Congressional Record, Volume 150 Issue 83 (Wednesday, June 16, 2004)

[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 83 (Wednesday, June 16, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6863-S6867]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005--Continued

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, let me take a minute to thank the two
managers for their hard work on this Defense bill. As I stated before,
this is the 11th day of consideration of this bill.
Although I think we have made real demonstrable progress today, I am
concerned that we are not quite certain when we will be able to finish
the bill and how many amendments may still be offered.
I have had discussions with the chairman and the Democratic
leadership, and I am prepared to file a cloture motion this evening.
With that said, I still hope we can work out an agreement to allow us
to finish the bill after a certain number of amendments, and with a
time certain for passage. I will continue to discuss our options with
the managers of the bill and hope that we can proceed in a balanced way
to finish the bill.

Cloture Motion

I send the cloture motion to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

Cloture Motion

We the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on Calendar No.
503, S. 2400, an original bill to authorize appropriations
for fiscal year 2005 for military activities of the
Department of Defense, for military construction, and for
defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe
personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the armed
services, and for other purposes.
Bill Frist, John Warner, Bob Bennett, John Cornyn, Mitch
McConnell, Norm Coleman, Susan Collins, Lamar
Alexander, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Rick Santorum, Lisa
Murkowski, Gordon Smith, Thad Cochran, Wayne Allard,
Chuck Hagel, Craig Thomas, Jeff Sessions.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory
quorum be waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Under the previous order, the Senator from Alabama is recognized to
offer an amendment on which there will be 10 minutes of debate.
The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be
recognized for 5 minutes and be notified at the conclusion of the 5
minutes, and the senior Senator from New York, Mr. Schumer, be
recognized.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 3372, As Modified

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, for decades, civilian employees of the
United States working overseas were shielded from prosecution for
criminal acts that were committed abroad. These persons were outside
the scope of military justice, and they were beyond the jurisdiction of
Federal courts in the United States, and also our State courts. Often,
foreign countries, when incapable of investigating and prosecuting the
cases, or they didn't have adequate laws, or they were not even
criminal offenses in the foreign country, did not prosecute. Maybe the
foreign country had no interest in prosecuting a fraud against the
United States.
In 1999, one of my constituents approached me with a terrible story
of how two innocent children were molested while living overseas with
their father, who was an Army service person. Because the perpetrator
of the crime did the act overseas, he was beyond the scope of
jurisdiction in the United States. Moreover, German law didn't cover
this, so the person was completely unprosecutable at that time.
After hearing this story, I began to work on and introduce the
Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, which was signed into law
eventually in the year 2000.
It provided U.S. Federal courts with jurisdiction over civilian
employees, contractors, and subcontractors affiliated with the
Department of Defense who commit crimes, and would have subjected that
person to at least 1 year of prison had the offense occurred in the
United States.
We worked with the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice,
and the Department of State and produced legislation which I think was
very helpful.
Now, in the war on terrorism, the Department of Justice is finding
this statute very helpful. In fact, the contractors involved in the Abu
Ghraib prison would probably not be prosecutable had we not passed this
law some time ago.
But as we have looked at it, we understand there are some gaps that
still exist.
Senator Schumer raised this issue in the Judiciary Committee, and I
began to work on dealing with those loopholes.
This act will deal with what our previous act dealt with--those who
were directly related to the Department of Defense, either contractors
or civilian employees. But the abuses in Abu Ghraib involved private
contractors who may not have in every instance been directly associated
with the Department of Defense, and as such, perhaps those people--or
some of them at least--might not be prosecutable under this statute. So
it highlighted our need to clarify and expand the coverage of the act.
I offer an amendment today, and I am pleased that Chairman Warner and
Ranking Member Levin have agreed to it. I believe it has been cleared
on both sides and accepted by the managers.
This amendment would give the Justice Department authority to
prosecute civilian contractors employed not only by the Department of
Defense but by any Federal agency that is supporting the American
military mission overseas.
The number of private contractors working in Iraq is about 10 times
as great as it was in the Persian Gulf conflict.
Private contractors are necessary to rebuilding a healthy Iraq. Yet
we cannot allow them to escape justice for crimes they may commit
overseas.
I am not sure right now the Iraqi government has the ability or the
interest in prosecuting a contractor who may have defrauded the United
States. It clearly remains true that if they are to be prosecuted, it
needs to be done here.
Our mission overseas is an honorable endeavor. It should not be
tainted by illegal acts by any, particularly a few, who embarrass our
country. Recent events have brought to light the need to ensure that
those acting improperly are held accountable in a court of law.
This amendment clarifies existing precedent and leaves no doubt
whether wrongdoers can be brought to justice. This includes physical
acts against personnel by contractors. It also includes frauds that
could be committed against the Department of Defense such as
overcharging. Fraudulent activities of any kind could be prosecuted
under this act.
I yield the remainder of my time to the Senator from New York, who,
having suffered the blows of terrorism firsthand, has taken an interest
in these matters for some time now. I am delighted to work with the
Senator on this legislation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, this amendment is an important amendment
to this bill. It is passing with bipartisan cosponsorship, both the
House and the Senate unanimously. It shows we can get things done in a
bipartisan way. In good part that is because of my colleague from
Alabama. I salute him for his leadership on this issue. He originally
discovered the loophole about contractors who work for DOE, that they
could not be prosecuted should they commit crimes abroad. He
successfully passed a law last year about this issue.
When we discovered all the problems in the prisons in Iraq, it was
clear that not all the contractors were contracted to by DOD. Other
agencies contracted them. It made sense to me that we prosecute them as
well. I believe it

