lasting psychological harms they inflict on innocent children. This 
provision is meant to recognize that the arm of the law should be long 
in the prosecution of crimes of this heinous nature.

  The bill also amends an existing Federal evidentiary rule, Federal 
Rule of Evidence 414, to permit the admission into evidence of prior 
offenses involving child molestation or the possession of sexually 
explicit materials containing minors. The current evidentiary rule 
permits such evidence to be admitted only where the victim is under 14 
years of age. This amendment extends the rule to apply to any victim 
who is under 18 years of age at the time of the offense. This amendment 
also makes clear that even where an individual possesses what may be 
virtual, as opposed to actual, child pornography, such evidence is 
admissible under Rule 414.
  This legislation limits the scope of the common law marital 
privileges by making them inapplicable in a criminal case in which a 
spouse stands accused of abusing a child in the home. Where a spouse is 
charged with abusing a child of either spouse, or a child under the 
custody or control of either spouse, neither the abuser nor his or her 
spouse should be permitted to invoke a marital privilege to avoid 
providing critical evidence in a criminal proceeding.
  Fourth, the bill enhances tools that are used to investigate child 
crimes. It expands the class of offenses that are included in the 
Combined DNA Index System, CODIS, by adding to the system all federal 
felony offenses and

[[Page S8459]]

other designated federal and state sexual offenses that subject Federal 
offenders to sex registration requirements. This extension will 
increase law enforcement's ability to solve crimes where DNA evidence 
is found.
  The bill also extends the Federal wiretap statute by adding 
additional sex exploitation offenses, as well as sex trafficking and 
other interstate sex offenses, to the statute's list of predicate 
offenses. As we all know, the Internet is becoming an increasingly 
popular means by which sexual predators make contact with child 
victims. Predators frequently initiate relationships with children 
online, but later seek to make personal contact with the child, either 
over the telephone or through face to face meetings. But as the law 
exists today, law enforcement authorities are restricted in their 
ability to investigate such predators. This amendment will not only aid 
investigators in obtaining evidence of such crimes, it will also help 
stop these crimes before a sexual predator makes contact with a child. 
To obtain a wiretap, law enforcement authorities will still need to 
meet the strict statutory guidelines of the wiretap statute and obtain 
authorization from a court. Thus, the legislation will not undermine 
the legitimate expectations of privacy of law-abiding Americans.
  Fifth, this legislation will strengthen criminal penalties by 
extending the supervised release period that applies to child and sex 
offenders, increasing the maximum penalties that apply to offenses 
involving transportation for illegal sexual activity, and directing the 
United States Sentencing Commission to consider enhancing the 
sentencing guidelines that apply to criminal offenses with which child 
predators are frequently charged.
  In particular, the bill grants Federal judges the discretion to 
impose up to lifetime periods of supervised release for individuals who 
are convicted of sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, transportation for 
illegal sexual activity, and sex trafficking offenses. Under current 
law, a judge can impose no more than 5 years of supervised release for 
a serious felony, and no more than 3 years for a lesser categorized 
offense. This amendment does not require the judge to impose a period 
of supervised release longer than 5 years; it simply authorizes a judge 
to do so where the nature and circumstances of the case justify a 
longer supervised release period.
  In my view, if there is any class of offenders on which our criminal 
justice system should keep a close eye, it is sexual predators. It is 
well documented that sex offenders are more likely than other violent 
criminals to commit future crimes. And if there is any class of victims 
we should seek to protect from repeat offenders, it is those who have 
been sexually assaulted. They suffer tremendous physical, emotional and 
psychological injuries. By ensuring that egregious sexual offenders are 
supervised for longer periods of time, we will increase the chance that 
they will be deterred from and punished for future criminal acts.
  In addition to increasing the maximum penalties that apply to certain 
offenses that involve the trafficking of children or other interstate 
elements, the bill directs the United States Sentencing commission to 
review the sentencing guidelines that apply to various federal offenses 
that are used to prosecute kidnappers, sexual abusers and exploiters to 
ensure that the sentences for these crimes are sufficiently severe 
where aggravating circumstances exist, such as where the victim was 
abducted, injured, killed, or abused by more than one person.
  The ``Comprehensive Child Protection Act of 2002'' will enhance our 
ability to combat crimes against children, but it is by no means an 
end. Congress needs to continue to explore additional ways in which we 
can improve our ability on a national level to protect our children. 
Our children fall victim to many of the same crimes we face as adults, 
and they are also subject crimes that are specific to childhood, like 
child abuse and neglect. The effects of such heinous crimes are 
devastating and often lead to an intergenerational cycle of violence 
and abuse.
  I want to do all I can to ensure that we devote the same intensity of 
purpose to crimes committed against children, as we do to other serious 
criminal offenses, such as those involving terrorism. We have no 
greater resource than our children. I invite the Department of Justice, 
the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other entities and 
professionals who are charged with protecting our children to work with 
me to improve our federal laws and to assist States in doing the same.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a section-by-
section summary analysis of S. 2917 be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2917

       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 ``Comprehensive Child 
     Protection Act of 2002''.

     SEC. 2. NATIONAL CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN RESPONSE CENTER.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 33 of title 28, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 540A. National Crimes Against Children Response Center

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the 
     Federal Bureau of Investigation a National Crimes Against 
     Children Response Center (referred to in this section as the 
     `Center').
       ``(b) Mission.--The mission of the Center is to develop a 
     national response plan model that--
       ``(1) provides a comprehensive, rapid response plan to 
     report crimes involving the victimization of children; and
       ``(2) protects children from future crimes.
       ``(c) Duties.--To carry out the mission described in 
     subsection (b), the Director of the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation shall--
       ``(1) consult with the Deputy Assistant Attorney General 
     for the Crimes Against Children Office and other child crime 
     coordinators within the Department of Justice;
       ``(2) consolidate units within the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation that investigate crimes against children, 
     including abductions, abuse, and sexual exploitation 
     offenses;
       ``(3) develop a comprehensive, rapid response plan for 
     crimes involving children that incorporates resources and 
     expertise from Federal, State, and local law enforcement 
     agencies and child services professionals;
       ``(4) develop a national strategy to prevent crimes against 
     children that shall include a plan to rescue children who are 
     identified in child pornography images as victims of abuse;
       ``(5) create regional rapid response teams composed of 
     Federal, State, and local prosecutors, investigators, victim 
     witness specialists, mental health professionals, and other 
     child services professionals;
       ``(6) implement an advanced training program that will 
     enhance the ability of Federal, State, and local entities to 
     respond to reported crimes against children and protect 
     children from future crimes; and
       ``(7) conduct outreach efforts to raise awareness and 
     educate communities about crimes against children.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated for the Federal Bureau of Investigation 
     such sums as necessary for fiscal year 2003 to carry out this 
     section.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
     sections for chapter 33 of title 28, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

``540A. National Crimes Against Children Response Center.''.

     SEC. 3. INTERNET AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION CONCERNING 
                   REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS.

       (a) In General.--Section 170101(e)(2) of the Violent Crime 
     Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 
     14071(e)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
     ``The release of information under this paragraph shall 
     include the maintenance of an Internet site containing such 
     information that is available to the public.''.
       (b) Compliance Date.--Each State shall implement the 
     amendment made by this section within 3 years after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, except that the Attorney General 
     may grant an additional 2 years to a State that is making a 
     good faith effort to implement the amendment made by this 
     section.
       (c) National Internet Site.--The Crimes Against Children 
     Section of the Department of Justice shall create a national 
     Internet site that links all State Internet sites established 
     pursuant to this section.

     SEC. 4. DNA EVIDENCE.

       Section 3(d) of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 
     2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135a(d)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Qualifying Federal Offense.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term `qualifying Federal offense' means--
       ``(1) any offense classified as a felony under Federal law;
       ``(2) any offense under chapter 109A of title 18, United 
     States Code;
       ``(3) any crime of violence as that term is defined in 
     section 16 of title 18, United States Code; or
       ``(4) any offense within the scope of section 4042(c)(4) of 
     title 18, United States Code.''.

[[Page S8460]]

     SEC. 5. INCREASE OF STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR CHILD ABUSE 
                   OFFENSES.

       Section 3283 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``25 years'' and inserting ``35 years''.

     SEC. 6. ADMISSIBILITY OF SIMILAR CRIME EVIDENCE IN CHILD 
                   MOLESTATION CASES.

       Rule 414 of the Federal Rules of Evidence is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``or possession of 
     sexually explicit materials containing apparent minors'' 
     after ``or offenses of child molestation''; and
       (2) in subsection (d), by striking ``fourteen'' and 
     inserting ``18''.

     SEC. 7. MARITAL COMMUNICATION AND ADVERSE SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 119 of title 28, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 1826 the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 1826A. Marital communications and adverse spousal 
       privilege

       ``The confidential marital communication privilege and the 
     adverse spousal privilege shall be inapplicable in any 
     Federal proceeding in which a spouse is charged with a crime 
     against--
       ``(1) a child of either spouse; or
       ``(2) a child under the custody or control of either 
     spouse.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
     sections for chapter 119 of title 28, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1826 
     the following:

``1826A. Marital communications and adverse spousal privilege.''.

     SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS IN 
                   THE INVESTIGATION OF SEXUAL CRIMES AND OTHER 
                   CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN.

       Section 2516(1)(c) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``section 1591 (sex trafficking of 
     children or by force, fraud, or coercion)'' after ``section 
     1511 (obstruction of State or local law enforcement),''; and
       (2) by inserting ``section 2251A (selling or buying of 
     children), section 2252A (relating to material constituting 
     or containing child pornography), section 2260 (production of 
     sexually explicit depictions of a minor for importation into 
     the United States), sections 2421, 2422, 2423, and 2425 
     (relating to transportation for illegal sexual activity and 
     related crimes),'' after ``sections 2251 and 2252 (sexual 
     exploitation of children),''.

