[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 147 (Thursday, November 14, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11063-S11066]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
21ST CENTURY DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I thank the Senate for voting to end
debate and to pass the bipartisan 21st Century Department of Justice
Authorization Act conference report. I commend the Majority Leader for
bringing this important legislation the floor and filing cloture in
order for the Senate to take final action on the conference report.
I regret that consideration and a vote on final passage on this
important measure was delayed, but I thank the overwhelming majority of
my colleagues for supporting cloture and passage of the conference
report.
This measure was passed by the House, by a vote of 400 to 4, last
Thursday. All Democrats were prepared to pass the conference report
that same day last week and any day this week. Given the Republicans'
objection to proceed to a vote and given the refusal to agree to a time
agreement, the Majority Leader was required to file cloture. I am glad
that the filibuster is over.
This legislation is truly bipartisan. It passed the House 400 to 4.
The conference report was signed by every conferee, Republican or
Democrat, including Senator Hatch and Representatives Sensenbrenner,
Hyde, and Lamar Smith.
Senators from both sides of the aisle spoke in favor of the
legislation. In particular, I thank Senator Hutchison for coming to the
floor on Tuesday to support this conference report. Senator Hutchison
has spoken to me many times about the need for more judgeships along
the Texas border with Mexico to handle immigration and criminal cases.
The conference report includes three new judgeships in the conference
report for Texas, one more than was included in the bill reported to
the Senate by the Senate Judiciary Committee and passed by the Senate
last December.
I thank Senator Sessions for his statements on Tuesday and today in
support of this bipartisan conference report.
Although he opposes Senator Hatch's legislation regarding automobile
dealer arbitration, which enjoys more than 60 Senate cosponsors and 200
House cosponsors and was included in the conference report, Senator
Sessions is supporting this conference report because it will improve
the Department of Justice and support local law enforcement agencies
across the nation. I appreciate Senator Sessions' work on the
provisions in the conference report on the Paul Coverdell Forensic
Sciences Improvement Grants and the Centers for Domestic Preparedness
in Alabama and other States.
Senator Brownback also spoke in favor of certain immigration
provisions in this bill that he worked on with Senator Kennedy, the
Chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. In
particular, the conference report includes language sought by Senators
Conrad and Brownback to reauthorize the program allowing foreign
doctors educated in the United States to remain here if they will
practice in underserved communities. This is a crucial provision to
ensure that residents in some of our most rural states receive adequate
medical care.
The conference report also contains another important immigration
provision to permit H-1B aliens who have labor certification
applications caught in lengthy agency backlogs to extend their status
beyond the sixth year limitation or, if they have already exceeded such
limitation, to have a new H-1B petition approved so they can apply for
an H-1B visa to return from abroad or otherwise re-obtain H-1B status.
Either a labor certification application or a petition must be filed at
least 365 days prior to the end of the 6th year in order for the alien
to be eligible under this section.
The slight modification to existing law made by this section is
necessary to avoid the disruption of important projects caused by the
sudden loss of valued employees. At a time when our economy is weak,
this provision is intended to help. I thank Senator Kennedy and Senator
Brownback for their work on this provision and their contributions to
the conference report. I thank Senator Feinstein for her excellent
speech earlier this week in support of this conference report. Senator
Feinstein has been a tireless advocate for the needs of California,
including the needs of the federal judiciary along the southern border.
She has led the effort to increase judicial and law enforcement
resources along our southern border. I am proud to have served as the
chair of the House-Senate conference committee that unanimously
reported a bill that includes five judgeships for the Southern District
of California. Long overdue relief for the Southern District of
California could be on the way once this conference report is adopted.
Senator Biden also contributed a great deal to this conference
report. He has fought doggedly to authorize a new Violence Against
Women Office at the Justice Department, and his efforts have borne
fruit in this legislation. He has also been one of the Senate's best
advocates for reauthorizing the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention Act, which we do here. In addition, he was a cosponsor of
the Drug Abuse Education, Prevention, and Treatment Act, and we have
included many provisions from that bill in this conference report.