[[Page S6864]]

made sense to everybody. So I suggest to my colleague from Alabama that
we work together to expand the amendment to include all contractors who
work abroad who commit crimes or potential crimes.
As usual, we worked very well together on this. I thank the Senator
for his leadership in passing the original bill, now law, and now
amending this to broaden it.
The amendment Senator Sessions and I are offering today will close a
dangerous loophole in our criminal law that would have allowed civilian
contractors who do the crime to escape doing the time. As I mentioned,
Senator Sessions closed part of this loophole a few years ago when he
passed the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act and showed a
great deal of foresight with that legislation.
The problem is that aside from Senator Sessions' bill there are
negligently few provisions that give DOJ the power to go after civilian
contractors. In short, if they do not contract with DOD, there is too
strong a likelihood they will escape prosecution. Nothing in this
amendment should be interpreted as undermining ongoing DOJ
investigations or providing a basis for argument that DOJ does not have
jurisdiction to prosecute contractor crimes in Iraq. Title 18, section
7, of the Criminal Code clearly confers such jurisdiction. This
amendment covers contractors and territory for which title 18, section
7, does not confer jurisdiction.
I am proud to have worked with my colleague from Alabama to get this
done. By passing this amendment today, this body gains stature because
an important amendment is passed in a bipartisan way, and our country
gains stature because the world sees when a crime is committed, unlike
in so many other places in America, it is prosecuted.
With that, I yield back the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Alabama [Mr. Sessions], for himself and
Mr. Schumer, proposes an amendment numbered 3372, as
modified.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To extend military extraterritorial jurisdiction to cover not
only personnel and contractor personnel of the Department of Defense,
but also personnel and contractor personnel of any Federal agency or
provisional authority supporting the mission of the Department of
Defense overseas, and for other purposes)

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. CONTRACTOR ACCOUNTABILITY.

Section 3267(1)(A) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
``(A) employed as--
``(i) a civilian employee of--

``(I) the Department of Defense (including a
nonappropriated fund instrumentality of the Department); or
``(II) any other Federal agency, or any provisional
authority, to the extent such employment relates to
supporting the mission of the Department of Defense overseas;

``(ii) a contractor (including a subcontractor at any tier)
of--

``(iii) an employee of a contractor (or subcontractor at
any tier) of--

SEC. __. DEFINITION OF UNITED STATES.