     SEC. 9. INCREASE OF MAXIMUM SUPERVISED RELEASE TERM FOR SEX 
                   OFFENDERS.

       Section 3583 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(k) Supervised Release Terms for Sex Offenders.--
     Notwithstanding subsection (b), the authorized term of 
     supervised release for any offense under chapter 109A, 110, 
     117, section 1201 involving a minor victim, or section 1591 
     is any term of years or life.''.

     SEC. 10. INCREASE OF MAXIMUM PENALTIES FOR SEX OFFENSES.

       Title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in section 1591(b)(2), by striking ``20 years'' and 
     inserting ``40 years'';
       (2) in section 2421, by striking ``10 years'' and inserting 
     ``20 years'';
       (3) in section 2422--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``10 years'' and 
     inserting ``20 years''; and
       (B) in subsection (b), by striking ``15 years'' and 
     inserting ``30 years'';
       (4) in section 2423--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``15 years'' and 
     inserting ``30 years''; and
       (B) in subsection (b), by striking ``15 years'' and 
     inserting ``30 years''; and
       (5) in section 2425, by striking ``5 years'' and inserting 
     ``10 years''.

     SEC. 11. DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CRIMES AGAINST 
                   CHILDREN.

       (a) Establishment of Position.--
       (1) In general.--Chapter 31 of title 28, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 507 the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 507A. Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Crimes 
       Against Children

       ``(a) The Attorney General shall appoint a Deputy Assistant 
     Attorney General for Crimes Against Children.
       ``(b) The Deputy Assistant Attorney General shall be the 
     head of the Crimes Against Children Section (CACS) of the 
     Department of Justice.
       ``(c) The duties of the Deputy Assistant Attorney General 
     shall include the following:
       ``(1) To prosecute cases involving crimes against children.
       ``(2) To advise Federal prosecutors and law enforcement 
     personnel regarding crimes against children.
       ``(3) To provide guidance and assistance to Federal, State, 
     and local law enforcement agencies and personnel, and 
     appropriate foreign entities, regarding responses to crimes 
     against children.
       ``(4) To propose and comment upon legislation concerning 
     crimes against children.
       ``(5) Such other duties as the Attorney General may 
     require, including duties carried out by the head of the 
     Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section and the Terrorism 
     and Violent Crime Section of the Department of Justice.''.
       (2) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of 
     sections for chapter 31 of title 28, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 507 
     the following:

``507A. Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Crimes Against 
              Children.''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations for CACS.--There is 
     authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Justice 
     for fiscal year 2003, such sums as necessary to carry out 
     this section.

     SEC. 12. DIRECTIVE TO SENTENCING COMMISSION.

       (a) In General.--Pursuant to its authority under section 
     994(p) of title 18, United States Code, and in accordance 
     with this section, the United States Sentencing Commission 
     shall review the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and policy 
     statements relating to child abuse and exploitation offenses, 
     including United States Sentencing Guideline sections 2A3.1, 
     2A3.2, 2A3.3, 2A3.4, 2A4.1, 2G1.1, 2G2.1, 2G2.2, 2G2.3, 
     2G2.4, and 2G3.1 to determine whether those sections are 
     sufficiently severe.
       (b) Considerations.--In reviewing the Federal Sentencing 
     Guidelines in accordance with subsection (a), the United 
     States Sentencing Commission shall consider whether the 
     guidelines are adequate where--
       (1) the victim had not attained the age of 12 years, or had 
     not attained the age of 16 years;
       (2) the victim died, or sustained permanent, life-
     threatening or serious injury as a result of the criminal 
     act;
       (3) the victim was abducted;
       (4) the victim was abused by more than 1 participant;
       (5) the offense involved more than 1 victim;
       (6) the ability of the victim to appraise or control his or 
     her conduct was substantially impaired;
       (7) the offense involved a large number of visual 
     depictions, including multiple images of the same victim; and
       (8) the offense involved material that portrays sadistic or 
     masochistic conduct or other depictions of violence.
                                  ____


             ``Comprehensive Child Protection Act of 2002''

       Section 1. Title--The Comprehensive Child Protection Act of 
     2002.
       Section 2. Creates a National Crimes Against Children 
     Response Center--The bill directs the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation to establish a National Crimes Against Children 
     Response Center whose primary mission will be to develop a 
     comprehensive and rapid response plan to reported crimes 
     involving the victimization of children. While the National 
     Response Center is to be established by the FBI, in 
     consultation with the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for 
     the Crimes Against Children Office, it will integrate the 
     resources and expertise of other Federal, State and local law 
     enforcement agencies, as well as other child services 
     professionals. By creating and training rapid response teams 
     comprised of Federal, State and local prosecutors, 
     investigators, victim witness specialists, mental health and 
     other child services professionals, the Center will greatly 
     enhance our national efforts to protect our children from 
     child predators.
       Section 3. Creates a National Internet Site for Sexual 
     Offender Information--The legislation directs the new 
     Department of Justice Crimes Against Children Office to 
     create an Internet site that consolidates sex offender 
     information which States currently release under the federal 
     reporting act. The bill also directs States that have not 
     developed Internet sites to do so.
       Currently, all 50 states have registration statutes that 
     require sex offenders to register and to share information 
     with the United States Attorney General through the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation, and over 30 States make offender 
     information available to the public on the Internet. The 
     creation of a national Internet site will enable concerned 
     citizens to find in one, easily accessible place, critical 
     information about sexual predators.
       Section 4. Expands the DNA Analysis and Backlog Elimination 
     Act, 42 U.S.C. 14135a(d), by increasing the categories of 
     offenses that are included in the system of convicted 
     offender DNA profiles, the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS). 
     The bill expands the class of offenses that are included in 
     CODIS by adding to the system all Federal felonies and 
     additional offenses that subject Federal offenders to sex 
     registration requirements.
       Currently, the DNA Analysis and Backlog Elimination Act 
     includes only select Federal offenses in CODIS. The 
     successful experience of a large number of States which 
     authorize the collection of DNA samples from all felony 
     offenders illustrated the merit of this extension. In these 
     States, numerous crimes have been solved based on DNA 
     evidence obtained from nonviolent felony offenders. The 
     addition of other offenses that subject Federal offenders to 
     sex registration requirements will further enhance 
     enforcement's ability to solve crimes.
       Section 5. Extends the Statute of Limitations Period for 
     Child Abuse Offenses contained in 18 U.S.C. 3283 to allow 
     prosecutions of offenses involving the sexual or physical 
     abuse of a child to be brought until the child reaches the 
     age of 35. Currently, such prosecutions may be brought until 
     the child is 25 years of age.
       This amendment is intended to recognize that the arm of the 
     law should be long in the prosecution of child abuse 
     offenses. Too often victims of such crimes do not come 
     forward until years after the abuse because they fear their 
     disclosures will lead to further humiliation, shame, and even 
     ostracism. This amendment will reduce the number of 
     meritorious child abuse cases that are barred from 
     prosecution on statute of limitations grounds.

[[Page S8461]]

       Section 6. Expands Rule 414 of the Federal Rules of 
     Evidence which allows evidence of a defendant's prior acts of 
     child molestation to be admitted in a criminal child 
     molestation case.
       The amendment extends the definition of ``child'' contained 
     in Rule 414 to include any person below the age of 18--rather 
     than age 14, as the Rule now reads. The amendment also makes 
     clear that where a defendant previously possessed what may 
     have been virtual, as opposed to actual, child pornography, 
     such evidence is admissible under Rule 414. Like the 
     possession of actual child pornography, the possession of 
     virtual child pornography is highly probative evidence that 
     should be admissible in a case of child molestation or 
     exploitation.
       Section 7. Precludes the Assertion of a Marital Privilege 
     in a Criminal Child Abuse Case in which a spouse stands 
     accused of abusing a child in the home. In such a case, 
     neither the abuser nor his or her spouse should be permitted 
     to invoke a marital privilege to preclude critical testimony 
     relating to the child abuse.
       Section 8. Expands the Federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. 
     2516(1)(c), by adding as predicate offenses to the statute, 
     sex trafficking, sex exploitation, and other interstate sex 
     offenses. Currently, the wiretap statute authorizes the 
     interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications in 
     the investigation of just two sexual exploitation of children 
     crimes. This expanded tool will be particularly useful to 
     investigators who track sexual predators and child 
     portnographers.
       To obtain a wiretap, law enforcement authorities will still 
     need to meet the strict statutory guidelines of the wiretap 
     statute and obtain authorization from a court. Thus, the 
     legislation will not undermine the legitimate expectations of 
     privacy of law-abiding Americans.
       Section 9. Extends the Maximum Supervised Release Period 
     that Applies to Sexual Offenders by granting Federal judges 
     the discretion to impose up to lifetime periods of supervised 
     release for individuals who are convicted of sexual abuse, 
     sexual exploitation, transportation for illegal sexual 
     activity, or sex trafficking offenses.
       Currently, under the general supervised release statute, 18 
     U.S.C. 3583, a judge can impose no more than 5 years of 
     supervised release for a serious felony, and no more than 3 
     years for a lesser categorized offense. This amendment will 
     not require judges to impose a period of supervised release 
     longer than 5 years; it simply authorizes them to do so where 
     the judge sees fit based on the nature and circumstances of 
     the particular case.
       Section 10. Increases the Maximum Penalties that Apply to 
     Certain Sexual Related Offenses by doubling the maximum 
     penalties for sexual related offenses involving the 
     trafficking of children and other interstate elements. 
     Stiffer penalties are needed to punish and deter individuals 
     who commit such offenses.
       Section 11. Creates a Crimes Against Children Section at 
     the Department of Justice--The bill also directs the Attorney 
     General to appoint a Deputy Assistant Attorney General to 
     oversee a new section at the Department of Justice designated 
     to focus solely on crimes against children. Among other 
     things, the new section will be tasked with prosecuting 
     crimes against children, providing guidance and assistance to 
     Federal State, and local law enforcement agencies and 
     personnel who handle such cases, coordinating efforts with 
     international law enforcement agencies to combat crimes 
     against children, and acting as a liaison with the 
     legislative and judicial branches of government to ensure 
     that adequate attention and resources are focused on 
     protecting our children from predators of all types.
       Section 12. Directs the Sentencing Commission to review the 
     guidelines that apply to child abuse and exploitation 
     offenses to determine whether they are sufficiently severe. 
     In so doing, the Sentencing Commission shall consider whether 
     the guidelines are adequate where aggravated circumstances 
     exist: the victim had not attained the age of twelve years, 
     or had not attained the age of sixteen years; the victim 
     died, sustained permanent, life-threatening, or serious 
     injury as a result of the criminal act; the victim was 
     abducted; the victim was abused by more than one individual; 
     the offense involved more than one victim; the offense 
     involved a large number of visual depictions, including 
     multiple images of the same victim; or the offense involved 
     material that portrays sadistic or masochistic conduct or 
     other depictions of violence.