I also would like to thank Senator Durbin for statements on the
Senate floor and his dedicated efforts to authorize a new Violence
Against Women Office, to expand the number of Boys and Girls Clubs in
our nation, and to create new judgeships in Illinois.
Senator Kohl was a tremendous help in our efforts to reauthorize the
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, especially Title V of
that Act, which provides for crucial prevention programs for our
nation's youth.
Senator Carnahan deserves the credit for the inclusion of the Law
Enforcement Tribute Act in this conference report. That provision
provides Federal assistance for local communities seeking to honor
fallen law enforcement officers. Without her tireless work, we would
not have been able to include that provision in this conference report.
For his part, Senator Feingold was able to include his and Senator
Hatch's Motor Vehicle Franchise Contract Arbitration Fairness Act in
this conference report. That bill will ensure that auto dealers will
have a level playing field in their disputes with the auto
manufacturers.
Finally, I also thank Senator Reid for his helpful comments and
support throughout the debate on the legislation.
Of course, our bipartisanship is evidenced by our including
authorization for additional judgeships not only in California but also
in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, Ohio, North Carolina, Illinois and
Florida. I have tried to improve on the record we inherited.
In the six and one-half years that they controlled the Senate, the
Republican majority was willing to add only eight judgeships to be
appointed by a Democratic President, and most of those were in Texas
and Arizona, States with two Republican Senators. We have, on the other
hand, proceeded at our earliest opportunity to increase federal
judgeships by 20, including in the border States where they are most
needed, well aware these positions will be filled with appointments by
a Republican President who has shown little interest in working with
Democrats in the Senate. These include a number of jurisdictions with
Republican Senators.
I also commend the senior Senator from California for her leadership
on the ``James Guelff and Chris McCurley Body Armor Act,'' the State
Criminal Alien Assistance Program reauthorization, and the many anti-
drug abuse provisions included in this conference
[[Page S11064]]
report. She spoke eloquently on the floor of the Senate regarding many
of the important provisions she has championed in this process.
This conference report will strengthen our Justice Department and the
FBI, increase our preparedness against terrorist attacks, prevent crime
and drug abuse, improve our intellectual property and antitrust laws,
strengthen and protect our judiciary, and offer our children a safe
place to go after school.
This conference report is the product of years of bipartisan work. By
my count, the conference report includes significant portions of at
least 25 legislative initiatives. This legislation is neither
complicated nor controversial. It passed the House overwhelmingly and
in short order with a strong bipartisan vote.
I thank my colleagues again for supporting the cloture motion and
final passage of this conference report so that all of this bipartisan
work and all the good that this legislation will do, will reach the
President's desk. I particularly want to thank Senator Hatch, who
worked very hard to help construct a good, fair and balanced conference
report as did all of the conferees. Likewise, I want to thank Chairman
Sensenbrenner and Representative Conyers of the House Judiciary
Committee for working with us to conclude this conference report
successfully.
The staffs of these Members must also be thanked for working through
the summer and over the last month to bring all the pieces of the
conference report together into a winning package. In particular, the
House Judiciary Committee staff has been enormously helpful, including
Phil Kiko, Will Moschella, Blaine Merritt, Perry Apelbaum, Ted Kalo,
Sampak Garg, Bobby Vassar, and Alec French. I would also like to thank
the staff of the House Education and Workforce Committee, including Bob
Sweet and Denise Forte. The Senate Judiciary Committee staff has shown
its outstanding professionalism and I want to thank Bruce Cohen, Beryl
Howell, Ed Pagano, Tim Lynch, Jessica Berry, Robyn Schmidek and Phil
Toomajian, Makan Delrahim, Leah Belaire, Michael Volkov, Melody Barnes,
Esther Olavarria, Robert Toone, Neil MacBride, and Louisa Terrell.
I appreciate that not all Members were or could be conferees and
participate in the conference, but after a full opportunity to study
the conference report passed last week in the House by a vote of 400 to
4, I hope that even those Members who raised objection will conclude
that on the whole this is a good, solid piece of legislation.