Section 2340(3) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
to read as follows:
``(3) `United States' means the several States of the
United States, the District of Columbia, and the
commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United
States.''.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, 4 years ago, I worked with Senators
Sessions and DeWine to pass the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Act, MEJA, which established Federal jurisdiction over crimes committed
by civilians employed by, or accompanying, our military overseas. The
Sessions-Schumer amendment further extends the jurisdictional authority
we created in MEJA by closing a possible jurisdictional gap that could
allow persons who commit crimes while accompanying our military
overseas to escape justice. I support this amendment, and am pleased
that the Senate has adopted it today. In addition, I thank the sponsors
for accepting my addition to their amendment, which closes a similar
jurisdictional loophole in Federal law.
Attorney General Ashcroft referred to this loophole last week, during
his annual appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee, while
attempting to defend the Administration's position on torture.
Interestingly, this loophole was created by legislative language that
was proposed by the Department of Justice as a means of broadening, not
shrinking, Federal criminal jurisdiction. This language, enacted as
part of the USA PATRIOT Act, redefined the ``special maritime and
territorial jurisdiction of the United States'' to include U.S.
military bases and other U.S. Government properties in foreign States.
The administration's summary of its proposal explained that it would
``extend'' Federal jurisdiction to ensure that crimes committed by or
against U.S. nationals abroad on U.S. Government property did not go
unpunished.
Unfortunately, the administration drafters of this proposal neglected
to mention to Congress how it would impact on the Federal anti-torture
statute. That statute prohibits torture committed ``outside the United
States'' by persons acting under color of law, and defines the term
``United States'' to include the ``special maritime and territorial
jurisdiction of the United States.'' By extending the special maritime
and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, the PATRIOT Act
effectively narrowed the reach of the anti-torture statute. Post-
PATRIOT Act, the anti-torture statute may not allow for the prosecution
of an individual who commits torture on a U.S. military base outside
the United States.
My addition to the Sessions-Schumer amendment corrects this problem
in a simple and straightforward way. It extends the anti-torture
statute to apply, without exception, to acts committed outside the 50
States, the District of Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories,
and possessions of the United States.
It may be that we should go further. Arguably, the anti-torture
statute should be extended to apply anywhere in the world--both inside
and outside the United States. I would welcome the views of the
Department of Justice on this question. In the meantime, there are
other Federal statutes that prohibit violence or excessive force by
those acting under color of law within our borders.
Torture is one of the most serious crimes imaginable. I can think of
no reason why the Federal Government should create safe havens for
torturers anywhere in the world. To the contrary, we should use every
means available to track them down and bring them to justice. The
language that I have proposed, and that the Senate has accepted, will
assist the Justice Department in doing just that.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is on
agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3372) was agreed to.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. BINGAMAN. I rise to thank Chairman Warner and Ranking Member
Levin for their acceptance of a very important amendment last evening
that was offered by me along with Senators Smith, Corzine, Kennedy, and
Akaka to clarify the important role that the Department of Defense
Vaccine Healthcare Centers Network plays in increasing training and
competency in understanding vaccine associated adverse events, their
diagnosis, treatment and medical exemption management.
My amendment, No. 3392, expands upon the language that originally
created the Vaccine Healthcare Centers, or VHCs, in 2001, to better
reflect their current function and mission, and recognize the growing
importance the Network will play in the future with the recent passage
of the BioShield Act.
As one example, the original language referenced only the anthrax
vaccine program but the VHCs have played a fundamental role in
developing and

[[Page S6865]]