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague from Utah, 
Senator Hatch, to introduce the ``Comprehensive Child Protection Act of 
2002''--a bill to help protect our nation's children from child 
molestation and other forms of abuse.
  Sexual abuse of children is a pervasive and extremely troubling 
problem in the United States. I learned that over 25 years ago when I 
was serving as the Country Prosecutor in Greene County, Ohio. I saw 
what this kind of abuse does to innocent, helpless children and how 
pervasive the crimes are in our communities. In fact, according to the 
Congressional Research Service, one of every three girls and one of 
every seven boys will be sexually abused before they reach the age of 
18.
  Our local police and prosecutors are on the front line in the fight 
against these criminals, and they deserve credit and our thanks for 
their hard work. For example, in Greene County recently, a number of 
child pornographers were identified and prosecuted when local law 
enforcement carried out a successful Internet sting operation.
  Despite successes like this, however, the data suggest that law 
enforcement is fighting an uphill battle. Last year, there were over 
5,400 registered sex offenders living in my home state of Ohio--an 
increase of 319 percent over 1998.
  Equally troubling, many child molesters prey upon dozens of victims 
before they are reported to law enforcement. Some evade detection for 
so long because many children never report the abuse. According to the 
Bureau of Justice Statistics, between 60 percent and 80 percent of 
child molestations and 69 percent of sexual assaults are never reported 
to the police. Of reported sexual assaults, 71 percent of the victims 
are children, according to the Congressional Research Service.
  For these reasons, it is vitally important that Congress do 
everything in its power to support law enforcement in its efforts to 
protect our nation's most vulnerable citizens. Enacting the 
``Comprehensive Child Protection Act of 2002'' would be a step in the 
right direction. By enacting this measure, we would help protect our 
children from sexual predators, pornographers, and others who abuse 
children. Among its major provisions, this legislation would:

       1. Direct the FBI to establish a new center that creates 
     and trains ``rapid response teams'' (composed of prosecutors, 
     investigators, and others) to respond promptly to reported 
     crimes against children;
       2. Establish a national Internet site that would make sex 
     offender information available to the public in one, easy to 
     access place. Currently, about 30 states make offender 
     information available to the public online;
       3. Authorize the collection of DNA samples from registered 
     sex offenders and the inclusion of these DNA samples in the 
     Combined DNA Index System, or ``CODIS;''
       4. Permit the prosecution of child abuse offenses until a 
     victim reaches the age of 35 (as opposed to the age of 25 
     under current law). This provision recognizes that victims of 
     such crimes often do not come forward until years after the 
     abuse, out of shame or a fear of further humiliation;
       5. Make it easier for investigators to track sexual 
     predators and child pornographers and make it easier to 
     prosecute criminal child abuse/molestation cases;
       6. Create a new section at the Department of Justice to 
     focus solely on crimes against children; and
       7. Stiffen penalties for sex-related offenses involving 
     children.

  This is a good bill--a bill that would help ensure that our children 
are protected from some of the most heinous of criminals. It is a bill 
that would increase the punishment for those criminals. And, it is a 
bill that, quite simply, is the right thing to do. I encourage my 
colleagues to join us in cosponsoring this important measure.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today in support of an act that I 
am cosponsoring with Senator Hatch that represents one of the most 
comprehensive pieces of legislation ever drafted to protect children, 
the Comprehensive Child Protection Act of 2002. As Ranking Republican 
on the Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs, I have been greatly concerned 
with the recent increase in reports of child abductions and murders, so 
I am glad to be a part of this effort to address this growing problem. 
In my tenure on the Judiciary Committee, I have long fought for our 
Nation's children, and have ardently supported laws that bring them and 
their families greater protection. I am also pleased that the President 
will be hosting a conference on missing and exploited children at the 
end of this month, and I look forward to that conference and appreciate 
the President's and First Lady's work on behalf of children.
  This legislation comes at a critical time because we are hearing more 
and more about children being taken from their homes or schools and 
abused, or worse, murdered. Our children are a gift to us, are our 
national treasure, and are our future. We must do all that we can to 
protect these innocents and give law enforcement every tool possible to 
ferret out the criminals who would do our children harm. With this 
legislation, we will be ensuring a greater measure of protection for 
our children.

[[Page S8462]]

  The bill does many important things. First, it helps law enforcement 
respond immediately to incidents of child abduction, because, as we've 
seen with the Amber Alert system, time is critical in any abduction 
case to thwart further injury or harm. The bill creates a National 
Crimes Against Children Response Center at the FBI that will integrate 
the resources and expertise of all Federal, State and local law 
enforcement sources to provide a rapid response for crimes involving 
child victims. The bill also helps law enforcement by making it 
possible to get wire taps for suspected sex trafficking and 
exploitation offenses, and will require that all Federal child sex 
crimes offenders have their DNA added to the national DNA registry. So 
the bill will help to centralize information about criminals and 
crimes, and makes the job of the criminal investigator easier and more 
accurate through wiretaps and DNA evidence.

  The bill also creates a website registry for convicted child sexual 
offenders so that parents, neighbors, and police know who in their 
communities is a convicted child predator. This website will supplement 
registries in all 50 States. This important tool will help families 
make better and fully-informed decisions about their childrens' safety, 
and will greatly aid law enforcements' response to reports of child 
abductions and other offenses against children.
  The bill also gives new tools to prosecutors and the courts. It 
extends the statute of limitations for prosecuting child offenders, 
allows prosecutors to introduce evidence of past child sex crimes in 
sentencing hearings, removes the so-called ``spousal privilege'' so 
that a spouse can't stand silent in the prosecution of the other spouse 
for child sexual abuse, and increases the maximum sentences and 
probation periods for child sex offenders. These important tools will 
make our communities safer by helping to rid them of child predators, 
and by keeping a tight leash on predators when they get released from 
prison.
  So this bill helps the public know about sexual predators in their 
communities, improves the nation's ability to respond to child 
abduction reports, and aids criminal investigators and prosecutors in 
their efforts to protect the public by identifying and locking-up child 
predators. I ask my fellow Senators to support this important bill.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself and Mr. Schumer):
  S. 2918. A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal 
Service located at 380 Main Street in Farmingdale, New York, as the 
``Peter J. Ganci, Jr. Post Office Building''; to the Committee on 
Government Affairs.
  Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President: I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 380 Main Street in Farmingdale, New York, as the ``Peter J. 
Ganci, Jr. Post Office Building,'' be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2918

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. PETER J. GANCI, JR. POST OFFICE BUILDING.

       (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal 
     Service located at 380 Main Street in Farmingdale, New York, 
     shall be known and designated as the ``Peter J. Ganci, Jr. 
     Post Office Building''.
       (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 
     document, paper, or other record of the United States to the 
     facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be 
     a reference to the Peter J. Ganci, Jr. Post Office Building.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself and Mr. Inouye):
  S. 2921. A bill to encourage Native contracting over the management 
of Federal lands, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian 
Affairs.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by 
Senator Inouye to introduce the ``Native American Contracting and 
Federal Lands Management Demonstration Project Act'' to expand the 
highly-successful Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance 
Act of 1975 and to bring Native knowledge and sensitivity to the 
management of Federal lands.
  Next week is the 140th anniversary of the bloodiest day in U.S. 
military history--the Battle at Antietam Creek in Sharpsburg, Maryland. 
Many Civil War historians see Antietam as the turning point in the 
Union's victory over the Confederacy and as the victory President 
Lincoln needed to issue the Emancipation Proclamation.
  Americans have a visceral impulse to restrict development of the 
lands like those at Antietam, not because we are sons of the Union or 
daughters of the Confederacy, but because we are Americans.
  We know that Antietam, like Omaha Beach and Little Bighorn and other 
places, is a sacred place.
  In 1978, Congress passed the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, 
AIRFA, which declared that it is ``the policy of the United States to 
protect and preserve for American Indians their inherent right of 
freedom to believe, express and exercise the traditional religions of 
the American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Native Hawaiians, including but 
not limited to access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, 
and the freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites.''
  It is clear that twenty-five years after the enactment of the AIRFA, 
the tools available to protect Native sacred places and religious 
beliefs are insufficient.
  At the same time, as our need for economic activities, such as 
logging, energy and mining, increases, the clashes between economic and 
cultural interests also increase.
  In 1970, President Nixon's Special Message to Congress on Indian 
Affairs changed forever Federal Indian law and policy. The President 
also signed into law legislation transferring the sacred Blue Lake 
lands back to the Pueblo of Taos. These two events set the stage for 
both the Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act, 1975, 
as well as the AIRFA, 1978.
  The legislation I am introducing builds on these precedents by 
setting up a demonstration project to expand opportunities for Native 
contracting on Federal lands. One goal of this bill is to bring to bear 
the knowledge and sensitivity of Native people to activities that are 
currently being carried out by Federal agencies.
  Under the bill, the Secretary of Interior would select up to 12 
tribes or tribal organizations per year to provide archaeological, 
anthropological, ethnographic and cultural surveys and analysis; land 
management planning; and activities related to the identification, 
maintenance, or protection of lands considered to have religious, 
ceremonial or cultural significance to Indian tribes.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2921