Although the debate is over, I want to address the objections raised
by a few Members to this legislation. I thank these Members for coming
to the floor to discuss their views and concerns, and want to show them
the respect they deserve by responding to those objections. I should
note that even in posing an objection to and delaying passage of the
conference report--as is their rights as Senators--these Members
acknowledged that there were parts of this bill they liked or may like
upon review.
Contrary to those who may argue that this legislation is not a
priority, it is. Congress has not authorized the Department of Justice
in more than two decades. While the Justice Department would certainly
continue to exist if we were to fail to reauthorize it, that is not an
excuse for shirking our responsibility now. I know that Senator Hatch
and Representatives Sensenbrenner and Conyers share my view. It is long
past time for the Judiciary Committees of the House and Senate--and the
Congress as a whole--to restore their proper oversight role over the
Department of Justice.
Through Republican and Democratic administrations, we have allowed
the Department of Justice to escape its accountability to the Senate
and House of Representatives and through them to the American people.
Congress, the people's representative, has a strong institutional
interest in restoring that accountability. The House has recognized
this, and has done its job. I am glad that we have done ours.
I agree with those Members who say that we need to give anti-
terrorism priority, but not lose sight of the other important missions
of the Department of Justice. The conference report takes such a
balanced approach. Those critics who say that there is nothing new in
this legislation to fight terrorism, have missed some important
provisions in the legislation as well as my floor statements over the
past week outlining what the conference report contains to help in the
anti-terrorism effort.
Let me repeat the highlights of what the conference report does on
this important problem.
The conference report fortifies our border security by authorizing
over $20 billion for the administration and enforcement of the laws
relating to immigration, naturalization, and alien registration. It
also authorizes funding for Centers for Domestic Preparedness in
Alabama, Texas, New Mexico, Louisiana, Nevada, Vermont and
Pennsylvania, and adds additional uses for grants from the Office of
Domestic Preparedness to support State and local law enforcement
agencies. These provisions have strong bipartisan support. I thank
Senator Sessions, Senator Shelby and Senator Specter for supporting
cloture on the conference report and for final passage.
Another measure in the bill would correct a glitch in a law that
helps prosecutors combat the international financing of terrorism. I
worked closely with the White House to pass the original provision to
bring the United States into compliance with a treaty that bans
terrorist financing, but without this technical, non-controversial
change, the provision may not be usable. This law is vital in stopping
the flow of money to terrorists. Worse yet, at a time when the
President is going before the U.N. emphasizing that our enemies are not
complying with international law, by blocking this minor fix, we leave
ourselves open to a charge that we are not complying with an anti-
terrorism treaty.
I agree with other Members that we should do more to help the FBI
Director in transforming the FBI from a crime fighting to a terrorism
prevention agency and to help the FBI overcome its information
technology, management and other problems to be the best that it can
be. The Judiciary Committee reported unanimously the Leahy-Grassley FBI
Reform Act, S. 1974, over six months ago to reach those goals, but this
legislation has been blocked by an anonymous hold from moving forward.
This conference report contains parts of that bipartisan legislation,
but not the whole bill, which continues to this day to be blocked to
this day.
Since the attacks of September 11 and the anthrax attacks last fall,
we have relied on the FBI to detect and prevent acts of catastrophic
terrorism that endanger the lives of the American people and the
institutions of our country. Reform and improvement at the FBI was
already important, but the terrorist attacks suffered by this country
last year have imposed even greater urgency on improving the FBI. The
Bureau is our front line of domestic defense against terrorists. It
needs to be as great as it can.
Even before those attacks, the Judiciary Committee's oversight
hearings revealed serious problems at the FBI that needed strong
congressional action to fix. We heard about a double standard in
evaluations and discipline. We heard about record and information
management problems and communications breakdowns between field offices
and Headquarters that led to the belated production of documents in the
Oklahoma City bombing case. Despite the fact that we have poured money
into the FBI over the last five years, we heard that the FBI's computer
systems were in dire need of modernization.
We heard about how an FBI supervisor, Robert Hanssen, was able to
sell critical secrets to the Russians undetected for years without ever
getting a polygraph. We heard that there were no fewer than 15
different areas of security at the FBI that needed fixing.