testing the DoD Smallpox Vaccine Program with clinical and research
follow-up. These functions should be reflected in the authorization of
the VHCs and the Bingaman-Smith-Corzine-Kennedy-Akaka amendment does
that.
Mr. President, Congress created the Vaccine Healthcare Centers, VHC,
Network as part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2001, but
focused the VHCs on establishing ``a system for monitoring adverse
events of members of the armed forces to the anthrax vaccine.''
The Vaccine Healthcare Center at Walter Reed Army Medical Center was
created in 2001 to respond to that congressional requirement.
Subsequently, with the creation of three additional regional centers at
Naval Medical Center Portsmouth in Virginia, Womack Army Medical Center
in North Carolina, and Wilford Hall Medical Center at Lackland Air
Force Base in Texas, the VHC Network today provides educational and
clinical support services that are available to 2.4 million Active Duty
and Reserve servicemembers and over 6 million family members for all
immunizations--not just the anthrax vaccine.
The importance of the VHCs to both servicemembers and the military
cannot be understated. The VHCs, particularly the one at Walter Reed
Army Medical Center, has established itself as an unbiased, objective
source of clinical vaccine-related information to servicemembers,
providers, the military and Congress, which is rather a remarkable
accomplishment.
In fact, there are strong feelings with respect to the anthrax and
smallpox vaccines, and it is no secret that I have grave concerns with
the military's policies with respect to the mandatory nature of those
vaccines at this time. However, regardless of how you feel about the
policy, few would disagree that the VHCs have provided a strong
scientific, and unbiased clinical perspective that all sides respect
and appreciate.
As the Armed Forces Epidemiological Board, or AFEB, found in a report
it published on April 14,2004, ``The VHC Network has become an integral
component of the referral and consultation services available on
vaccine adverse event issues for the DoD and can play an important role
in the study and evaluation of cases or clusters of possible rare
vaccine-induced adverse events.''
Furthermore, in testimony before the House Armed Services Committee
on February 25, 2004, Dr. William Winkenwerder, Jr., Assistant
Secretary for Defense Health Affairs stated, ``And we are delighted to
say we now have on-site in the Vaccine Healthcare Center Network, a
network of specialty clinics to provide the best possible care in rare
situations where serious adverse events follow vaccination. In all our
vaccination efforts, we focus on keeping individual service members
healthy, so they can return home safely to their families and loved
ones.
Although I do not always agree with Dr. Winkenwerder on force
protection policy, I do on the importance of the Vaccine Healthcare
Centers Network. My amendment with Senators Smith, Corzine, Kennedy,
and Akaka updates and recognizes the importance of the VHCs to our
Nation's servicemembers.
The original stated purpose of the language in 2001 was narrowly
focused on the creation of a DoD Center of Excellence treatment faculty
focused on providing treatment and follow-up as part of a system of
monitoring adverse events of servicemembers for the anthrax vaccine. In
fulfilling that original mission, DoD found that the VCH Network was
needed to improve vaccine safety and efficacy for all vaccines, and not
just limited to the anthrax vaccine.
To achieve this purpose, VHCs provide education, expert consultations
and problem resolution, medical exemption management, disability
assessments, and clinical research. These functions are not adequately
recognized in the current DoD authorization language and my amendment
reflects these expanded roles on behalf of our Nation's sevicemembers.
In fact, during fiscal year 2003 alone, the VHCs responded to over
160,000 contacts and provided case management for over 600 complicated
vaccine-related cases for servicemembers. Moreover, just 4 days ago,
the Chicago Tribune reported that a study by a researcher at Walter
Reed Army Medical Center in conjunction with the Vaccine Healthcare
Center there has conducted research that indicates ``military personnel
inoculated against smallpox face a seven to eight times greater risk of
heart inflammation'' than those who had never been vaccinated.
The study finds that, since the smallpox vaccination program was
resumed in 2002, 615,000 servicemembers have been inoculated and that
there have been 77 confirmed or suspected cases of heart inflammation,
including at least one in my state.
As exemplified by the myopericarditis issue with smallpox vaccine,
the VHCs also provide a place to identify uncommon adverse events and
help provide early recognition and interdiction which drives policy
changes in real time to protect the health and well-being of our
Nation's military personnel.
Mr. President, vaccines are a prescription drug and, like any
prescription drug, carry risk and side effects. We, as a Nation, cannot
ask our servicemembers to continue with a vaccination policy and not
recognize this critical fact. The VHC Network serves everybody by
providing objective clinical education, services, and research into
these matters that better inform all parties, including policymakers,
of both the risk and benefits vaccines carry. Moreover, the Network
serves to minimize those risks as best as they can.
Army Surgeon General, Lt. General James Peake, urged repeatedly in a
memorandum dated February 10, 2004, to commanders and regional medical
commands that clinicians utilize the VHC Network resources, while
noting the ``U.S. Army lost a valuable Soldier, Rachel Lacy, in April
2003, a month after receiving five vaccinations during mobilization.''
Unfortuantely, this critical resource could have been lost or
severely limited without the passage of our amendment. That would be
unacceptable, particularly in light of the high praise from Dr.
Winkenwerder, Lt. Gen. James Peake and the Armed Forces Epidemiological
Board for the critical work VHCs perform. To that end, I ask unanimous
consent to have printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks
the memorandum from Dr. Peake.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1)
Mr. BINGAMAN. And finally, as the use of passive immune globulin and
other immune modulators increases, complex interactions and expert
evaluation of adverse events will be needed more than ever in support
of both our Nation's servicemembers and to guide both military
readiness and homeland defense policy. The VHCs are a critical
component in that endeavor.
So again, I thank the mangers of the bill, Chairman Warner and
Ranking Member Levin, for agreeing to the Bingaman-Smith-Corzine-
Kennedy-Akaka amendment to appropriately reflect and confirm
congressional support for the activities undertaken by the VHC Network,
as their role is critical to the health and well-being of our Nation's
servicemembers.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

(Exhibit 1.)

Department of the Army, Headquarters, United States Army
Medical command,
Fort Sam Houston, TX, February 10, 2004.