       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 ``Native American Contracting 
     and Federal Lands Management Demonstration Project Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       For the purposes of this Act, the following definitions 
     shall apply:
       (1) Federal lands.--The term ``Federal lands'' means any 
     land or interests in land owned by the United States, 
     including leasehold interests held by the United States, 
     except Indian trust lands.
       (2) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given such term by section 4(e) of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act.
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

       (a) In General.--The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to expand the provisions of the Indian Self 
     Determination and Education Assistance Act, as amended (25 
     U.S.C. 450 et seq.), in order to expand Native employment and 
     income through greater contracting opportunities with the 
     Federal Government;
       (2) to encourage Native contracting on Federal lands for 
     purposes of benefiting from the knowledge and expertise of 
     Native people in order to promote innovative management 
     strategies on Federal lands that will lead to greater 
     sensitivity toward, and respect for, Native American 
     religious beliefs and sacred sites;
       (3) to better accommodate access to and ceremonial use of 
     Indian sacred lands by Indian religious practitioners; and

[[Page S8463]]

       (4) to prevent significant damage to Indian sacred lands.

     SEC. 4. NATIVE AMERICAN FEDERAL LANDS MANAGEMENT 
                   DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

       (a) In General.--The Indian Self Determination and 
     Education Assistance Act is amended by adding a new 
     subsection as follows:

     ``SEC._. NATIVE AMERICAN FEDERAL LANDS MANAGEMENT 
                   DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior shall 
     establish the `Native American Federal Lands Management 
     Demonstration Project' to enter contracts with Indian tribes 
     or tribal organizations to perform functions including, but 
     not limited to, archeological, anthropological and cultural 
     surveys and analyses, and activities related to the 
     identification, maintenance, or protection of lands 
     considered to have religious, ceremonial or cultural 
     significance to Indian tribes.
       ``(b) Participation.--During each of the 2 fiscal years 
     immediately following the date of the enactment, the 
     Secretary shall select not less than 12 eligible Indian 
     tribes or tribal organizations to participate in the 
     demonstration project.
       ``(c) Eligibility.--To be eligible to participate in the 
     demonstration project, an Indian tribe or tribal 
     organization, shall--
       ``(1) request participation by resolution or other official 
     action of the governing body of the Indian tribe or tribal 
     organization;
       ``(2) demonstrate financial and management stability and 
     capability, as evidenced by the Indian tribe or tribal 
     organization having no unresolved significant and material 
     audit exceptions for the previous 3 fiscal years; and
       (3) demonstrate significant use of or dependency upon the 
     relevant conservation system unit or other public land unit 
     for which programs, functions, services, and activities are 
     requested to be placed under contract.
       ``(d) Planning Phase.--Each Indian tribe and tribal 
     organization selected by the Secretary to participate in the 
     demonstration project shall complete a planning phase prior 
     to negotiating and entering into a conservation system unit 
     management contract. The planning phase shall be conducted to 
     the satisfaction of the Indian tribe or tribal organization 
     and shall include--
       ``(1) legal and budgetary research; and
       ``(2) internal tribal planning and organizational 
     preparation.
       ``(e) Contracts.--
       ``(1) In general.--Upon request of a participating Indian 
     tribe or tribal organization that has completed the planning 
     phase pursuant to subsection (e), the Secretary shall 
     negotiate and enter into a contract with the Indian tribe or 
     tribal organization for the Indian tribe or tribal 
     organization to plan, conduct, and administer programs, 
     services, functions, and activities, or portions thereof, 
     requested by the Indian tribe or tribal organization and 
     related to archeological, anthropological and cultural 
     surveys and analyses, and activities related to the 
     identification, maintenance or protection of lands considered 
     to have religious, ceremonial or cultural significance to 
     Indian tribes.
       ``(2) Time limitation for negotiation of contracts.--Not 
     later than 90 days after a participating Indian tribe or 
     tribal organization has notified the Secretary that it has 
     completed the planning phase required by subsection (e), the 
     Secretary shall initiate and conclude negotiations, unless an 
     alternative negotiation and implementation schedule is 
     otherwise agreed to by the parties. The declination and 
     appeals provisions of the Indian Self-Determination and 
     Education Assistance Act, including section 110 of such Act, 
     shall apply to contracts and agreements requested and 
     negotiated under this Act.
       ``(f) Contract Administration.--
       ``(1) Inclusion of certain terms.--At the request of the 
     contracting Indian tribe or tribal organization, the 
     benefits, privileges, terms, and conditions of agreements 
     entered into pursuant to titles I and IV of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act may be included in 
     a contract entered into under this Act. If any provisions of 
     the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act 
     are incorporated, they shall have the same force and effect 
     as if set out in full in this Act and shall apply 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law. The parties may 
     include such other terms and conditions as are mutually 
     agreed to and not otherwise contrary to law.
       ``(2) Audit.--Contracts entered into under this Act shall 
     provide for a single-agency audit report to be filed as 
     required by chapter 75 of title 31, United States Code.
       ``(3) Transfer of employees.--Any career Federal employee 
     employed at the time of the transfer of an operation or 
     program to an Indian tribe or tribal organization shall not 
     be separated from Federal service by reason of such transfer. 
     Intergovernmental personnel actions may be used to transfer 
     supervision of such employees to the contracting Indian tribe 
     or tribal organization. Such transferred employees shall be 
     given priority placement for any available position within 
     their respective agency, notwithstanding any priority 
     reemployment lists, directives, rules, regulations, or other 
     orders from the Department of the Interior, the Office of 
     Management and Budget, or other Federal agencies.
       ``(g) Available Funding; Payment.--Under the terms of a 
     contract negotiated pursuant to subsection (f), the Secretary 
     shall provide each Indian tribe or tribal organization funds 
     in an amount not less than the Secretary would have otherwise 
     provided for the operation of the requested programs, 
     services, functions, and activities. Contracts entered into 
     under this Act shall provide for advance payments to the 
     tribal organizations in the form of annual or semiannual 
     installments.
       ``(h) Timing; Contract Authorization Period.--An Indian 
     tribe or tribal organization selected to participate in the 
     demonstration project shall complete the planning phase 
     required by subsection (c) not later than 1 calendar year 
     after the date that it was selected for participation and may 
     begin implementation of its requested contract no later than 
     the first day of the next fiscal year. The Indian tribe or 
     tribal organization and the Secretary may agree to an 
     alternate implementation schedule. Contracts entered into 
     pursuant to this Act are authorized to remain in effect for 5 
     consecutive fiscal years, starting from the fiscal year the 
     participating Indian tribe or tribal organization first 
     entered into its contract under this Act.
       ``(i) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the close of 
     each of fiscal years 2003 and 2006, the Secretary shall 
     present to the Congress detailed reports, including a 
     narrative, findings, and conclusions on the costs and 
     benefits of this demonstration project.
       ``(j) Planning Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to the availability of 
     appropriated funds, upon application the Secretary shall 
     award a planning grant in the amount of $100,000 to any 
     Indian tribe or tribal organization selected for 
     participation in the demonstration project to enable it to 
     plan for the contracting of programs, functions, services, 
     and activities as authorized under this Act and meet the 
     planning phase requirement of subsection (e). An Indian tribe 
     or tribal organization may choose to meet the planning phase 
     requirement without applying for a grant under this 
     subsection. No Indian tribe or tribal organization may 
     receive more than 1 grant under this subsection.
       ``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as are necessary for each of the 
     2 fiscal years immediately following the date of the 
     enactment of this Act to fund planning grants under this 
     section.''.

     SEC. 5. TRIBAL PROCUREMENT CONTRACTING AND RESERVATION 
                   DEVELOPMENT.