The FBI Reform Act tackles these problems with improved
accountability, improved security both inside and outside the FBI, and
required planning to ensure the FBI is prepared to deal with the
multitude of challenges we are facing.
We are all indebted to Senator Grassley for his leadership in the
area. Working with Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Judiciary
Committee we unanimously reported
[[Page S11065]]
the FBI Reform Act more than six months ago only to be stymied in our
bipartisan efforts by an anonymous Republican hold.
The conference report does not contain all of the important
provisions in the FBI Reform Act that Senator Grassley and I, and the
other members of the Judiciary Committee, agreed were needed, but it
does contain parts of that other bill.
Among the items that are, unfortunately, not in the conference report
and are being blocked from passing in the stand-alone FBI Reform bill
by an anonymous Republican hold are the following: Title III of the FBI
Reform bill that would institute a career security officer program,
which senior FBI officials have testified before our Committee would be
very helpful;
Title IV of the FBI Reform bill outlining the requirements for a
polygraph program along the lines of what the Webster Commission
recommended;
Title VII of the FBI Reform bill that takes important steps to fix
some of the double standard problems and support the FBI's Office of
Professional Responsibility, which FBI Ethics and OPR agents say is
very important; and
Title VIII to push along implementation of secure communications
networks to help facilitate FISA processing between Main Justice and
the FBI. These hard-working agents and prosecutors have to hand-carry
top secret FISA documents between their offices because they still lack
send secure e-mail systems.
The FBI Reform bill would help fix may of these problems and I would
hope we would be able to pass all of the FBI Reform Act before the end
of this Congress. These should not be controversial provisions and are
designed to help the FBI.
During the debate on this conference report, some Members complained
it included provisions that were not contained in either the Senate or
House bills. Now, each of the proposals we have included are directly
related to improving the administration of justice in the United
States. We were asked to include many of them by Republican members of
the House and Senate.
Let me give you some examples. The conference report reauthorizes the
State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, which President Bush has
sought to eliminate. On March 4 of this year, Senator Kyl and Senator
Feinstein sent me a letter asking me to include an authorization for
SCAAP--which was not authorized in either the House- or Senate-passed
bill--in the conference report. That proposal had been considered and
reported by the Judiciary Committee but a Republican hold has stopped
Senate consideration and passage. I agreed with Senator Kyl that we
should authorize SCAAP. I still believe that it is the right thing to
do.
In addition to including the reauthorization of SCAAP, the conferees
also authorized an additional judge for Arizona. Members have been
arguing for years that their States need more judges. We took those
arguments seriously, and added another new judge for Arizona on top of
the two that were added in 1998 and the third that was added in 2000.
As I said before, we have added 20 additional judicial positions in
this conference report.
Some have been critical of the conference report's authorization of
funding for DEA police training in South and Central Asia, and for the
United States-Thailand drug prosecutor exchange program. I believe that
both of these are worthy programs that deserve the Senate's support.
I have listened to President Bush and others in his Administration
and in Congress argue that terrorist organizations in Asia, including
Al Qaeda, have repeatedly used drug proceeds to fund their operations.
The conferees wanted to do whatever we could to break the link between
drug trafficking and terror, and we would all greatly appreciate the
Senate's assistance in that effort.
Beyond the relationship between drug trafficking and terrorism, the
production of drugs in Asia has a tremendous impact on America.
For example, more than a quarter of the heroin that is plaguing the
northeastern United States, including my State of Vermont, comes from
Southeast Asia. Many of the governments in that region want to work
with the United States to reduce the production of drugs, and these
programs will help. It is beyond me why any Senator would oppose them.
Some have complained that the conference report demands too many
reports from the Department of Justice and that this would interfere
with the Department's ongoing counterterorism efforts. It is true that
our legislation requires a number of reports, as part of our oversight
obligations over the Department of Justice. I assure the Senate,
however, that if the Department of Justice comes to the House and
Senate Judiciary Committees and makes a convincing case that any
reporting requirement in this legislation will hinder our national
security, we will work out a reasonable accommodation. I think,
however, that such a turn of events is exceedingly unlikely, as no one
at the Department has mentioned any such concerns.
Some Members have complained that the conference report includes
pieces of legislation that had not received Committee consideration.