Memorandum for Commanders, Regional Medical Commands

Subject: Learning from Adverse Events After Vaccination--
Action Memorandum.

1. Immunization is one of the most valuable tools available
to keep Soldiers healthy. The overwhelming majority of
immunizations are followed by mild symptoms, such as soreness
at the injection site; severe adverse reactions are extremely
rare. Unfortunately, the U.S. Army lost a valuable Soldier in
April 2003, a month after receiving five vaccinations during
mobilization. Although the evidence was inconclusive, medical
experts determined that vaccination may have contributed to
her death (Tab A). Additional information about the case is
available at www.vaccines.mil/panelreport.asp.
2. Please relay this message to clinicians in your command,
noting these key points: Remind vaccinees to seek medical
care if they experience medical problems, or they can call
the DoD Vaccine Clinical Call Center at 866-210-6469; Remind
clinicians to take a vaccination history during patient
assessments. Be particularly alert in post-vaccination cases
of fever, chest symptoms (e.g., dyspnea, chest pain), or
clinical findings such as pleural or pericardial
inflammation;

[[Page S6866]]

In conditions not responding to antibiotics, consider the
possibility of autoimmune disease and appropriate treatments
for such conditions; Seek specialty consultation as
clinically appropriate. Consider the unique consultation
resources within the Vaccine Healthcare Center (VHC) Network
(www.vhcinfo.org, 202-782-0411 (DSN: 662);
[email protected]); Continue to report adverse events
after vaccination to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting
System (VAERS, www.vaers.org); Continue to follow guidelines
for managing adverse events after vaccination
(www.vaccines.mil/pdf/cpguidelines.pdf). Note there are new
guidelines for the evaluation and treatment of
myopericarditis after smallpox vaccination; Grant medical
exemptions when clinically appropriate. When needed, use
consultation services for a second opinion (e.g., Vaccine
Healthcare Center Network);
3. For more vaccine resources, take advantage of the
experts at the Vaccine Healthcare Center Network
(www.vhcinfo.org) and the Military Vaccine Agency
(www.vaccines.mil).
4. My points of contact for this action are COL John
Grabenstein at 703-681-5101 and COL Renata Engler at 202-782-
0411.
James B. Peake,
Lieutenant General, Commanding.