       (a) In General.--Section 7 of the Indian Self-Determination 
     and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450e) is amended by 
     adding at the end thereof the following new subsection (d):
       ``(d) Fostering Tribal Procurement Contracting and 
     Reservation Development.--
       ``(1) Upon the request and application of an Indian tribe 
     to provide certain services or deliverables which the 
     Secretary of the Interior would otherwise procure from a 
     private sector entity, and absent a request to contract those 
     services or deliverables pursuant to section 102 of this Act 
     (25 U.S.C. 450f) made by the tribe or tribes to be directly 
     benefited by said services or deliverables, the Secretary of 
     the Interior shall contract for such services or deliverables 
     through the applicant Indian tribe pursuant to section 102 of 
     this Act (25 U.S.C. 450f).
       ``(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply unless the applicant 
     tribe provides assurances to the Secretary that the principal 
     beneficiary of the contracted services remains the tribe or 
     tribes originally intended to benefit from the services or 
     deliverables. For purposes of this subsection, the 
     contracting tribe shall enjoy no less than the same rights 
     and privileges under this Act as would the beneficiary tribe 
     if the beneficiary tribe exercised its rights to contract 
     under section 102 of this Act. If at any time the beneficiary 
     tribe (or tribes) seeks to contract services being provided 
     by the contracting tribe, the beneficiary tribe (or tribes) 
     shall give the contracting tribe and the Secretary of the 
     Interior no less than 180 days' notice.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself, Mr. Burns, Mr. Lott, Mr. Gregg, Ms. 
        Mikulski, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. Dodd):
  S. 2922. A bill to facilitate the deployment of wireless 
telecommunications networks in order to further the availability of the 
Emergency Alert System, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Emergency 
Communications and Competition Act, ECCA, along with my colleague from 
Montana, Senator Burns. I am pleased that this legislation has also 
been cosponsored by Senators Lott, Gregg, Mikulski, Leahy, and Baucus.
  This bill will ensure that consumers will soon be able to avail 
themselves of an innovative new wireless technology, recently approved 
by the Federal Communications Commission. It is called the Multichannel 
Video Distribution and Data Service, MVDDS, a title which accurately 
describes what this new service will provide consumers: cable 
competition and a high speed access to the Internet.
  Unless Congress Acts, however, it may be years before service is 
actually

[[Page S8464]]

deployed to the public. That would be a lost opportunity for consumers, 
we would lose the opportunity to improve our communications 
infrastructure, not only for our citizens' access to cable and the 
Internet, but also for public safety purposes. MVDDS technology can 
address all of these needs, and we should remove unnecessary and 
counterproductive regulatory obstacles that prevent its swift 
deployment.
  This bill is supported by consumer groups. The Consumers Union has 
endorsed this legislation, because it will help ensure that competition 
rapidly emerges for video programming as well as high speed Internet 
services. The Consumers Union notes that cable rates have risen 45 
percent since cable was deregulated in 1996, an increase that is almost 
three times faster than inflation. According to the FCC, just one 
percent of cable communities enjoy ``effective competition.'' MVDDS can 
go head-to-head with incumbent cable systems everywhere, and I believe 
that this good old fashioned competition will result in lower prices 
and better service for consumers even for those who don't choose to 
subscribe to MVDDS.
  This legislation has also been endorsed by the National Grange, 
America's oldest general farm and rural public interest organization. 
The National Grange recognizes the extraordinary opportunity this new 
wireless technology can offer rural Americans, but it fears that the 
FCC Order authorizing MVDDS failed to ensure that it will indeed 
adequately serve rural America. At this time I would ask that these two 
letters, and other letters of support, be published in the Record 
following my statement.
  The bill Senator Burns and I are introducing today will restore 
fairness in the FCC licensing process, and in so doing, speed the 
deployment of MVDDS to applicants that are ready to launch service to 
the public now.
  The ECCA provides that MVDDS applicants will be licensed in the same 
manner as satellite companies who applied on the same day to share the 
same spectrum. Currently, the FCC plans to subject only MVDDS 
applicants to an auction process. This would impose a discriminatory 
tax on an innovative new technology. Unfortunately, this is more of the 
same burdensome regulation that I believe has contributed to the 
collapse of the telecommunications sector. Government regulation is 
necessary, certainly; but we must be smart in how we regulate business. 
We must ensure that our laws and regulations are technologically 
neutral so that government policies don't replace the role of the 
marketplace in determining the fate of consumer products and services.
  Furthermore, an auction would drastically delay the introduction of 
service to the public. Mr. President, this is quite the opposite of 
what spectrum auctions are supposed to do. In this case, industry 
incumbents can use the auction to block the introduction of new 
competition. A company with vast resources available could easily 
trounce a small startup in an auction--and then, under the terms of the 
FCC's Order, it would not have to deploy service for 10 years. 
Consumers cannot wait for spectrum to be ``shelved'' for an entire 
decade.
  The ECCA solves this problem by ensuring that only qualified 
applicants will be licensed. That is, within six months of enactment, 
the FCC would issue licenses to any applicant that can demonstrate 
through independent testing that it will employ a technology that won't 
cause harmful interference to DBS operators with whom they would share 
spectrum. Then, to be sure that service is in fact deployed, the ECCA 
requires licensees to provide service to consumers within five rather 
than ten years.
  This legislation also requires that parties who apply for licenses 
under this provision must assume specific public interest obligations 
in exchange for their prompt licensing. The bill requires full must-
carry of local television stations, and an additional set aside of 4 
percent of system capacity for other public interest purposes such as 
tele-medicine and distance learning. I can assure my colleagues that 
these are issues particularly important in rural areas in states like 
Louisiana.
  The ECCA will also promote public safety, in two ways. First, it will 
require MVDDS licensees to air Emergency Alert System warnings. These 
alerts are presently carried by cable systems and over-the-air 
broadcasters. However, they are not seen by those who get their 
programming from DBS unless the viewer happens to be watching a local 
channel. In states like Louisiana, where DBS operators do not carry 
local stations, this is particularly important. Unfortunately, my state 
is not alone--local stations are also not carried in Alaska, Arkansas, 
Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Montana, Mississippi, Nebraska, North and South 
Dakota, West Virginia, and Wyoming. In total, over 1,100 TV stations 
are not carried by DBS.
  Second, this legislation requires MVDDS licensees to make their 
transmission systems available to national security and emergency 
preparedness personnel on a top-priority basis in times of need. We all 
know that when emergencies strike, the need for public safety personnel 
to communicate with one another skyrockets. MVDDS wireless networks, 
which will be deployed ubiquitously throughout the country, can help 
alleviate this thirst for spectrum.
  For these reasons, I believe that Congress should act on this matter 
as soon as possible. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and vote 
for enactment this year. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 
bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2922

       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 ``Emergency Communications and 
     Competition Act of 2002''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are as follows:
       (1) To facilitate the deployment of new wireless 
     telecommunications networks in order to extend the reach of 
     the Emergency Alert System (EAS) to viewers of multichannel 
     video programming who may not receive Emergency Alert System 
     warnings from other communications technologies.
       (2) To ensure that emergency personnel have priority access 
     to communications facilities in times of emergency.
       (3) To promote the rapid deployment of low cost multi-
     channel video programming and broadband Internet services to 
     the public, without causing harmful interference to existing 
     telecommunications services.
       (4) To ensure the universal carriage of local television 
     stations, including any Emergency Alert System warnings, by 
     multichannel video programming distributors in all markets, 
     regardless of population.
       (5) To advance the public interest by making available new 
     high speed data and video services to unserved and 
     underserved populations, including schools, libraries, tribal 
     lands, community centers, senior centers, and low-income 
     housing.
       (6) To ensure that new technologies capable of fulfilling 
     the purposes set forth in paragraphs (1) through (5) are 
     licensed and deployed promptly after such technologies have 
     been determined to be technologically feasible.

      SEC. 3. LICENSING.

       (a) Grant of Certain Licenses.--
       (1) In general.--The Federal Communications Commission 
     shall assign licenses in the 12.2-12.7 GHz band for the 
     provision of fixed terrestrial services using the rules, 
     policies, and procedures used by the Commission to assign 
     licenses in the 12.2-12.7 GHz band for the provision of 
     international or global satellite communications services in 
     accordance with section 647 of the Open-market Reorganization 
     for the Betterment of International Telecommunications Act 
     (47 U.S.C. 765f).
       (2) Deadline.--The Commission shall accept for filing and 
     grant licenses under paragraph (1) to any applicant that is 
     qualified pursuant to subsection (b) not later than six 
     months after the date of the enactment of this Act. The 
     preceding sentence shall not be construed to preclude the 
     Commission from granting licenses under paragraph (1) after 
     the deadline specified in that sentence to applicants that 
     qualify after that deadline.
       (b) Qualifications.--
       (1) Non-interference with direct broadcast satellite 
     service.--A license may be granted under this section only if 
     operations under the license will not cause harmful 
     interference to direct broadcast satellite service.
       (2) Acceptance of applications.--The Commission shall 
     accept an application for a license to operate a fixed 
     terrestrial service in the 12.2-12.7 GHz band if the 
     applicant--
       (A) successfully demonstrates the terrestrial technology it 
     will employ under the license with operational equipment that 
     it furnishes, or has furnished, for independent testing 
     pursuant to section 1012 of the Launching Our Communities' 
     Access to Local Television Act of 2000 (47 U.S.C. 1110); and
       (B) certifies in its application that it has authority to 
     use such terrestrial service technology under the license.