Let me deal with some of the specific proposals that have been cited.
The Law Enforcement Tribute Act was mentioned as a provision not
considered by the Judiciary Committee, but this is incorrect. In
reality, the Committee reported that bill favorably on May 16. Its
passage has been blocked by an anonymous Republican hold.
Complaints have been made about inclusion of the motor vehicle
franchise dispute resolution provision in the conference report for
bypassing the Committee. But, again, that is incorrect. The Judiciary
Committee fully considered this proposal and reported Senator Hatch's
Motor Vehicle Franchise Contract Arbitration Fairness Act last October
31. It has been stalled from the Senate floor by anonymous Republican
holds.
A section allowing FBI danger pay was cited as a proposal that
bypassed Committee consideration, but, again, the Judiciary Committee
did consider this proposal as part of the original DOJ Authorization
bill, S. 1319.
Some have complained that the Federal Judiciary Protection Act, which
is included in the conference report, had not come before the
Committee, but on the contrary, this legislation, S. 1099, was passed
the Judiciary Committee and the Senate by unanimous consent last year
and in the 106th Congress, as well.
A complaint was raised on the floor about a provision on the U.S.
Parole Commission being included in the conference report. That was
included because the Bush Administration included it in its budget
request.
A complaint was also raised about the conference report's provision
establishing the FBI police to provide protection for the FBI buildings
and personnel in this time of heightened concerns about terrorist
attacks. Contrary to the critics, this proposal was considered by the
Judiciary Committee as part of the FBI Reform Act, S. 1974, which was
reported unanimously on a bipartisan basis but has been blocked by an
anonymous hold.
Similarly, a complaint was made on the floor about bypassing the
Committee with the provision in the conference report for the FBI to
tell the Congress about how the FBI is updating its obsolete computer
systems. Again, this is incorrect. This provision was included in the
FBI Reform Act, S. 1974, which was considered by the Judiciary
Committee and unanimously reported without objection.
Some critics have complained that the conference report includes
intellectual property provisions that have passed neither the House or
the Senate. It is not for lack of trying to pass these provisions
through the Senate, but anonymous Republican holds have held up for
months passage of the Madrid Protocol Implementation Act, S. 407. This
legislation has passed the House on three separate times in three
consecutive Congresses. Let us get it passed now in the conference
report.
The conference report also contains another intellectual property
matter, the Hatch-Leahy TEACH Act, to help distance learning. Contrary
to the critics' statements, this passed the Senate in June, 2001.
The Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments
Act, S. 320, contained in this conference report, was passed by the
Senate at the beginning of this Congress,
[[Page S11066]]
in February, 2001. It is time to get this done.
The criticism made on the floor that the juvenile justice provisions
in the conference report never passed the House or Senate is simply
wrong. The conference report contains juvenile justice provisions
passed by the House in September and October of last year, in H.R. 863
and H.R. 1900.
The criticism that the conference report contains criminal justice
improvements that were passed by neither the House or the Senate
glosses over two important points: First, that many of the provisions
were indeed passed by the House, and, second, that others have been
blocked from Senate consideration and passage by anonymous Republican
holds. Let me give you some examples.
The conference report contains the Judicial Improvements Act, S. 2713
and HR 3892, that passed the House in July, 2002, but consideration by
the Senate was blocked after the Senate bill was reported by the
Judiciary Committee.
The Antitrust Technical Corrections bills, H.R. 809, had the same
fate. After being passed by the House in March, 2001, and reported by
the Senate Judiciary Committee, consideration was blocked in the
Senate.
CONCLUSION
This conference report is a comprehensive attempt to ensure the
administration of justice in our nation. It is not everything I would
like or that any individual Member of Congress might have authored.
It is a conference report, a consensus document, a product of the
give and take with the House that is our legislative process. It will
strengthen our Justice Department and the FBI, increase our
preparedness against terrorist attacks, prevent crime and drug abuse,
improve our intellectual property and antitrust laws, strengthen and
protect our judiciary, and offer our children a safe place to go after
school.
The conference report merits the support of the United States Senate
to help the Justice Department and the American people.
____________________