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I thank the managers of the Department of
Defense authorization bill, Senators Warner and Levin, for their
assistance earlier this week in adopting an important amendment. I
offered the amendment, now a provision of this bill, to express the
sense of the Senate concerning programming on American Forces Radio and
Television Service, AFRTS.
As my colleagues know, for American service members and their
families stationed in more than 177 countries and U.S. territories
around the world, as well as for DOD civilians and their families,
AFRTS is intended to broadcast a ``touch of home'' by providing
programming that reflects a cross section of what is widely available
to stateside audiences. According to the AFRTS website, its programming
is meant to ``represent what is seen and heard in the United States.''
I support AFRTS in its mission. Making U.S. entertainment and news
programming available to American service members wherever they are
located is important for their morale and to keep them informed. I
believe the fiscal year 2004 funding level of $47 million for AFRTS is
justified.
Several weeks ago, however, it came to my attention that the
programming on one AFRTS service--its ``uninterrupted voice,'' or talk
radio, service--has what I consider to be a political bias in its
social and political commentary.
For the information of my colleagues, the radio broadcast component
of AFRTS, which is American Forces Radio, consists of 13 channels, or
``services.'' Seven of these radio services focus on music, with news
briefs at the top of every hour. Two are continuous news information
services. One service broadcasts National Public Radio 24 hours a day,
7 days a week. Two services are continuous sports talk. The final
service is what the network calls uninterrupted voice service, or talk
radio service.
Based on conversations between my staff and personnel at AFRTS, I
believe the bias that exists in the social and political commentary
portions of this talk radio service is not intentional. I commend the
openness of American Forces Radio officials in the dialogue we have now
begun on this topic. But in my view the bias in this programming is
real.
Public criticism of American Forces Radio content has focused on the
fact that Rush Limbaugh's commentary is carried daily on the talk radio
service. I generally do not agree with Rush Limbaugh's commentaries.
But I do not object to the fact that they are run on a daily basis on
this service. Some people do object. However, what I do take issue with
is the fact that there is no commentary on the service that would even
begin to balance the extreme right-wing views that Rush Limbaugh
routinely expresses on his program.
Critics have specifically cited Rush Limbaugh's use of his show to
condone and trivialize the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. guards at
the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. As many of my colleagues know, and as
has been pointed out previously here on the Senate floor, Mr. Limbaugh
reportedly likened the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. guards at Abu
Ghraib to a fraternity initiation. He called some of the abusive
tactics a ``brilliant maneuver.'' I think the critics are right.
Limbaugh's remarks--and there are many more offensive remarks by Mr.
Limbaugh on this topic than I have mentioned here--are repugnant. They
do damage to the American image when they are heard around the world. I
would guess that Limbaugh's comments on Abu Ghraib also probably offend
a large majority of American service members.
Still, I am not calling for American Forces Radio to pull Rush
Limbaugh's commentaries from their talk radio service. I am asking, and
I am pleased that the Senate is now on record asking, that AFRTS meet
its own mandate, as generally articulated in Department of Defense
Regulation 5120.20R. That regulation calls for AFRTS political
programming that is ``characterized by its fairness and balance,'' as
well as news programming guided by a ``principle of fairness'' that
requires ``reasonable opportunities for the presentation of conflicting
views on important controversial public issues.''
Liberals, moderates and independents contribute to funding for
American Forces Radio through payment of their taxes, just like
conservatives do. There is no reason that American service members
should receive lengthy right-wing commentaries with regularity on
American Forces Radio's talk service, without some balance from
competing views as part of that same service. For the good of its
listeners, and to meet its own mandate, American Forces Radio needs to
make a greater effort to give a balanced, fair representation of
varying political viewpoints on its talk radio service.
In conversations with my staff, individuals at AFRTS have said that
their programming of Rush Limbaugh on the talk service is driven
strictly by national ratings here in the States. That was not the
position taken by a DOD official on CNN earlier this month, however.
According to news coverage posted on CNN.com, Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense Allison Barber has said that the appropriateness
of content is a factor in deciding what commentaries are broadcast on
American Forces Radio.
I agree with the Deputy Assistant Secretary's statement. Content is a
factor in deciding which commentaries to run on American Forces Radio.
At the same time, I also agree with stated AFRTS policy. There should
be fairness and balance in political programming on American Forces
Radio.
My amendment in no way prescribes specific content or programming at
AFRTS. That is not the role of the Senate. What my amendment does do,
appropriately, is state that it is the sense of the Senate that the
Secretary of Defense should ensure that AFRTS policies of fairness and
balance are being fully implemented. The amendment calls on the
Secretary to develop appropriate methods of oversight in this regard. I
look forward to working with the Department and others to see that
AFRTS meets these proper goals.
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I rise to express my strong support for
the amendment adopted yesterday to the Department of Defense
authorization bill that would strengthen Federal hate crime laws.
This amendment would strengthen Federal hate crimes law in two
important ways. First, it would remove the requirement that the victim
be engaged in a federally protected activity when the crime occurs.
This change will make it easier for hate crimes to be prosecuted and
local officials to be assisted when the hate crime is based on race,
religion, or national origin. Second, the current statute is expanded
to cover hate crimes based on gender, sexual orientation, and
disability.
Since the Federal Bureau of Investigation began to track hate crimes
in 1991, the incidents of hate crimes based on sexual orientation have
more than tripled. If the changes to the Federal hate crimes statute
incorporated in this amendment are enacted, it will allow the Federal
government to prosecute these crimes and assist local law enforcement
officials in dealing with these violent hate crimes.
Any crime hurts our society, but crimes motivated by hate are
especially harmful. Many States, including my own State of Vermont,
have already passed strong hate crimes laws, and I applaud them in this
endeavor.

[[Page S6867]]

An important principle of the amendment is that it allows for Federal
prosecution of hate crimes without impeding the rights of States to
prosecute these same crimes.
The adoption of this amendment by the Senate is an important step
forward in ensuring that the perpetrators of these harmful crimes are
brought to justice. The American public knows that Congress should pass
this legislation, and I call upon the conferees to retain this
important provision during the conference on this legislation.
Mr. LEVIN. I will ask unanimous consent the resolution relative to
the Detroit Pistons victory be introduced in 1 minute, but first I ask
unanimous consent that I temporarily turn the floor over to Senator
Biden. Then I will introduce this unanimous consent resolution, Senator
Stabenow will be recognized for 5 minutes, I will be recognized for 5
minutes, and then Senator Miller will be recognized for 8 minutes after
that.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Delaware.

____________________