[[Page S8465]]

       (3) Clarification.--Section 1012(a) of the Launching Our 
     Communities' Access to Local Television Act of 2000 (47 
     U.S.C. 1110(a); 114 Stat. 2762A-141) is amended by inserting 
     ``, or files,'' after ``has filed''.
       (4) PCS or cellular services.--A license granted under this 
     section may not be used for the provision of Personal 
     Communications Service or terrestrial cellular telephony 
     service.
       (c) Prompt Commencement of Service.--In order to facilitate 
     and ensure the prompt deployment of service to unserved and 
     underserved areas and to prevent stockpiling or warehousing 
     of spectrum by licensees, the Commission shall require that 
     any licensee under this section commence service to consumers 
     within five years of the grant of the license under this 
     section.
       (d) Expansion of Emergency Alert System.--Each licensee 
     under this section shall disseminate Federal, State, and 
     local Emergency Alert System warnings to all subscribers of 
     the licensee under the license under this section.
       (e) Access for Emergency Personnel.--
       (1) Requirement.--Each licensee under this section shall 
     provide immediate access for national security and emergency 
     preparedness personnel to the terrestrial services covered by 
     the license under this section as follows:
       (A) Whenever the Emergency Alert System is activated.
       (B) Otherwise at the request of the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security.
       (2) Nature of access.--Access under paragraph (1) shall 
     ensure that emergency data is transmitted to the public, or 
     between emergency personnel, at a higher priority than any 
     other data transmitted by the service concerned.
       (f) Additional Public Interest Obligations.--
       (1) Additional obligations.--Each licensee under this 
     section shall--
       (A) adhere to rules governing carriage of local television 
     station signals and rules concerning obscenity and indecency 
     consistent with sections 614, 615, 616, 624(d)(2), 639, 640, 
     and 641 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 534, 
     535, 536, 544(d)(2), 559, 560, and 561);
       (B) make its facilities available for candidates for public 
     office consistent with sections 312(a)(7) and 315 of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 312(a)(7) and 315); and
       (C) allocate 4 percent of its capacity for services that 
     promote the public interest, in addition to the capacity 
     utilized to fulfill the obligations required of subparagraphs 
     (A) and (B), such as--
       (i) telemedicine;
       (ii) educational programming, including distance learning;
       (iii) high speed Internet access to unserved and 
     underserved populations; and
       (iv) specialized local data and video services intended to 
     facilitate public participation in local government and 
     community life.
       (2) License boundaries.--In order to ensure compliance with 
     paragraph (1), the Commission shall establish boundaries for 
     licenses under this section that conform to existing 
     television markets, as determined by the Commission for 
     purposes of section 652(h)(1)(C)(i) of the Communications Act 
     of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 534(h)(1)(C)(i)).
       (g) Redesignation of Multichannel Video Distribution and 
     Data Service.--The Commission shall redesignate the 
     Multichannel Video Distribution and Data Service (MVDDS) as 
     the Terrestrial Direct Broadcast Service (TDBS).
                                  ____



                                              Consumers Union,

                                  Washington, DC, August 29, 2002.
       Dear Senator: On behalf of Consumers Union, we are writing 
     to seek your support for the Emergency Communications and 
     Competition Act of 2002, sponsored by Senators Landrieu and 
     Burns. This legislation would benefit consumers by ensuring 
     that quality wireless spectrum is available for video 
     programming and a wide range of public services, including 
     emergency warnings.
       Consumers Union has long advocated for policies that will 
     increase competition to cable television and encourage 
     deployment of advanced Internet services to rural and 
     underserved communities, and we support policies that 
     encourage efficient use of wireless spectrum. We believe that 
     multichannel video and data distribution service (MVDDS) 
     could provide an extraordinary opportunity for consumers to 
     receive video programming, local broadcast, and broadband 
     Internet access at affordable prices, by efficiently reusing 
     satellite spectrum. However, a recent FCC order authorizing 
     MVDDS fails to ensure that this spectrum will be used for the 
     purpose of competition for video programming.
       Nationwide, consumers have seen their cable television 
     rates rise 45 percent since cable was deregulated in 1996, an 
     increase almost three times faster than inflation. In the few 
     areas where there is robust competition among cable 
     providers, rate increases have been less draconian; consumers 
     receive more channels for less money. Direct competition for 
     video services should be a high public policy priority 
     because it results in lower prices and better service for 
     consumers.
       Instead, the FCC's decision seems to better serve the 
     interests of companies who want to provide wireless data 
     services to businesses, by defining markets in a way that it 
     will be difficult to provide video services. By basing MVDDS 
     licenses on an entirely different geographic system than what 
     is currently used for television markets, the FCC order would 
     render local television carriage all but impossible, 
     perpetuating artificial scarcity for video spectrum. This 
     virtually forecloses the possibility that MVDDS could be a 
     robust competitor to cable.
       At a time when the FCC has also eliminated the 45 MHz 
     spectrum cap, inviting more wireless consolidation, it is far 
     less critical to put additional spectrum on the market for 
     non-video services. Accordingly, we support the Emergency 
     Communications and Competition Act of 2002 as a sound 
     approach to ensure that MVDDS is a vehicle for real 
     competition to cable television, especially in rural and 
     underserved areas.
       First, the bill would facilitate licensing of companies in 
     the 12.2-12.7 GHz band that are committed to providing these 
     needed consumer services. Moreover, this bill requires that 
     licensees build out these services within five years, 
     compared with the FCC's order which allows license holders to 
     warehouse MVDDS spectrum as long as ten years before 
     providing services. Second, the Emergency Communications and 
     Competition Act of 2002 would ensure access to local 
     broadcast signals by including full must carry requirements 
     and retransmission consent requirements in all television 
     markets. Third, this bill fixes the market boundary 
     definition problem by setting license boundaries that conform 
     to existing television market boundaries.
       Importantly, the bill would also require each licensee to 
     disseminate Federal, State and local Emergency Alert System 
     warnings to all subscribers. Currently, subscribers to 
     Digital Broadcast Satellite (DBS) programming only receive 
     alerts if they happen to live in an area where local 
     programming is carried by DBS providers. This possibility is 
     denied to subscribers in the 13 states in which DBS provides 
     no local channels (AK, AR, ID, IA, LA, ME, MT, MS, NE, ND, 
     SD, WV, and WY). Given the heightened need for effective 
     local security and emergency management plans, consumers must 
     be able to receive Emergency Alerts regardless of where they 
     live and how they access video programming services.
       Finally, the Emergency Communications and Competition Act 
     of 2002 includes a number of specific public interest 
     obligations of tremendous benefit to consumers. The bill 
     requires a licensee to make its facilities available for 
     candidates for public office and to provide at least 4% of 
     its capacity for services that promote the public interest, 
     including telemedicine services, educational programming, 
     including distance learning, high speed Internet access to 
     unserved and underserved populations, or local data and video 
     services intended to facilitate public participation in local 
     government and community life.
       Consumers Union has long argued that American consumers 
     must have competitive alternatives for video programming as 
     well as for high speed Internet services. The Emergency 
     Communications and Competition Act 2002 will help ensure such 
     competition rapidly emerges. For all of these reasons, we ask 
     you to support the Emergency Communications and Competition 
     Act of 2002.
           Respectfully,
     Chris Murray,
       Internet & Telecommunications Counsel.
     Gene Kimmelman,
       Senior Director.
                                  ____

                                                  National Grange,


                         of the Order of Patrons of Husbandry,

                                  Washington, DC, August 16, 2002.
     Hon. Mary L. Landrieu,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Landrieu: On behalf of the National Grange, I 
     am writing to thank you for introducing the Emergency 
     Communications and Competition Act of 2002 (ECCA) sponsored 
     by Sen. Mary Landrieu (LA) which would assure that 
     multichannel video and data distribution services (MVDDS) 
     will be available and affordable in every rural community 
     across the nation.
       The National Grange is America's oldest general farm and 
     rural public interest organization. Founded in 1867, today 
     the Grange represents nearly 300,000 Grange members 
     affiliated with 3200 local, county and state Grange chapters. 
     The Grange members are families and individuals who share a 
     common interest in community involvement, agricultural and 
     rural issues. The Grange is a genuine grassroots, bipartisan, 
     political advocacy organization. The goal of Grange advocacy 
     is the well being and prosperity of rural America.
       Rural telecommunication service deployment is a top 
     priority for the National Grange. In our priority issues 
     document Blueprint for Rural America 2002, we described the 
     vital need for telecommunications services in rural areas:

     ``Adequate access to telecommunications services such as 
     telephone, Internet, satellite and cable is important to 
     rural America. The Internet delivers services and products 
     efficiently, irrespective of geographic location. Today, 
     workers who telecommute can enjoy a rewarding career and a 
     rural life style. Satellite technology can bring new 
     information to every farm in America. We must assure

[[Page S8466]]

     that advanced telecommunications technologies are available 
     in every rural community at affordable costs.''

       We believe that multichannel video and data distribution 
     services (MVDDS), as set forth in the ECCA, provide an 
     extraordinary opportunity for rural Americans to receive 
     video programming, local broadcast, and broadband Internet 
     access at affordable prices. However, the FCC order 
     authorizing MVDDS failed to ensure that rural America will be 
     adequately served by this new technology. By contrast, the 
     ECCA would assure that MVDDS is available and affordable in 
     every rural community.
       First, the ECCA would facilitate licensing of services in 
     the 12.2-12.7 GHz band. It requires that licensees build out 
     services within five years. The FCC rule allows license 
     holders to warehouse MVDDS spectrum for as long as ten years 
     before providing services. Rural Americans cannot afford to 
     wait another ten years for access to advanced 
     telecommunitions technologies such as MVDDS. The National 
     Grange believes that license holders should be held to a 
     strict ``use or lose'' standard if they fail to deploy 
     services within the statutory five-year time frame.
       Second, the ECCA would reverse the FCC's inappropriate 
     decision to auction licenses in this band. Historically, 
     auctions have failed to foster competition, particularly in 
     rural markets. Only 31% of spectrum licenses offered for sale 
     in 2001 were actually sold. Rural areas remain grossly 
     underserved by spectrum licensing programs.
       Third, it would include full ``must carry'' requirements 
     for all local broadcast signals in all television markets 
     served by MVDDS providers. Consumers in rural areas depend on 
     local programming for news, information about local events, 
     and other important interests. However, in many states, rural 
     consumers are unable to receive those signals over Direct 
     Broadcast Satellite (DBS) services or even, in some cases, by 
     means of over-the-air free broadcasting.
       Fourth, the ECCA would require each licenses to disseminate 
     Federal, State and local Emergency Alert System warnings to 
     all subscribers. Currently, subscribers to DBS programming 
     may or may not receive alerts. DBS provides no local channels 
     in 13 states (AK, AR, ID, IA, LA, ME, MT, MS, NE, ND, SD, WV, 
     and WY). DBS subscribers in these states receive no emergency 
     or local broadcasts at all. Given the heightened need for 
     effective local security and emergency management plans, 
     rural Americans must receive Emergency Alerts regardless of 
     where they live and how they access video programming 
     services.
       Finally, the ECCA includes a number of specific public 
     interest obligations that will benefit rural consumers. The 
     bill requires a licenses to provide at least 4% of its 
     capacity for services that promote the public interest, 
     including telemedicine services, distance learning, high 
     speed Internet access to unserved and underserved 
     populations, or local data and video services intended to 
     facilitate public participation in local government and 
     community life. If implemented effectively, these provisions 
     could dramatically change the way that rural Americans engage 
     in civic life, experience education, and find necessary 
     medical services.
       The National Grange has a suggestion for improving this 
     bill. We support adding language to the ECCA to protect the 
     property interests of rural Americans with a provision 
     forbidding MVDDS licenses from being used as evidence of 
     public good for private property condemnation proceedings, 
     other than in the cases of existing utility or railroad 
     rights of way. We understand that MVDDS transmission 
     technology is very small, and should not require building new 
     towers or other projects that would require condemnation of 
     private property. Because of this we do not believe there 
     will be any technical justification for license holders to 
     ask local governments to exercise eminent domain authority on 
     private property in order to meet build out requirements.
       The National Grange has long argued that rural Americans 
     must have competitive alternatives to cable and Direct 
     Broadcast Satellite services, both for video and high speed 
     Internet services. The Emergency Communications and 
     Competition Act of 2002 will ensure that competitive service 
     is deployed in a timely manner along with critical local and 
     emergency broadcast signals in rural underserved areas. For 
     all of these reasons, we strongly support the Emergency 
     Communications and Competition Act of 2002.
           Sincerely,
     Kermit W. Richardson, President.
                                  ____

