[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 108 (Monday, July 21, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H7177-H7178]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    AMENDING THE PROTECT ACT TO CLARIFY CERTAIN VOLUNTEER LIABILITY

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the Senate bill (S. 1280) to amend the PROTECT Act to clarify certain 
volunteer liability.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                S. 1280

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

     SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO THE PROTECT ACT.

       Section 108 of the PROTECT ACT (Public Law 108-21) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Limitation on Liability.--In connection with the 
     Pilot Programs established under this section, in reliance 
     upon the fitness criteria established under section 
     108(a)(3)(G)(i), and except upon proof of actual malice or 
     intentional misconduct, the National Center for Missing and 
     Exploited Children, or a director, officer, employee, or 
     agent of the Center shall not be liable in any civil action 
     for damages--
       ``(1) arising from any act or communication by the Center, 
     the director, officer, employee, or agent that results in or 
     contributes to a decision that an individual is unfit to 
     serve as a volunteer for any volunteer organization;
       ``(2) alleging harm arising from a decision based on the 
     information in an individual's criminal history record that 
     an individual is fit to serve as a volunteer for any 
     volunteer organization unless the Center, the director, 
     officer, employee, or agent is furnished with an individual's 
     criminal history records which they know to be inaccurate or 
     incomplete, or which they know reflect a lesser crime than 
     that for which the individual was arrested; and
       ``(3) alleging harm arising from a decision that, based on 
     the absence of criminal history information, an individual is 
     fit to serve as a volunteer for any volunteer organization 
     unless the Center, the director, officer, employee, or agent 
     knows that criminal history records exist and have not been 
     furnished as required under this section.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Lofgren) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner).


                             General Leave

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 1280.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, when the House passed S. 151, the PROTECT Act, which was 
signed into law by President Bush on April 30, 2003, we directed the 
Attorney General to establish a pilot program to perform background 
checks on individuals that volunteered to work with children.
   The pilot project, among other things, requires the National Center 
for Missing and Exploited Children to act as a liaison between several 
volunteer organizations that work with children in the FBI. Under the 
pilot project, the Center will receive from the FBI background check 
information on individuals seeking to volunteer with children and make 
a determination as to the suitability of those individuals for 
volunteer organizations.
   This legislation seeks to correct an oversight in that pilot 
project, which is scheduled to begin next week, a week from tomorrow on 
July 29, 2003. This legislation clarifies the Center's liability in 
connection with the pilot program in three specific situations and 
protects the Center from lawsuits in any one of three different 
situations except in cases where there is intentional misconduct or 
actions taken with actual malice.
   First, the bill stipulates that the Center shall not be held liable 
for any act or communication that results in a decision that an 
individual is unfit to serve as a volunteer for any volunteer 
organization. The purpose of this program is to keep individuals who 
are potentially dangerous away from our children, and it needs to be 
clear that the Center will not be sued as a result of making this 
determination.
   Second, this legislation also addresses the unfortunate situation 
where an individual with a criminal history may be cleared by the 
Center due to inaccurate or incomplete records and subsequently commits 
a crime in their capacity as a volunteer.
   The hope is that this program will be 100 percent successful in 
keeping criminals away from our children. However, we must also 
acknowledge that the effectiveness of these background checks are 
predicated on the accuracy and completeness of the records the FBI 
relies upon. Unless the Center willfully ignores information indicating 
that an individual might be a potential danger, they should not be 
responsible for subsequent crimes committed by that individual.
  The third and final section of this bill addresses the situation 
where a decision is made to clear an individual based on the absence of 
criminal history information. In this case, were the individual to 
subsequently commit a crime, the Center would be protected unless they 
knew that criminal history records existed and have not been furnished.
   I urge my colleagues to expeditiously vote in favor of this 
legislation to ensure the smooth operation of this pilot project and 
the protection of the National Center for Missing and Exploited 
Children, and would point out that unless this bill is enacted into law 
by a week from Tuesday, the pilot project will be delayed.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
   Mr. Speaker, this is a technical amendment, it seems to me, to the 
PROTECT Act signed into law, as the chairman said, on April 30, and it 
merely clarifies the legal liability of the National Center for Missing 
and Exploited Children when it conducts background checks on volunteers 
that work with children.
   The PROTECT Act, which I and 400 other Members of the House 
supported, creates this pilot project which the chairman has described; 
and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has been 
selected to conduct these checks on volunteers who work with children.
   I think it is important that the pilot program will provide 
safeguards that ensure the volunteer consents to the background check 
and allows the volunteer to correct erroneous information in the 
criminal history database because we want accurate information and that 
is part of accuracy. But we also need to establish clear criteria for 
the circumstances in which an individual could be deemed unfit to 
volunteer to work with children.
   This amendment simply clarifies that absent proof of knowing 
malicious or intentional conduct, the National Center for Missing and 
Exploited Children and its employees will not be liable for the actions 
they take in conducting these background checks in deciding whether an 
individual is fit to volunteer to work with children.
   The other body passed this bill by unanimous consent, and I believe 
this

[[Page H7178]]

is a noncontroversial bill. I support the bill.
  Since this is a pilot project, we will know in 18 months' time how 
things have worked, and we will have an opportunity to make further 
adjustments should they be warranted. I think it is important that we 
all support this act today so that we do not disrupt the beginning of 
the pilot project.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
   Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 1280.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________