                                             Leadership Conference


                                              on Civil Rights,

                                Washington, DC, September 9, 2002.
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator: The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 
     (LCCR), the nation's oldest, largest, and most diverse 
     coalition of organizations committed to the protection of 
     civil and human rights in the United States, writes to 
     express our support for the Electronic Communications and 
     Competition Act of 2002, sponsored by Senators Landrieu and 
     Burns. We believe that the legislation will help bridge the 
     digital divide by encouraging rapid deployment of a new 
     wireless multichannel video and data technology (MVDDS). This 
     new technology will bring low-cost broadband Internet and 
     video services to rural and underserved areas and increase 
     the prospects for media ownership by minorities and women.
       While LCCR was pleased that the Federal Communications 
     Commission approved the creation of MVDDS, the order failed 
     to ensure that MVDDS would provide local broadcast 
     television, video programming, and broadband Internet 
     services throughout the country. There is no question that 
     auctions favor incumbents and are a major impediment to 
     minority media ownership. The Electronic Communications and 
     Competition Act will ensure that MVDDS fulfills, among other 
     things, its potential to increase minority ownership and 
     bridge the digital divide.
       Notwithstanding the decades of civil rights community 
     advocacy, minority broadcast ownership is declining. Although 
     minorities represent more than one quarter of the nation's 
     population, they are just 23, or 1.9% of the 1288 owners of 
     licensed, full-power commercial broadcast television stations 
     in the United States.
       The Electronic Communications and Competition Act will 
     eliminate the auction requirement and compel immediate 
     licensing of all conforming MVDDS technologies. In addition, 
     it will require license-holders to build out services within 
     five years, significantly narrowing the digital divide. The 
     act will also require that a percentage of each license-
     holder's capacity be used for public interest purposes such 
     as distance education, telemedicine, or other important local 
     purposes.
       In sum, I urge you to support the Electronic Communications 
     and Competition Act. It provides a rare opportunity to 
     increase media diversity and to narrow the digital divide.
           Sincerely,
                                                Wade J. Henderson,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                                  National Council of La Raza,

                                Washington, DC, September 4, 2002.
       Dear Senator: As you know, the National Council of La Raza 
     (NCLR) has long advocated on behalf of the nation's growing 
     Hispanic community on a number of economic, education, and 
     other social policy issues. You may not be aware, however, 
     that NCLR has also had a long-standing interest in policy 
     affecting telecommunications, access to the Internet, and the 
     growing concentration of the media industry. That is why I am 
     writing today to seek your support for the Emergency 
     Communications and Competition Act of 2002, sponsored by 
     Senators Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and Conrad Burns (R-MT).
       NCLR has been a strong supporter in the past for policies 
     that will increase competition in the cable industry and 
     encourage deployment of advanced Internet services to rural 
     and underserved communities. We have also urged ``must 
     carry'' rules for all video programming competitors, 
     regardless of platform, to ensure that communities, 
     especially rural ones, have full access to local and 
     emergency broadcast signals. That is why earlier this summer 
     we wrote to a number of lawmakers expressing our support for 
     new technology that will provide multichannel video and data 
     distribution services (``MVDDS'') (a copy of that earlier 
     communication is attached). MVDDS provides a significant 
     opportunity for consumers to receive video programming, local 
     broadcasts and broadband Internet access at affordable 
     prices. As noted in that earlier correspondence, the FCC 
     order authorizing MVDDS failed in many significant respects 
     to serve the interests of consumers and underserved 
     communities.
       We urge Congress to enact the Emergency Communications and 
     Competition Act of 2002 to ensure that MVDDS benefits are 
     available to all consumers, especially in rural and 
     underserved areas, for a range of reasons.
       First, the bill would facilitate licensing of companies in 
     the 12.2-12.7 GHz band who are committed to providing these 
     needed consumer services. Additionally, this bill requires 
     licensees to build out these services within five years, 
     compared with the current FCC rule which allows license 
     holders to warehouse MVDDS spectrum for as long as ten years 
     before providing services.
       Second, the Emergency Communications and Competition Act of 
     2002 would include full ``must carry'' requirements and 
     retransmission consent requirements in all television 
     markets, thereby ensuring access to local broadcast signals. 
     Moreover, this bill sets license boundaries that conform to 
     existing television market boundaries. Local access is 
     critical as consumers depend on local programming for news, 
     information about local events, language appropriate 
     programming, and other critical interests. Current FCC rules 
     for the MVDDS licenses call for entirely different geographic 
     boundaries, which would render local television carriage 
     almost impossible.
       Third, the bill would require each licensee to disseminate 
     federal, state and local Emergency Alert System warnings to 
     all subscribers. Today, subscribers to Digital Broadcast 
     Satellite (``DBS'') programming only receive alerts if they 
     happen to live in areas where local programming is carried by 
     DBS providers. This possibility does not even exist in the 14 
     states in which DBS provides no local channels (AK, AR, ID, 
     IA, LA, ME, MT, MS, NE, ND, SD, VT, WV, and WY). Given the 
     heightened need for effective local security and emergency 
     management plans, consumers should be able to receive 
     Emergency Alerts regardless of where they live and how they 
     access video programming services.
       Fourth, the Emergency Communications and Competition Act of 
     2002 provides other

[[Page S8467]]

     important benefits to consumers by requiring a licensee to 
     provide at least 4% of its capacity for services that promote 
     the public interest, including telemedicine services, 
     educational and long distance learning proramming, high-speed 
     Internet access to unserved and underserved populations, and/
     or local data and video services intended to facilitate 
     public participation in local governments and community life, 
     and also requires a licensee to make its facilities available 
     for candidates for public office.
       Finally, as noted in our earlier correspondence, MVDDS is 
     likely to increase for minority broadcasting ownership 
     opportunities and Latino content over the airwaves, a 
     critically important consideration for NCLR.
       NCLR believes that all American consumers are entitled to 
     have access to competitive alternatives to cable and DBS 
     services, for both video and high-speed data services. For 
     the reasons set forth above, we ask you to support the 
     Emergency Communications and Competition Act of 2002.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Raul Yzaguirre,
     President.
                                  ____

                                               Avoyel-Taensa Tribe


                                                 of Louisiana,

                                  Simmesport, LA, August 28, 2002.
     Hon. Mary L. Landrieu,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Landrieu: I am writing on behalf of the 
     Avoyel-Taensa Indian Organization. We are a rural people by 
     nature and have an obvious concern about the development of 
     rural areas in Louisiana. The Emergency Communications and 
     Compensation Act of 2002 is critical for further development 
     in this legislation and hope that you decide to sponsor it.
       This legislation provides benefits for rural areas 
     previously not available. Schoolchildren will have access to 
     the internet--a significant advancement in education for 
     rural communities. Also, this legislation will provide access 
     to a wide-range of television stations for an entire rural 
     area at an affordable cost. Having telemedicine capabilities 
     in community health centers is becoming essential. This new 
     Bill would bring this technology to the rural communities.
       This new Bill will also require full ``must carry'' 
     requirements for all local broadcast signals in all 
     television markets. Consumers in rural areas depend on local 
     programming for news, information about local events, and 
     other important interests. Subscribers to Direct Broadcast 
     Satellite (DBS) do not have access to local broadcast signals 
     in the State of Louisiana.
       Most importantly, however, the Emergency Communications and 
     Competition Act of 2002 brings a new level of security to our 
     rural communities. DBS does not distribute Federal, State, 
     and Local emergency alerts to its subscribers. This Act will 
     ensure that emergency alerts will reach the rural 
     communities. Given the heightened need for local security and 
     emergency management, it is imperative that rural Americans 
     receive emergency alerts.
       There is a new technology, led by Northpoint Technology 
     that can effectively bring the luxury of satellite television 
     and the necessity of local programming and emergency alerts 
     at an affordable cost to the rural areas of Louisiana. We are 
     pleased you have taken an interest in this legislation and 
     stand by you if you decide to sponsor it.
           Sincerely Yours:
                                                    Romes Antoine,
     Tribal Chief
                                  ____

                                                  Wilma Mankiller,


                                             Route 1, Box 945,

                                    Stilwell, OK, August 16, 2002.
     Hon. Mary Landrieu,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Landrieu: Thank you for drafting the 
     ``Emergency Communications and Competition Act.'' Passage of 
     your legislation will help facilitate the rapid deployment of 
     the Multichannel Video Distribution and Data Service (MVDDS), 
     a new wireless service that the Federal Communications 
     Commission recently authorized.
       This innovative wireless technology can provide affordable 
     video programming (including all local channels) and 
     broadband Internet access to consumers throughout the entire 
     country, and it will be particularly important to Native 
     Americans who live in rural areas where competition all too 
     often is lacking or non-existent.
       Your legislation will ensure that the FCC promptly issues 
     licenses to qualified applicants. As you know, the FCC has 
     decided to issue MVDDS licenses through an auction process. 
     Auctions have yet to facilitate the deployment of video 
     service or broadband to Native American communities. I'm 
     particularly worried that in this case an auction may prevent 
     the deployment of actual service for at least a decade.
       Unless Congress enacts your legislation, well-heeled 
     opponents of new completion could outbid small startups. 
     Auction participants aren't required to have a proven 
     technology and they don't have to deploy any service for ten 
     years. Your bill corrects this by requiring all applicants to 
     demonstrate they are capable of deploying MVDDS and requiring 
     them to do so in five years.
       The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), the 
     nation's oldest, largest and most representative tribal 
     government, as well as the National Indian Telecommunications 
     Institute (NITI), a tribally-owned and operated not-for-
     profit organization dedicated to ensuring that Native 
     Americans have the same opportunity to participate in, and 
     benefit from, the digital revolution as other Americans have 
     urged the FCC to licenses to qualified applicants without an 
     auction process.
       As the NCAI wrote to the FCC on March 22, 2002, ``The 
     difficulty in finding service providers willing and able to 
     provide telecommunications to Native American communities is 
     well documented. As the FCC's own records show auctions do 
     nothing to narrow that gap and indeed may exacerbate the 
     problem.... If the FCC auctions use of the 12.2-12.7 GHz 
     band, the potential to bring video and broadband services to 
     our communities in that spectrum will remain unfulfilled.''
       I heartily share these concerns and thus I am very grateful 
     that you have crafted legislation that will ensure the 
     promise of MVDDS in rural America and tribal communities can 
     be fulfilled through prompt licensing of companies that are 
     ready, willing and able to offer new competitive service.
       I and several other Native Americans are local affiliates 
     of Northpoint Technology, the only company that has 
     demonstrated its technology through independent testing. We 
     clearly lack the resources to compete at an auction against 
     giant communications companies. I find it remarkable that 
     they are eligible to seek a license when they have no MVDDS 
     technology.
       It's also grossly unfair to subject us to MVDDS applicants 
     to an auction when the FCC is issuing licenses--without 
     auction--to several satellite companies that applied to share 
     the same spectrum on the same day I filed my license 
     application. Your legislation will ensure that terrestrial 
     and satellite applicants for the same spectrum are treated in 
     a like manner. While I believe that Northpoint is currently 
     the only qualified terrestrial applicant because it alone 
     submitted equipment for the independent testing conducted by 
     the MITRE Corporation last year, your legislation clearly 
     offers an opportunity for other companies to similarly become 
     qualified by subjecting their own technology to independent 
     testing this year.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Wilma Mankiller,
     Principal Chief, Cherokee Nation.
                                  ____

                                              Marzulla & Marzulla,


                                              Attorney at Law,

                                  Washington, DC, August 30, 2002.
     Re the Emergency Communications and Competition Act of 2002.

     Hon. Mary Landrieu,
     Senate Hart Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Landrieu: I am writing to thank you for 
     sponsoring the Emergency Communications and Competition Act 
     of 2002.
       This measure will promote the deployment of the Multi-
     channel Video Distribution and Data Service (``MVDDS''), an 
     innovative ground-based wireless digital technology that will 
     share spectrum with satellites in the 12.2-12.7 GHz spectrum 
     band. Sharing this spectrum will dramatically increase the 
     capacity of radio spectrum, and promises consumers new and 
     competitive choices for multi-channel video programming and 
     internet broadband services.
       Because of its affordability, this technology will also 
     make possible provision of broadband services to underserved 
     populations such as students, library users, Indians on 
     reservations, community center users, seniors, and residents 
     in low-income housing.
       However, this bill does more than benefit the consumer. 
     This bill also protects the intellectual property rights of 
     the inventors of this new technology, and thus is consistent 
     with the constitutional framers' intent that creators and 
     owners of intellectual property rights enjoy the fruits of 
     their labor.
       As you know, rather than permitting the inventors to 
     utilize their new technology, the FCC instead chose to 
     dismiss the inventors' licensing applications (after allowing 
     their application to languish for over three years), and 
     called for a nationwide spectrum auction. The FCC's refusal 
     to process the inventors' permit application for over three 
     years itself raises serious due process concerns. See, e.g., 
     MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. FCC, 627 F.2d 322, 341 (1980) 
     (``[D]elay in the resolution administrative proceedings can 
     also deprive regulated entities, their competitors or the 
     public of rights and economic opportunities without the due 
     process the Constitution requires.'').
       The FCC's decision to auction off the right to use the 
     inventors' technology, the only technology currently proven 
     able to allow terrestrial service to reuse the same spectrum 
     currently used by satellite systems, to the highest bidder 
     also smacks of a taking of private property without payment 
     of just compensation. See Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co., 467 
     U.S. 986, 1003 (1984) (``[I]ntangible property rights ... are 
     deserving of the protection of the Taking Clause has long 
     been implicit in the thing of [the Supreme] Court. . . .''); 
     Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. Beckwith, 449 U.S. 155, 
     164 (1980) (holding that government may not ``by ipse 
     dixit,... transform private [property into public property 
     without just compensation.'').
       Thus, this bill should be enacted not only because it 
     protects the property rights of the inventors, but because it 
     also benefits consumers. This bill will require the FCC to 
     accept an application for a license to operate a

[[Page S8468]]

     fixed terrestrial service in the 12.2-2.7 GHz band only from 
     an applicant that ``will employ terrestrial service 
     technology under the license that has been successfully 
     demonstrated with operational equipment that the application 
     has furnished for testing pursuant to section 1012 of the 
     Launching Our Communities' Access to Local Television Act of 
     2000 (47 U.S.C. Sec. 1110) and certifies in its application 
     that it has authority to use such terrestrial service 
     technology under the license.'' See proposed bill at Sec. 3 
     (b)(1)(B)(i). This bill will also require a license to build 
     out the system covered by the license within five years of 
     the grant of the license. See proposed bill at Sec. 3 (c).
       These requirements will ensure that the FCC issues licenses 
     promptly and in a fair and constitutional manner to qualified 
     applicants (i.e., any party that demonstrates its own 
     technology can share spectrum with satellites would be 
     eligible for a license). This bill will finally enable 
     consumers to enjoy an important new competitive service that 
     is so long overdue.
       Seldom does one bill protect private property rights, 
     increase competition, and provide more service options for 
     the public. I am happy to report that this bill accomplishes 
     all three. I commend you for authoring this important 
     legislation and ask that you call upon me if any can be of 
     any assistance to help secure its passage.
           Yours truly,
     Nancie G. Marzulla.
                                  ____

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, today I rise with my colleague from 
Louisiana, Sen. Landrieu, to introduce the ``Emergency Communications 
and Competition Act of 2002'' or ``ECCA.''
  This bill will build upon previous legislation I authored, the LOCAL 
TV Act, to help ensure that all local TV stations, not just those in 
the largest markets are available to consumers. As a former 
broadcaster, I know Montana has some of the smallest of the Nations' 
210 television markets, from 169th-ranked Missoula all the way down to 
210th-ranked Glendive.
  Today, the satellite operators provide local channels in 52 markets. 
I'm not crossing my fingers that they will get to Glendive anytime 
soon. That's why we need this legislation. It will enable the rapid 
deployment of the new Multichannel Video Programming and Data 
Distribution Service, MVDDS, which the Federal Communications 
Commission authorized earlier this year.
  I commend the FCC for authorizing this new service, it not only 
promises to bring local channels to all markets, regardless of size, 
but it will also provide broadband Internet access to rural Americans 
who have no such access today. I expect that the low cost of this 
wireless technology will translate into low prices for consumers. This 
is precisely the kind of innovative new technology we should encourage 
and promote.
  I am most concerned, however, that unless we pass this legislation, 
we may never see the deployment of this new service. The FCC has 
determined that licenses for this new service should be auctioned. I 
appreciate the FCC's effort to help generate new revenues for the 
Federal Treasury, but we must never let that consideration override 
good public policy judgments. The public interest is best served when 
the spectrum is licensed promptly to applicants that are ready to 
deploy service.
  While auctions make sense in many instances, this is not always the 
case. Two years ago, Congress passed the ORBIT Act, legislation I 
authored which, in part, exempted from auctions ``spectrum used for the 
provision of international or global satellite communications 
services.''
  We are now confronted with a case of first impression in which the 
FCC has determined to issue licenses to both terrestrial and satellite 
applicants that share the same spectrum. Previously this was thought to 
be technologically impossible, as I mentioned, the FCC has now 
determined that the terrestrial-based MVDDS can share with satellites. 
In my judgment, the same Federal resource must be licensed in the same 
manner to all applicants, regardless of the technology they will 
employ. To do otherwise is to pick industry winners and losers. This 
bill corrects this problem.

                          ____________________